jonoh81

In terms of state contributions of sales and income taxes, Cuyahoga County is 3rd of the big 3. Here were the net contributions in that regard by metro: Cincinnati: $465,044,791 Columbus: $464,783,998 Cleveland: $309,373,270 https://www.cleveland.com/datacentral/index.ssf/2017/03/as_donor_counties_cuyahoga_fra.html Franklin County was the highest donor of sales taxes, but the lowest in income taxes, and overall #2 of all counties in the state. This was in 2014, so the numbers may have shifted some since then with Franklin County- and the overall metro- growing so fast. So no, I don't think Columbus is subsidized nearly to the extent you're claiming here. I don't really have a dog in this fight, but I think the argument is about net regional transfers, which that Cleveland.com data dump doesn't get into. Well if someone wants to provide data on how Cleveland/Cincinnati metro dollars end up in Columbus, I would like to see them. I would also like to know how the Columbus metro is putting almost half a billion into the rest of the state, but it's also being subsidized. It seems to me the only thing this data shows is that the 3-Cs hold up the rest of the state, not that they're subsidizing each other, but again, if anyone has specific regional transfer information, some links would be great.

There was an attempt at dispersing government jobs in the past, and it ended up costing the state more than to concentrate them.

In terms of state contributions of sales and income taxes, Cuyahoga County is 3rd of the big 3. Here were the net contributions in that regard by metro: Cincinnati: $465,044,791 Columbus: $464,783,998 Cleveland: $309,373,270 https://www.cleveland.com/datacentral/index.ssf/2017/03/as_donor_counties_cuyahoga_fra.html Franklin County was the highest donor of sales taxes, but the lowest in income taxes, and overall #2 of all counties in the state. This was in 2014, so the numbers may have shifted some since then with Franklin County- and the overall metro- growing so fast. So no, I don't think Columbus is subsidized nearly to the extent you're claiming here.

The percent changes I used were taken from the estimated totals of the population, such as the number of people over 25 with a bachelors in 2010 vs. the number of people over 25 with a bachelors in 2016.

Yeah, I was going to mention that the 1-year estimates are considered the least reliable of the 2. This is a fair point. It does jump around a bit, and of course it has a higher MOE than the 5-Year Estimates. But I checked those and they show the same trend, just smoother. I went ahead and used the 1-Year because of the lag that is inherent in the 5-Year data. I also looked at the 1-year for city limits since you did metros. Those go back to 2005, but I just went to 2010 with them. 2016 % of Total aged 25+ HS or Less Cincinnati: 37.1% Cleveland: 53.7% Columbus: 37.5% Some College/Associates Degree Cincinnati: 26.0% Cleveland: 30.0% Columbus: 27.3% Bachelors Degree Cincinnati: 20.9% Cleveland: 10.5% Columbus: 23.4% Graduate/Professional Degree Cincinnati: 16.1% Cleveland: 5.8% Columbus: 11.9% All College Degrees Cincinnati: 43.3% Cleveland: 22.7% Columbus: 42.7% What obviously stands out is how much less educated Cleveland is, particularly on higher degrees. Here are the changes 2010-2016 HS or Less Cincinnati: -9.8% Cleveland: -5.4% Columbus: +8.9% Some College/Associates Degree Cincinnati: -0.4% Cleveland: -1.3% Columbus: +8.5% Bachelors Degree Cincinnati: +16.1% Cleveland: +25.6% Columbus: +25.8% Graduate/Professional Degree Cincinnati: +27.2% Cleveland: +15.9% Columbus: +31.1% Any Degree Cincinnati: +17.5% Cleveland: +16.0% Columbus: +26.9% Columbus does seem to be attracting lower education levels while the other 2 are losing them, so there may be some truth that Columbus is getting Cleveland/Cincinnati's low education population This study backs up what I posted yesterday about Cleveland's manufacturing employment base shrinking/moving as we head towards a knowledge based economy. https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2320&context=urban_facpub Yes, but Columbus’ gain far exceeds what the other 2 are losing, suggesting that it’s also a function of overall growth. Columbus attracts across the board, and from more than just Cleveland and Cincinnati.

