Author Archives: admin

Young Professionals and the City: A Comparison

Posted on by
Reply




young professionals

Millennials- those born roughly between 1981 and 2001- are big news these days. They 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. I wanted to look at Columbus and its peers to see where it ranks in terms of attracting these young professionals.

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. I used the age group of 25-34 specifically, as that is usually the number most often cited in the news.

Rank of Total Population Aged 25-34
2005_______________________2010___________________2014
1. Chicago: 463,236_______1. Chicago: 510,042_______1. Chicago: 525,381
2. San Antonio: 180,981_____2. San Antonio: 200,645____2. San Antonio: 226,711
3. Austin: 137,523_________3. Austin: 162,247_________3. Austin: 199,838
4. San Jose, CA: 133,144___4. Columbus: 147,584______4. Columbus: 170,759
5. Columbus: 131,641______5. San Jose, CA: 142,551___5. San Jose, CA: 153,690
6. Indianapolis: 114,532_____6. Indianapolis: 133,088____6. Charlotte, NC: 141,869
7. Detroit: 110,759_________7. Charlotte, NC: 127,539___7. Indianapolis: 140,491
8. Charlotte, NC: 100,025____8. Portland, OR: 113,210___8. Portland, OR: 116,109
9. Portland, OR: 90,023_____9. Milwaukee: 97,359______9. Milwaukee: 100,205
10. Las Vegas: 84,418______10. Detroit: 85,023________10. Minneapolis: 90,662
11. Milwaukee: 82,060______11. Minneapolis: 81,532____11. Las Vegas: 90,441
12. Sacramento, CA: 75,497___12. Las Vegas: 81,212____12. Detroit: 89,843
13. Minneapolis: 74,208___13. Sacramento, CA: 78,527__13. Sacramento, CA: 84,013
14. Kansas City, MO: 68,060__14. Kansas City: 73,872__14. Kansas City, MO: 79,262
15. Virginia Beach: 60,749__15. Virginia Beach: 67,614__15. Virginia Beach: 75,543
16. Omaha, NE: 56,248____16. Omaha, NE: 62,396_____16. Omaha, NE: 71,040
17. Wichita, KS: 52,426____17. St. Louis: 57,627_______17. Pittsburgh: 62,473
18. Cleveland: 50,558_____18. Wichita, KS: 56,737_____18. St. Louis: 61,718
19. St. Louis: 48,137______19. Cleveland: 54,428______19. Wichita, KS: 58,334
20. Cincinnati: 44,945_____20. Pittsburgh: 51,109______20. Cleveland: 56,134
21. Toledo: 43,134_______21. St. Paul, MN: 50,107_____21. St. Paul, MN: 54,464
22. Orlando: 40,846______22. Cincinnati: 49,067_______22. Orlando: 54,395
23. St. Paul, MN: 39,676__23. Orlando: 48,102________23. Cincinnati: 54,247
24. Lincoln, NE: 38,893___24. Madison, WI: 44,662_____24. Madison, WI: 44,835
25. Madison, WI: 38,826___25. Lincoln, NE: 42,034_____25. Toledo: 43,661
26. Pittsburgh: 38,744____26. Toledo: 41,580_________26. Lincoln, NE: 40,071
27. Grand Rapids: 35,287__27. Fort Wayne, IN: 35,193__27: Grand Rapids: 38,922
28. Des Moines: 32,640__28. Providence, RI: 31,044__28. Fort Wayne, IN: 37,741
29. Fort Wayne, IN: 31,738__29. Grand Rapids: 30,963__29. Des Moines: 33,857
30. Akron: 30,436_______30. Des Moines: 30,376_____30. Providence, RI: 31,902
31. Providence, RI: 29,307__31. Akron: 27,446________31. Akron: 28,207
32. Dayton: 18,591_______32. Dayton: 20,278________32. Dayton: 21,096
33. Youngstown: 8,505____33. Youngstown: 8,484_____33. Youngstown: 8,468

