Columbus

Delaware County: 189,113 +3,911 +14,899

Fairfield County: 150,381 +1,584 +4,225

Franklin County: 1,231,393 +17,559 +67,979

Hocking County: 28,725 +117 -655

Licking County: 169,390 +887 +2,898

Madison County: 43,918 +646 +483

Morrow County: 35,152 +114 +325

Perry County: 35,812 -120 -246

*****way County: 56,876 +410 +1,178

Union County: 53,776 +396 +1,476

Metro Area: 1,994,536 +25,504 +92,562

 

 

Why is this county censored?

 

Lol too funny!  http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=picka 

another report out on Cuyahoga's shrinking population from WKYC...

When can we expect to begin to see the population rise again?

It's interesting to me that Cincinnati's core county (Hamilton) has considerably fewer people than either Columbus (Franklin) and Cleveland (Cuyahoga), but has larger surrounding counties.  4 over 200,000 - 2 over 100,000 in the Cincinnati metro.  I think that's probably due to several things, including the continued emergence of Cin-Day.  Between Butler and Warren counties there are ~600,000 people, making it only 25% smaller than Hamilton County. The continued growth in this area could really effect the locus of power in the region in coming decades. While not in Cin-Day territory, Clermont county is now also over 200,000, so the 'collar counties' now have roughly the same combined population as Hamilton County. Great to see Hamilton County growing again though, and I hope it's more a result of growth in the city than the burbs. 

 

Surrounding counties for Cleveland:

 

Summit: 500,000

Lorain: 300,00

Lake: 230,000

Portage: 160,000

Medina: 170,000

another report out on Cuyahoga's shrinking population from WKYC...

When can we expect to begin to see the population rise again?

 

"When"... I like your optimism

It's interesting to me that Cincinnati's core county (Hamilton) has considerably fewer people than either Columbus (Franklin) and Cleveland (Cuyahoga), but has larger surrounding counties.  4 over 200,000 - 2 over 100,000 in the Cincinnati metro.  I think that's probably due to several things, including the continued emergence of Cin-Day.  Between Butler and Warren counties there are ~600,000 people, making it only 25% smaller than Hamilton County. The continued growth in this area could really effect the locus of power in the region in coming decades. While not in Cin-Day territory, Clermont county is now also over 200,000, so the 'collar counties' now have roughly the same combined population as Hamilton County. Great to see Hamilton County growing again though, and I hope it's more a result of growth in the city than the burbs. 

 

Surrounding counties for Cleveland:

 

Summit: 500,000

Lorain: 300,00

Lake: 230,000

Portage: 160,000

Medina: 170,000

 

I was just going based on the list above.  Summit county wasn't listed in Cleveland's MSA because it's in Akron's.

I am not sure what goes into revising numbers or even up to what point some of these numbers would be considered in the "margin of error" range, but I would like to point out that for the metro of Cleveland last year it was published that the metro had a loss of 14 people. This year the number is stated to be 1700 down with a revised gain of 800 for last year. It will be interesting if the 1700 is revised in next year's census. Irrespective, this is all indicative of stagnation and unfortunately a poor natural increase rate stemming from the demographic malaise of the 70s and 80s. In comparison, Cincy and Columbus start from a much higher point due to their higher rates of natural increase. More robust job growth is needed.

Just looked up the land areas for each of the biggest three counties:

 

1) Franklin- 543 sq mi

2) Cuyahoga- 457 sq mi

3) Hamilton- 413 sq mi

 

County densities, 2014 (land only)

Cuyahoga: 2,756.7

Franklin: 2,314.6

Hamilton: 1,986.8

I am not sure what goes into revising numbers or even up to what point some of these numbers would be considered in the "margin of error" range, but I would like to point out that for the metro of Cleveland last year it was published that the metro had a loss of 14 people. This year the number is stated to be 1700 down with a revised gain of 800 for last year. It will be interesting if the 1700 is revised in next year's census. Irrespective, this is all indicative of stagnation and unfortunately a poor natural increase rate stemming from the demographic malaise of the 70s and 80s. In comparison, Cincy and Columbus start from a much higher point due to their higher rates of natural increase. More robust job growth is needed.