Yeah, I was going to mention that the 1-year estimates are considered the least reliable of the 2. This is a fair point. It does jump around a bit, and of course it has a higher MOE than the 5-Year Estimates. But I checked those and they show the same trend, just smoother. I went ahead and used the 1-Year because of the lag that is inherent in the 5-Year data. I also looked at the 1-year for city limits since you did metros. Those go back to 2005, but I just went to 2010 with them. 2016 % of Total aged 25+ HS or Less Cincinnati: 37.1% Cleveland: 53.7% Columbus: 37.5% Some College/Associates Degree Cincinnati: 26.0% Cleveland: 30.0% Columbus: 27.3% Bachelors Degree Cincinnati: 20.9% Cleveland: 10.5% Columbus: 23.4% Graduate/Professional Degree Cincinnati: 16.1% Cleveland: 5.8% Columbus: 11.9% All College Degrees Cincinnati: 43.3% Cleveland: 22.7% Columbus: 42.7% What obviously stands out is how much less educated Cleveland is, particularly on higher degrees. Here are the changes 2010-2016 HS or Less Cincinnati: -9.8% Cleveland: -5.4% Columbus: +8.9% Some College/Associates Degree Cincinnati: -0.4% Cleveland: -1.3% Columbus: +8.5% Bachelors Degree Cincinnati: +16.1% Cleveland: +25.6% Columbus: +25.8% Graduate/Professional Degree Cincinnati: +27.2% Cleveland: +15.9% Columbus: +31.1% Any Degree Cincinnati: +17.5% Cleveland: +16.0% Columbus: +26.9% Columbus does seem to be attracting lower education levels while the other 2 are losing them, so there may be some truth that Columbus is getting Cleveland/Cincinnati's low education population, but it's seeing growth at all education levels. And the growth is 3x faster at the higher education levels.

How did this ever get approved for Clintonville of all places? These people flip out and clutch their pearls over almost everything.

Yeah, I was going to mention that the 1-year estimates are considered the least reliable of the 2.

Sometimes it's better to spend money on alternatives to something even if it's not immediately better for everyone. That's basically the justification used for expanding highways- not just current use, but projected use. Not to say that those projections are always accurate, because in many cases they far overestimate the future numbers as there is a lot of lobbying for these projects that too often override necessity or financial concerns. The Portsmouth Bypass just being one glaring example.

I used Educational Attainment 1-year for metros and got different numbers. 2013-2016 High School or Less Cincinnati: -2.2% Cleveland: -2.4% Columbus: -0.6% Some College/Associates Degree Cincinnati: +2.1% Cleveland: +2.7% Columbus: +4.5% Bachelors Cincinnati: +8.2% Cleveland: +0.4% Columbus: +13.1% Graduate/Professional Degree Cincinnati: +10.2% Columbus: +10.3% Cleveland: +5.3% All College Degrees Cincinnati: +6.6% Cleveland: +3.4% Columbus: +12.4% And just 25-34 Education Attainment in 2016, Bachelors or Higher Total % Cincinnati: 39.0% Cleveland: 35.7% Columbus: 40.6% And change 2013-2016 Cincinnati: +12.7% Cleveland: -2.7% Columbus: +9.2% Not sure why we have different numbers.

