This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Maryland C‑class High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Maryland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Maryland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MarylandWikipedia:WikiProject MarylandTemplate:WikiProject MarylandMaryland articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Urban studies and planning C‑class High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Urban studies and planning, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Urban studies and planning on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Urban studies and planningWikipedia:WikiProject Urban studies and planningTemplate:WikiProject Urban studies and planningUrban studies and planning articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Civil engineering C‑class Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Civil engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Civil engineering on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Civil engineeringWikipedia:WikiProject Civil engineeringTemplate:WikiProject Civil engineeringCE articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

I'm not sure that I agree with Amitparikh's recent changes. Here are my thoughts.

• Does it matter that the hospital was recently renovated? Will it have been "recently renovated" for a person reading ten years from now? Perhaps a date of renovation would be more useful.
• Ditto for listing the anchor stores in the mall - those are not the same stores that anchored the mall when I grew up in Columbia, so there's a history of change (as at all malls).
• Style nitpicks: I think "dramatically" might be preferable to "drastically," which has a negative connotation. When I was a kid we always called it "CA" and 'not' "the CA." What's up with calling the Supreme Sports club "24/7" - does that matter?
• What source said that many Columbia residents work for the government and nearby DOD facilities? Plenty of people around DC work for those entities, but I haven't heard any specific citation of percentage so I don't think this is appropriate to say.
• Columbia is nowhere near a metro station. Public transportation to DC requires a car to get you to the metro, or a series of bus rides.

-Etoile 15:19, 18 May 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I guess it is late, but I'll respond:

• Agree with date on hospital renovation.
• Agree with date on mall anchors.
• CA = "Columbia Association". I think all I was trying to say was "the Columbia Association".
• Supreme being 24/7 was a major change. CA did it to compete with the new gym in town, Lifetime Fitness. There has been a lot of money spent by CA in recent months/years to improve the gym facilities in preparation for competition with Lifetime Fitness.
• I don't have a source for DOD and government workers... I guess I just threw that in to inform people reading the article who are not from Columbia that government employment is a big thing in the DC Metropolitan Area, including Columbia.
• Agree about public transportation.

Amit 15:04, 3 November 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Census-designated place

Anyone know the Census-designated place area for Columbia since it would include about 5 zip codes. Or how do you find out? --Noitall 05:32, August 18, 2005 (UTC)

• • One very good source is the The Census Bureau website. Here, you will find more indepth information on Columbia and other CDPs across the country. Other great pages within the site include:

• • 1990 Census Profile of Columbia CDP
  • 1970 Census Profile for Places and Counties in Maryland (PDF file)
  • 1980 Census Profile for Places and Counties in Maryland (PDF file)
  • Detailed profile of Columbia.

-- Moreau36 1153, 29 August 2005

Thank you. That was extremely useful for additional research. I can find the CDP for Columbia on the fact finder portion of the Census page, but I still can not find where the CDP area is defined. I assumed it was by area code, but I am not certain. Any idea? --Noitall 05:30, August 31, 2005 (UTC)

I think the population is 88,254 according to the Cenus Bureau 2000

And, yes I'm pretty sure it's a town not a city

Mariotts Ridge high school info and more Resevoir High School info

1. "Eastablished" is not a word, and opened is more accurate 2. Big box and suburb were already linked in the article. 3. automobile is a common noun that does not require a link.