 

Yes.  Natural growth is typically well over 50% of the total growth rate for a metro, so when it's poor or in the negative (like Youngstown), that will automatically cut into whatever migration is occurring.  Cleveland has decent international migration, but its negative domestic migration and poor natural growth continue to hurt it.  I've been reading how it seems to be attracting more young people, so we'll see if that eventually translates, but that will take years.

Yes.  Natural growth is typically well over 50% of the total growth rate for a metro, so when it's poor or in the negative (like Youngstown), that will automatically cut into whatever migration is occurring.  Cleveland has decent international migration, but its negative domestic migration and poor natural growth continue to hurt it.  I've been reading how it seems to be attracting more young people, so we'll see if that eventually translates, but that will take years.

 

Over the last few decades, Cuyahoga County (and Greater Cleveland in general) have had trouble retaining young adults of child-rearing age (particularly educated ones,) which of course contributes to its lower-than-average natural growth, and has probably had a vicious cycle-type effect on economic growth.  I think that's starting to change, but it'll likely take several decades before meaningful growth occurs.

 

It could be worse, though- Pittsburgh experienced an outright exodus of young people in the 80s, and Youngstown's bleed has been a lot more brutal, and the effects are still being felt today.  They're both experiencing negative natural growth (i.e., more deaths than births.)  I'd bet (though I haven't dug into the numbers) that Cuyahoga probably only sees a natural increase because it's significantly less white than Allegheny, Mahoning, etc., and non-whites typically have higher birthrates than whites.

The problem is people don't stay at their jobs 30+ year any more. Once we get back to that, there will always be some moving around.

 

Columbus

Delaware County: 189,113 +3,911 +14,899

Fairfield County: 150,381 +1,584 +4,225

Franklin County: 1,231,393 +17,559 +67,979

Hocking County: 28,725 +117 -655

Licking County: 169,390 +887 +2,898

Madison County: 43,918 +646 +483

Morrow County: 35,152 +114 +325

Perry County: 35,812 -120 -246

*****way County: 56,876 +410 +1,178

Union County: 53,776 +396 +1,476

Metro Area: 1,994,536 +25,504 +92,562

 

 

Why is this county censored?

 

Lol too funny!  http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=picka 

 

you can add slovenian to the list of pička languages

it's pronounced peach ka

just like this milkshake available in yugoslav heavy western lake county:

 

what i want to know is WHO DECIDED TO CENSOR THIS

That's hilarious, much like an old joke about a "dessert" allegedly served in French restaurants.

I'm not sure how realistic this is. But check out the growth rates for MSA by 2030.

 

http://www.naidesco.com/PDFs/Whitepaper_Where_Pop_Growth_2020_2030_9_14.pdf

I saw someone mentioned this over on City Data about St. Louis' MSA and their population decline.  Of course, it's Wikipedia so I am not sure how accurate it is.  Looks like Cincinnati, Cleveland, and Columbus all posted growth.

 

MSA change between 2010-2014

 

Columbus: 4.87%

Cincinnati: 1.65%

Cleveland: 0.63%

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Metropolitan_Statistical_Areas

I'm not sure how realistic this is. But check out the growth rates for MSA by 2030.

 

http://www.naidesco.com/PDFs/Whitepaper_Where_Pop_Growth_2020_2030_9_14.pdf

 

That's interesting.  Projects Cincy and C-Bus with nearly identical absolute growth (though I don't see percentages listed, I assume that will be a slightly higher growth rate for Columbus based on staring points). 

 

Crazy how many people places like Houston, DFW, and Atlanta are going to keep adding (projected). 

 

Crazy how many people places like Houston, DFW, and Atlanta are going to keep adding (projected). 

 

With so much of our economy tied to home-building/sprawl, places like that can just carry on from momentum alone.  People move there for jobs, need houses, houses get built, it generates more jobs, repeat.  The problem of course is that the growth industry is in many cases just growth itself.

