Young Professionals: A Comparison

**Updated 11/22/2017.

Millennials and Young Professionals are big news these days. Millennials are the largest generation ever in terms of total numbers (exceeding 76 million), and their choices are already having big impacts on everything from housing to the economy, and Young Professionals have long been an important urban demographic. I wanted to look at Columbus and its peers to see where it ranks in terms of attracting the 25-34 age group that include these demographics.

For the comparison, I looked at metro areas of 1.5-2.5 million as well as major Midwest metros and then used their core cities to get the numbers.

Rank of Total Population Aged 25-34

2005_______________________2010___________________2016

1. Chicago: 463,236_______1. Chicago: 510,042________1. Chicago: 532,349
2. San Antonio: 180,981_____2. San Antonio: 200,645____2. San Antonio: 241,783
3. Austin: 137,523_________3. Austin: 162,247_________3. Austin: 214,687
4. San Jose, CA: 133,144___4. Columbus: 147,584______4. Columbus: 180,685
5. Columbus: 131,641______5. San Jose, CA: 142,551___5. San Jose, CA: 165,408
6. Indianapolis: 114,532_____6. Indianapolis: 133,088____6. Charlotte, NC: 149,024
7. Detroit: 110,759_________7. Charlotte, NC: 127,539___7. Indianapolis: 143,328
8. Charlotte, NC: 100,025____8. Portland, OR: 113,210___8. Nashville: 130,593
9. Portland, OR: 90,023_____9. Nashville: 110,882______9. Portland: 127,557
10. Las Vegas: 84,418______10. Milwaukee: 97,359____10. Milwaukee: 101,449
11. Milwaukee: 82,060______11. Detroit: 85,023_______11. Detroit: 101,246
12. Sacramento, CA: 75,497___12. Minneapolis: 81,532__12. Sacramento: 92,883
13. Minneapolis: 74,208___13. Las Vegas: 81,212______13. Minneapolis: 90,022
14. Kansas City, MO: 68,060__14. Sacramento: 78,527__14. Las Vegas: 84,756
15. Virginia Beach: 60,749__15. Kansas City: 73,872____15. Kansas City: 81,532
16. Omaha, NE: 56,248____16. Virginia Beach: 67,614__16. Virginia Beach: 75,365
17. Wichita, KS: 52,426____17. Omaha: 62,396________17. Omaha: 72,055
18. Cleveland: 50,558_____18. St. Louis: 57,627_______18. Orlando: 63,947
19. St. Louis: 48,137______19. Wichita: 56,737________19. Pittsburgh: 62,515
20. Cincinnati: 44,945_____20. Cleveland: 54,428______20. St. Louis: 61,777
21. Toledo: 43,134_______21. Pittsburgh: 51,109______21. Cleveland: 58,773
22. Orlando: 40,846______22. St. Paul: 50,107________22. Wichita: 57,869
23. St. Paul, MN: 39,676__23. Cincinnati: 49,067_______23. St. Paul: 55,306
24. Lincoln, NE: 38,893___24. Orlando: 48,102________24. Cincinnati: 54,754
25. Madison, WI: 38,826___25. Madison: 44,662_______25. Madison: 48,759
26. Pittsburgh: 38,744____26. Lincoln: 42,034_________26. Lincoln: 43,882
27. Grand Rapids: 35,287__27. Toledo: 41,580________27: Toledo: 42,888
28. Des Moines: 32,640__28. Fort Wayne: 35,193______28. Grand Rapids: 39,829
29. Fort Wayne, IN: 31,738__29. Providence: 31,044____29. Fort Wayne: 37,372
30. Akron: 30,436_______30. Grand Rapids: 30,963____30. Des Moines: 34,961
31. Providence, RI: 29,307__31. Des Moines: 30,376____31. Providence: 30,630
32. Dayton: 18,591_______32. Akron: 27,446_________32. Akron: 29,786
33. Youngstown: 8,505____33. Dayton: 20,278________33. Dayton: 22,930
34. Nashville, TN: N/A___34. Youngtown: 8,484_______34. Youngstown: 7,621

So Columbus ranks highly among total population in the 25-34 age group. But what about growth?

