For years, if not decades, we’ve been hearing a familiar tale- that anyone and everyone is moving from the Midwest and Northeast to the South and West. This trend began during and after the collapse of Northern manufacturing, and as higher cost of living began to make the lower-cost South more attractive in particular. However, a lot of the South’s growth over the years- indeed a majority- never had anything to do with region-to-region migration. Instead, it was due largely to natural growth (births vs. deaths) and international migration, particularly from Central America. What received all the attention, though, was the belief that people were packing up and moving to the South from places like Ohio and other struggling Northern states. While that may have been true for a while, that is increasingly looking like it is no longer the case.
The Midwest, especially, has been derided as the region no one wants to live in. Despite its growing population approaching 66 million people, the common refrain was that its colder winters, flailing economies and questionable demographic future meant that it was simply a region being left behind by the booming Southern states.
Recently, the US Census released estimates for 2015-2016 geographic mobility, and they tell a very different story altogether. Regional domestic migration in 2016 may have actually bucked the trends.
First, let’s look at the total domestic migration moving to the Midwest from other regions. South to Midwest: +309,000 West to Midwest: +72,000 Northeast to Midwest: +61,000 Total to Midwest: +442,000
And then compare that to the total that the Midwest sends to other regions. Midwest to South: -254,000 Midwest to West: -224,000 Midwest to Northeast: -34,000 Total from Midwest: -512,000
Net difference by region. Midwest vs. South: +55,000 Midwest vs. West: -152,000 Midwest vs. Northeast: +27,000 Total Net: -70,000
So while the Midwest is seeing an overall net domestic migration loss, it is entirely to the Western states.
This could just be an off year, as almost all recent years showed losses to the South, but then again, maybe not. The South has been in a boom for several decades now, and in that time, the region still lags the other 3 in almost every quality of life metric used. All booms end eventually, and the South’s 2 biggest perceived advantages, low cost of living and business-friendly climate, have been gradually eroding over time. As Census surveys show, people don’t actually move for a change in weather, so it’s the economic factors that are going to make the biggest impacts long-term. The Midwest now has many cities and several states that are doing well economically, including Columbus, and perhaps they are becoming more attractive than they have in many years. Time will tell, but last year, the narrative of an unattractive Midwest vs. South was at least temporarily shelved.
I’ve seen several articles across the internet lately questioning the idea that Millennials and young adults prefer density and urban areas. I decided to see how this played out in Franklin County overall. I first looked at the total population aged 20-34 in the year 2000 and the year 2015 by Census Tract. Here were the maps for those years.
After looking at the numbers for both years, I came up with this map for how that age group had changed in the 2000-2015 period.
Unfortunately, some tracts, particularly in the eastern suburban areas, did not exist in 2000, and so I was not able to figure out the change for them during the period. The rest of the map, however, shows that the strongest growth in this age group was not only inside 270, but closest to Downtown and central corridors along Broad and High Streets. These maps don’t tell us about the relationship between those changes and the population density of the census tracts. So I went further and broke the tracts into increments of density to see where the strongest growth was occurring.
With a few exceptions, there appears to be a correlation between average 20-34 aged population growth and the density of the census tracts it occurs in. This suggests that this age group, at least in Franklin County, prefers areas with moderate to high density, which typically translates to urban living.
The 2016 population estimates came out this morning from the Census. Nationally, it seems that overall growth rates slowed down from where they were the year prior, and there were some surprising results in a few cases.