 

Crazy how many people places like Houston, DFW, and Atlanta are going to keep adding (projected). 

 

With so much of our economy tied to home-building/sprawl, places like that can just carry on from momentum alone.  People move there for jobs, need houses, houses get built, it generates more jobs, repeat.  The problem of course is that the growth industry is in many cases just growth itself.

 

Yeah it's called the "growth economy".  When the San Fernando Valley and Orange County were built-out in the late 80's, it caused a snowball effect throughout the LA economy.  For the first time in 40 years there weren't 1,000 tract home developments going up one after another. 

Yeah it's called the "growth economy".  When the San Fernando Valley and Orange County were built-out in the late 80's, it caused a snowball effect throughout the LA economy.  For the first time in 40 years there weren't 1,000 tract home developments going up one after another. 

 

Toronto and Vancouver have been using immigration to achieve that very result.

^To be fair a lot of the growth in the Texas and Georgia metros is from immigration and natural increase as well as domestic migration. Houston and Dallas' populations for instance grow more from natural increase than domestic migration.

 

One thing these growth estimates don't factor in is the lack of water to support these projected populations in the future. That could slow things drastically.

I saw someone mentioned this over on City Data about St. Louis' MSA and their population decline.  Of course, it's Wikipedia so I am not sure how accurate it is.  Looks like Cincinnati, Cleveland, and Columbus all posted growth.

 

MSA change between 2010-2014

 

Columbus: 4.87%

Cincinnati: 1.65%

Cleveland: 0.63%

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Metropolitan_Statistical_Areas

 

According to the Census Bureau, the two numbers listed in wiki for 2010 and 2014 are switched, so its actually a decline

And the numbers for STL, Sacramento, and Memphis are wrong based on what the Census says. I thought it was weird they supposedly had 4, 6 and 11% declines and no one said a word about it... lol

I saw someone mentioned this over on City Data about St. Louis' MSA and their population decline.  Of course, it's Wikipedia so I am not sure how accurate it is.  Looks like Cincinnati, Cleveland, and Columbus all posted growth.

 

MSA change between 2010-2014

 

Columbus: 4.87%

Cincinnati: 1.65%

Cleveland: 0.63%

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Metropolitan_Statistical_Areas

 

According to the Census Bureau, the two numbers listed in wiki for 2010 and 2014 are switched, so its actually a decline

And the numbers for STL, Sacramento, and Memphis are wrong based on what the Census says. I thought it was weird they supposedly had 4, 6 and 11% declines and no one said a word about it... lol

 

Switched for Cleveland only. If you go there it now shows a decline for Cleveland, but Columbus and Cincinnati are growing.

I'm not sure how realistic this is. But check out the growth rates for MSA by 2030.

 

http://www.naidesco.com/PDFs/Whitepaper_Where_Pop_Growth_2020_2030_9_14.pdf

 

 

That's interesting.  Projects Cincy and C-Bus with nearly identical absolute growth (though I don't see percentages listed, I assume that will be a slightly higher growth rate for Columbus based on staring points). 

 

Crazy how many people places like Houston, DFW, and Atlanta are going to keep adding (projected). 

 

 

Retirees moving closer to their kids/grandkids?

Retirees moving closer to their kids/grandkids?

 

My parents sold their winter house in Orlando and stayed in Cleveland year round after they got too old to keep making the long drives back and forth to be closer to their kids.

Retirees moving closer to their kids/grandkids?

 

My parents sold their winter house in Orlando and stayed in Cleveland year round after they got too old to keep making the long drives back and forth to be closer to their kids.

 

When mom and dad retire in Cleveland and the kids and grandkids live in Alpharetta, the process would reverse.  Could things like that be feeding this trend?

^I wrote above what is causing the trend. Immigration and a plethora of employment opportunities in the south and a dearth of those things in the north. Don't believe me spend an hour researching the topic.

