The Youth Movement and Cedar Rapids

Census tract 11.02 has gained 153 of the "young and restless" since 2010

The idea factory that is City Observatory reported this week that census data show educated young adults continue to settle in city centers. The researchers looked at population change within a three-mile radius around the central business district in the 52 largest metropolitan areas in the United States. They found the number of those aged 25-34 with at least a bachelor's degree increased in each of those 52 cores; that in the vast majority of those areas the annual rate of increase was greater in 2010-16 than in 2000-10; and that college-educated young adults are 2.5 times more likely than other people to live in these city centers (Cortright 2020).

The site includes a dashboard where you can look at the record for individual metros. For example, downtown Chicago's young educated population was 93,179 in 2016; it increased at an annual rate of 3.5% between 2010 and 2016, down from 4.4 percent between 2000 and 2010. Downtown Washington, D.C. had a young educated population of 99,051 in 2016; its annual increase was 4.1 percent between 2010 and 2016, down from 5.6 percent between 2000 and 2010. Downtown Seattle's young educated population of 53,775 in 2016 was up at an annual rate of 8.8 percent since 2010, after rising a mere 3 percent annually between 2000 and 2010.

Highlights of Table 4 (Cortright 2020: 13)...

Biggest downtown populations, aged 25-34 with bachelor's degree+

New York NY 242,380

San Francisco CA 116,248

Washington DC 99,051

Chicago IL 93,179

Boston MA 90,889

NEXT: Philadelphia, Seattle, Denver, Baltimore, Minneapolis, Los Angeles, Portland OR

#52: Las Vegas NV 2,393

Largest population changes, 2010-2016, aged 25-34 with bachelor's degree+

San Francisco CA 25,213

Seattle WA 22,120

Washington DC 21,400

Philadelphia PA 21,395

Boston MA 20,799

NEXT: Chicago, Denver, New York, Los Angeles, Austin, Dallas

#52: Rochester NY 279

Largest annualized rate of change, 2010-2016, aged 25-34 with bachelor's degree+

Detroit MI 16.0%

Phoenix AZ 12.9

Indianapolis IN 11.3

Nashville TN 10.4

Kansas City MO 9.5

NEXT: Seattle, Los Angeles, Dallas, Richmond, Oklahoma City

#52: Rochester NY 0.4%

Cortright concludes that cities continue to attract well-educated young adults, limited only by housing supply (see New York City), demonstrating "strong and sustained demand for urban living" in spite of rising costs and how easily technology facilitates mobility. This seems to sustain even in the face of the coronavirus pandemic, as early data from Zillow and Apartment Finder show searches in downtown areas actually increasing. The concentration of talent in cities, and within cities, in close-in urban neighborhoods is a key characteristic of the increasingly knowledge-based, urban economy that primarily drives US economic growth.... [H]aving an urban environment that both attracts and retains these talented workers is an essential part of any local economic development strategy (Cortright 2020: 3; see also Herriges 2020, Patino 2020).

Cedar Rapids is, of course, a much smaller city than those in Cortright's dataset, but a first pass with U.S. Census Bureau data shows similar growth in the young educated population of our core.

A three mile radius around the center of the business district roughly extends from Edgewood Road on the west to Forest Drive on the east, and from Wilson Avenue on the south to 29th Street/Coldstream Avenue on the north. That area includes, more or less, census tracts 11.01, 11.02, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, and 27. Following Cortright (2020: 23), data are from the American Community Survey's 5-year estimates, comparing the 2012 and 2018 surveys (to which Cortright refers by their midpoints, 2010 and 2016). 

Between the 2012 and 2018 surveys, the Cedar Rapids metropolitan statistical area as defined by the U.S. Census Bureau increased its population of young educated people by 1,578, dispersed this way:

    Linn County 1,510

        Cedar Rapids 1,114

            downtown core 499

            rest of city 615

        Marion 117

        Hiawatha -227

        next five towns in size 125

        rest of county 381

    Other counties 68

The core of Cedar Rapids, defined as those 13 census tracts I listed above, increased in population from 42,568 to 42,852, a scant 0.67 percent, much smaller than the 7.5 percent gain in the largest metros reported by Cortright (2020: 11) . The young educated population in the core increased at a much higher rate, 30.8 percent, from 1,619 to 2,118. This is comparable to the 32.8 percent overall for the largest metros (Cortright 2020: 12), and much larger than the city as a whole (17 percent) or the Cedar Rapids metropolitan statistical area, which grew about 12 percent in young educated population. Outside of the city limits, experience was mixed. Some towns outside Cedar Rapids added well-educated young adults, albeit from tiny bases. Lisbon grew 333 percent (42 to 140), Mt. Vernon 21 percent (285 to 344), and Fairfax 15 percent (74 to 114). Linn County outside of its eight largest towns actually grew 67 percent (570 to 951).