Total Growth Rank in 25-34 Population 2005-2016

1. Austin, TX: 77,164
2. Chicago: 69,113
3. San Antonio, TX: 60,802
4. Columbus: 49,044
5. Charlotte, NC: 48,999
6. Portland, OR: 37,534
7. San Jose, CA: 32,264
8. Indianapolis, IN: 28,796
9. Pittsburgh, PA: 23,771
10. Orlando, FL: 23,101
11. Milwaukee, WI: 19,389
12. Sacramento, CA: 17,386
13. Minneapolis, MN: 15,814
14. Omaha, NE: 15,807
15. St. Paul, MN: 15,630
16. Virginia Beach, VA: 14,616
17. St. Louis, MO: 13,642
18. Kansas City, MO: 13,472
19. Madison, WI: 9,933
20. Cincinnati: 9,809
21. Cleveland: 8,215
22. Fort Wayne, IN: 5,634
23. Wichita, KS: 5,443
24. Lincoln, NE: 4,989
25. Grand Rapids, MI: 4,542
26. Dayton: 4,339
27. Des Moines, IA: 2,321
28. Providence, RI: 1,323
29. Las Vegas, NV: 338
30. Toledo: -246
31. Akron: -650
32. Youngstown: -884
33. Detroit, MI: -9,513
34. Nashville: N/A

Again, Columbus ranks near the top during this period. What about more recently, since 2010?

Total Growth Rank of 25-34 Population 2010-2016

1. Austin: 52,440
2. San Antonio: 41,138
3. Columbus: 33,101
4. San Jose: 22,857
5. Chicago: 22,307
6. Charlotte: 21,485
7. Nashville: 19,711
8. Detroit: 16,223
9. Orlando: 15,845
10. Sacramento: 14,356
11. Portland: 14,347
12. Pittsburgh: 11,406
13. Indianapolis: 10,240
14. Omaha: 9,659
15. Grand Rapids: 8,866
16. Minneapolis: 8,490
17. Virginia Beach: 7,751
18. Kansas City: 7,660
19. Cincinnati: 5,687
20. St. Paul: 5,199
21. Des Moines: 4,585
22. Cleveland: 4,345
23. St. Louis: 4,152
24. Madison: 4,097
25. Milwaukee: 4,090
26. Las Vegas: 3,544
27. Dayton: 2,652
28. Akron: 2,340
29. Fort Wayne: 2,179
30. Lincoln: 1,848
31. Toledo: 1,308
32. Wichita: 1,132
33. Providence: -414
34. Youngstown: -863

So Columbus is also doing well since 2010 and attracts significantly more people in the 25-34 age group than cities often cited for this very metric.

Finally, now that we know the totals and the growth, what is the % of total city population that the 25-34 age group makes up?

25-34 % of Total City Population 2016

1. Orlando: 23.1%
2. Austin: 22.6%
3. Minneapolis: 21.8%
4. Columbus: 20.9%
5. Pittsburgh: 20.6%
6. Grand Rapids: 20.3%
7. Portland: 19.9%
8. Nashville: 19.8%
9. St. Louis: 19.8%
10. Chicago: 19.7%
11. Madison: 19.3%
12. Sacramento: 18.8%
13. Cincinnati: 18.3%
14. St. Paul: 18.3%
15. Charlotte: 17.7%
16. Providence: 17.1%
17. Milwaukee: 17.0%
18. Kansas City: 16.9%
19. Indianapolis: 16.8%
20. Virginia Beach: 16.7%
21. Des Moines: 16.2%
22. San Antonio: 16.2%
23. Omaha: 16.1%
24. San Jose: 16.1%
25. Lincoln: 15.7%
26. Toledo: 15.4%
27. Cleveland: 15.2%
28. Akron: 15.1%
29. Detroit: 15.0%
30. Wichita: 14.8%
31. Fort Wayne: 14.3%
32. Las Vegas: 13.4%
33. Youngstown: 11.9%
34. Dayton: 8.2%

Columbus has an existing large population of the 25-34 age demographic, and looks to be one of the strongest performers into the near future.
Some would ask why that would be considering that Columbus transit is woefully lacking and has a reputation (very undeservedly, in my opinion) of being suburban- characteristics that Millennials/YPers supposedly almost universally reject. Perhaps the bottom line is that economics trump all other desires. Cost of living and employment tend to be higher up the list than rail lines, and Columbus has both a strong economy and relatively low COL. Whatever the case may be, Columbus seems to be doing something right.

