Jump to content
Toddguy

Columbus: Population Trends

Recommended Posts

^ haha wow now thats a nice first — i never thought i’d see the day where ohioans complained about people moving in!

 

upon closer inspection a lot of those examples were columbus native returnees, but still its just another sign of columbus popularity these days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ haha wow now thats a nice first — i never thought i’d see the day where ohioans complained about people moving in!

 

upon closer inspection a lot of those examples were columbus native returnees, but still its just another sign of columbus popularity these days.

 

They're the ones paying cash for the $400K+ homes and I work in the construction field so I'm far from complaining.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ ha -- profit -- excellent!

 

get'm up to ready player one population levels

 

then we can never get away from the sprawl, livin' in the sprawl

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wouldn't "the middle of Flyover Country" be Brady, Nebraska, halfway between New York and San Francisco?


“To an Ohio resident - wherever he lives - some other part of his state seems unreal.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

big article in the post about ny’ers flocking to columbus:

 

https://nypost.com/2018/04/25/ex-new-yorkers-are-flocking-to-this-midwest-sanctuary/

 

Such a nice story...but why did the last five words of the article have to be "The middle of flyover country"?  smh.  Such elitism.

 

That's exactly what I thought when I read "flyover country."  What a completely condescending and unnecessary thing to say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ oh please thats nothing. at least columbus doesnt get every article about it with lead in’s like ‘the city known as the mistake by the lake’ or ‘struggling rust belt’ yadda yadda that come off like they were written by the writer’s grandparents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree. Mostly what we get I would call "innocent ignorance." It's usually along the lines of a backhanded compliment like, "You won't believe this is" or "Who knew this existed in" flyover country, Columbus, Ohio, etc

 

Our reputation is just that we don't have one at all, or that of a boring, white bread nowheresville with nothing to do. Either can be corrected easily enough

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ oh please thats nothing. at least columbus doesnt get every article about it with lead in’s like ‘the city known as the mistake by the lake’ or ‘struggling rust belt’ yadda yadda that come off like they were written by the writer’s grandparents.

 

 

It might be ironic, really. Dry New York humor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There really is something exciting about census releases; hard to explain why, but I'm absolutely fascinated by everything to do with population growth, stagnation, depletion, demographic changes, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There really is something exciting about census releases; hard to explain why, but I'm absolutely fascinated by everything to do with population growth, stagnation, depletion, demographic changes, etc.

 

Me too. When I was a kid I could not wait for the new Almanacs to come out lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

879,170. A gain of over 15,000.  Still just barely ahead of Fort Worth and Charlotte. Over 15,000 more than Indianapolis now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of the 25 largest cities in the US, Columbus was number FOUR in growth rate over the past year.

 

-Seattle

-Fort Worth

-Charlotte

 

then Columbus. Growth rate of 1.79%

 

http://www.urbanophile.com/2018/05/24/census-releases-city-population-estimates/

 

*Renn could have at least mentioned Columbus being number four on the list while babbling on about other cities. *hmmph!*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I searched and did not see any thread for this particular area and there is one for Cleveland, so maybe we can use this one for Columbus without having any problems with any city vs city stuff and just talk about our own area?

 

I am impressed with the growth-over 31,000 for the metro in only one year and something like 22,000 for Franklin County. I just wonder how much of that number will be in Cbus city limits?

 

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

 

Around 70% tends to end up in Columbus itself, so my guess is that the city grew between 15K-17K 2016-2017, putting the population between 875,000-877,000. However, because previous-year estimates have been adjusted upward for Columbus, I could easily see the city hitting 880,000 come the May estimate for July 1, 2017.  If so, the city is probably edging closer to 900,000 at this point in 2018.  At that rate, 1 million would be hit around 2025. 

 

Just want to point out how accurate this was.


Very Stable Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I searched and did not see any thread for this particular area and there is one for Cleveland, so maybe we can use this one for Columbus without having any problems with any city vs city stuff and just talk about our own area?

