I just assume that the characters in sitcoms are so realistic that they are able to live in such nice, $4000+ per month apartments in NYC because they, not unlike a handful of people I know, use their paycheck solely on clothes and booze, and pay the rent with their parents money.

I don't know if you remember the sitcom Kate & Allie with Jane Curtin and Susan St. James in which they play divorcees (both seemingly marginally employed in the show) from the suburbs living together with their kids in a great townhouse in Greenwich Village. A friend went to a taping of the show (I think it was at the Ed Sullivan Theater pre-Letterman days) and there was a Q&A afterward with the cast and the audience starting asking how much a place like that would rent for (obviously in today's dollars--as well as decades ago when the show was made--many, many thousands per month), and how the characters could afford to live there. Everyone studiously avoided answering the question!

Friends attempted to explain how they could afford such an amazing place in the Village by explaining that their grandmother had had it for years and years at a rent controlled amount.

 

That was honestly lazy writing, but in the context it could possibly work to make them able to afford it when gainfully employed.

 

Which they often weren't.

 

Chandler and Ross definitely could afford decent places on their own and Chandler often had some financial help from Joey. And by the end of the show Rachel could probably afford a decent place as well. But at the beginning only Chandler really had a job that could pay the bills realistically.

I just assume that the characters in sitcoms are so realistic that they are able to live in such nice, $4000+ per month apartments in NYC because they, not unlike a handful of people I know, use their paycheck solely on clothes and booze, and pay the rent with their parents money.

 

Except in the 80s and 90s, it wasn't very expensive to live in New York City because so much of it was a disaster zone.  Even some of the nicer areas of Manhattan like "the twenties" (nobody seems to use that phrase anymore) weren't heinously expensive.  Jerry Seinfeld (and Kramer's) apartments probably rented in the early 90s for around $800.  If you really didn't have money, you could live in Chelsea, in the Lower East Side, or (gasp!) across the river in Brooklyn.  I remember in 2000 going to a woman's 1-bedroom right at the foot of the Brooklyn Bridge that she was paying $850/mo for.  On that same trip we met an artist splitting an entire floor of a warehouse in what is now called DUMBO for $800.  When the art galleries were pushed from Soho to Chelsea in the late 90s, that signaled a pretty seismic shift that portended a complete gentrification of Manhattan, including Harlem. 

 

Back then, when average people could live in the center of Manhattan, they had access to several subway lines within walking distance of their apartments.  Now people are pushed out into areas where they keep riding the same line to the same station as part of every single trip.  Not only does it take a lot of time, life also gets pretty monotonous.  I had a friend living on that ridge above Hoboken a few years ago for $450/mo.  He had to walk down that damn hill then walk to the Hoboken terminal every time he went into Manhattan, which was more than a 30 minute walk.  It gets pretty old when you have to do it every single day to go to work, then a second time to go socialize after work.  So he started staying in. 

 

 

FYI, DUMBO got its name decades before 2000. 1978 to be precise.

 

I'm sure others have seen those articles detailing what sitcom characters could actually afford their place in NYC. Basically only Jerry Seinfeld and Liz Lemon fit the requirements to pay their bills.

FYI, DUMBO got its name decades before 2000. 1978 to be precise.

 

I'm sure others have seen those articles detailing what sitcom characters could actually afford their place in NYC. Basically only Jerry Seinfeld and Liz Lemon fit the requirements to pay their bills.

 

And Barney Stinson!

FYI, DUMBO got its name decades before 2000. 1978 to be precise.

 

 

Yes I know it's much older, but its existence and continued use is absolutely ridiculous, as are all of the realtor/developer hype names, and of course "Knox Hill".  I remember on that very trip that guy making fun of living in "DUMBO", and one of the guys asking where DILDO was. Speaking of which, I am lucky to have visited Times Square as a teenager before it was cleaned up.  A city really loses something when the most notorious bad part or most notorious blighted property goes away.  DT Cincinnati hasn't been the same since the closure of The Phoenix Café. 

Can you actually explain why it's "ridiculous?" I see people whining about neighborhood names all the time, and sometimes it's legit when it's completely made up and has no grounds in anything official (like what many realtors use) but DUMBO is an officially recognized neighborhood whether you like the use of acronyms or not. Neighborhood names come and go as they develop, decline, redevelop, etc. DUMBO is no different than Chelsea, the East Village, Greenwhich Village, Harlem, Astoria, Park Slope, Prospect Lefferts Gardens, and so on and so forth.

