Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The office vacancy rate is creeping up. The downtown rate is already over 15% and no new construction there is happening and actually the available square footage contracted over the last 3 months. The suburban market is doing better. But none of this reads as a boomtown.
There's actually several hundred thousand sq ft of construction. That vacancy rate must be taken with a grain of salt. The majority is in a tower that underwent bankruptcy and hasn't been modernized. Office is not the only aspect indicative of a boom , and as the yelp article indicated, there are lots of small businesses and new retail opening.
Office space in all but the top 20 cities is a DINOSAUR. I don't see Louisville office vacancy improving much due to so much dinosaur 1970s style office space particularly in the PNC bldg.
Lists like this are why the phrase "Don't trust everything you read on the internet" is completely true and valid. You see these insane lists of "Top ___ cities/state/places to live" all the time from various different websites, and most of the time they are complete nonsense, using criteria that the author of the article/list believes should be used, and conveniently leaves out other criteria that wouldn't fit his/her own narrative.
I think all of these cities have potential, but they aren't, by any stretch of the imagination, "boomtowns".
I'll never forget that one internet list, which rattled off the "most sustainable cities" in the U.S. I kid you not, Miami and Orlando were considered among the most "sustainable". The same cities that are constantly hit by nasty hurricanes and that scientists predict will be underwater soon.
At any rate, if there's a lot of construction happening in a place, specifically residential and commercial construction, then at the least the population growth figures would indicate if a boom is occurring or maybe hint that one is about to occur. It could simply mean that local demographic shifts are underway without any real change in growth statistics, such as what is happening in several Rustbelt cities.
So yeah, doing your due diligence will tell you what you need to know. Sorry but no one is going to change their or the commonly accepted definition of the word "boomtown" to accommodate Louisville.
This describes Milwaukee to a T. Construction left and right downtown but no/little population growth. I would not consider Milwaukee a boomtown. I'm thrilled with the developments downtown and I love living here but I don't need to falsely claim it's a boomtown.
Residents of any city can find a list that promotes their city to boost their ego. Most are paid promotionals masked as information. Few are properly researched.
How does Honolulu play in here? I think you can "boom" without massive population growth. Sometimes a boom is cultural, tourism, restored urban bones, etc. Milwaukee and Louisville both qualify there. Yelp didnd't use any Mickey Mouse criteria....they used objective data based on the number of new businesses opening!
Relax you sunbelt poster children! No one is claiming these older cities are growing like your beloved sprawlbelt. But they are doing well. Very well so much that construction wise, and some other ways like tourism draws, they are booming.
How does Honolulu play in here? I think you can "boom" without massive population growth. Sometimes a boom is cultural, tourism, restored urban bones, etc. Milwaukee and Louisville both qualify there. Yelp didnd't use any Mickey Mouse criteria....they used objective data based on the number of new businesses opening!
Relax you sunbelt poster children! No one is claiming these older cities are growing like your beloved sprawlbelt. But they are doing well. Very well so much that construction wise, and some other ways like tourism draws, they are booming.
You're really going to unnecessary lengths to justify the obvious use of hyperbole here by Yelp. This has nothing to do with bias towards the Sunbelt and against other parts of the country; it's about common sense usage of terms. I haven't seen anyone in this thread from any other city on this list state their agreement with the "boomtown" descriptor although they are well aware of the areas wherein their city is progressing. But since it seems so important to you that somebody called your city a boomtown, I won't rain on your parade anymore. Just know that in real life, folks aren't assigning these cities to the boomtown category and guess what? That's okay.
You're really going to unnecessary lengths to justify the obvious use of hyperbole here by Yelp. This has nothing to do with bias towards the Sunbelt and against other parts of the country; it's about common sense usage of terms. I haven't seen anyone in this thread from any other city on this list state their agreement with the "boomtown" descriptor although they are well aware of the areas wherein their city is progressing. But since it seems so important to you that somebody called your city a boomtown, I won't rain on your parade anymore. Just know that in real life, folks aren't assigning these cities to the boomtown category and guess what? That's okay.
If it makes you feel any better, I consider your beloved Richmond to be in a minor boom too. I'd say Yelp's 5 boomtowns are in a minor boom....lots of retail and construction growth. Lots of hotel growth. WHY does this bother people so much?
Louisville is NIGHT AND DAY compared to 2014. There is NO COMPARISON. Man....13 BILLION in construction since then! Downtown Louisville was a ghost town then. 2019 downtown Louisville is booming and the amount of gentrification and rehab infill in urban neighborghoods is unprecedented....that said, your brief tour missed over HALF the elite urban hoods! This would be like going to NYC, sticking to Manhattan, and saying it can't hold a candle to Tokyo or Paris. Come on people!
Steelcityrising....where ya at? He thought I was overhyping Louisville until a recent visit.
