Is Columbus the best city in the Midwest? (Cleveland, Cincinnati: employment, theater)

[dustin183]

Originally Posted by TheProf

I have a problem with this thread on a number of levels, not the least of which is the title and fact that "best" is subjective in an overall sense. In terms of preferences, Columbus doesn't even rank first in Ohio: I prefer both Cincinnati and Cleveland over Columbus in terms of urban form -- the other 2 Cs are stronger imho, cultural sophistication and, yes, sports -- outside of big-time college sports, of course. I like Cleveland the best for these, and a number of other reasons, including better mass transit, more diverse quality neighborhoods (including a wider range of high-quality housing), better overall walkability (please, no walk-score stats) and greater, more diverse, more beautiful natural areas and more interesting typography.

But in terms of the OP's specific breakdown, my responses comparing Cleveland are these:

A few reasons:
It is the number one (or two) top city in terms of growth. -- yes, Columbus is hard to beat, here.

It has has a diverse and stable economy. More stable, yes probably, it's newer, more white-collar and state-govt driven. Diverse, no. Cleveland still has some industrial prowess that Columbus never has had. Cleveland whips Columbus on the medical piece. And I believe Cleveland is stronger in terms of its diverse corporate structure and power.

It has a great array of restaurants and other food brands like Jeni's.
Cleveland is a growing national foodie city supported by a wide array of quality restaurants. Columbus is not in the conversation.

It has great parks and museums. Re Parks, Cleveland has a lake with some high-quality parks and beaches, a national park and Emerald Necklace system of parks Columbus which lacks. Columbus also has no answer to Rockefeller Park and it's Cultural Gardens. In terms of museums: Cleveland in a walk. It has museums of national and international stature. Columbus has none at that level.

It has great sports options. Ohio State and nothing close. The Blue Jackets are nice and have developed a powerful team (good for them!), but the NHL still takes a backseat compared to the other 3 major pro sports and Cleveland is rep'd by all 3 while Columbus has none.

It has a diverse and friendly community. Cleveland is more diverse in terms of race and ethnicity. I don't know how to define a "friendly community" so I can't answer this.

It offers something for everyone. Again, this lacks clear definition beyond answering

It offers great educational opportunities. it depends on what you're talking about. Yes, in terms of public K-12 schools, Columbus is probably better than Cleveland because Columbus is a newer major city without an industrial past, which has decayed in Cleveland and other similar cities in our more post-industrial climate. In terms of higher education? Case Western Reserve U ranks higher than Ohio State in terms of research universities. Obviously OSU sheer size gives it a lot of umph, but that doesn't always translate into quality.

If Columbus is behind Cincy and Cleveland, then why is it growing faster? Why are people moving there and leaving nearly every other city in Ohio (and the midwest)?

To me, that implies that most people believe Columbus is one of the best cities in the midwest. People and companies aren't going to rush to a crappy city. They go to good cities.

I think Columbus is up there with Madison in terms of the high growth midwest cities.

If I had to rank midwest cities (let's say at least 200k people), it would look something like this:

Top Tier:

Columbus
Madison, WI
Minneapolis

Middle Tier:

Des Moines
Grand Rapids, MI
Chicago
Pittsburgh
Indianapolis
Cincy

Lower Tier:

Milwaukee
Cleveland
St. Louis
Toledo
Akron
Dayton
Detroit

I have not been to all of these cities. Yes this list is largely opinion based. But it is also partly based on growth rates and real estate trends and overall quality of life; more so than say amenities (which Chicago would win by its shear size). I think Columbus probably has the best "blend" of what people are looking for:
1) affordable
2) job opportunities
3) good place to raise kids
4) a good offering of cultural, entertainment and educational amentities (stuff like COSI, schools, theaters, sports, art, etc)

Cleveland beats Cbus in sports and Cleveland has more history. But I think it is too dependent on heavy industry. And personally I like "new money" cities over "old money" because there is more opportunity for the avg person. Old money cities are too much into nepotism (generational wealth).

[dustin183]

Originally Posted by bjimmy24

Bad public transit, B-level cultural institutions, pro sports nobody cares about, relatively low density, lack of history/identity, disproportionately white collar (and accompanying homogenous sensibilities.), etc.

Sorry, just felt this thread needed a reality check. It's not a bad place, but I think it is the 3rd or 4th best city in Ohio, let alone the midwest.

It's not quite big enough for good public transit.

The cultural stuff is more geared towards families. Stuff like Cosi, Franklin Park Conservatory and Botanical Gardens (amazing kid area). But plenty of nightlife for the singles and yuppies. Cleveland wins in terms of orchestra and museums.

Soccer is growing nationwide. It actually has a higher avg attendance than NBA. I think its fare to say that no one really cares about the Browns or Indians. The Cavs are dunzo too since Bron Bron left. Probably one of those teams will move to Columbus eventually.

Low density - that's pretty much the case in every city except Chicago.

Lack of history - it's not as historic but there is decent history. But I think it's good that the history is limited.

White collar - yes, I don't see this as a negative or positive.
Homogeneous - I think the midwest overall is guilty of this. I don't think Cbus is anymore homogeneous than other midwest cities, except Chicago. There are communities of Somalis, Korean, Laos, and everything else. But yeah historically it's a bit German-centric I guess you could say.