Another way in which the State of Ohio has been favoring Columbus over the 2C's and Dayton: By killing the 3C rail, it kindof forced people to move to Columbus if they found a job there and previously lived in Cleveland or Cincinnati. I live in Cleveland and was once offered a job by a company in Columbus. As I certainly would not want to live in Columbus, the only way to do it would be to commute from CLE. The train would have made that possible. But driving 4 hrs each day makes it less practical. So for people who can't say 'no' to an offer, they are forced to move to Columbus instead of living in their preferred city. The 3C rail was killed by Kasich, not Columbus. State government being in Columbus doesn't mean Columbus controls state government, which is made up of representatives across the state. Furthermore, back in the 1980s, Kasich was instrumental in killing a Columbus citywide rail system proposal, so this is hardly new for him. He just doesn't like public transit. It has nothing to do with him favoring Columbus. Also, it sounds less like the 3C rail death prevented you from getting that job, but rather your own refusal to, god forbid, live in Columbus.

I'm thinking Columbus does gain people from SE Ohio and Kentucky and West Virginia for those types of jobs, honestly. A lot of the area's warehouse concentration is on the South Side and southern suburbs- exactly where a lot of those transplants end up moving. This is supported in part by the fact that every single southern suburb voted for Trump in Franklin County, while all but 1 central and northern suburb went Clinton.

I would imagine most mid-size cities like Columbus or Cincinnati have concentrated pockets of street energy. Indianapolis has Broad-Ripple, Austin has 6th Street, etc. Obviously you're not going to find that in mostly residential neighborhoods away from the core. And I actually don't think the Short North caters to mostly OSU students. In fact, it seems to be the opposite where a lot of the people coming to the SN these days are older suburbanites. I think the SN caters to a good mix of folks. You can find a hangout spot no matter what your age is. Once you go north of the Kroger on High Street you get into the area where pretty much everything is catered to OSU students, but that is not part of the SN. Right, I just don't think the SN has ever really catered to OSU students. Back in my early 20s when I was going out a lot, it seems a lot of the students would end up either on Park Street or just stick to the area around Campus itself. The SN then was basically the gay neighborhood. Today, the SN is yuppified enough to the point where you go in any restaurant or bar and it's families, young couples, suburbanites, etc., but not necessarily the "bros" and such of OSU.

I would imagine most mid-size cities like Columbus or Cincinnati have concentrated pockets of street energy. Indianapolis has Broad-Ripple, Austin has 6th Street, etc. Obviously you're not going to find that in mostly residential neighborhoods away from the core. And I actually don't think the Short North caters to mostly OSU students. In fact, it seems to be the opposite where a lot of the people coming to the SN these days are older suburbanites. As for it looking sketchy, that can't be said for anywhere south of at least 2nd Avenue, which is the main area of the Short North, including both neighborhoods on either side of High. In fact, there's not a single vacant lot south of 2nd now. There are a couple surface parking lots, but they serve existing businesses, or in the case of the Graystone lot at Hubbard and High, apartments. I'm actually not even sure where you would've been to see a "grassy lot". I suspect you were either in the far northern boundary near 4th or 5th Avenues, which haven't yet seen peak redevelopment, or out of the SN altogether, perhaps in the area just south of Campus.

I think the youthful vibrancy you're talking about is one of Columbus' most attractive characteristics to a lot of people that move there.

At least quite of bit of Linden is built with a grid pattern, albeit larger than the older parts of the city. This makes it much easier to infill over time and create commercial corridors, but it will take large-scale efforts to completely rebuild the neighborhood. The housing stock is mostly very small, post-war stuff of low relative quality. Replacing that over time (and I don't mean with Nashville-style McMansions) will do wonders for the area.

It's such a prime spot too. Well, the bad news is it's owned by our favorite slumlords...er... I mean local owners... The Tonti Organization. Maybe they'll pull a Madison's Building on us all and sell it finally? I designed a nice pocket park for this parking lot when I was in school - in 1988. It's been a parking lot for a long time... There are parking lots Downtown that have been there for a LONG time, like the one at the northeast corner of 3rd and State, which hasn't held a single building since 1938.

Yes.