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

Total Growth Rank in 25-34 Population 2005-2014
1. Austin, TX: 62,315
2. Chicago: 62,145
3. San Antonio, TX: 45,730
4. Charlotte, NC: 41,844
5. Columbus: 39,118
6. Portland, OR: 26,086
7. Indianapolis: 25,959
8. Pittsburgh: 23,729
9. San Jose, CA: 20,546
10. Milwaukee, WI: 18,145
11. Minneapolis, MN: 16,454
12. Virginia Beach, VA: 14,794
13. St. Paul, MN: 14,788
14. Omaha, NE: 14,612
15. St. Louis, MO: 13,581
16. Orlando, FL: 13,549
17. Kansas City, MO: 11,202
18. Cincinnati: 9,302
19. Sacramento, CA: 8,516
20. Las Vegas, NV: 6,023
21. Madison, WI: 6,009
22. Fort Wayne, IN: 6,003
23. Wichita, KS: 5,908
24. Cleveland: 5,576
25. Grand Rapids, MI: 3,635
26. Providence, RI: 2,595
27. Dayton: 2,505
28. Des Moines, IA: 1,217
29. Lincoln, NE: 1,178
30. Toledo: 527
31. Youngstown: -37
32. Akron: -2,229
33. Detroit: -20,736

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

Total Growth Rank of 25-34 Population 2010-2014
1. Austin: 37,591
2. San Antonio: 26,066
3. Columbus: 23,175
4. Chicago: 15,339
5. Charlotte: 14,330
6. Pittsburgh: 11,364
7. San Jose: 11,139
8. Las Vegas: 9,229
9. Minneapolis: 9,130
10. Omaha: 8,644
11. Grand Rapids: 7,959
12. Virginia Beach: 7,929
13. Indianapolis: 7,403
14. Orlando: 6,293
15. Sacramento: 5,486
16. Kansas City: 5,390
17. Cincinnati: 5,180
18. Detroit: 4,820
19. St. Paul: 4,357
20. St. Louis: 4,091
21. Des Moines: 3,481
22. Portland: 2,899
23. Milwaukee: 2,846
24. Fort Wayne: 2,548
25. Toledo: 2,081
26. Cleveland: 1,706
27. Wichita: 1,597
28. Providence: 858
29. Dayton: 818
30. Akron: 761
31. Madison: 173
32. Youngstown: -16
33. Lincoln: -1,963

So Columbus is doing even better since 2010 than it did in the earlier period and attracts significantly more Millennials in the 25-34 age group than cities often cited for this very metric.

Next, let’s look at percentage growth, as city size can affect this.

Total Percent Growth 2005-2014 in 25-34 Population
1. Pittsburgh: +61.25%
2. Austin: +45.31%
3. Charlotte: +41.83%
4. St. Paul: +37.27%
5. Orlando: +33.17%
6. Columbus: +29.72%
7. Portland: +28.98%
8. St. Louis: +28.21%
9. Omaha: +25.89%
10. San Antonio: +25.27%
11. Virginia Beach: +24.35%
12. Indianapolis: +22.67%
13. Minneapolis: +22.17%
14. Milwaukee: +22.11%
15. Cincinnati: +20.70%
16. Fort Wayne: +18.91%
17. Kansas City: +16.46%
18. Madison: +15.48%
19. San Jose: +15.43%
20. Dayton: +13.47%
21. Chicago: +13.42%
22. Sacramento: +11.28%
23. Wichita: +11.27%
24. Cleveland: +11.03%
25. Grand Rapids: +10.30%
26. Providence: +8.85%
27. Las Vegas: +7.13%
28. Des Moines: +3.73%
29. Lincoln: +3.03%
30. Toledo: +1.22%
31. Youngstown: -0.44%
32. Akron: -7.32%
33. Detroit: -18.75%

So Columbus again performs well in percentage growth, despite having one of the largest populations in the age group. It performs even better in the period since 2010, coming in at 3rd place.