Some tracts within the Cedar Rapids core dramatically increased their well-educated young adult population, though there were other neighboring tracts where that group decreased. Big increases were noted in 11.02 (Ellis Park west to Edgewood Road), 12 (east of Ellis Park along the river), 23 (east of Edgewood Road between 1st and E Avenues), 24 (stadiums west to Edgewood Road) and 26 (Czech Village and Hayes Park) on the west side, and 13 (Cedar Lake and the northern Mound View neighborhood) east of the river. For what it's worth--the tracts are not contiguous--these six increased their combined young educated population from 451 to 778, a gain of 72.5 percent .

Census tract 27, which has seen some very prominent construction in the New Bohemia district, saw a marginal decline in well-educated young adult population from 102 to 98.

New apartment construction in Oakhill-Jackson (census tract 27)

At this point, you may feel like saying "Nice confirmation," and prepare your clicking finger to move on to the next blog. However, humility compels me to say that:

1. because of how Cortright names his data points ("2010" and "2016"), I initially looked at the wrong surveys ("Big whoop," says a chorus of readers), and...
2. when a fellow uses the 2010 and 2016 surveys, the data for metropolitan Cedar Rapids look... totally different. Between those two surveys, Cedar Rapids's downtown core gained exactly 64 people aged 25-34 with bachelor's degree or higher, a mere 3.6 percent. That's less than the rest of the city (617), not to mention Marion (1,455) and Mount Vernon (130), and barely higher than tiny Lisbon (56).

There may be some volatility due to Cedar Rapids's catastrophic 2008 flood that would be affected by substituting 2006 and 2007 for 2011 and 2012 in the initial wave, or switching 2012-3 for 2017-8 in the second wave. Maybe cohorts of existing residents are aging into or out of the categories at once. Or there may be volatility due to random error in the survey data. Or maybe some of my math is off--only the 2016 and 2018 surveys include raw numbers, so that required calculations for 2010 and 2012--though I did double-check if some number looked weird.

Age 25-34 with bachelor’s or +	ACS 2010	ACS 2012	ACS 2016	ACS 2018
Cedar Rapids city	6252	6457	6933	7571
13 core tracts	1779	1619	1843	2118
Marion	846	2010	2301	2127
Hiawatha	331	530	382	303
Mount Vernon	101	285	231	344
7 LC towns not CR	1586	3246	3283	3261
Rest of Linn Co	1812	570	946	951
Tract 12	64	38	73	78
Tract 24	203	108	246	227
Tract 26	31	18	74	136
Tract 27	85	102	33	98

In any case, I'm not as confident in the robustness of what I reported above as I might have been if I'd just run it correctly the first time and left it at that.

There are other reasons to question how much Cedar Rapids's experience would match that of major metros. One way in which Cedar Rapids clearly differs is its lack of density, which when paired with its small size makes it very easy to get around as long as you own an automobile. If the reason to live in the core of a major city is to be close to the employment and entertainment action (Cortright 2020: 6-7, citing several studies including a 2015 NBER paper by Edlund et al. and a 2020 Knight Foundation/Urban Institute paper by Scott et al.), a short drive from anywhere in Linn County puts you smack in the center of the Cedar Rapids action. It takes about as much time on a Saturday afternoon to drive to downtown Chicago from 4950 N. Ashland Av (former address of my grandparents) than it does to drive to downtown Cedar Rapids from Mt.Vernon, but here the drive can practically be door-to-door, with parking plentiful and often free once you get to your destination.

My friend Chris Draper, a private economist and planner, suggested the earlier age of marriage and childbearing in Cedar Rapids might make closeness-to-entertainment less of a concern for young educated people. According to the Census, 37.1 percent of Cedar Rapids women aged 20-34 are married, which is about double the typical percentage for major metros. So that may be one factor encouraging young educated Cedar Rapidians to locate away from the city center. On the other hand, it doesn't explain differences between major metros. San Francisco (23.2) and Seattle (26.3) actually have higher percentages of young married women than Rochester, New York (16.0).

Cortright (2020:14) suggests one reason for low growth among young educated people in metros like New York City and Washington, D.C. is lack of available housing. That may apply to Cedar Rapids as well? We have a lot of pricey condominiums in the city center, as well as income-controlled apartments, but how much in between?

SEE ALSO: "Where are the Suburbs?" 24 June 2019

Out of the mouths of babes

Source: Wikimedia commons

For a second year, my Corridor Urbanism co-founder Ben Kaplan and I took the urbanist message to America's youth, specifically sixth graders from Roosevelt and Wilson Middle Schools in Cedar Rapids participating in the Kids on Course program at Coe College. Last time we asked them about changes they'd like to see in the Mound View neighborhood--I'm not sure we knew then that none of them lives near the Mound View neighborhood--resulting in a gaudy but nonetheless energetic list of walkable potential attractions.

