The first part of this comparison of young professionals and the city, seen here, seemed to be well-received, so I wanted to expand the examination of the 25-34 age group. In the first post, I just compared growth of this population by Columbus’ peers, but let’s take a closer look at this group through educational attainment. I will use the same 33 cities I used in the first post.
Educational Attainment 2014 Rank by City of Bachelors Degree or Higher within 25-34 Population 1. Chicago: 268,470 2. Austin: 97,721 3. Columbus: 75,305 4. San Jose: 68,392 5. Charlotte: 63,132 6. San Antonio: 62,572 7. Portland: 60,259 8. Minneapolis: 51,043 9. Indianapolis: 48,188 10. Pittsburgh: 35,860 11. Kansas City: 32,101 12. Madison: 30,039 13. Milwaukee: 29,661 14. Omaha: 28,984 15. St. Louis: 28,946 16. Sacramento: 27,304 17. Cincinnati: 25,496 18. St. Paul: 22,929 19. Virginia Beach: 22,134 20. Orlando: 20,181 21. Wichita: 19,659 22. Las Vegas: 17,817 23. Lincoln: 16,429 24. Grand Rapids: 15,724 25. Detroit: 14,285 26. Fort Wayne: 12,228 27. Cleveland: 12,013 28. Des Moines: 10,089 29. Providence: 10,432 30. Toledo: 8,514 31. Akron: 6,600 32. Dayton: 4,029 33. Youngstown: 1,084
Columbus has the 3rd highest total of 25-34-year-olds with at least a bachelor’s degree, even compared to some cities with larger populations in the city or metro area. This is likely due to the high number of colleges and universities in the area, not least of which includes Ohio State.
2014 % of Total 25-34 Age Group with Bachelors or Higher 1. Madison: 67.0% 2. Pittsburgh: 57.4% 3. Minneapolis: 56.3% 4. Portland: 51.5% 5. Chicago: 51.1% 6. Austin: 48.9% 7. Cincinnati: 47.0% 8. St. Louis: 46.9% 9. Charlotte: 44.5% 10. San Jose: 44.5% 11. Columbus: 44.1% 12. St. Paul: 42.1% 13. Lincoln: 41.0% 14. Omaha: 40.8% 15. Grand Rapids: 40.5% 16. Kansas City: 40.5% 17. Orlando: 37.1% 18. Indianapolis: 34.3% 19. Wichita: 33.7% 20. Providence: 32.7% 21. Sacramento: 32.5% 22. Fort Wayne: 32.4% 23. Des Moines: 29.8% 24. Milwaukee: 29.6% 25. Virginia Beach: 29.3% 26. San Antonio: 27.6% 27. Akron: 23.4% 28. Cleveland: 21.4% 29. Las Vegas: 19.7% 30. Toledo: 19.5% 31. Dayton: 19.1% 32. Detroit: 15.9% 33. Youngstown: 12.8%
While just outside of the top 10 in the peer group, Columbus still performs in the top 1/3rd when it comes to the % of 25-34-year-olds that have at least a bachelor’s degree.
2000-2014 Total Change in Age 25-34 with a Bachelor’s Degree or Higher 1. Chicago: +78,514 2. Austin: +38,348 3. Portland: +26,042 4. San Antonio: +23,504 5. Columbus: +21,601 6. Charlotte: +19,149 7. Pittsburgh: +19,060 8. Minneapolis: +15,629 9. St. Louis: +14,538 10. San Jose: +13,372 11. Sacramento: +11,530 12. Kansas City: +10,499 13. Madison: +8,774 14. Orlando: +8,600 15. Omaha: +8,521 16. Indianapolis: +8,369 17. Milwaukee: +7,031 18. Grand Rapids: +6,275 19. Wichita: +6,049 20. Fort Wayne: +5,350 21. Cincinnati: +5,083 22. Las Vegas: +4,433 23. St. Paul: +4,316 24. Virginia Beach: +4,167 25. Lincoln: +3,450 26. Providence: +2,488 27. Des Moines: +806 28. Dayton: +59 29. Youngstown: -108 30. Cleveland: -522 31. Akron: -628 32. Detroit: -1,471 33. Toledo: -1,639
Another great showing is in the total growth of 25-34-year-olds with at least a bachelor’s degree. Again, Columbus is outperforming several larger cities/metros on the list.