For more information on demographics, go to: Columbus Demographics
And for Franklin County racial and economic maps, go to: Census Tract and Zip Code Maps

Tract Profile #1- Tract 1, 110 and 120

I didn’t get a chance to post this last week, but here is the first in the tract profile series. It’s just about everything anyone wanted to know about an area based on its tracts.

Tract #1 was the furthest north tract in the city boundaries at the time that tracts came about in the 1930 census. It included the areas of Clintonville, Whetstone and Beechwold, communities largely built between 1920 and 1950.

The population grew rapidly between 1930 and 1950, rising by almost 7x. By 1960, the US Census split the growing tract into two parts, #110 and #120, and they have remained through the present day.

Population of Tract #1, #110 and #120 Combined
1930: 1,252
1940: 2,618
1950: 6,944
1960: 9,456
1970: 8,850
1980: 7,374
1990: 6,902
2000: 6,645
2010: 6,506

2010 Columbus City Tract Population Ranking out of 156
110: 59th
120: 68th

Total and % Change by Decade
1940: +1,366 +109.11%
1950: +4,326 +165.24%
1960: +2,512 +36.18%
1970: -606 -6.41%
1980: -1,476 -16.68%
1990: -470 -6.37%
2000: -259 -3,75%
2010: -139 -2.09%

Population Density
2010: 3,654.0
2000: 3,733.4
1990: 3,877.7
1980: 4,142.9
1970: 4,972.2
1960: 5,312.7

2010 Columbus City Tract Rank for Density out of 156
110:
120:

So the population of this area peaked around 1960 and has declined every decade since. However, the good news is that the rate of decline has been slowing since the 1970s. Of the two tracts that currently make up the original Tract #1 boundary, one grew in population during the 2000s, so the area is seeing a gradual turnaround.

Housing 2010
Occupied Units: 95.66%
Vacant Units: 4.34%
Average Year Built: 1949
Housing Units built before 1959: 82.73%
Housing Units built 1960 and Later: 17.27%
Median Rent: $853.00
Median Home Price: $202,750.00

So definitely this area is mostly from the mid-20th century, with above average home prices and low vacancy rates.

Demographics for Area

White
2010: 6,233 95.8%
2000: 6,428 96.7%
1990: 6,823 98.9%
Black
2010: 84 1.3%
2000: 54 0.8%
1990: 26 0.4%
Asian
2010: 78 1.2%
2000: 72 1.1%
1990: 40 0.6%
Hispanic
2010: 103 1.6%
2000: 63 0.9%
1990: 27 0.4%
Other
2010: 111 1.7%
2000: 91 1.4%
1990: 13 0.2%

White Population Tract Ranking
110: 1st
120: 2nd
Black Population Tract Ranking
110: 155th
120: 154th
Asian Population Tract Ranking
110: 102nd
120: 86th
Hispanic Population Tract Ranking
110: 138th
120: 154th

The area is clearly majority White and doesn’t seem to be changing very quickly. The area contains the Whitest tracts within the city of Columbus.