 

I am impressed with the growth-over 31,000 for the metro in only one year and something like 22,000 for Franklin County. I just wonder how much of that number will be in Cbus city limits?

 

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

 

Around 70% tends to end up in Columbus itself, so my guess is that the city grew between 15K-17K 2016-2017, putting the population between 875,000-877,000. However, because previous-year estimates have been adjusted upward for Columbus, I could easily see the city hitting 880,000 come the May estimate for July 1, 2017.  If so, the city is probably edging closer to 900,000 at this point in 2018.  At that rate, 1 million would be hit around 2025. 

 

Just want to point out how accurate this was.

 

Yes it was very accurate to less than 1,000. Given the location of Columbus, to gain over 15,000 people in one year is amazing growth. If that growth continues (and the estimates are correct) then Columbus will be at 915,000 or more by the 2020 census.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DarkandStormy said:

Frankly, Aaron Renn annoys me.  He seems to like Columbus, but also seems to enjoy knocking it when he can find an angle.  The part about how Columbus just gains from Ohio is not only factually untrue (it has net national gains outside of Ohio as well, including from nearly 30 states), but the vast majority of metros/cites nationally gain most of their domestic population from within their home states.  This doesn't even count the growing international migration.  He attempts to create a false narrative that Columbus is both unique in its migration trends, and that it's somehow in danger of imminent failure if the rest of Ohio stops moving there.  Worse, he posts this false information and narrative across multiple media platforms, including the Atlantic.  This to me is just another one of those annexation claims, where people need there to be something wrong or negative regardless of the facts.  Notice how he suggested any criticism of his view would be the result of a "cadre" of Columbus boosters.  What a tool.

Edited by jonoh81

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because I don't like letting falsehoods go unchallenged...

 

Domestic Migration to the Columbus Metro

Ohio Only

2006-2010: +7,910

2011-2015: +7,895

2012-2016: +8,998

Rest of the US

2006-2010: -1,278

2011-2015: +1,598

2012-2016: +2,139

Total Domestic

2006-2010: +6,632

2011-2015: +9,493

2012-2016: +11,137

 

Number of net positive migration states outside Ohio (including DC and Puerto Rico)

2006-2010: 21

2011-2015: 28

2012-2016: 29

 

All data is based on the Census migration estimates.  The totals are the estimated annual averages for each period. 

 

Suck it, Renn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, jonoh81 said:

Frankly, Aaron Renn annoys me.  He seems to like Columbus, but also seems to enjoy knocking it when he can find an angle.  The part about how Columbus just gains from Ohio is not only factually untrue (it has net national gains outside of Ohio as well, including from nearly 30 states), but the vast majority of metros/cites nationally gain most of their domestic population from within their home states.  This doesn't even count the growing international migration.  He attempts to create a false narrative that Columbus is both unique in its migration trends, and that it's somehow in danger of imminent failure if the rest of Ohio stops moving there.  Worse, he posts this false information and narrative across multiple media platforms, including the Atlantic.  This to me is just another one of those annexation claims, where people need there to be something wrong or negative regardless of the facts.  Notice how he suggested any criticism of his view would be the result of a "cadre" of Columbus boosters.  What a tool.

I just read it and kind of agree. He just ignores what does not fit the narrative he has established in his mind. The whole idea of "booster bros" is ridiculous especially since the city IMO still grapples a bit with an inferiority complex, and  much of what may seem to be boosterism is just the response to those who mindlessly attack the city over every. single. thing.(people like that Minneapolisite guy on CD forums-and he is not alone). If you look at sites like CD forums, or hell even this site, Columbus has a distinct lack of supporters compared to cities of it's size. It has a distinct lack of discussion or topics compared to it's peer cities IMO.

 

And we all know the weaknesses of the city: the city schools, lack of public transit options, the city having one of the greatest divides between the haves and havenots, The Hilltop, Linden, The aging post-war corridors(Hamilton road, Brice road, Far west side/Broad, etc), the lack of a "brand", etc. etc.