Back then, when average people could live in the center of Manhattan, they had access to several subway lines within walking distance of their apartments.  Now people are pushed out into areas where they keep riding the same line to the same station as part of every single trip.  Not only does it take a lot of time, life also gets pretty monotonous.  I had a friend living on that ridge above Hoboken a few years ago for $450/mo.  He had to walk down that damn hill then walk to the Hoboken terminal every time he went into Manhattan, which was more than a 30 minute walk.  It gets pretty old when you have to do it every single day to go to work, then a second time to go socialize after work.  So he started staying in. 

 

I stayed in that area once for a cheap hotel near Manhattan.  The bus service there is ridiculously good, with tons of express and even privately run jitneys going to manhattan like every 10 mins 24/7, your friend probably shouldn't have to walk so far...

Can you actually explain why it's "ridiculous?" I see people whining about neighborhood names all the time, and sometimes it's legit when it's completely made up and has no grounds in anything official (like what many realtors use) but DUMBO is an officially recognized neighborhood whether you like the use of acronyms or not. Neighborhood names come and go as they develop, decline, redevelop, etc. DUMBO is no different than Chelsea, the East Village, Greenwhich Village, Harlem, Astoria, Park Slope, Prospect Lefferts Gardens, and so on and so forth.

 

Why isn't it obvious that it's ridiculous?  I had a professor whose dad owned buildings for his restaurant food distribution businesses in what later was coined Tribeca, back when there was tumbleweed blowing through the place. He rolled his eyes and got upset whenever somebody used that term. 

 

 

 

 

Your anecdote doesn't explain anything for one.

 

Secondly, why is naming a neighborhood whose borders have developed over time ridiculous? It's not like neighborhoods are these things set in stone and cannot change. Even if the buildings are the same doesn't mean the neighborhood isn't completely different than it once was. How is naming DUMBO as such any different than creating neighborhood names for any of the other dozens of neighborhoods in NYC?

 

Is your only point of contention that it's an acronym? If so that's a flimsy ass argument.

Is "CUF" equally as ridiculous?

WCPO has some sort of inside article about "Is greater Cincinnati the fastest growing metro in the midwest". I could not read the whole thing because of the firewall.

Your anecdote doesn't explain anything for one.

 

Secondly, why is naming a neighborhood whose borders have developed over time ridiculous? It's not like neighborhoods are these things set in stone and cannot change. Even if the buildings are the same doesn't mean the neighborhood isn't completely different than it once was. How is naming DUMBO as such any different than creating neighborhood names for any of the other dozens of neighborhoods in NYC?

 

Is your only point of contention that it's an acronym? If so that's a flimsy a$$ argument.

 

I shouldn't have to use anecdotes or offer any explanation.  Branding and rebranding is lame. 

 

You have strong opinions about some weird things

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/money/2016/04/01/cleveland-fed-cincinnati-seeing-sustained-growth/82479420/

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2016/05/19/cincinnati-s-population-inches-up-again.html?ana=twt

 

A few tidbits:

 

Cincinnati's population grew to 298,550 from 298,041, an increase of 509 people, or 0.17 percent. In the five years since the 2010 Census, Cincinnati has added 1,644 people or about a half percent to its population.

 

Cincinnati’s population growth trailed a few of its regional economic competitors in the Midwest: Columbus added more than 12,000 people in the last year, Indianapolis added more than 4,000 and Louisville added more than 2,500. Columbus, which requires annexation into the city for anyone seeking to tap into its water system, has nearly three times Cincinnati’s land area, while Indianapolis and Louisville, whose populations incorporate people who live under their metropolitan, city-county governments, have nearly five times the geography.

 

Other Midwestern regional competitors -- Chicago, Cleveland, St. Louis, Pittsburgh, Milwaukee and Detroit -- lost population.

 

It's interesting that in the midst of what is often referred to as a national trend towards "repopulating our urban centers", the population data doesn't really show that to be the case. I think that what we're seeing is "population shifts" where many cities have urban centers are becoming more desirable, but because there aren't a lot of urban residential options (and the new ones being built tend to be expensive relative to regional markets) there aren't very many new residents are actually moving into the cities.