^I wrote above what is causing the trend. Immigration and a plethora of employment opportunities in the south and a dearth of those things in the north. Don't believe me spend an hour researching the topic.

Exactly, it's jobs that drive growth in a region.  People want to make money, and they go to regions that they can.  Sprawl in the north is detrimental to the inner-city because people aren't coming in to replace what the "sprawlers" left behind.  Sure, there is sprawl like crazy in the south, but at the same time, those city's and regions are still growing due to excellent job opportunities and incoming folks filling up old post war affordable housing. 

Maybe there's a play on the retiree thing, but that's probably just a minor aspect of the puzzle.  In the end, jobs create growth.  People have been flocking to cities forever for opportunity. 

One thing these growth estimates don't factor in is the lack of water to support these projected populations in the future. That could slow things drastically.

 

And the cost of the requisite additional infrastructure.  Traffic is not getting any better in any of those high-growth MSAs.

^I wrote above what is causing the trend. Immigration and a plethora of employment opportunities in the south and a dearth of those things in the north. Don't believe me spend an hour researching the topic.

Exactly, it's jobs that drive growth in a region.  People want to make money, and they go to regions that they can.  Sprawl in the north is detrimental to the inner-city because people aren't coming in to replace what the "sprawlers" left behind.  Sure, there is sprawl like crazy in the south, but at the same time, those city's and regions are still growing due to excellent job opportunities and incoming folks filling up old post war affordable housing. 

Maybe there's a play on the retiree thing, but that's probably just a minor aspect of the puzzle.  In the end, jobs create growth.  People have been flocking to cities forever for opportunity. 

 

As has been said in other contexts, job sprawl (especially in manufacturing and affiliated businesses) has very different causes from residential sprawl. 

One thing these growth estimates don't factor in is the lack of water to support these projected populations in the future. That could slow things drastically.

 

And the cost of the requisite additional infrastructure.  Traffic is not getting any better in any of those high-growth MSAs.

 

That's a good point. I was just in Dallas in the beginning of the month and looked at how the construction of additional capacity on I-30 was stopped. I asked about it and was told its been like that for years, which shocked me. Miles of columns, and jersey barriers along the road and no construction actually happening.

One thing these growth estimates don't factor in is the lack of water to support these projected populations in the future. That could slow things drastically.

 

And the cost of the requisite additional infrastructure.  Traffic is not getting any better in any of those high-growth MSAs.

 

The North Will Rise Again!!!!

One thing these growth estimates don't factor in is the lack of water to support these projected populations in the future. That could slow things drastically.

 

And the cost of the requisite additional infrastructure.  Traffic is not getting any better in any of those high-growth MSAs.

 

That's a good point. I was just in Dallas in the beginning of the month and looked at how the construction of additional capacity on I-30 was stopped. I asked about it and was told its been like that for years, which shocked me. Miles of columns, and jersey barriers along the road and no construction actually happening.

 

Dallas is very lucky to have DART largely in place at this point, as it is projected to add 2 million residents over the next 15 years.  DART is now a much more comprehensive system than is MARTA in Atlanta, which is also projected to add 2 million.

 

Meanwhile in Ohio...if you're under 40 you should definitely be concentrating on buying rental properties in the 3c's.  Right now anyone of typical professional income can afford to buy 2 rental houses in the next 5 years while the interest rates are still low.  Then you get to sit back and watch the money roll in in 15 years. 

 

One thing these growth estimates don't factor in is the lack of water to support these projected populations in the future. That could slow things drastically.

 

And the cost of the requisite additional infrastructure.  Traffic is not getting any better in any of those high-growth MSAs.

 

That's a good point. I was just in Dallas in the beginning of the month and looked at how the construction of additional capacity on I-30 was stopped. I asked about it and was told its been like that for years, which shocked me. Miles of columns, and jersey barriers along the road and no construction actually happening.

 

Dallas is very lucky to have DART largely in place at this point, as it is projected to add 2 million residents over the next 15 years.  DART is now a much more comprehensive system than is MARTA in Atlanta, which is also projected to add 2 million.