According to Emporis Louisville has one high rise building under construction no sky scrapers . Not sure that is a boom town when some down towns have 20+ Sky Scrapers under construction at a time.
Yes, you're right, and we all, pretty much, know that. Glad you brought it up, though, because your words could not be more true.
Well yes because Austin has grew by 20% in 8 years is a boomtown while Milwaukee that has goined about 20 people. So saying the former is a boomtown makes a hell of a lot more sense than the latter.
That doesn’t mean you have to prefer Austin to Milwaukee.
If it makes you feel any better, I consider your beloved Richmond to be in a minor boom too. I'd say Yelp's 5 boomtowns are in a minor boom....lots of retail and construction growth. Lots of hotel growth. WHY does this bother people so much?
My beloved Richmond? I think you have me confused for someone else. I like the place and all but have never lived there and have zero ties to the city.
Nobody's bothered by cities with projects under construction but your passionate insistence on using the term "boomtown" to describe them all because a run-of-the-mill ranking called them such, clearly a bit of an exaggeration for effect, reeks of insecurity and desperation--which is utterly perplexing because Louisville is a fine city in its own right with much to offer as is. There's no need to go over the top in describing what's going on there as if nobody could grasp it unless the descriptor "boomtown" was used. The fact that you have to continually qualify the type and level of "boom" happening there strongly suggests that perhaps you shouldn't call it a boomtown. You certainly don't have to do that with large cities like Seattle, Denver, Austin, Dallas, Charlotte, etc since everything the term connotes is actually happening there: rapid population growth, rapid job growth due to the growth of major corporations already located there or relocating/establishing a presence there, the city emerging or solidifying itself as a leader in key economic sectors, major infrastructure development, tons of commercial and residential construction of all types, increasing airport passenger counts, the addition of new professional sports franchises and venues, hosting high profile national events, a rising national profile, etc. Louisville has a few of these things in place, which is great and is indicative of the city's good health and future potential, but not enough to the point where it can be called a boomtown without qualification or further explanation. I don't know why someone's refusal to redefine the term or alter their perception of what the term connotes in an effort to accommodate Louisville, all because you seem to be inexplicably wed to the descriptor, perplexes you. Several other cities out there are in a similar position as Louisville (Birmingham comes to mind) and I don't call them boomtowns either. And there's no compelling evidence at this point in time that I should start calling them such either.
My beloved Richmond? I think you have me confused for someone else. I like the place and all but have never lived there and have zero ties to the city.
Nobody's bothered by cities with projects under construction but your passionate insistence on using the term "boomtown" to describe them all because a run-of-the-mill ranking called them such, clearly a bit of an exaggeration for effect, reeks of insecurity and desperation--which is utterly perplexing because Louisville is a fine city in its own right with much to offer as is. There's no need to go over the top in describing what's going on there as if nobody could grasp it unless the descriptor "boomtown" was used. The fact that you have to continually qualify the type and level of "boom" happening there strongly suggests that perhaps you shouldn't call it a boomtown. You certainly don't have to do that with large cities like Seattle, Denver, Austin, Dallas, Charlotte, etc since everything the term connotes is actually happening there: rapid population growth, rapid job growth due to the growth of major corporations already located there or relocating/establishing a presence there, the city emerging or solidifying itself as a leader in key economic sectors, major infrastructure development, tons of commercial and residential construction of all types, increasing airport passenger counts, the addition of new professional sports franchises and venues, hosting high profile national events, a rising national profile, etc. Louisville has a few of these things in place, which is great and is indicative of the city's good health and future potential, but not enough to the point where it can be called a boomtown without qualification or further explanation. I don't know why someone's refusal to redefine the term or alter their perception of what the term connotes in an effort to accommodate Louisville, all because you seem to be inexplicably wed to the descriptor, perplexes you. Several other cities out there are in a similar position as Louisville (Birmingham comes to mind) and I don't call them boomtowns either. And there's no compelling evidence at this point in time that I should start calling them such either.
So if I search your posts I won't find boosterism for Richmond? Come on now! Birmingham has NO WHERE near the construction of Louisville. Louisville is as much bigger than Birmingham as Milwaukee is bigger than Louisville. Yet, we have people honestly claiming Milwaukee is several tiers above Louisville.
What is considered a highrise? Louisville has probably a dozen 5 story buildings under construction.
I can personally think of 6 highrises over 5 stories under construction, some of which still have cranes up. We had a nonbiased poster who just drove by Louisville and said there were several cranes up. They stretch from UofL's campus to the east suburbs.
Yet, we have people here trying to downplay what's going on in Louisville and compare it to Birmingham. It's utterly laughable. It's a stretch for Louisville to compare to true boomtowns when Yelp is the one who used the term. Louisville can't be compared to metros 300k bigger but is identical to metros 200-300k smaller with less even population growth? What gives?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