 

The <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/04/01/the-surprisingly-narrow-reality-of-americas-urban-revival/">Wonkblog at the Washington Post had a post</a> looking at population growth, broken down by the density of each census block, showing that we aren't really seeing a change in the growth rate of more dense areas.

 

What we ARE seeing is that wealthier populations are now choosing to live in urban areas.

 

In Cincinnati, the CBD is able to grow its population simply because it is growing from such a tiny base.

 

If you look just at OTR, for example, even over the most recent few years it has not gained total population, despite (or because?) the fact that property values have increased dramatically:

 

Peak population 1900: 44,475

1960: 27,577

2000: 7,638

2010: 6,964

2014: 5,610

 

All of this is to say... that while there appears to be demand urban housing, the supply hasn't caught up so prices are simply increasing. Cincinnati needs to take advantage of this opportunity where the demand exists to generate more new and affordable housing options in urban areas. As <a href="

wise philosopher</a> once said, The Rent Is Too Damn High!

Yes, single (wealthy) adults are now living in units that 10-15 years ago had (poor) households of 2-8 people living in them.  If everyone who is single in OTR got married and had 2 kids and kept living in that same unit, then the population would increase dramatically, without any new rehabs. 

Yeah, I know the Liberty and Elm Street project got rejected.  I know a lot of people weren't hot on the design, but that is the type of density we need in OTR to really push the vibrancy / density to higher levels and help with streetcar ridership.  All this will help with talent attraction and help with GE as well if they are recruiting people and can say, hey you can live here, take the streetcar to work, etc.  Also I am hoping they open a damn grocery downtown soon.  My hometown in Cedar Rapids just accepted a proposal for a 28 story high rise with a grocery already committed to the project.  Cedar Rapids 1/10th the metro size of Cincinnati.  Kroger has got to be blocking any other grocers from coming in through Cranley or their other minions downtown.

 

http://www.thegazette.com/subject/news/government/28-story-high-rise-gets-cedar-rapids-staff-support-20160513

Liberty & Elm didn't get "rejected"... but it did downsize as a result of community/historic feedback. It still will add density and population to the area (since that block is vacant now), but just not as much as it the original designs would have added.

^Yeah I meant to say rejected at it's proposed height and density.  I agree it will add density, etc., but IMO on Liberty Street we shouldn't limit too much the size of the buildings on those main corridors along Liberty and Central Parkway.  I'm not saying add a tower or anything, but even something like the YMCA would be OK in my opion across Liberty and CP.  Just my opinion though to add more density in those important arteries.

^I totally agree. Central Parkway should support much taller buildings. Hopefully Liberty will get narrowed in the future, but even a narrowed Liberty should support taller buildings.

 

The initial Liberty & Elm design had a "cut away" corner... which they have now revised to build out all the way to the corner. That is a very good revision that came from community feedback. The corners of these intersections needs to be filled with buildings with substantial mass. "Cutting away" the corner, even with a tall building, really undermines its presence and the streetscape wall.

^It blows my mind how few designers realize that despite a nearly endless supply of public "plazas" on corners that are just awful and completely degrade the urban quality of a major intersection.

 

And I agree we should be pushing for larger buildings along Liberty. Over the Rhine has several 6 story+ buildings within its bounds (not just along Central Parkway) yet somehow community groups have gotten it in their head that this is "too tall" and will somehow ruin everything. It's incredibly tiresome and frustrating because these groups that claim to be acting in the good of the neighborhood are actually hurting its long-term success by forcing development to scale back.

I think with all of the Cleveland and Columbus population trends threads being so active, I was wondering, where is a Cincinnati one??? 🤨 Well here is one that last had a post in 2016 and a lot has changed since then and this needs a bump lol.

 

Cincinnati's city population stopped declining in estimates after bottoming in 2012 at around 296500. 2019 estimate had the city population up to 303,940. I believe this is different from the prior fake out of 2007-2010's city estimate growth, as there is clear momentum and growth in the vast majority of city neighborhoods now. Even if the city had a slightly slower self response rate, I think this will be mixed out with what seemed to be a underestimate by census estimates of Ohio's population by 106,000. ACS had the city at 301,000, which it can underestimate trends and changes. 