 

He simply cannot speak of the city without taking a swipe at it, and when he can't come up with anything, he just makes something up. He did not even define how this supposed "booster bros" group will make things tougher besides 'not being able to take criticism'. Much of that group only exists as a counter to those who have an agenda and who continue perpetrating a false narrative of the city-including Renn himself, as you so well pointed out in your own criticism of his methodology in domestic migration. Of course in his mind, correcting a false narrative is being a "booster bro" lol.

 

He also does not seem to get that the city has a relatively young population(younger than that of Ohio as a whole as well as the nation as a whole) and that the majority of population growth is natural increase of births over deaths-demographics that are just the opposite of say a city/region like PIttsburgh(not knocking that city).

 

Renn is just Renn-he is often spot on, but he has his own blind spots and limitations just like anyone else.

Edited by Toddguy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Toddguy said:

I just read it and kind of agree. He just ignores what does not fit the narrative he has established in his mind. The whole idea of "booster bros" is ridiculous especially since the city IMO still grapples a bit with an inferiority complex, and  much of what may seem to be boosterism is just the response to those who mindlessly attack the city over every. single. thing.(people like that Minneapolisite guy on CD forums-and he is not alone). If you look at sites like CD forums, or hell even this site, Columbus has a distinct lack of supporters compared to cities of it's size. It has a distinct lack of discussion or topics compared to it's peer cities IMO.

 

And we all know the weaknesses of the city: the city schools, lack of public transit options, the city having one of the greatest divides between the haves and havenots, The Hilltop, Linden, The aging post-war corridors(Hamilton road, Brice road, Far west side/Broad, etc), the lack of a "brand", etc. etc.

 

He simply cannot speak of the city without taking a swipe at it, and when he can't come up with anything, he just makes something up. He did not even define how this supposed "booster bros" group will make things tougher besides 'not being able to take criticism'. Much of that group only exists as a counter to those who have an agenda and who continue perpetrating a false narrative of the city-including Renn himself, as you so well pointed out in your own criticism of his methodology in domestic migration. Of course in his mind, correcting a false narrative is being a "booster bro" lol.

 

He also does not seem to get that the city has a relatively young population(younger than that of Ohio as a whole as well as the nation as a whole) and that the majority of population growth is natural increase of births over deaths-demographics that are just the opposite of say a city/region like PIttsburgh(not knocking that city).

 

Renn is just Renn-he is often spot on, but he has his own blind spots and limitations just like anyone else.

 

For most of its life, no one cared about Columbus.  In the Midwest and Ohio, it was a 3rd or 4th-tier city at best.  Only when so many other cities declined or when Columbus began to really rise did we start seeing all the naysayers.  Notice that you don't really see a lot of the "it grew through annexation!" or "its success is all based on it being a capital!" from people outside of the Midwest/Great Lakes.  The only thing people from outside the region seem to say about Columbus is that they're surprised a city from the Midwest is growing so fast or something, because they dismiss the region completely most of the time.  For locals, though, I think the criticism comes from a more personal place.  Columbus has really started to challenge the rankings of regional cities, and when some have comfortably been so far ahead for so long, it seems like a threat in some way.  So they find reasons to tear it down.  They don't always think about the reality that the Midwest/Great Lakes needs cities like Columbus and Madison and Des Moines and Omaha, because each one represents a contradiction to the narrative about how everyone's abandoning a declining region to head to Florida (one of the worst states ever) or the West Coast.  You're absolutely correct that even in Columbus, many natives and non-natives alike still have an inferiority complex.  If anything, people don't give it enough credit rather than giving it too much.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Columbus Region to Grow to 3 Million Residents by 2050

 

Quote

When the Insight2050 study was first unveiled way back in 2014 by the Mid Ohio Regional Planning Commission (MORPC), local planners projected that the Columbus region was on track to add another 500,000 people to its population by the year 2050. An update today confirms that the original projections were a little too conservative — we’re actually poised to add another 1,000,000 residents by the same destination year of 2050...