 

Meanwhile in Ohio...if you're under 40 you should definitely be concentrating on buying rental properties in the 3c's.  Right now anyone of typical professional income can afford to buy 2 rental houses in the next 5 years while the interest rates are still low.  Then you get to sit back and watch the money roll in in 15 years. 

 

 

Having been a temporary landlord (estate executor) in the City of Cleveland, I can say that the aggravation may not be worth it.  Don't expect any backup from the courts either.  Having a separate Housing Court means tenants have all the advantages over landlords.

If you own 1-2 rental units you can do a good job vetting tenants.  If you have 20+ units there is no way to use your personal network to find all of them.  If you are over-leveraged you run the risk of having a squatting tenant taking advantage of eviction laws to cause that property to lose a lot of money. 

Jake do you have a lot of rental property?

 

E-Rocc - In Hamilton County, it is relatively easy to evict a tenant, they can only hold over for about 3-4 weeks if the landlord is vigilant on asserting their rights. Collecting on past debts can be a bigger challenge, but that is always a challenge.  There are other jurisdictions like Cook County in IL or out in CA, where it can take 3-6 months to evict. 

Jake do you have a lot of rental property?

 

E-Rocc - In Hamilton County, it is relatively easy to evict a tenant, they can only hold over for about 3-4 weeks if the landlord is vigilant on asserting their rights. Collecting on past debts can be a bigger challenge, but that is always a challenge.  There are other jurisdictions like Cook County in IL or out in CA, where it can take 3-6 months to evict. 

 

No I don't yet, and I don't have a precise plan for what I'm going to buy next.  If you're drawn to this it's easy to get excited and make thoughtless decisions.  Luckily buying property takes a little more time than buying stock so you're somewhat less likely to make an impulsive mistake.  Still, people make bad decisions all the time.  The guys who really make money are the ones who wait and wait and wait until a great deal presents itself.  If you go and buy something as soon as you have $50,000~ to put down, inevitably some better deal will appear 3 months later. 

 

I think a lot of people let their minds jump to worst-case scenarios when mulling the idea of owning rental property.  If you start at age 30 or 40 and do the math on what you're going to have in your pocket at age 70, losing a few months' rent every few years and doing a few pricey emergency repairs doesn't add up to much as a percentage of what you're going to haul in at the finish line. 

 

 

Jake do you have a lot of rental property?

 

E-Rocc - In Hamilton County, it is relatively easy to evict a tenant, they can only hold over for about 3-4 weeks if the landlord is vigilant on asserting their rights. Collecting on past debts can be a bigger challenge, but that is always a challenge.  There are other jurisdictions like Cook County in IL or out in CA, where it can take 3-6 months to evict. 

 

In Cleveland it's city municipal court, and it's "Housing Court".  A separate court with separate elections.  Landlords aren't always eligible to vote.  Tenants are.

If the landlord follows proper procedures as spelled out in Ohio law, evictions (through whatever court) should not take longer than 5 weeks.

 

Judges are not influenced by the voting power of one tenant.

 

Typically, Ohio courts have strongly favored landlords, especially when presumptions are to be made.

 

The procedures are tougher on landlords when the tenant is Section 8 or otherwise subsidized.  It is a trade-off the landlord must accept for the security in rent payments the landlords received when accepting such tenants.

If the landlord follows proper procedures as spelled out in Ohio law, evictions (through whatever court) should not take longer than 5 weeks.

 

Judges are not influenced by the voting power of one tenant.

 

Typically, Ohio courts have strongly favored landlords, especially when presumptions are to be made.

 

The procedures are tougher on landlords when the tenant is Section 8 or otherwise subsidized.  It is a trade-off the landlord must accept for the security in rent payments the landlords received when accepting such tenants.

 

Typically, if it is a matter of paying the rent, the judges will side with the landlord 90-95% of the time. If it is a matter of additional damages the courts are more deferential to the tenant's unless the landlord has good documentation. Of course, in many cases, even when you do get a judgment, it is rather difficult to collect on it anyway, since the tenant likely has no real assets.