First, let’s take a look at the core counties for Columbus and its peer/Midwest counterparts nationally. The core city is in parenthesis. 2010—————————————————2015———————————2016 1. Cook (Chicago): 5,194,675————-1. Cook: 5,224,823————-1. Cook: 5,203,499 2. Clark (Las Vegas): 1,951,269———-2. Clark: 2,109,289————-2. Clark: 2,155,664 3. Wayne (Detroit): 1,820,584————-3. Santa Clara: 1,910,105—-3. Bexar: 1,928,680 4. Santa Clara (San Jose): 1,781,642—4. Bexar: 1,895,482—4. Santa Clara: 1,919,402 5. Bexar (San Antonio): 1,714,773——-5. Wayne: 1,757,062———5. Wayne: 1,749,366 6. Sacramento (Sac.): 1,418,788–6. Sacramento: 1,496,664–6. Sacramento: 1,414,460 7. Cuyahoga (Cleveland): 1,280,122—7. Orange: 1,284,864——–7. Orange: 1,314,367 8. Allegheny (Pittsburgh): 1,223,348—8. Cuyahoga: 1,255,025—-8. Franklin: 1,264,518 9. Franklin (Columbus): 1,163,414—–9. Franklin: 1,250,269—–9. Cuyahoga: 1,249,352 10. Hennepin (Minn.): 1,152,425—10. Allegheny: 1,229,298—-10. Hennepin: 1,232,483 11. Orange (Orlando): 1,145,951—11. Hennepin: 1,220,459—-11. Allegheny: 1,225,365 12. Travis (Austin): 1,024,266——12. Travis: 1,174,818——12. Travis: 1,199,323 13. Milwaukee (Mil): 947,735–13. Mecklenburg: 1,033,466–13. Mecklenburg: 1,054,835 14. Mecklenburg (Charl.): 919,628–14. Milwaukee: 956,314—14. Milwaukee: 951,448 15. Marion (Indianapolis): 903,393—15. Marion: 938,058———–15. Marion: 941,229 16. Hamilton (Cincinnati): 802,374—16. Hamilton: 807,748——–16. Hamilton: 809,099 17. Multnomah (Portland): 735,334–17. Multnomah: 789,125—17. Multnomah: 799,766 18. Jackson (Kansas City): 674,158–18. Jackson: 686,373——-18. Jackson: 691,801 19. Davidson (Nashville): 626,667—19. Davidson: 678,323——-19. Davidson: 684,410 20. Providence (Providence): 626,671–20. Kent: 636,095———20. Kent: 642,173 21. Kent (Grand Rapids): 602,622–21. Providence: 632,488—-21. Providence: 633,673 22. Summit (Akron): 541,781———22. Douglas: 549,168——–22. Douglas: 554,995 23. Montgomery (Dayton): 535,153–23. Summit: 541,316——–23. Summit: 540,300 24. Douglas (Omaha): 517,110–24. Montgomery: 531,567——24. Dane: 531,273 25. Sedgwick (Wichita): 498,365–25. Dane: 522,878———–25. Montgomery: 531,239 26. Dane (Madison): 488,073——-26. Sedgwick: 510,360——26. Sedgwick: 511,995 27. Lucas (Toledo): 441,815——–27. Polk: 466,688————–27. Polk: 474,045 28. Virginia Beach (VB): 437,994–28. Virginia Beach: 451,854–28. Vir. Beach: 452,602 29. Polk (Des Moines): 430,640—-29. Lucas: 433,496————-29. Lucas: 432,488 30. Allen (Fort Wayne): 355,359—30. Allen: 368,040————-30. Allen: 370,404 31. St. Louis (St. Louis): 319,294–31. St. Louis: 314,875———31. St. Louis: 311,404 32. Lancaster (Lincoln): 285,407—32. Lancaster: 305,705——-32. Lancaster: 309,637 33. Mahoning (Youngstown): 238,823–33. Mahoning: 231,767–33. Mahoning: 230,008
Franklin County moved up one spot to 8th most populated core county of the group.
A little more than 4 years ago, I posted numbers on the recovery of Ohio downtowns, and what that might mean for the future. That post has proven to be one of the site’s most popular. I figured it was time to take a look at their continuing changes.
You can see by the chart for the 1950 Boundary population, the urban core of each city, that all 3-Cs suffered population losses post-1950. However, the rate of losses gradually declined, and 2 of the cities, Columbus and Cincinnati, appear to be growing in this boundary since at least 2010. Cleveland continues to lose.
This is shown further by the chart below.