dml 13:36, 3 November 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I admit, I didn't catch the mispelling, but I don't think you can argue that opened is more accurate. It makes it sound like an amusement park. -James Howard (talk/web) 14:04, 3 November 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Which came first, Columbia Pike, or Columbia, Maryland? If it's the latter, then how old are the portions called "Old Columbia Pike?" Or was there a Columbia, MD before the Rouse Co. built it into the town we know today? (A third, perhaps unlikely, scenario is the town was named as such to take advantage of the fact that the road was already named that way.) I assumed Columbia Pike actually referred to "Disctrict of Columbia", but those using the road may in fact be travelling to Columbia, MD. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 16:55, 11 February 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Pike does in fact refer to the District of Columbia, it has that name in Montgomery County as well as Howard County. It dates from the early 19th century I believe. I recall reading Columbia was the name of a post office on Columbia Pike in the general vicinity of the current new town, and the subdivision of Columbia Hills, just northeast of the intersection of US 29 and MD 108 predates the new town of Columbia. dml 17:22, 11 February 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Various sources, notably Creating a New City, state that the project name was Columbia, as the area had previously been known as Columbia. When the it came time to pick a final name Columbia stuck. -James Howard (talk/web) 17:29, 11 February 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hecht's was acquired by Macy's in 2006, and they have officially transitioned all Hecht's stores to Macy's stores. Although the sign at the mall may still say Hecht's, I believe it is prudent to reflect the recent change and acquisition. Amit 14:53, 3 November 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not that I necessarily like suburbs myself, but to say the word "inexorably" seems to be biased against the phenomenon. The word "aloof" also seems inappropriate. Icemachine79 15:23, 14 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

[these comments moved from top of page]

In the opening paragraph it says "town" but in later paragraphs it says "city". Columbia has a "town center" but technically it is a city. Comments.

In the eyes of the Howard County and State of Maryland governments, I believe Columbia is technically a town, not a city, despite the fact that it has near 100,000 inhabitants. Columbia is not its own municipality, nor does it govern itself (though the Columbia Association itself has its own governing body). -user:bmortimer

Techncally, in the eyes of the Howard County and State of Maryland governments, Columbia is neither a town or a city. Columbia is unincorporated; it has no mayor, no city council, no separate school district. From a legal standpoint, Columbia is a series of neighborhoods and developments in an unincorporated area of Howard County. Of course, in practice, these neighborhoods and developments form a coherent community that is perceived as a unit by its residents; thus, the area is a census-designated place. But since it is neither a "town" nor a "city" in the way those terms are legally used in Maryland, we are left to fall back on how they are used colloquially, with the resulting inconsistencies. --Jfruh (talk) 21:17, 26 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There is in fact a sharp definition of what consitutes Columbia: it consists of that land under the control of the Columbia Association. Therefore Atholton and Diamondback are not part of Columbia proper because they both predate it and therefore are not bound by CA covenants. There are also some parcels here and there within the CA territory which they never acquired and therefore are not fully part of Columbia. For our purposes it's probably best to stick with the "new city" terminology just for consistency sake, as long as we are clear that it doesn't mean the kind of dense urbanization that people conventionally associate with the word. Mangoe (talk) 15:45, 27 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

True, but that's a purely private arrangement -- in that sense, Columbia is essentially an enormous condominium complex or housing association. My point is that from the point of view of the state and county, there's no legal erected city (or town, or village, or whatever) of Columbia in the sense that, say, there's a city of Rockville. --Jfruh (talk) 04:10, 28 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Issue fixed for now, assuming the 10 villages are all part of CA control. It is common for parts of census-designated places to include suburbs and named places not served by the named post office.71.230.16.111 (talk) 07:04, 16 December 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please list all the neutrality issues in this section so that they may be addressed. Timneu22 11:06, 20 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Since nobody has done so over the last five months, I'm removing the template. --Jfruh (talk) 22:00, 20 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have re-added the neutrality tag, as the article appears to be written somewhat like an advertisement, promoting the city rather than describing it in a neutral manner of tone. I have removed the advert-like passages from the intro section, but there still may be more left throughout the article. Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 03:38, 21 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've checked the high schools against the attendance area map and made corrections accordingly. Mangoe (talk) 16:39, 27 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is quite short on citations. In particular the many claims for novelty need citation. Mangoe (talk) 02:58, 3 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

We have some geographic and demographic problems as it stands, because the census tract is a lot bigger than Columbia is. Judging from their maps, they are including Atholton, Diamondback, Holiday Hills, and the southern part of Clarksville, all of which predate Columbia and are not part of any of the "new citry" planning. The 2006 maps even include Savage, which is a century older than Columbia. It's quite misleading to talk about these areas as if they have anything to do with Rouse's vision, because they don't. They are merely fiats of convenience by the census, and even then the post office agrees that Savage and Clarksville aren't in Columbia.