Breakdown of First Reported Ancestry
German: 39.92%
Irish: 19.99%
English: 14.33%
Italian: 7.33%
French: 6.20%
Polish: 5.96%
American: 2.82%
Scottish: 2.73%
Dutch: 2.30%
Welsh: 2.22%
Hungarian: 2.10%
Swedish: 1.80%
Swiss: 1.46%
Scotch-Irish: 1.40%

Ancestry of Asian Population
Chinese: 27.19%
Indian: 26.59%
Other: 14.48%
Japanese: 12.90%
Korean: 11.31%
Filipino: 7.54%

Native Born: 96.98%
Foreign Born: 3.02%
English Spoken at Home: 96.4%
Spanish Spoken at Home: 0.96%
Other Languages Spoken at Home: 2.64%

Gender and Age
Male Population: 46.75%
Female Population: 53.25%

Age
Under 5: 5.1%
5 to 9: 4.45%
10 to 14: 4.01%
15 to 19: 3.19%
20 to 24: 2.92%
25 to 34: 15.47%
35 to 44: 16.11%
45 to 54: 15.71%
55 to 64: 16.38%
65 to 74: 8.21%
75 and Over: 8.48%

Median Male Age: 42.5
Median Female Age: 46.0
Median Age: 44.2

Tract Median Age Rank in Columbus out of 156
110: 41.6 138th
120: 46.8 153rd

The area skews much older than Columbus’s average of around 31 years old, and females make up more of the population. European ancestry dominates.

Income and Poverty
Per-Capita Income: $39,261
Median Individual Income: $43,964
Median Household Income: $71,240

Population in Poverty: 10.0%
Families in Poverty: 2.99%

Educational Attainment
Less than High School: 1.49%
High School Graduate: 14.44%
Some College: 22.09%
Bachelor’s Degree: 35.27%
Masters, Doctorate or Other Professional Degree: 19.15%

School Enrollment Preference
Public Schools: 47.38%
Private Schools: 52.62%

Overall, the Clintonville/Beechwold/Whetstone areas are mid-20th century neighborhoods that are well educated, earn more than the national average, have an older population than the Columbus average, and skew female and European. The population also values private and public education fairly equally, but private schools are the winner.

Is Columbus Getting Younger?

This article: http://www.newgeography.com/content/003351-america-s-baby-boom-and-baby-bust-cities
from New Geography suggests… maybe. It was one of only two Midwestern cities (the other being Indianapolis) that saw its population of people aged 15 and younger grow from 2000-2010, and actually scored at #18 for the best growth in this catergory in the 51 largest metros. The 15 and younger population grew by almost 32,000, or 9.2%. Columbus has long been a young city, especially within Ohio, where the median age is almost 37, higher than the national average. In 2010, Columbus’ median age was just 31.4. Should its young population continue to rise, that median age may actually drop over time. It’s long been established that younger cities tend to do better economically and with growth, while aging cities tend to see sustained decline, so this is good news for Columbus’ future.

Age Demographics for the City of Columbus 2000-2010
Under 5
2000: 52,638 7.4%
2010: 61,122 7.7%
5 to 14
2000: 95,251 13.4%
2010: 99,143 12.6%
15 to 24
2000: 122,768 17.3%
2010: 133,796 16.9%
25 to 34
2000: 139,327 19.6%
2010: 147,584 18.7%
35 to 44
2000: 112,361 15.8%
2010: 110,342 14.0%
45 to 54
2000: 80,668 11.3%
2010: 97,782 12.4%
55 to 64
2000: 45,949 6.5%
2010: 74,265 9.4%
65 to 74
2000: 33,718 4.7%
2010: 35,816 4.5%
75 and Over
2000: 28,964 4.1%
2010: 30,089 3.8%

Age Demographics for the Metropolitan Area 2000-2010
Under 5
2000: 115,002 7.1%
2010: 127,350 6.9%
5 to 14
2000: 233,018 14.4%
2010: 253,211 13.8%
15 to 24
2000: 233,784 14.5%
2010: 264,784 14.4%
25 to 34
2000: 256,992 15.9%
2010: 270,931 14.7%
35 to 44
2000: 270,406 16.8%
2010: 260,069 14.1%
45 to 54
2000: 213,906 13.3%
2010: 265,770 14.4%
55 to 64
2000: 127,707 7.9%
2010: 202,911 11.0%
65 to 74
2000: 89,876 5.6%
2010: 109,390 5.9%
75 and Over
2000: 72,003 4.5%
2010: 86,215 4.7%