This year we asked them about mobility, specifically how confident these 12-year-olds feel navigating the city on their own, and what changes to street design might encourage them. (Ben introduced us to Streetmix, an intriguing website on which you can design your own street features. They drew their own ideal streets, which were adorable and which I would be able to share with you except that I didn't think to collect them. They did tend to feature protected bike lanes, whether because we unconsciously suggested them or not.

What we did collect were surveys we used to start them thinking about the subject. We had five students, which perhaps reflects that the compelling nature of urban design has not yet caught fire among our city's 12-year-olds. Three were from Wilson, two from Roosevelt. There were four boys and one girl, all white except for one boy who came to the U.S. from Congo. Your humble blogger can tell you that, at 12, he took the design of his town for granted, just the way it was, and assumes that these young people have, too--that is, until they landed in a classroom with certain troublemakers who attempted to teach them to think critically about their streets!

(Source: Roosevelt school website)

Roosevelt (above, recently renamed Roosevelt Creative Corridor Business Academy) and Wilson were built in the 1920s and serve the near west side of the city. Their attendance areas are fairly compact for Cedar Rapids middle schools, and are a mix of older neighborhoods with grid street patterns and some newer subdivisions with cul-de-sacs. We didn't ask about students' neighborhoods or specific distance from school.

(1) How do you usually travel to school? Bus-1 Car-2 Walk-1 Car or Walk-1

(2) Do you ride a bicycle for fun? To get places? Both? Fun-2 Both-1 Yes-1 Not really-1

(3) Can/do you walk or ride your bike to school? Why or why not?
Walk, because my mom don't want my bike stolen or broken!
I can walk to school but not ride my bike there because it is [too hilly?]
I walk
No, because it's to far and my parents wont let me
No, I live far from Wilson

(4) Can/do you walk or ride your bike to your friend's house?
Yes, I walk because we live 3 houses down from each other
Yes, both
I walk
I can if I know where they live
No

(5) Could you run an errand to the store for your family, if they asked?
Yes-2
No-2 [One added: "I cant run a errand to a store because they are too far away"]
I don't know

(6) Would you ride the city bus by yourself?
Yes-2 [One added: "it sounds like fun"]
No-2
I do not no

(7) Is there a place you like to go in town where you have to rely on others to take you?
Lindale Mall
Practice, restaurant, shop
No or "not relly"-3

(8) If your town could change one thing to make it easier for you to get around on your own, what should it be?
More rules
A train
Yes
Nothing
I do not no

What do we learn from this tiny lot of surveys, other than spelling may be a lost art and/or that I am either easily amused or patronizing? First of all, none of the children shared our experience of independent movement at that age. Ben (in the 1990s, in Albuquerque, New Mexico) and I (in the 1970s, in Wheaton, Illinois) both remember spending our summers riding our bikes all over the place. They do not do this. Secondly, though this was probably the first time they thought much about city design, they are very aware of this limitation.

Nearly two decades ago, Andres Duany and his co-authors described how suburban design negatively impacts children:

Dependent always on some adult to drive them around, children and adolescents are unable to practice at becoming adults. They cannot run so simple a household errand as picking up a carton of milk. They cannot bicycle to the toy store and spend their money on their own. They cannot drop in on their mother at work. Most cannot walk to school. Even pickup baseball games are a thing of the past, with parents now required to arrange car-pooling with near-military precision, to transport the children at the appointed times. Children are frozen in a form of infancy, utterly dependent on others, bereft of the ability to introduce variety into their own lives, robbed of the opportunity to make choices and exercise judgment. (Andres Duany, Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk, and Jeff Speck, Suburban Nation: The Rise of Sprawl and the Decline of the American Dream [New York: North Point Press, 10th anniversary edition, 2010], 116-117)

There is also the question of enabling routine activity to improve physical fitness.

Despite Cedar Rapids's efforts to improve the walkability of downtown and the core neighborhoods, more consideration of the development pattern of the town as a whole is needed to equitably address the "8-80" crowd, i.e. children and the elderly. Note that the students' comments reflected concern primarily with distance to places, and secondarily to secure storage, moreso than street infrastructure. Where do we build schools? Housing developments? Shopping areas?

Finally, who knows why Ben and I are so nerdy about urban development? But surely one factor for both of us was that we learned from a young age that our mobility was not dependent on driving or being driven in cars. Though both of us are now auto-owners, we continue to use a variety of transportation modes to get around our city, and look for ways that our city can better accommodate everyone.

Today's independent walkers and bike riders will be better prepared for the needs of the 21st century.

SEE ALSO: Spencer Gardner, "Strength Test #6: Can Children Safely Walk or Bike in Your Town?" Strong Towns, 5 April 2017

ON THIS BLOG:
"Talking About Walking," 4 November 2013
"What is a Stroad?" 3 April 2014