2000-2014 Total % Change in Age 25-34 with a Bachelor’s Degree or Higher 1. Pittsburgh: +113.45% 2. St. Louis: +100.90% 3. Fort Wayne: +77.78% 4. Portland: +76.11% 5. Orlando: +74.26% 6. Sacramento: +73.09% 7. Grand Rapids: +66.41% 8. Austin: +64.59% 9. San Antonio: +60.16% 10. Kansas City: +48.60% 11. Wichita: +44.45% 12. Minneapolis: +44.13% 13. Charlotte: +43.54% 14. Omaha: +41.64% 15. Chicago: +41.33% 16. Madison: +41.26% 17. Columbus: +40.22% 18. Las Vegas: +33.12% 19. Providence: +31.32% 20. Milwaukee: +31.07% 21. Lincoln: +26.58% 22. Cincinnati: +24.90% 23. San Jose: +24.30% 24. St. Paul: +23.19% 25. Virginia Beach: +23.19% 26. Indianapolis: +21.02% 27. Des Moines: +8.68% 28. Dayton: +1.49% 29. Cleveland: -4.16% 30. Akron: -8.69% 31. Youngstown: -9.06% 32. Detroit: -9.34% 33. Toledo: -16.14%
So in Part 1, it was shown that Columbus had one of the fastest growing 25-34 populations. These numbers show that it also has one of the largest age 25-34 populations with a Bachelor’s degree or higher in terms of totals, and one of the fastest growing in terms of totals. By %, however, it performs a bit worse, but part of the reason for that is because so many of these cities started with relatively low educated populations to begin with. Overall, Columbus seems to be very attractive, not only to this age group, but also for those within the group that are highly educated.
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.
This link, entitled The Changing Shape of American Cities, gives comparison maps for multi-demographic data points between 1990 and 2012 for dozens of cities, including Columbus. It gives this demographics by distance, meaning that the information is broken down by the status at the mile distance from “City Hall”, or from the center of each city’s downtown area.
This allows users to compare cities using standardized areas even though cities come in very different sizes.
Using these graphs, here are some examples of the information we can see for Columbus’s immediate downtown.
% of Population with a Bachelor’s Degree at Mile 0 1990: 26% 2012: 51%
% of Population Aged 22-34 at Mile 0 1990: 32% 2012: 38%
% of Population Living Below the Poverty Line at Mile 0 1990: 30% 2012: 27%
Over the years, I’ve learned that Columbus has a very suburban reputation, meaning that it is perceived to have very low density throughout, especially because it aggressively annexed suburban areas into the city limits decades ago. With those claims, I wondered what the metro population densities would be if Columbus’ area size was scaled down to others, with the goal of finding out if it really deserves the suburban reputation. Bare with me, because there is a lot to look at.
First, I used Columbus’ 18 peer metros (population 1.5-2.5 million) per the Census, as well as the 14 largest Midwest metros. Since there was some overlap in the 2 groups, it made for a total group comparison of 27. So a fairly sizeable group. Next, I used the mile marker population, which in the City Hall census analysis is made up of circles going out from the center. So it’s just a matter of finding the area of each circle and dividing the population into that. What’s left is the density by area.