I've added a little language to clarify this, but I think it needs more elaboration. Please add your comments on this matter. Mangoe (talk) 15:44, 8 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I guess that, in the absence of an actual municipality of Columbia, there are simply multiple ways to define "Columbia." The Census Bureau has one definition, and the Columbia Association has another. The problem is that its the Census's definition that is easiest to derive demographic data from. If you'd like to go through the raw census data and exclude those areas that aren't part of the Columbia Association, go ahead. Failing that, it might be easiest to just put a note on the demographic data to the effect that includes some areas not part of the Columbia Assocation.--Jfruh (talk) 17:15, 8 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm surprised that the swiss cheese nature of Columbia is not mentioned. When I explain it to people who are not familiar with the area, the outparcels really confuse some people and may be worth explicit mention. Also, when did Allview become part of Columbia? I know that they are served from the Columbia post office, but traditionally in the early 1990's, they were always considered a larger outparcel. The list of communities that are separate from Columbia reads like a definitive list instead of a list of a few examples. Alcourt (talk) 10:22, 22 October 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Citations are needed for the "new town" statement. Most wiki articles correspond "city", "town", "village" and "townships" as incorporated places under the guidelines of their respective states. Unless Columbia was chartered by the state, it's still considered unincorporated. --Moreau36 (talk) 17:31, 19 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Part of the problem is our article on new town, which covers every variety of planned community, but which should really be talking about the American "new town" movement of the 1960s-70s. I'm having trouble finding really good citations for the movement as a whole, though for instance I found the movement discussed in Bloom, Nicholas Dagen (2001). Suburban Alchemy. Ohio State University Press.; on page 1, it says "The 1960s new-town movement— most strongly reflected at Reston, Virginia; Columbia, Maryland; and Irvine, California— sought to reshape how Americans built and nurtured new suburban communities." Bloom in a footnote refers to another book which is apparently considered the classic study on the movement, which I'm going to see if I can get a hold of from the Ho Co library. In any case, I can find a host of references to Columbia that call it a "new town", up to and including the zone district for it; for instance, there's a recent Washington Post reference here. Mangoe (talk) 21:17, 19 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for the clarification. The definitions can cause major confusion for the casual reader. There are different definitions for Columbia; the USGS, the U.S. Census Bureau, and from the developers. --Moreau36 (talk) 22:01, 19 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The article is not about a subdivision of the census; it's an article about a planned community. Mangoe (talk) 15:02, 12 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Columbia is also a census-designated place defined by the Bureau itself, just like other CDP articles within Wikipedia. The demographics in 2000 were strictly tderived from the census, which does not treat "planned communities" or "new towns" as incorporated places unless the municipal charter was given by Maryland. It's a "planned community" or "new town", but the truth of the matter is, it's still unincorporated. (see: Westchase, Florida or Reston, Virginia) It doesn't make sense creating a separate article for just Columbia CDP. --Moreau36 (talk) 16:10, 12 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I agree with the last sentiment to extent of saying that we shouldn't have articles on CDPs at all. The problem is that people keep changing the lede in this and other articles to say that "Columbia (or whatever town name) is a CDP." Well, especially in this case the statement is misleading. Most of what the article says is UNtrue about the CDP as a whole. Mangoe (talk) 16:43, 12 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Links to Columbia Patch keep getting removed. It is a local news website for Columbia residents. Wiki pages for cities and towns traditionally have links to local media. Would a proper compromise be adding a media section with links to The Columbia Flier and Columbia Patch? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Someoneswitness (talk • contribs) 20:58, 7 November 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The links are removed because they do not belong in the article. Per WP:USCITY: "A link to some of the official websites should be provided here, such as the official city government, or the convention and visitors bureau. Providing links to every commercial, educational, or other entity within the city is not appropriate for this section." This position is likewise supported by WP:EL and WP:NOT#REPOSITORY.

