Columbus Poverty vs. Ohio Cities



Columbus poverty

Columbus poverty, like poverty everywhere else, is not exactly a positive metric. But how does its own rate compare to that of other Ohio cities? The following numbers are based off the American Community Survey. They are estimates, not physical counts like the population census, so there is a definite fudge factor involved with them as to their overall accuracy. 2011 is the latest year available for the ACS estimates.

2011 % of City Population Living in Poverty, Lowest to Highest
1. Columbus: 23.2%
2. Akron: 28.9%
3. Cincinnati: 29.5%
4. Toledo: 30.1%
5. Youngstown: 33.2%
6. Cleveland: 34.3%
7. Dayton: 35.7%

Change from 2010-2011
Cincinnati: -3.6%
Akron: -1.7%
Cleveland: +0.9%
Columbus: +2.7%
Dayton: +3.5%
Youngstown: +4.4%
Toledo: +16.7%
Change from 2007-2011
Youngstown: +1.8%
Columbus: +10.5%
Cleveland: +16.3%
Dayton: +18.2%
Akron: +22.5%
Cincinnati: +25.5%
Toledo: +33.2%

Change from 2000-2011
1. Cleveland: +30.4%
2. Youngstown: +33.9%
3. Cincinnati: +34.7%
4. Dayton: +55.2%
5. Columbus: +56.8%
6. Akron: +65.1%
7. Toledo: +68.2%

2011 % of Metro Population Living in Poverty, Lowest to Highest
1. Cincinnati: 14.3%
2. Columbus: 15.4%
3. Cleveland: 16.0%
4. Youngstown: 16.1%
5. Akron: 16.6%
6. Dayton: 17.6%
7. Toledo: 20.2%

Change from 2010-2011
1. Youngstown: -5.8%
2. Columbus: -1.9%
3. Cincinnati: +2.1%
4. Cleveland: +6.0%
5. Akron: +7.1%
6. Dayton: +8.0%
7. Toledo: +16.1%

Change from 2007-2011
1. Youngstown: +8.8%
2. Columbus: +14.9%
3. Akron: +23.9%
4. Cleveland: +26.0%
5. Cincinnati: +28.8%
6. Toledo: +36.5%
7. Dayton: +37.5%

Change from 2000-2011
1. Youngstown: +40.0%
2. Cleveland: +48.1%
3. Cincinnati: +50.5%
4. Columbus: +55.5%
5. Toledo: +66.9%
6. Akron: +69.4%
7. Dayton: +76.0%



Columbus Residential Development Booming




Columbus residential development booming

During and just after the recession’s housing crash, single-family home construction in the Columbus area seemed to fall apart, much like it did across the nation. Foreclosure rates soared, prices fell and builders were suddenly left with too many homes they couldn’t get rid of.

Out of the ashes of this market rose a surge in rental demand. It suddenly made more and more sense to rent rather than to own, especially for young professionals and empty nesters who wanted to downsize during tough economic times. Not only did what housing people wanted change, but so did where they wanted it to be located.

Columbus experienced a relative boom in rental housing during the late 1990s into the first few years of the 2000s, but almost all of that rental housing was constructed along and outside of I-270, where the suburbs were exploding with growth. Inside of 270 saw little of this, and the urban core neighborhoods around Downtown were almost completely ignored altogether. Single-family housing became popular again during the early 2000s mild recession, and the housing boom that would help lead to the Great Recession of 2007-2009 really began at that time. However, it was in 2002 that the City and Mayor Coleman came up with a 10-year plan to help bring more residents to Downtown. It began offering tax incentives to developers who would build there, in some cases 100% abatements, in a goal to have 10,000 residential units built in and around Downtown by 2012.

I’ve done a ton of research on the results of this move by the city, and it did have an impact. From what I’ve been able to find (so far), Downtown and the surrounding neighborhoods saw the addition of less than 200 residential units between 2000 and 2002. 2003 saw over 500 alone with the new incentives package in place. Between 2003 and 2006, the area added over 2,000 new residential units, most of them condos. As the Great Recession hit in 2007, the rate of new projects slowed to half of what it was, though still higher than it was prior to 2003.

As the Great Recession eased and more financing became available, construction began to pick up once more. With the new trends in favor of urban living and rentals, the rental market has exploded and overall Columbus residential development is booming across all parts of the city.



1810 US Census



The 1810 US Census doesn’t exactly have a lot of information available. The earliest censuses seem to focus more on economic information rather than population and demographics.

In 1810, Ohio had just 36 counties and Columbus had not been founded yet. Franklin County, however, did exist at the time, as well as Franklinton and a few other towns.

Franklin County
Cotton Goods Value in Dollars: $6,043
Rank of Ohio’s Counties: 3rd
Flaxen Goods Value in Dollars: $13,935
Rank of Ohio’s Counties: 13th
Blended and Unnamed Cloths and Stuffs Value in Dollars: $9,927
Rank of Ohio’s Counties: 15th
Woolen Goods Value in Dollars: $2,496
Rank of Ohio’s Counties: 13th
# of Looms: 150
# of Naileries: 1
# of Tanneries: 5

That’s all I have for now, but if I find more information about the area in 1810, I will add it here.

Housing Impact of Immigration



Housing impact of immigration

The Impact of Immigration on the Housing Market

For this link, you can zoom to county level and see the housing impact of immigration. Basically, the more immigration, the greater the impact.

Columbus Housing Market May 2013



May home sales set a record for the month.
Columbus housing market May 2013

Through May, total sales are also way up, and were the 2nd highest for the 2000-2013 period.

The average May home sales price was the highest since 2006.

The average January-May sales price was also up.

To me, all this shows is that after the Recession’s downturn, housing in the Columbus area is seeing a strong recovery. In some cases, the recovery is already surpassing the market that existed pre-Recession.