Density at Mile Marker 3, with an Area of 28.27 Square Miles 2000————————————2010 1. Chicago: 17,528.7_____________________ 1. Chicago: 18,003.2 2. San Jose, CA: 13,883.0________________ 2. San Jose, CA: 14,549.2 3. Las Vegas: 11,646.0___________________ 3. Las Vegas: 11,576.2 4. Minneapolis: 11,494.2_________________ 4. Minneapolis: 11,503.3 5. Milwaukee: 11,448.9___________________ 5. Milwaukee: 11,288.0 6. Providence: 11,173.7__________________ 6. Providence, RI: 11,240.2 7. Pittsburgh: 10,594.4__________________ 7. Pittsburgh: 9,738.7 8. San Antonio. TX: 9,234.3______________ 8. Portland, OR: 8,973.6 9. Portland, OR: 8,257.0_________________ 9. San Antonio, TX: 8,846.8 10. Cincinnati: 8,141.9__________________ 10. Columbus: 7,834.0 11. Columbus: 8,134.9____________________ 11. Sacramento, CA: 7,668.7 12. Sacramento, CA: 7,261.5______________ 12. Austin, TX: 7,534.0 13. Austin, TX: 7,232.3__________________ 13. Cincinnati: 7,273.6 14. Akron: 6,925.4_______________________ 14. Grand Rapids, MI: 6,540.0 15. Grand Rapids, MI: 6,852.0____________ 15. Akron: 6,284.9 16. Indianapolis: 6,727.9________________ 16. Orlando: 6,055.1 17. Toledo: 6,651.5______________________ 17. Omaha: 5,968.3 18. Dayton: 6,382.8______________________ 18. Toledo: 5,982.1 19. St. Louis: 6,093.7___________________ 19. Indianapolis: 5,879.9 20. Kansas City: 6,025.1_________________ 20. St. Louis: 5,663.8
Density at Mile Marker 4, with an Area of 50.27 Square Miles 2000———————————2010 1. Chicago: 15,447.2____________________ 1. Chicago: 15,205.9 2. San Jose, CA: 12,209.3_______________ 2. San Jose, CA: 12,629.6 3. Las Vegas: 9,788.0___________________ 3. Las Vegas: 10,022.2 4. Minneapolis: 8,874.4_________________ 4. Minneapolis: 8,921.8 5. Milwaukee: 8,823.8___________________ 5. Milwaukee: 8,725.5 6. Providence, RI: 8,454.3______________ 6. Providence, RI: 8,483.8 7. Pittsburgh: 8,216.0__________________ 7. Portland, OR: 7,785.5 8. Portland, OR: 7,282.9________________ 8. Pittsburgh: 7,602.6 9. San Antonio, TX: 7,208.6_____________ 9. San Antonio, TX: 6,995.5 10. Cincinnati: 6,922.8_________________ 10. Cincinnati: 6,279.4 11. Columbus: 6,449.3___________________ 11. Columbus: 6,257.4 12. Sacramento, CA: 5,744.7_____________ 12. Sacramento, CA: 6,138.5 13. Austin, TX: 5,541.5_________________ 13. Austin, TX: 5,847.2 14. St. Louis: 5,447.5__________________ 14. Omaha: 5,047.2 15. Cleveland: 5,356.2__________________ 15. St. Louis: 5,001.6 16. Indianapolis: 5,348.8_______________ 16. Grand Rapids, MI: 4,922.9 17. Detroit: 5,163.1____________________ 17. Orlando: 4,911.7 18. Omaha: 5,019.8______________________ 18. Indianapolis: 4,793.5 19. Akron: 4,900.7______________________ 19. Akron: 4,532.0 20. Dayton: 4,889.3_____________________ 20. Cleveland: 4,521.8
Density at Mile Marker 5, with an Area of 78.54 Square Miles Note that this area size is about the current city size of Cincinnati and Cleveland. 2000————————————2010 1. Chicago: 14,213.6___________________ 1. Chicago: 13,591.0 2. San Jose, CA: 10,464.0______________ 2. San Jose, CA: 11,037.1 3. Las Vegas: 8,521.9__________________ 3. Las Vegas: 9,062.8 4. Minneapolis: 7,443.0________________ 4. Minneapolis: 7,455.9 5. Milwaukee: 7,081.2__________________ 5. Milwaukee: 7,029.1 6. Pittsburgh: 7,009.9_________________ 6. Pittsburgh: 6,492.7 7. San Antonio, TX: 6,326.6____________ 7. Portland, OR: 6,442.3 8. Providence, RI: 6,048.3_____________ 8. San Antonio, TX: 6,223.4 