It looks like a complete waste. Kind of like the whole building... and people want to let Kauffman take up a large space in Short North with this crap just for the sake of infill I have to admit that I do actually love the building (especially the commons side) haha, however the catwalk is just unnecessary on all levels. Is it possible they skimped on the bridge because the parking garage is not long for this world? What's kind of ironic about the garage is that back in the mid-1980s when it was being planned, there were competing proposals to build up to 20-story mix-used towers on top of it. They were never built due to the expense of required sprinklers. I'm not sure if the garage ended up being built with possible upward development in mind. Now, we'd all prefer to see that topside development or the garage be replaced entirely, the latter of which seems really unlikely.

The tax abatement thing is a bit of an Amazon effect I think. They say they have phase one planned by 2021 and phase two planned for as close as a year later, but no location or rendering for that phase?-seems odd to me. Also 1000 surface lot spaces!!! Yikes! I suppose they will get what they want. Better than them leaving for Nashville or some other location. *sigh* The parking lot could just be a placeholder for phase 2. I'm not sure why they would want to build a second phase in another location if they had the space there. They could easily put in another building and build a garage.

The Census released demographic estimates for counties and metros yesterday. I looked at the numbers for the 3-Cs. Total Non-Hispanic White By Core County 2017 and change from 2010. Cuyahoga: 738,951 -48,594 Franklin: 819,604 +34,506 Hamilton: 532,187 -11,314 Metro Non-Hispanic White Total and change from 2010. Cincinnati: 1,747,284 +5,757 Cleveland: 1,440,587 -51,786 Columbus: 1,520,204 +59,267 Non-Hispanic White % of Total Population by Core County in 2010 and 2017 Cuyahoga 2010: 61.5% 2017: 59.2% Franklin 2010: 67.5% 2017: 63.4% Hamilton 2010: 67.7% 2017: 65.4% Non-Hispanic White % of Total Metro Population in 2010 and 2017. Cincinnati: 2010: 81.8% 2017: 79.6% Cleveland 2010: 71.8% 2017: 70.0% Columbus 2010: 76.8% 2017: 73.1% Non-Hispanic White % Change 2010-2017 by Core County Cuyahoga: -6.2% Franklin: +4.4% Hamilton: -2.1% Non-Hispanic White % Change 2010-2017 by Metro Cincinnati: +0.3% Columbus: +4.1% Cleveland: -3.5% Non-Hispanic Black Total By Core County in 2017 and change from 2010 Cuyahoga: 369,766 -6,120 Franklin: 292,139 +46,782 Hamilton: 213,053 +7,588 Metro Non-Hispanic Black Total and change from 2010. Cincinnati: 272,079 +17,178 Cleveland: 407,130 -3,560 Columbus: 325,339 +53,433 Non-Hispanic Black % of Total Population by Core County in 2010 and 2017 Cuyahoga 2010: 29.4% 2017: 29.6% Franklin 2010: 21.1% 2017: 22.6% Hamilton 2010: 25.6% 2017: 26.2% Non-Hispanic Black % of Total Metro Population in 2010 and 2017. Cincinnati: 2010: 12.0% 2017: 12.4% Cleveland 2010: 19.8% 2017: 19.8% Columbus 2010: 14.3% 2017: 15.7% Non-Hispanic Black % Change 2010-2017 by Core County Cuyahoga: -1.6% Franklin: +19.1% Hamilton: +3.7% Non-Hispanic Black % Change 2010-2017 by Metro Cincinnati: +6.7% Columbus: +19.7 Cleveland: -0.9% Non-Hispanic Asian Total By Core County in 2017 and change from 2010 Cuyahoga: 39,917 +6,779 Franklin: 68,700 +23,350 Hamilton: 21,969 +5,609 