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 2014
1. Minneapolis: 22.27%
2. Austin: 21.89%
3. Orlando: 20.73%
4. Pittsburgh: 20.45%
5. Columbus: 20.42%
6. Grand Rapids: 20.08%
7. St. Louis: 19.44%
8. Chicago: 19.30%
9. Portland: 18.74%
10. St. Paul: 18.30%
11. Madison: 18.25%
12. Cincinnati: 18.19%
13. Providence: 17.81%
14. Charlotte: 17.52%
15. Sacramento: 17.32%
16. Kansas City: 16.84%
17. Virginia Beach: 16.75%
18. Milwaukee: 16.71%
19. Indianapolis: 16.50%
20. Des Moines: 16.19%
21. Omaha: 15.91%
22. San Antonio: 15.78%
23. Toledo: 15.54%
24. San Jose: 15.13%
25. Wichita: 15.02%
26. Dayton: 14.96%
27. Fort Wayne: 14.74%
28. Las Vegas: 14.74%
29. Lincoln: 14.68%
30. Cleveland: 14.41%
31. Akron: 14.26%
32. Detroit: 13.21%
33. Youngstown: 13.02%

And here’s a simple % of population projection for just 4 years from now, 2018, provided the 25-34 population grows the same between 2014-2018 as it did 2010-2014.
1. Pittsburgh: 24.18%
2. Grand Rapids: 23.71%
3. Austin: 23.38%
4. Minneapolis: 23.27%
5. Columbus: 22.16%
6. Orlando: 21.34%
7. St. Louis: 20.82%
8. Cincinnati: 19.85%
9. Chicago: 19.70%
10. St. Paul: 19.05%
11. Providence: 18.20%
12. Portland: 18.14%
13. Virginia Beach: 18.1%
14. Sacramento: 17.84%
15. Charlotte: 17.67%
16. Kansas City: 17.64%
17. Des Moines: 17.50%
18. Madison: 17.40%
19. Milwaukee: 17.07%
20. Indianapolis: 16.85%
21. Omaha: 16.61%
22. Toledo: 16.59%
23. San Antonio: 16.52%
24. Fort Wayne: 15.61%
25. Las Vegas: 15.59%
26. Dayton: 15.27%
27. San Jose: 15.24%
28. Wichita: 15.23%
29. Cleveland: 15.08%
30. Akron: 14.73%
31. Detroit: 14.48%
32. Youngstown: 13.35%
33. Lincoln: 13.13%

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 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. Continue this look at this population in Part 2.



Columbus Bike and Pedestrian Infrastructure Map

Posted on by
Reply

So first up to repost from the data loss will be one of the easiest. As mentioned the first time, I wanted to create a map that included the 10-county metro area highlighting every bit of existing, planned and under construction infrastructure involving biking and pedestrian activities. There are some existing maps that show this, but they are not regularly updated and they lack significant detail in what type of infrastructure exists.

Here is the link to the map: https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=zjN5g-xqXg7o.kmfXTQGVWudU&usp=sharing

The map is still very much a work in progress. I have neither finished the existing infrastructure level or the planned infrastructure level. I update it a bit more almost every day, so keep checking back!



Historic Record of Early Season Cold

Posted on by
Reply




early season cold

With temperatures predicted to fall to near freezing for the first time this week for the fall season, I thought it might be interesting to take a look at the incidence of early season cold, and the average on when it tends to arrive.

Here are the earliest dates on record for the following:

Temperatures Below 40 and Temperature Range of Observed Dates
1. 8/29/1965: 39
2. 9/8/1951: 39
3. 9/9/1883: 39
4. 9/13/1964: 38
5. 9/14/1902, 9/14/1923, 9/14/1953, 19/14/1975: 38-39
6. 9/17/1959: 37
7. 9/20/1896, 9/20/1956, 9/20/1962: 37-39
8. 9/21/1889, 9/21/1897, 9/21/1991: 37-38
9. 9/22/1918, 9/22/1974, 9/22/1976, 9/22/1995: 37-38
10. 9/23/1885, 9/23/1913, 9/23/1963, 9/23/1967, 9/23/1981, 9/23/1989: 35-39

Average Date of First Under-40 Temp By Decade (1878-2014)
2010s: October 11th
2000s: October 8th
1990s: October 2nd
1980s: September 30th
1970s: October 1st
1960s: September 25th
1950s: September 25th
1940s: September 30th
1930s: October 11th
1920s: October 2nd
1910s: October 9th
1900s: October 5th
1890s: October 1st
1880s: October 2nd
1870s: October 1st

