jonoh81

I've already taken him to task for *only* using IRS figures, which have serious flaws. Columbus has been attracting more immigrants in recent years than at any point in the last 50, but if you read his stories, you would believe that migration is collapsing. He also doesn't seem to believe that international migration has any value, only domestic, as he never mentions it. Furthermore, even if Columbus had no migration whatsoever, the population would still be growing decently just due to natural growth rates. Honestly, I think he singles out Columbus because some people- myself included- have criticized him on his stories regarding it. He seems to have a chip on his shoulder now.

The reality, however, is that Columbus does a decent job of retaining those people after graduation. Also, migration figures don't make any assumptions on the length of stay, only that the people entered a location in a given year. Living in a place for at least 4 years, even if just for school, would count as being a resident.

Looking at both Cincy and Columbus, it appears that domestic migration overall is down a bit versus other recent periods. It could be noise, or it could be part of the national trend where migration overall has fallen to historic lows. That said, both are doing much better than they were in the earliest period the Census has for countries- 2006-2010.

Yeah, so do I, but to be fair, they interviewed like 3 couples.

It's not necessarily NYC. It's New York and New Jersey overall. Central Ohio in general does well with the Northeast states.

So basically their designations are fairly arbitrary because they're not applied universally. If one used urbanized area around New York, contiguous development would nearly stretch from DC to Boston along the I-95 corridor.

Well, the Census doesn't actually use contiguous development as a factor in determining any of its official population areas, including MSA, contrary to what some people might believe. It mostly uses commuting patterns. Only in CSA are Cleveland and Akron listed together for that reason, not in MSA, and why Dayton and Cincinnati are not combined in either one. That they have some suburban sprawl touching along I-75 doesn't matter and never has. Demographia may use contiguous, though, but who knows.

I tend to think CSA is only good for measuring the size of a media market in a region, but the absolute worst in measuring the size of a core city. They're far too big.

To this day, I still have no idea what standards of measurement that Demographia uses. They're all over the place.

Each measurement has its pros and cons. I like Urbanized Area because it shows continuously-connected development in a region, something that MSA, CSA or city limits cannot. It's just one measure of many. I think the reason it doesn't get mentioned as much is because the population for them is only measured once per decade, during the decennial Census, rather than annually like all the others.

I suspect the answer is much more mundane. The problem is that these tracks are busy, and it would be difficult to run passenger rail on freight lines even if that weren't the case. Either the freight would have to move to another line or a separate passenger line would have to be built, because I can't see them both using it at the same time. I also think that if the widening were included for some kind of future passenger rail station, that would've been mentioned at some point over the 57 years that this project took from planning through construction phases. I also think the Olentangy transit corridor route will go on Olentangy itself in the form of BRT, or a nearby separate line if it happens to be rail (which I don't think it will be).

Maybe for a light rail line- lol, j/k.

Yep. I think I mentioned it here at least once that the initial plans called for the CC to be south of the railroad tracks. It was going to include a hotel and event space together. A separate, but connected transit hub was planned on the northern side of the tracks in a revamped Union Station. When US was torn down by the city, the city lost funding to build the transit station because of the demolition, and the city built the CC in its place, instead. The idea of the transit hub was still incorporated into the design, but never built. And we still got the hotel on the south side of the tracks.

Yeah, I know I know... but I hate just about everything about this. The loss of the historic buildings instead of incorporation, the extremely bland, boxy style, the hospital colors, the reduced density, the arrogance of the developer in trying to go around the variance process to build a cheaper, more mediocre project... no thanks. "Mixed bag" is far too kind.

Ah okay, well then in that case, I couldn't do a comparison with their standards. I could do one with population density only, as I have no way of calculating how much of a tract is paved. In terms of basic density, Franklin County census tracts increased their average density by +315.4 2010-2017. Here were the 25 biggest gainers in that period. 1. 1121-Campus: +7463.8 2. 7721-Linden: +3115.1 3. 21-Short North: +2,428.2 4. 9323-Leahwood East Side: +2104.3 5. 22-Italian Village: +2,034.1 6. 6942-Northgate North Columbus: +1951.8 7. 40-Downtown: +1,711.5 8. 20-Victorian Village: +1,666.3 9. 7551-South of Easton: +1,595.9 10. 9331-Eastmoor/Linwood: +1565.2 11. 6933-Forest Park East NE Columbus: +1304.0 12. 52-German Village: +1,283.9 13. 6931-Forest Park East NE Columbus: +1263.5 14. 29-King-Lincoln: +1178.0 15. 330-Linden: +1124.3 16. 7043-Crosswoods Far North: +1094.1 17. 6353-Northcrest NW Columbus: +1092.1 18. 1810-Campus: +1091.8 19. 9322-Beechwood/Shady Lane: +1084.2 20. 2760-Eastmoor: +1083.8 21. 38-Olde Towne East: +1025.3 22. 32-Arena District/Vic Village: +1012.5 23. 910-Linden: +1008.6 24. 30-Downtown: +1000.0 25. 7532- West of Easton: +995.8

Okay, I'm matching color to 2017 tract densities and already noticing some issues. For example, on the Columbus map, Tract 14 is dark blue, but the density is only 2691. Yet Tract 920 in Linden is light blue, but has a density of almost 6,000. Are we sure that the colors are just based on density?

If you can't find them, I can just do a simple comparison. I have the 2017 ACS density figures for tracts, so it would just be a matter of matching them up to the color scheme to see where the cutoffs are.

If I knew what deciles- or density figures- these were based on, I could easily do a 2010 comparison to the latest tract density figures to see what tracts would've been classified what in 2010 vs say 2017. Just from looking at the Columbus map, I can tell that all the darker blue have densities of at least 5,000 or higher. Light blue looks like maybe 2500-4999 or something, light red maybe 1000-2499 and dark red less than 1000.

Okay, gotcha. Do you happen to know what those deciles are?

So if I'm correct in my understanding, doesn't that mean that the definition of urban would change based on the city? New York's density would be much higher than Des Moines', so the deciles would be on a much different scale. 100K PPSM in New York may be top 20%, while 10K PPSM would be in Des Moines. If so, is 10K urbanity the same as 100K urbanity?

Seem to be just further evidence that Columbus is not just sprawl. However, I would like to see the methodology on what they are considering urban vs suburban.

Confluence Village will be the first AD development in like 20 years to be mixed-use with added retail space. That's just sad. I don't know why the successful concept of the first stages was never carried over to the rest.

The design is ZzzzzzzZzzzzzzzzzzz.

The demolition of Mt Carmel West has begun.

https://www.columbusnavigator.com/founders-park-harrison-west/ Short and sweet.