Also, if a local media section were added, it should contain internal wikilinks to articles about notable subjects, not external links to other websites (per WP:EL). --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 21:05, 7 November 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

OK, so the Grace facility long predates Columbia; it actually isn't "in" anywhere. The Westvaco facility was on the far side of the road from JHU/APL and never even had a Columbia address (APL now uses the buildings as an annex). Mangoe (talk) 03:26, 12 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Is Grace in Columbia? Grace has this website Grace in Columbia, Maryland I think you are right about Westvaco. I checked and they appeared to have been at 11101 Johns Hopkins Rd, Laurel, MD 20723. I fixed the article. (talk) 14:36, 11 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oops, my commit message says Removed sourced statement that Westvaco was in Columbia but I meant to write Removed unsourced statement that Westvaco was in Columbia (talk) 15:22, 11 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The mention of "spot development" is confusing. Haphazard development in various certain spots? Of that specific area? I have no idea what this is supposed to mean, and a brief search-engine jaunt turns up nothing useful. Would also be nice to know what the "model school for the nation" bit about Wilde Lake High School is supposed to be referring to. ElectricValkyrie (talk) 22:03, 23 January 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Fixed. (talk) 14:21, 11 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Columbia, Maryland. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130911234518/http://factfinder2.census.gov to http://factfinder2.census.gov
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140518050030/http://www.postalmuseum.si.edu/statepostalhistory/Maryland_Post_Offices.pdf to http://www.postalmuseum.si.edu/statepostalhistory/Maryland_Post_Offices.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130911234518/http://factfinder2.census.gov to http://factfinder2.census.gov
• Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6gpGlyhlr?url=http%3A%2F%2Ffactfinder.census.gov%2Ffaces%2Ftableservices%2Fjsf%2Fpages%2Fproductview.xhtml%3Fsrc%3Dbkmk to http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130911234518/http://factfinder2.census.gov to http://factfinder2.census.gov

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ((Sourcecheck))).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template ((source check)) (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:27, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Columbia, Maryland. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110930202612/http://nexus.umn.edu/Papers/NextAmerica.pdf to http://nexus.umn.edu/Papers/NextAmerica.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110725185839/http://www.columbiaarchives.org/index.cfm?action=content.sub&page=publications_books&oid=5 to http://www.columbiaarchives.org/index.cfm?action=content.sub&page=publications_books&oid=5
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110703032518/http://www.grace.com/Media/GraceInYourArea/documents/GraceInMaryland.pdf to http://www.grace.com/Media/GraceInYourArea/documents/GraceInMaryland.pdf
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://factfinder2.census.gov/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090207003537/http://www.hcpss.org/boundarylines/map_high.pdf to http://www.hcpss.org/boundarylines/map_high.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141129032140/http://www.profootballarchives.com/doug02400.html to http://www.profootballarchives.com/doug02400.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110725185839/http://www.columbiaarchives.org/index.cfm?action=content.sub&page=publications_books&oid=5 to http://www.columbiaarchives.org/index.cfm?action=content.sub&page=publications_books&oid=5
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110725185839/http://www.columbiaarchives.org/index.cfm?action=content.sub&page=publications_books&oid=5 to http://www.columbiaarchives.org/index.cfm?action=content.sub&page=publications_books&oid=5

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template ((source check)) (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:07, 11 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Columbia, Maryland. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110606041837/http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/MapItDrawServlet?geo_id=16000US2419125&_bucket_id=50&tree_id=420&context=saff&_lang=en&_sse=on to http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/MapItDrawServlet?geo_id=16000US2419125&_bucket_id=50&tree_id=420&context=saff&_lang=en&_sse=on
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://maggiemoos.com/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050415234043/http://www.howard.k12.md.us/lrhs/home.html to http://www.howard.k12.md.us/lrhs/home.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140203073736/http://www.columbiaassociation.com/content/getinvolved/teens/exchange_programs.cfm?expand=3 to http://www.columbiaassociation.com/content/getinvolved/teens/exchange_programs.cfm?expand=3

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template ((source check)) (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:15, 14 September 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page have been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Fireworks at Columbia.jpg
• Rouse family.jpg

You can see the reasons for deletion at the file description pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:21, 18 February 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Fireworks at Columbia.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:06, 19 February 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]