9. Portland, OR: 5,950.1_______________ 9. Providence, RI: 6,055.8 10. Cincinnati: 5,588.9________________ 10. Sacramento, CA: 5,664.2 11. Cleveland: 5,494.6_________________ 11. Orlando: 5,274.1 12. Columbus: 5,252.9__________________ 12. Columbus: 5,152.1 13. Sacramento, CA: 5,104.0____________ 13. Cincinnati: 5,096.2 14. Orlando: 4,993.7___________________ 14. Austin, TX: 4,993.7 15. Austin, TX: 4,786.5________________ 15. Cleveland: 4,602.4 16. Detroit: 4,748.7___________________ 16. St. Louis: 4,285.4 17. St. Louis: 4,731.5_________________ 17. Indianapolis: 4,086.1 18. Indianapolis: 4,447.7______________ 18. Omaha: 3,962.2 19. Akron: 4,025.9_____________________ 19. Grand Rapids, MI: 3,887.3 20. Grand Rapids, MI: 3,990.6__________ 20. Akron: 3,778.8
So if Columbus was the same size as Cincinnati and Cleveland, it would be the most dense city of the 3. And it’s generally in the top half of the grouping in its most urban areas.
But what about further out, past the urban core?
Density at Mile Marker 10, with an Area of 314.16 Square Miles. This area size is much larger than the city limits of Columbus, but it gives an idea of the larger area’s density and not just within the city limits. 2000———————————–2010 1. Chicago: 9,344.3______________________ 1. Chicago: 8,795.0 2. San Jose, CA: 4,563.2_________________ 2. San Jose, CA: 4,809.8 3. Minneapolis: 4,183.2__________________ 3. Las Vegas: 4,794.2 4. Detroit: 4,117.4______________________ 4. Portland, OR: 4,230.3 5. Las Vegas: 3,877.3____________________ 5. Minneapolis: 4,178.3 6. Portland: 3,780.8_____________________ 6. San Antonio, TX: 3,454.9 7. Cleveland: 3,308.4____________________ 7. Detroit: 3,354.7 8. Pittsburgh: 3,279.8___________________ 8. Columbus: 3,163.9 9. San Antonio, TX: 3,217.8______________ 9. Pittsburgh: 3,080.4 10. Milwaukee: 3,013.7___________________ 10. Orlando: 3,055.0 11. Columbus: 2,973.3____________________ 11. Sacramento, CA: 3,016.4 12. St. Louis: 2,937.6___________________ 12. Milwaukee: 3,006.2 13. Cincinnati: 2,873.4__________________ 13. Cleveland: 2,923.7 14. Orlando: 2,783.9_____________________ 14. Indianapolis: 2,772.6 15. Sacramento, CA: 2,736.7______________ 15. St. Louis: 2,751.3 16. Indianapolis: 2,652.6________________ 16. Cincinnati: 2,746.8 17. Kansas City: 2,599.0_________________ 17. Kansas City: 2,538.3 18. Providence, RI: 2,360.0______________ 18. Austin, TX: 2,439.6 19. Austin, TX: 2,111.3__________________ 19. Providence, RI: 2,375.1 20. Dayton: 1,920.7______________________ 20. Charlotte, NC: 2,332.7
So what does all this tell us? That while Columbus is not the most dense city of its peer group, or within the Midwest group, it probably does not wholly deserve its low-density, suburban reputation. Most of the measurements are in the top half of the grouping for density, yes, but it is clearly the most weak in the urban core closest to Downtown, as that ranking is the lowest for it. The Mile 0 population, for example, is down near the very bottom, and that is a good reason why densities are not as high as they should/could be. Currently, Downtown and surrounding neighborhoods are seeing a residential development boom, so that will help, but the city needs to think a lot bigger if it wants that stereotype to truly go away. The recent abandonment of the Convention Center mixed-use project is not a good way to go about that goal… and it should be a goal.
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%