 

Hamilton County, which peaked at 924,000 in 1970 has stopped losing population and is now gaining population. 802,000 in 2010, the last estimate in 2019 was 817,473. 

 

Butler County seems to have slowed down in population growth as has Warren County (but not as much as Butler). 

 

Now the question is, what will 2020 estimates being released next month show for counties and municipalities? The county and city head count will more than likely not be released for a few months. 

 

And if we account for the underestimating the 2020 census did with the estimates versus the actual 2020 census head count, how will that affect things?

 

My predictions are

July 1, 2020 (2020 estimates)

Hamilton County - 820,100

City of Cincinnati - 304,530

April 1, 2020 (2020 official census)

Hamilton County, - 822,800 (low end - 817,400 high end - 828,700)

City of Cincinnati - 305,395 (low end - 300,200 high end - 309,670)

 

The city will REALLY need to sell if we show a population gain that after 50 years of straight population loss, the city is on the mend again and rising in population, no longer numerically declining. 

 

I do think no matter what there is going to be a population gain in the city, all of the statistics have backed this up. Again, I do not think we are heading for a 2010 disappointment situation. 

15 hours ago, stashua123 said:

Butler County seems to have slowed down in population growth as has Warren County (but not as much as Butler). 

 

If you look at the Census migration numbers, more folks are moving into Hamilton County from Warren, Clermont, and Boone Counties now than the other way around. That represents a huge change from the past half century. Hamilton County still has a slight net negative to Campbell, Kenton, and Butler, but it's trending in Hamilton County's favor.

It's official. Cincinnati had its first population growth in 70 years according to the 2020 Census results. A numeric increase of 12,374, or approximately 4%.

That's a fantastic result.  And good to see the county growing, and the metro growth of well over 100K was very solid.  

https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2021/08/13/2020-census-takeaways.html
 

More info on Cincinnati population trend. 

So the last census we grew was 1950, then our streetcars started to be ripped out and our population shrank for the next 70 years until mysteriously we started building a new streetcar in 2012 and had our first gains again in 2020 census. It's almost like investment in public transit is linked to population growth. 

 

Also I know that OTR population shrank, which seems strange but this is again why people who care about affordable housing and diversity in the neighborhood need to fight against 4-6 unit buildings becoming single family homes, not the big new projects they cry about. 

On 4/27/2021 at 6:51 PM, stashua123 said:

 

 

My predictions are

July 1, 2020 (2020 estimates)

Hamilton County - 820,100

City of Cincinnati - 304,530

April 1, 2020 (2020 official census)

Hamilton County, - 822,800 (low end - 817,400 high end - 828,700)

City of Cincinnati - 305,395 (low end - 300,200 high end - 309,670)

 

The city will REALLY need to sell if we show a population gain that after 50 years of straight population loss, the city is on the mend again and rising in population, no longer numerically declining. 

 

I do think no matter what there is going to be a population gain in the city, all of the statistics have backed this up. Again, I do not think we are heading for a 2010 disappointment situation. 

Two things.  First, kudos on your projections--really close.  Second, awesome that the city and the county both hit your "high end" predictions.  That's great.  

@jag09had a link to 2020 demographic data by neighborhood in the Oakley development chat and while the link did not work for me, I was curious if somehow we could get that data together to make a picture of how our 52 neighborhoods populations changed from 2010-2020. 

On 8/14/2021 at 10:17 PM, stashua123 said:

@jag09had a link to 2020 demographic data by neighborhood in the Oakley development chat and while the link did not work for me, I was curious if somehow we could get that data together to make a picture of how our 52 neighborhoods populations changed from 2010-2020. 

The City's planning department keeps neighborhood level census information on their website. I'm not sure how long it will be, but I assume they will update it eventually to include 2020 data: https://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/planning/maps-and-data/census-demographics/

For the second month in a row The cincinnati metro has lead the nation in fastest selling homes. Average 10 days on the market.

Edited August 17, 20213 yr by unusualfire

So I assume that the Cincinnati and Dayton MSA's still haven't been merged by the Census Bureau despite armchair demographers' predictions to the contrary for the past 30-ish years?