Jake do you have a lot of rental property?

 

E-Rocc - In Hamilton County, it is relatively easy to evict a tenant, they can only hold over for about 3-4 weeks if the landlord is vigilant on asserting their rights. Collecting on past debts can be a bigger challenge, but that is always a challenge.  There are other jurisdictions like Cook County in IL or out in CA, where it can take 3-6 months to evict. 

 

No I don't yet, and I don't have a precise plan for what I'm going to buy next.  If you're drawn to this it's easy to get excited and make thoughtless decisions.  Luckily buying property takes a little more time than buying stock so you're somewhat less likely to make an impulsive mistake.  Still, people make bad decisions all the time.  The guys who really make money are the ones who wait and wait and wait until a great deal presents itself.  If you go and buy something as soon as you have $50,000~ to put down, inevitably some better deal will appear 3 months later. 

 

I think a lot of people let their minds jump to worst-case scenarios when mulling the idea of owning rental property.  If you start at age 30 or 40 and do the math on what you're going to have in your pocket at age 70, losing a few months' rent every few years and doing a few pricey emergency repairs doesn't add up to much as a percentage of what you're going to haul in at the finish line. 

 

 

Definitely check out REIA if you are interested in acquiring small properties. They do a good job and provide a lot of info and leads.

Columbus now larger than Cincinnati, Cleveland, and Dayton combined!!!!! (and with a nearly identical area and density to all three combined as well)

 

Columbus 13th fastest growing city in the nation!!!

 

Columbus poised to overtake Indianapolis in population(only 12,831 people behind)!

 

http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk

 

okay, somebody had to do it. Let the attacking begin!  :-)  (where is the hiding emoticon?)  :wink:

From the PD:  http://www.cleveland.com/datacentral/index.ssf/2015/05/columbus_is_triple_the_size_of.html

Northern/Northeast Ohio is a heavily populated area...an area that Cleveland doesn't get credit for, the way that Atlanta, or other large cities do . What I mean is, Atlanta gets credit for 6 million people (the Atlanta CSA). That CSA is an area of TEN THOUSAND SQUARE MILES. Cleveland, little ol' Cleveland gets credit for 3.5 million people in a SIX THOUSAND SQUARE MILES. And 4.5 million people in an 8,000 square mile area. Basically, this is a question: Wouldn't Cleveland have that same amount of people in a CSA if it were expanded to a 10000 mile area? And why doesn't Cleveland market all of Northern Ohio in their efforts? Take advantage of the Islands, Wineries, Cedar Point, etc. Make this super regional to be successful.

^Get the Ohio Legislature to make Ohio have 5 counties instead of 88. Problem solved. ;)

From the PD:  http://www.cleveland.com/datacentral/index.ssf/2015/05/columbus_is_triple_the_size_of.html

 

That article also forgot to mention in it’s list that Minneapolis and Oakland are also larger with a smaller area.

 

And regarding their comparison of Columbus with Cincinnati, Cleveland, and Toledo combined, a better comparison would be with Cincinnati, Cleveland, and Dayton combined.

 

Columbus: 217.2 square miles, 835,957 people, density of 3,848 per square mile.

 

Cinci-Cleve-Dayton: 211.2 square miles, 828,689 people, density of 3,923 per square mile.

 

So combine those three cities and you have nearly the same size, density, and population as Columbus.

 

Also with the combination of Cleve-Cincy-Toledo, the density is 4,099 per square mile, again not that far from that of Columbus

Question:  Why hasn't the population boom in Columbus led to more downtown development?  Off the top of my head, maybe it's just not a downtown-centric city.  Imagine if even half of the office buildings around 270 were instead built as towers downtown.  But they weren't, which helps to fuel the typical view of Columbus being smaller than it is.  But the same goes for many of the newer "big" cities, like Phoenix and San Jose, even Indy.  They all have small downtowns, relative to their modern populations.  And Columbus already has more skyline than any of those cities. 