[dustin183]

Originally Posted by Losfrisco

It's not really controversial to say that Dayton, Toledo, and perhaps even Youngstown have more identity as American cities than Columbus.

Yes but that does not make them better cities. They haven't kept up with the times. I would love to see them all thrive and go through a renaissance. But I doubt it will happen. Which is ok. Accept that cities go through through cycles of growth and contraction. Contract with grace. Don't try to save everything. Demolish vacant buildings and give the land back to mother nature. The demand is just not there anymore. And that's ok. Manufacturing is not what is used to be; though it may come back a little. And these populations don't want to embrace (or rather aren't into) the future stuff like AI, robotics, genetics, e-comm, video game dev, etc.

[dustin183]

Originally Posted by 1watertiger

Based on my personal experience. IMO Best city in the Midwest is Chicago.
Best Metroparks -Cleveland (on par with the best in nation)
Museums/culture- Chicago/Cleveland (Tie), Detroit. (Cleveland has possibly the best orchestra in the country).
ethnic diversity/foods-Chicago,Cleveland,Detroit,Milwaukee,St.Louis
Sports-Chicago,Detroit,Cleveland,Milwaukee,Minneapolis,st .louis,Indianapolis
Cities on the Great Lakes tend to be my favorite in the “Midwest”. Landlocked or river cities In the “Midwest” have less recreational options .

The numbers indicate that the people believe Columbus is the best as it is the top growing midwest city.

That is an objective metric. What you listed are subjective metrics.

So, why are people moving there (ie - why is it the best)?

Just think, if you are moving to the midwest from say NYC or LA, what would be your top choice? Columbus. But why? I think it is hard to pinpoint. There is a bit of mystery. A vibe, that draws you there, that is hard to define. A sense of optimism. A place for aspirations, yet also a place to slow down if needed.

[Natural510]

I figured the Clevelanders would show up to argue, lol. Cleveland does have better museums and sports options but Columbus is better in the other areas the OP mentioned. The Twin Cities and Madison have high QoL markers too, but a strong argument could be made for Columbus, yes.

[1watertiger]

Originally Posted by Natural510

I figured the Clevelanders would show up to argue, lol. Cleveland does have better museums and sports options but Columbus is better in the other areas the OP mentioned. The Twin Cities and Madison have high QoL markers too, but a strong argument could be made for Columbus, yes.

What about our metroparks/Great Lake/outdoor activities?
Theater/broadway plays?
Ethnic foods/restaurant scene?
Largest and fastest growing downtown?
1st and 4th largest employment centers in Ohio?

Also, are there any good nightlife areas besides High st in Columbus?

[bjimmy24]

Originally Posted by Natural510

I figured the Clevelanders would show up to argue, lol. Cleveland does have better museums and sports options but Columbus is better in the other areas the OP mentioned. The Twin Cities and Madison have high QoL markers too, but a strong argument could be made for Columbus, yes.

I don't understand Madison for the same reason I don't understand Columbus. I really don't see what makes them "great". State gov and big state universities, i.e. redirection of the rest of the state's wealth to one mediocre city that can offer artificially more jobs. This is what these places hang their hats on? Artchitecture - blah, "nightlife" - a bunch of 20 year olds puking on each other, everyone has the same hobbies and interests.

I don't really get the Twin Cities either. It's just a larger version of this.

[bjimmy24]

Tier 1
- Chicago (basically by itself due to size, I don't actually prefer it)
- Detroit

Tier 2
- Cleveland
- Cincinnati
- St. Louis
- Milwaukee
- Kansas City
- Minneapolis/St. Paul
- Indianapolis

Tier 3
- Columbus
- Madison

These rankings are trying to be objective about overall influence. I'd take many smaller cities over Columbus/Madison in terms of where I'd live (Grand Rapids, Akron, for example). And I don't think I'd actually enjoy living in Chicago or Detroit very much, but due to size they must be on top.

[jbcmh81]

Originally Posted by greenvillebuckeye

tOSU runs that town sports wise. So I don't know about "options". I mean unless you believe the Clippers and Blue Jackets can compete for a fair share of the Cbus sports market. Now that Vegas has an NFL team, Columbus is the second largest metro area other than Austin, TX to NOT have an MLB, NFL or NBA team.

I'm a buckeye fan but to say Cbus has sports options might be a stretch.

The irony is that Columbus had some of the very first NFL and MLB teams (before it was the MLB) in the country. The lack of them today has to do with competition. Team owners in Cleveland/Cincinnati have actively blocked NFL/MLB/NBA teams from coming to Columbus over the years because they feared losing fans and revenue.

I do think Columbus does pretty well overall, though, despite being blocked from having other teams. There's no sport not represented in the college, minor or professional levels.

[TheProf]

Originally Posted by Natural510

I figured the Clevelanders would show up to argue, lol. Cleveland does have better museums and sports options but Columbus is better in the other areas the OP mentioned. The Twin Cities and Madison have high QoL markers too, but a strong argument could be made for Columbus, yes.

No, it's a lot more than that... Try public transit, quality housing, better/more diverse suburban living, natural areas, health institutions, quality restaurants/foodie rep, greater diversity race and ethnically, better quality public architecture (by far), better and more and more diverse apartment living, ... and on and on.

Cleveland isn't just better than C-Bus in these areas, it smokes C-Bus.