Highs Below 32
1. 10/30/1917: 32
2. 11/3/1951, 11/3/1966: 28-29
3. 11/4/1991: 27
4. 11/6/1967: 31
5. 11/7/1971: 31
6. 11/8/1976: 32
7. 11/10/1913: 27
8. 11/12/1920, 11/12/1921, 11/12/1932: 30-32
9. 11/13/1911, 11/13/1919, 11/13/1986, 11/13/1996: 25-32
10. 11/15/1880, 11/15/1893, 11/15/1916, 11/15/1933, 11/15/1940, 11/15/1969: 24-32

Average Date of First 32 or Below High By Decade
2010s: December 4th
2000s: December 2nd
1990s: December 7th
1980s: November 28th
1970s: November 29th
1960s: November 23rd
1950s: November 26th
1940s: December 2nd
1930s: November 27th
1920s: November 28th
1910s: November 22nd
1900s: November 30th
1890s: November 25th
1880s: November 30th
1870s: December 4th

Lows Below 32
1. 9/21/1962: 31
2. 9/29/1961: 32
3. 9/30/1888, 9/30/163: 31-32
4. 10/1/1899: 30
5. 10/2/1886, 10/2/1908, 10/2/1974: 31-32
6. 10/3/1975, 10/3/1981, 10/3/2003: 32
7. 10/4/1952, 10/4/1987: 29-32
8. 10/5/1965, 10/5/1968: 31-32
9. 10/6/1892, 10/6/1964, 10/6/1980, 10/6/1988: 30-31
10. 10/7/1889, 10/7/1935: 30-31

Average Date of First 32 or Below Low By Decade
2010s: October 24th
2000s: October 26th
1990s: October 22nd
1980s: October 17th
1970s: October 17th
1960s: October 8th
1950s: October 22nd
1940s: November 3rd
1930s: October 24th
1920s: October 28th
1910s: October 31st
1900s: October 24th
1890s: October 20th
1880s: October 20th
1870s: October 26th




Failed Project- Gay and Front City Office Tower

Posted on by
Reply



This occasional series on failed and canceled projects around the city today talks about an unassuming parking garage that was originally supposed to be much more.

Beginning in 1984 and continuing into 1985, a parking garage/city office tower was being tossed around to house an increasing number of city office works. Space had become tight and many existing buildings were more than 50 years old and required extensive renovations. The Daimler Group started construction on the 10-story garage part of the project at the southeast corner of W. Gay and N. Front in late 1984. The 16-story office project that would’ve been built on top (for a total 26-story building) was just one of 3 options the city was considering to alleviate its office problems. The other two options consisted of a $75 million civic center about a block north of City Hall, or simply renovating the existing buildings.

In the end, it was deemed that there were too many other problems to spend public dollars on. At the time, there was quite an issue with road maintenance funding, and the city deemed that it was not the right time to build a brand new tower for city workers. By April 1985, the project was dead, although the garage was finished and remains to this day.

city office tower

The Gay and Front garage in 2015.

Ironically, within a few years, the city would have several much larger office towers. 5 new towers were built between 1986 and 1991, though not all were specifically built for city offices. Renovation of existing buildings has been ongoing since.



Random Columbus Photos 3

Posted on by
Reply



This Random Columbus Photos 3 edition looks at a Downtown icon, the Columbus Athletic Club..

Photo Date: November 1, 1914
Location: 136 E. Broad Street
Random Columbus photos 3

The photo shows the ongoing excavation of the Columbus Athletic Club. It was conceived a few years prior as a social club by a group of wealthy Columbus businessmen in 1912. The organization was originally housed in the Atlas Building at Gay and High, but the club wanted their own building. Construction began in early 1914, and the 6-story building was dedicated in 1915. The 100-year-old institution, now on the National Register of Historic Places, looks pretty much the same as it did when it was first built, and it remains a private club to this day. Over the years, the club has had many prominent members, including politicians and even a president, Warren G. Harding.