 

Cincinnati recently added a major piece in Great American.  Cleveland is getting at least three new towers this decade (E&Y, Hilton, Nucleus).  Given how much it's outpacing the other C's in population these days, isn't Columbus also due for some next-level downtown developments?  Is there a general sense that might happen soon?   

It honestly seems like Columbus's urban initiative is 2-10 stories. There are a LOT of low rise urban developments happening around Columbus, including Downtown, that Cleveland and Cincy could learn from. Many are actually really nicely designed and a much higher quality than what we're seeing elsewhere at a similar scale in Ohio.

 

As for highrise though, it just doesn't seem to be where the interest in Columbus is at the moment and it might be because Downtown is, for a lack of a better word, poorly done in general. Many open front lawns, lifeless ground floors, etc. dominate many parts of Downtown Columubs (not all though) and as a result I just don't think there's much excitement to add to those areas. Instead Columbus has some nice lowrise neighborhoods which is where all the desire is and as such those neighborhoods are adding some nice density and it's likely that'll continue for awhile.

I like what's happening in Columbus.  The core is getting denser for sure.  That's a good point though about the impact of lawns and dead ground floors.

Question:  Why hasn't the population boom in Columbus led to more downtown development?  Off the top of my head, maybe it's just not a downtown-centric city.  Imagine if even half of the office buildings around 270 were instead built as towers downtown.  But they weren't, which helps to fuel the typical view of Columbus being smaller than it is.  But the same goes for many of the newer "big" cities, like Phoenix and San Jose, even Indy.  They all have small downtowns, relative to their modern populations.  And Columbus already has more skyline than any of those cities. 

 

Cincinnati recently added a major piece in Great American.  Cleveland is getting at least three new towers this decade (E&Y, Hilton, Nucleus).  Given how much it's outpacing the other C's in population these days, isn't Columbus also due for some next-level downtown developments?  Is there a general sense that might happen soon?   

Because Ohio has alot of cheap land to build on. Why build a 150m skyscraper downtown when you can build several low rise building for 50-75m on cheap land else where?

Columbus is starting to see more projects above 10 stories get proposed and/or built, but not many. Downtown there is Two25 Commons (17 stories) and 250 High (12 stories), both mixed-use office/apartment buildings. A couple major projects are also in the planning stages that have the potential to have some height, including Edwards development on High, and Nationwide's next condo development in the Arena District. In the Short North, the new Le Meridien hotel is 11 stories and the proposed White Castle project also goes up to 11. Other than that, most of the development is between 2-10, like jmicha[/member] mentioned.

 

The last real high-rise project built was Nationwide's North Bank condo tower, which is 20 stories and was finished just before the recession.

 

That said, all of the low and mid-rise development is adding significant density to the core. Jeffrey Park, for example, doesn't have anything over 5 stories but that development alone is adding more than 1,400 new residential units to a vacant former-industrial site immediately adjacent to Downtown.

I think that the 2-10 story stuff is way better for the urban vitality/street life of an area than a skyscraper is. Skyscrapers strike me as closed off from the rest of the city... walled fortresses with attached parking and a starbucks on the ground floor that are horrible for street life.

 

Sometimes they are even worse when the try to be "cities within a city." Tower City Center being the worst offender in Ohio. Also the GM Renaissance Center in Detroit comes to mind.

 

You build too much too fast and it ends up cannibalizing surrounding areas. Whereas with the smaller buildings development is more on pace with actual growth. I'm a little skeptical about NuCLEus in Cleveland. I love the stuff we are getting along High Street in Columbus like the Fireproof building or the proposed White Castle building, or even now on West Fifth Avenue with the View from Fifth. I wish Cleveland would start to get stuff like that. Uptown and the Flats developments are a start I guess. West 25th Street would be a perfect place for buildings like that though, and I can't believe it hasn't happened yet.

 

Let Chicago and New York build skyscrapers, in Ohio for the next 50 years we should focus on 2-10 story buildings. THEN maybe skyscrapers if we run out of room.