 

 

Edited by DevolsDance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's interesting, at least to me, is that I'm seeing more and more of my own work in these stories.  Back when the 2014 MORPC report came out, I was one saying that the numbers were far too low given that metro growth had been accelerating for the previous 3 decades.  I'm also the person who calculated that % of metro growth that Franklin County receives, as well as how much Columbus gets. I did the same calculation for all of the largest US cities here: http://allcolumbusdata.com/?p=9393  I'm glad years of crunching numbers is getting some attention, but sometimes a shoutout would be nice! 

Edited by jonoh81
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I checked out your link.  Your conclusion is completely invalid.

 

Quote

 


So what’s all this mean? Columbus performs particularly well here. Franklin County attracts a high percentage of the total metro population, and Columbus itself is one of only 5 cities with more than 50% of the metro growth entering the city limits. Even accounting for area size, Columbus does fairly well. This suggests that urban growth there is stronger than in most cities.
 

 

 

I know we've discussed this ad nauseum, but you can't equate "core city" with "urban".  Columbus has many decidedly suburban areas within the core city.  Many cities do not.

 

I'm not saying there aren't good things going on in Columbus or that maybe it is growing in its urban areas, but you need to dig a little deeper to prove that (like maybe compare 1950s city limits for each city).

Edited by jam40jeff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jam40jeff said:

I checked out your link.  Your conclusion is completely invalid.

 

 

I know we've discussed this ad nauseum, but you can't equate "core city" with "urban".  Columbus has many decidedly suburban areas within the core city.  Many cities do not.

 

I'm not saying there aren't good things going on in Columbus or that maybe it is growing in its urban areas, but you need to dig a little deeper to prove that (like maybe compare 1950s city limits for each city).

What you’re asking for is virtually impossible.  First you would need an accepted definition of “urban”.  Then you would need to somehow measure only those urban areas within city limits and then find population figures only for those.   I actually did the 3C 1950 boundaries, but it took ages just to put those together. It would take many years to do it for all the largest US cities.  Even then, 1950 boundaries don’t necessarily include all urban areas in a city, anyway.  

I get that all cities and their boundaries are different, but there’s only so much you can reasonably do to standardize them.  I fully stand by my work.  

BTW, Columbus ‘ 1950 boundary is also seeing lots of population growth, so that is consistent.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jonoh81 said:

What you’re asking for is virtually impossible.  First you would need an accepted definition of “urban”.  Then you would need to somehow measure only those urban areas within city limits and then find population figures only for those.   I actually did the 3C 1950 boundaries, but it took ages just to put those together. It would take many years to do it for all the largest US cities.  Even then, 1950 boundaries don’t necessarily include all urban areas in a city, anyway.  

I get that all cities and their boundaries are different, but there’s only so much you can reasonably do to standardize them.  I fully stand by my work.  

BTW, Columbus ‘ 1950 boundary is also seeing lots of population growth, so that is consistent.  

 

I get that's it's difficult (but surely not impossible), but my point is that you shouldn't be so confident in drawing your "definitive conclusions" based on flawed methodology.

 

No metric is going to be 100% accurate, but 1950s boundaries for each city would IMO be much more accurate.  The vast majority of urban, walkable neighborhoods were built pre-WW2 in this country.  Most of the newer urban development, even in a city like Columbus, is a rebuilding of these neighborhoods.  This could change in the future, and there are certainly some limited exceptions to this rule, but it would IMO be a much more accurate metric than simply using the core city's boundaries.

 

Again, I said that Columbus very well might be growing within the 1950s city boundaries, and that would be wonderful.  I am interested if you have any statistics showing the scale of this growth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, jam40jeff said:

 

I get that's it's difficult (but surely not impossible), but my point is that you shouldn't be so confident in drawing your "definitive conclusions" based on flawed methodology.