As far as the actual Downtowns of each, here are the population trends.
For the most part, population declines in the 3-Cs peaked around 1980, give or take a decade. Since then, all of them have seen increases, with Cleveland seeing the most rapid increase and Cincinnati the least. Columbus has seen steady, but increasingly rapid growth with each subsequent decade since 1980.
The Census just came out with 2015 demographic numbers for all places with at least 65,000 people. Given that half the decade is over, it’s a good point to look at where Columbus stands relative to its national/Midwest peers in a foreign-born comparison. A few days ago, I gave numbers for GDP. In the next few posts, I will look at the people that make up the populations of these places.
First up, let’s take a look at foreign-born populations. I have looked at this topic some in the past, but I have never done a full-scale comparison for this topic.
Total Foreign-Born Population Rank by City 2000, 2010 and 2015 2000—————————————-2010———————————-2015 1. Chicago, IL: 628,903———–1. Chicago: 557,674—————1. Chicago: 573,463 2. San Jose, CA: 329,750——–2. San Jose: 366,194————-2. San Jose: 401,493 3. San Antonio, TX: 133,675—-3. San Antonio: 192,741———-3. San Antonio: 208,046 4. Austin, TX: 109,006————4. Austin: 148,431——————4. Austin: 181,686 5. Las Vegas, NV: 90,656——-5. Las Vegas: 130,503————-5. Charlotte: 128,897 6. Sacramento, CA: 82,616—–6. Chalotte: 106,047—————6. Las Vegas: 127,609 7. Portland, OR: 68,976———7. Sacramento: 96,105————-7. Sacramento: 112,579 8. Charlotte, NC: 59,849——–8. Columbus: 86,663—————-8. Columbus: 101,129 9. Minneapolis, MN: 55,475—–9. Portland: 83,026—————–9. Nashville: 88,193 10. Columbus: 47,713———–10. Indianapolis: 74,407———–10. Portland: 86,041 11. Milwaukee, WI: 46,122—–11. Nashville: 73,327—————11. Indianapolis: 72,456 12. Detroit, MI: 45,541———–12. Minneapolis: 57,846———–12. Minneapolis: 70,769 13. Providence, RI: 43,947—–13. Milwaukee: 57,222————-13. Milwaukee: 58,321 14. Nashville, TN: 38,936——-14. Providence: 52,926————14. Providence: 53,532 15. Indianapolis, IN: 36,067—-15. Orlando: 43,747—————-15. Orlando: 50,558 16. Virginia Beach, VA: 28,276–16. Virginia Beach: 40,756—–16. Omaha: 48,263 17. Orlando, FL: 26,741———17. Omaha: 39,288—————–17. Detroit: 39,861 18. Omaha, NE: 25,687———18. Kansas City: 35,532———18. Virginia Beach: 38,360 19. Kansas City, MO: 25,632—19. Detroit: 34,307—————-19. Kansas City: 37,787 20. Cleveland: 21,372————20. St. Louis: 23,011————–20. Pittsburgh: 28,187 21. Grand Rapids, MI: 20,814–21. Pittsburgh: 18,698————21. St. Louis: 21,802 22. St Louis, MO: 19,542——-22. Cleveland: 17,739————-22. Grand Rapids: 19,176 23. Pittsburgh, PA: 18,874—–23. Grand Rapids: 16,615——–23. Cleveland: 18,830 24. Cincinnati: 12,461———–24. Cincinnati: 16,531————-24. Cincinnati: 16,896 25. Toledo: 9,475—————–25. Toledo: 11,559—————–25. Akron: 10,024 26. Akron: 6,911——————26. Akron: 8,524——————–26. Toledo: 9,257 27. Dayton: 3,245—————-27. Dayton: 5,102——————-27. Dayton: 7,381 28. Youngstown: 1,605———28. Youngstown: 3,695————28. Youngstown: 1,058
Here’s the 2000-2015 total change.
And the 2000-2015 change by %.
So Columbus has an above average total and growth compared to its peers nationally.