Metro Non-Hispanic Asian Total and change from 2010. Cincinnati: 57,543 +16,739 Cleveland: 49,937 +9,215 Columbus: 90,098 +32,269 Non-Hispanic Asian % of Total Population by Core County in 2010 and 2017 Cuyahoga 2010: 2.6% 2017: 3.2% Franklin 2010: 3.9% 2017: 5.3% Hamilton 2010: 2.0% 2017: 2.7% Non-Hispanic Asian % of Total Metro Population in 2010 and 2017. Cincinnati: 2010: 1.9% 2017: 2.6% Cleveland 2010: 2.0% 2017: 2.4% Columbus 2010: 3.0% 2017: 4.3% Non-Hispanic Asian % Change 2010-2017 by Core County Cuyahoga: +20.5% Franklin: +51.5% Hamilton: +34.3% Non-Hispanic Asian % Change 2010-2017 by Metro Cincinnati: +41.0% Columbus: +55.8% Cleveland: +22.4% Hispanic Total By Core County in 2017 and change from 2010 Cuyahoga: 73,989 +12,719 Franklin: 70,887 +15,169 Hamilton: 26,649 +6,042 Metro Hispanic Total and change from 2010. Cincinnati: 70,623 +15,503 Cleveland: 119,797 +21,664 Columbus: 86,431 +19,578 Hispanic % of Total Population by Core County in 2010 and 2017 Cuyahoga 2010: 4.8% 2017: 5.9% Franklin 2010: 4.8% 2017: 5.5% Hamilton 2010: 2.6% 2017: 3.3% Hispanic % of Total Metro Population in 2010 and 2017. Cincinnati 2010: 2.6% 2017: 3.2% Cleveland 2010: 4.7% 2017: 5.8% Columbus 2010: 3.5% 2017: 4.2% Hispanic % Change 2010-2017 by Core County Cuyahoga: +20.8% Franklin: +27.2% Hamilton: +29.3% Hispanic % Change 2010-2017 by Metro Cincinnati: +28.1% Columbus: +29.3% Cleveland: +22.1% Non-Hispanic Other Total By Core County in 2017 and change from 2010 Cuyahoga: 25,891 +3,608 Franklin: 40,651 +8,760 Hamilton: 19,964 +3,523 Metro Non-Hispanic Other Total and change from 2010. Cincinnati: 46,972 +9,173 Cleveland: 41,393 +6,161 Columbus: 56,653 +12,204 Non-Hispanic Other % of Total Population by Core County in 2010 and 2017 Cuyahoga 2010: 1.7% 2017: 2.1% Franklin 2010: 2.7% 2017: 3.2% Hamilton 2010: 2.1% 2017: 2.5% Non-Hispanic Other % of Total Metro Population in 2010 and 2017. Cincinnati: 2010: 1.8% 2017: 2.1% Cleveland 2010: 1.7% 2017: 2.0% Columbus 2010: 2.3% 2017: 2.7% Non-Hispanic Other % Change 2010-2017 by Core County Cuyahoga: +16.2% Franklin: +27.5% Hamilton: +21.4% Non-Hispanic Other % Change 2010-2017 by Metro Cincinnati: +24.3% Columbus: +27.5% Cleveland: +17.5%

Agree, I'd like to see it be a substantial urban-type proposal instead of the Dublin-office-park look. The visibility in that location would be huge, and a short, squat building is squandering the location.

What façade changes are they supposed to be making?

https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/searchresults.xhtml?refresh=t Use the buttons on the left to find any information you're looking for.

You're right, and that's why I made the comment about that link not really being about Millennials, but about just the change in that age group at the time. I made that same comparison for the numbers above that was used in the link, only over a greater time and using total change rather than just supposedly migration. The closest thing I could find to what the other site did was to look at mobility 2015-2016. Here were the total numbers of people who moved to each city in that 20-34 age group 2015-2016 from outside the city. Akron: +4892 Cincinnati: +13,030 Cleveland: +6,230 Columbus: +27,270 Dayton: +2,911 Toledo: +4,765 Youngstown: +1,085 Basically if someone could point me to the specific numbers they used, I would appreciate it.