 

No metric is going to be 100% accurate, but 1950s boundaries for each city would IMO be much more accurate.  The vast majority of urban, walkable neighborhoods were built pre-WW2 in this country.  Most of the newer urban development, even in a city like Columbus, is a rebuilding of these neighborhoods.  This could change in the future, and there are certainly some limited exceptions to this rule, but it would IMO be a much more accurate metric than simply using the core city's boundaries.

 

Again, I said that Columbus very well might be growing within the 1950s city boundaries, and that would be wonderful.  I am interested if you have any statistics showing the scale of this growth.

 

It's not flawed, though.  It measured what I wanted it to measure- if population was going into a city's limits or not and what % of that total metro growth did so.  Cities arguably contain most of a region's urbanity, so I don't think it's that controversial as far as that goes.  The numbers are accurate in terms of what I wanted to show for them.  That city limits differ cannot be helped in that case.  1950 limits are also different for each city in terms of their built area and area sizes, so that wouldn't exactly change the problem as much as you think it does.  What you're asking for is different than what I measured, IMO.  It seems you want something a lot more detailed, down to the neighborhood level. As I said, 1950 boundaries are difficult to measure.  To find them for the 3-Cs, I had to find 1950 boundary maps for each, get the census tracts that made them up, and then go through them decade by decade to see how they changed over time.  Census tracts have split multiple times since 1950, and current ones don't always exactly match how they were in 1950, so you need to find the equivalent or as close to it to get the population changes.  It would be MUCH easier to simply ignore boundaries altogether and use a standard "urban" definition- something based on density, perhaps?- to find out how those areas are growing versus areas that do not match the definition.  Even then, it would take a significant amount of time.  I do this stuff for free, on my own time.  If I had all the time in the world and didn't have more than one other job, sure, I could wade through that data minefield. 

 

However, because I have already done all this for the 3-C 1950 boundaries, I can at least provide that data.  I'll post it soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, so based on the 1950 boundary, here were the results.

Cleveland 1950 Boundary 2010-2017 Change: -6,000

Cleveland Metro Change 2010-2017: -18,396

1950 Boundary % of Metro Population Change 2010-2017: 32.6%

2017 Cleveland City Boundary 2010-2017 Change: -11,290

2017 City Boundary % of Metro Population Change 2010-2017: 61.4%

Cuyahoga County 2010-2017 Change: -31,608

Cuyahoga County % of Metro Population Change 2010-2017: 171.8%

 

Cincinnati 1950 Boundary 2010-2017 Change: +2,392

Cincinnati Metro Change 2010-2017: +64,502

1950 Boundary % of Metro Population Change 2010-2017: 3.7%

2017 Cincinnati City Boundary 2010-2017 Change: +4,356

2017 City Boundary % of Metro Population Change: 6.8%

Hamilton County 2010-2017 Change: +11,448

Hamilton County % of Metro Population Change 2010-2017: 17.7%

 

Columbus 1950 Boundary 2010-2017 Change: +6,566

Columbus Metro Change 2010-2017: +176,751

1950 Boundary % of Metro Population Change 2010-2017: 3.7%

2017 Columbus City Boundary 2010-2017 Change: +92,137

2017 City Boundary % of Metro Population Change: 52.1%

Franklin County 2010-2017 Change: +128,567

Franklin County % of Metro Population Change 2010-2017: 72.3%

 

For Cleveland and Cincinnati, the 1950 and 2017 boundaries are very similar, as both cities were unable to grow much area-wise after that time.  Columbus is obviously much different.  So to your point about what is urban and not, let's assume that "urban" means either a population density at or above 5000 ppsm and/or within an obviously urbanized location (such as Downtown, which is urban, but with a population density below 5000).  Let me pull those figures and post them.

Edited by jonoh81

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The urbanist opinions out there on Twitter, etc., are a big homogenous blob.  Aaron Renn doesn't pay any attention to those people doesn't care if they like him or not. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jmecklenborg said:

The urbanist opinions out there on Twitter, etc., are a big homogenous blob.  Aaron Renn doesn't pay any attention to those people doesn't care if they like him or not. 