It was a very hot topic on UO in 2007

Does anyone else think that Cincinnati will hit the 2000 census results by 2030? I feel like if we continue the trend we have been going we could reach it or slightly pass it on the next census. I don’t ever (in my lifetime) see Cincinnati getting the percentage increase of places like Austin or Nashville but I think we could start getting a good percentage boost. 

What would that be 22,000 or so more?  Based on recent trends and seeing seemingly everything new filll up or sell quickly I would say yes.  It will be interesting to see where the estimates for 2021 land.  Obviously not perfect but they seem to be more reliable these days and actually a little understated.

Cincinnati neighborhoods ranked by how closely their demographics match the city as a whole. Over-the-Rhine, East Walnut Hills/Evanston, and Madisonville are most representative.

 

I'd be curious to the the 2010 to 2020 trend over that time frame, because it seems like EWH/Evanston are quickly trending white, Madisonville too.  In 2030, Walnut Hills will probably be near the top of this list, but it will also be quickly trending white-majority like EWH and Madisonville are now.

Awesome, thanks for doing that. Could you add another column for the % point increase in white population from 2000-2020? For example, Madisonville would be (35.7 - 50.8) = 15.1% pt change. Same thing for black % as well, i'd be curious where exactly their migration is to.

 

So while they appear to be one of our most diverse neighborhoods right now (and their rank increase is green), the trend indicates that 2020 compared to 2030 will be red.

Edited February 25, 20223 yr by 10albersa

Fixed Over-the-Rhine/Pendleton, so now they're combined in both 2000 and 2020 

 

Edited February 25, 20223 yr by thomasbw
added Over-the-Rhine and Pendelton data together

Corryville's population has tanked. I suppose that's what you get when all of those people with kids get moved out for 1BR graduate student units. And it explains why Short Vine got so sleepy.

1 hour ago, GCrites80s said:

Corryville's population has tanked. I suppose that's what you get when all of those people with kids get moved out for 1BR graduate student units. And it explains why Short Vine got so sleepy.

I also wonder if the stats fail to capture a portion of the student population. @thomasbw- where are you getting this data from? 

17 hours ago, jwulsin said:

I also wonder if the stats fail to capture a portion of the student population. @thomasbw- where are you getting this data from? 

It's all census data. The 2000 stuff is conveniently compiled by the City of Cincinnati here. https://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/planning/maps-and-data/census-demographics/

 

The Enquirer has a good breakdown of 2020- https://www.cincinnati.com/storytelling/cincinnati-neighborhoods/neighborhoods/corryville/

 

 

Also Corryville's Population went from 3830 in 2000 to 4373 in 2020.   

Oh I see, its share of the city's population tanked rather than its total population.

On 2/26/2022 at 9:09 AM, thomasbw said:

Also Corryville's Population went from 3830 in 2000 to 4373 in 2020.

Thanks for clarifying. 

Cincinnati bucks census trend

By Chris Wetterich  –  Staff reporter and columnist, Cincinnati Business Courier

 

Greater Cincinnati dodged a national trend of major regions losing population between 2020 and 2021, with the metropolitan area gaining 2,268 people, according to the latest estimates from the Census Bureau.

The estimates cover the period between July 1, 2020 and July 1, 2021.

 

Skyrocketing housing costs and the pandemic resulted in an exodus of people in major metropolitan areas, including New York, Los Angeles, Chicago and San Francisco, according to the bureau.

 

Among Cincinnati’s peer Midwestern regions, St. Louis, Cleveland, Detroit, Louisville and Pittsburgh lost population, while Columbus, Indianapolis and Kansas City gained population.

The 16-county Greater Cincinnati population stood at 2,259,935, a gain of 2,268, continuing the region’s slow but consistent growth. It ranked 236th for population growth as a percentage during the year. The U.S. has 384 metropolitan statistical areas.

 

MORE

 

 

 

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/opinion/2022/07/09/opinion-increasing-density-vital-cincinnatis-success/7816668001/?fbclid=IwAR0rI3hJO2VPu_yFJmxqgqYzAL8n0nWt2DAlFjjM0A8MBsEJQXuWr5nZLms

The City of Cincinnati resumed its pre pandemic growth trend according to 2022 census estimates released by the Census Bureau 

 

July 2021 - 308,685

July 2022 - 309,513

 

This is remarkable considering Hamilton County lost population as a whole in the same estimates. 

 

Above 2020 Census population of 309,317