 

 

Well bless his heart*said in best southern style*.  How are things in incestuous Cincinnati? lol. I can't believe Renn backed down on banning that guy. And he still just goes on and on about "The Place That Shall Not Be Named" like no policy was ever put in place.  

Edited by Toddguy
the Aral Sea, Heath Bars, you know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, GCrites80s said:

He used to be signed up over at the Columbus Underground  forum and would engage with people from time to time.

 I often agree with him. I think he was spot on about Nashville and it's light rail plans for instance. I guess maybe there are some "Booster Bros" in Columbus if one of the recent comments over there is true re: the Minneapolis job applicant. If six people actually said "What does Minneapolis have that Columbus does not have?" then that is a problem. There is no denying that among other things we do not have the legacy institutions that cities that were larger earlier(the twin cities had about 830,000 people within their city limits alone in 1950)have. Add into the fact that the urban area is about twice the size now as that of Columbus, and it really makes me wonder how many people are that ignorant about other cities/states?

 

I think the major thing that has held Minneapolis back just a bit is the climate, or maybe even the perception of the climate being worse than what it really is. Kind of like the perception that Cleveland is absolutely buried in snow during the winter, when most of the Lake Effect stuff is east and inland.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our Minneapolis friend used to post here very often years ago and pick the dumbest fights with people and even jab at Columbus in random PMs to users. Same deal with CU. Also whined about Columbus on the now-defunct James Howard Kunstler forum.

 

One thing MSP does have that Columbus doesn't is, of course, rail transit but that's true of just about everywhere now.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of rail, allow me to suggest something completely unfeasible politically...it is remarkable that Columbus continues to barely sprawl outward from East to West south of Broad St.   Put your compass needle on the statehouse and draw a semicircle at about the 9 mile radius.  You're in farmland all the way from 3 o'clock to 9 o'clock. 

 

Seems to me that there is a real opportunity to build a rail system *now*, before it gets prohibitively expensive.  Zone it so that medium-density has to be near the stations...now.  Before anything is there.  So a line from West Jefferson, one from Mt. Sterling, one from Circleville, and one from Lancaster, all converging downtown and then proceeding northward in a subway under High St. to OSU, where it all comes to an end at Lane Ave. 

 

Sorry, Dublin.  Sorry,  Powell.  Sorry, Polaris.  Sorry, Gahana.  You don't get trains! 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, jonoh81 said:

 

It's not flawed, though.  It measured what I wanted it to measure- if population was going into a city's limits or not and what % of that total metro growth did so.

 

Well, that's fine if that's what you wanted to measure, but I was referring simply to your conclusion.  Specifically,

 

Quote

 


Even accounting for area size, Columbus does fairly well. This suggests that urban growth there is stronger than in most cities.
 

 

 

I was simply saying that the data provided didn't in fact show that.

 

Thanks for posting the 1950s boundary numbers.  That is interesting and I think it does make a much stronger argument for your case.

Edited by jam40jeff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, GCrites80s said:

Our Minneapolis friend used to post here very often years ago and pick the dumbest fights with people and even jab at Columbus in random PMs to users. Same deal with CU. Also whined about Columbus on the now-defunct James Howard Kunstler forum.

 

One thing MSP does have that Columbus doesn't is, of course, rail transit but that's true of just about everywhere now.

I remember that guy from here(when I almost exclusively lurked) and I see him on CD(where I am not a member and only lurk-I will not be a part of that site). He is beyond anything I have seen and has destroyed the development thread over there. Matt is no where close to that. He has problems with a certain mindset he sees there, and takes that into non-Cincinnati discussions, but it is NOTHING like that nut in Minneapolis. Anything and everything about Columbus is attacked and compared unfavorably to any other possible place with no exceptions and it is done with an obvious bitterness that comes through very clearly. It is kind of disturbing to me-someone being that caught up on hating some city that you don't even live in anymore.

So glad that guy is not here anymore. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/20/2018 at 10:00 PM, jmecklenborg said:

Speaking of rail, allow me to suggest something completely unfeasible politically...it is remarkable that Columbus continues to barely sprawl outward from East to West south of Broad St.   Put your compass needle on the statehouse and draw a semicircle at about the 9 mile radius.  You're in farmland all the way from 3 o'clock to 9 o'clock. 

 

Seems to me that there is a real opportunity to build a rail system *now*, before it gets prohibitively expensive.  Zone it so that medium-density has to be near the stations...now.  Before anything is there.  So a line from West Jefferson, one from Mt. Sterling, one from Circleville, and one from Lancaster, all converging downtown and then proceeding northward in a subway under High St. to OSU, where it all comes to an end at Lane Ave. 

 

Sorry, Dublin.  Sorry,  Powell.  Sorry, Polaris.  Sorry, Gahana.  You don't get trains! 

 

 

That would basically load the Uncool Crescent with first-round draft picks in an effort to create some parity. Also, 100 years ago, the Scioto Valley Traction line did that exact thing leading to TOD. Pickaway County had a few tiny TODs that are completely erased such as Bell's Station and the one at Cromley Road and Lockbourne-Eastern.

Edited by GCrites80s

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole dilemma is that when the city fathers of London, Circleville, Lancaster, etc., figure out that they can be the next DT Westerville, they're going to zone out apartments and will demand 100x200ft. lots for any new single-family home construction.  These various towns and small cities with sort-of intact downtowns and identities will compete with one another to be the most yuppie.  So yet again, the people who would actually benefit from access to transit won't be able to afford to live near it.  

 

That's the one thing that I don't think a lot of reporters get nationwide about gentrification -- when the yuppies move in to a former poor area close to a downtown, transit ridership inevitably goes down.  The problem is pretty similar for commuter rail, I'd imagine, although we of course have no examples of this in Ohio.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/20/2018 at 6:16 PM, jonoh81 said:

Okay, so based on the 1950 boundary, here were the results.

Cleveland 1950 Boundary 2010-2017 Change: -6,000

Cleveland Metro Change 2010-2017: -18,396

1950 Boundary % of Metro Population Change 2010-2017: 32.6%

2017 Cleveland City Boundary 2010-2017 Change: -11,290

2017 City Boundary % of Metro Population Change 2010-2017: 61.4%

Cuyahoga County 2010-2017 Change: -31,608

Cuyahoga County % of Metro Population Change 2010-2017: 171.8%

 

Cincinnati 1950 Boundary 2010-2017 Change: +2,392

Cincinnati Metro Change 2010-2017: +64,502

1950 Boundary % of Metro Population Change 2010-2017: 3.7%

2017 Cincinnati City Boundary 2010-2017 Change: +4,356

2017 City Boundary % of Metro Population Change: 6.8%

Hamilton County 2010-2017 Change: +11,448

Hamilton County % of Metro Population Change 2010-2017: 17.7%

 

Columbus 1950 Boundary 2010-2017 Change: +6,566

Columbus Metro Change 2010-2017: +176,751

1950 Boundary % of Metro Population Change 2010-2017: 3.7%

2017 Columbus City Boundary 2010-2017 Change: +92,137

2017 City Boundary % of Metro Population Change: 52.1%

Franklin County 2010-2017 Change: +128,567

Franklin County % of Metro Population Change 2010-2017: 72.3%

 

For Cleveland and Cincinnati, the 1950 and 2017 boundaries are very similar, as both cities were unable to grow much area-wise after that time.  Columbus is obviously much different.  So to your point about what is urban and not, let's assume that "urban" means either a population density at or above 5000 ppsm and/or within an obviously urbanized location (such as Downtown, which is urban, but with a population density below 5000).  Let me pull those figures and post them.

 

Thank you for pulling this together!

 

The population losses between the 1950 and 2017 City of Cleveland boundaries seem too significant. Cleveland's boundaries have grown very little since the 1930s, except for a few annexations from Brook Park for airport expansions. 

 

 

http://northcoastgeo.com/blog/2016/9/29/map-of-city-of-cleveland-land-annexations

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...