jbcmh81

1950 Columbus had approximately 42 sq. miles. http://assets.columbus.gov/Development/planning/columbusgrowthmapseries.pdf shows a nice set of maps of that area, and anything after that has pretty much just been sprawly. I wonder where they got the square miles from. This shows 220 square miles in 2000, but the Census has 217.17 for 2010, and less than 200 for 2000. In any case, that's why it's interesting to see where the population lives. Sprawl or not, the population lives pretty close to the center in contrast to the assumed view.

Less populous when you include the entire metro, yes, but it's interesting that Columbus generally has the highest population of any metro from mile 3-15. It's definitely much more compact than people give it credit for. Sorry, but it's not. Columbus only has about 8% more people within 10 miles of downtown than Cleveland, despite having nearly twice as much land area in that radius. I'm not talking about just population total, but where they live. You would expect that a metro that everyone says is sprawl to have most of the population much more spread out than it really does. The population in Columbus is much closer to the center than it should be given its reputation. You could argue that more of those people live in low-density sprawl closer to the center, I guess, but my point about it being more compact is that the population is not 50 miles out, but 10.

The only natural barrier in the Columbus area would be the Scioto-Darby Creek. It's heavily protected and development can only push out so far westward, something places like Westerville and Dublin are dealing with already. At least Dublin can expand northward, but they seem to be focusing now on density and infill, something few other suburbs are bothering with yet. Delaware County still has a ton of undeveloped land.

I would love it if the annual estimate broke down population by mile and census tract. We'd be able to better track overall trends within a city/metro. Unforunately, that's only for the decennial census.

Yeah, and perhaps Dayton as well considering the population estimates showed growth the last few years.

I actually think the 2000's were the bottom for most places and I would expect that we see gradual improvement over the next several years to decade. May not a reversal of all losses, but a start.

I didn't come up with the numbers at all. The Census released these a couple days ago. They listed the metro population at each mile distance from what they called "City Hall". All I did was put them on a spreadsheet and added them up.

The problem with that theory is that all 3-Cs have sizeable communities beyond 20 miles in their metros. Looking over Columbus and Cincinnati, I found 6 communities with populations near or over 10,000 beyond 20 miles in Columbus with 5 for Cincinnati. Most of Cincinnati's largest communities are either within Hamilton County or near the border. These communities represented 163,414 people for Columbus and 183,287 for Cincinnati, so there's not a huge difference there. That would mean that, of all the population living beyond 20 miles in the 2 metros, Cincinnati would still be 100K ahead in population there that doesn't reside in any city. You may be right that Columbus has more low-density development, but these numbers don't support that. All they really show is that more population lives closer to the core city than they do in Cincinnati.

Less populous when you include the entire metro, yes, but it's interesting that Columbus generally has the highest population of any metro from mile 3-15. It's definitely much more compact than people give it credit for.

I would actually argue that Cleveland's are the most consistent. They reach a plateau fairly quickly, stay there for several miles, and then only gradually decline. Columbus' may be a close second, though.

I added up the total for the populations of every mile for the metros and they matched the 2010 total metro populations, so I don't think the numbers actually missed any population within the metro. Not sure how they worked around features like the Lake in Cleveland, but maybe they just used distance by land only.

Yeah, it's definitely interesting. I like this data specifically because you can easily see growth patterns at a given distance from the urban center, and every metro is different. Examples... Akron-Saw losses at every mile until 6, and then steady gains all the way out to the metro edge, implying that the majority of the population growth is suburban or exurban. Canton-Had rings of loss and growth... loss until mile 4, gain until mile 8, then back and forth out to the metro edge, forming two distinct growth donuts. The far suburban areas suffered consistent loss, though not as great as the urban center. Cincinnati-Had only a small loss at mile 0, but consistent, large losses through mile 7, followed by strong gains all the way out to the metro edge. Cincinnati did have, by far, the largest population at mile 0. There were also distinct peaks and valleys of total population. Population would peak, fall and the peak again in a wave pattern. This happened throughout the entire distance. Cincinnati also had the 2nd highest population beyond the 20-mile mark, indicating a lot of suburban sprawl, but not the most of the metros measured. Cleveland- The only metro to have population growth at both mile 0 and mile 1 and the highest growth at mile 0. Unfortunately, there were huge losses all the way from mile 2 out to mile 11, the furthest that the losses extended of all the metros measured. Also, the strongest growth was not until mile 19, the furthest out for this of any metro measured. Cleveland also had the largest population beyond mile 20. All this supports the idea that, while Cleveland is rebuilding its Downtown successfully, it also has the largest area of population losses as well as the most population sprawl the furthest from its core. A few other good points, though, is that it had the most consistent high population closer to the core that only gradually went down the further you went out, and it had the 2nd highest mile marker population of any metro with a population of 134,166 at mile 5. Columbus-Doing the best of the metros measured overall. Had the 2nd highest growth at mile 0, followed by losses from mile 1 to mile 4 that, combined, were the lowest losses within the first 5 miles of any metro measured. From mile 5 all the way out to the metro edge was strong population growth. It also had the highest mile growth of any metro with +30,586 at mile 10, as well as the highest population mile marker, mile 8, with 158,988. Population peaked between mile 8 and mile 11 and then fairly rapidly dropped off. The problem is that so much of the growth was further out. It was good to see the Downtown areas growing, but otherwise the strong growth remained at the 5 mile marker and beyond. However, the Columbus metro had the 3rd highest population beyond mile 20, behind both other 2-Cs. This seems to support that, while most of the growth happening is just inside I-270 and beyond, the overall metro population and sprawl is somewhat more compact than in Cleveland and Cincinnati. This is also supported by the fact that population ramps up very fast vs the other metros, and leads or is close to the lead from mile 3 out to mile 15. Dayton- One of the more strange growth patters. Beyond the strong losses through mile 5 and strong gains from 8 through 13, there were patterns of growth and loss seemingly at random all the way out to the metro edge. Toledo- Another strange growth pattern. Was only one of 3 metros to have growth at mile 0. Losses from mile 1-5, growth from 6-11, and then random loss and growth to the metro edge. Youngstown-Performing the worst of all the metros. Had only one mile marker in the first 20 to see growth. All the other 19 were losses. Even though the losses weren't the highest of all the metros, they were the most consistent and and even occurred in the far suburbs.

Total Population By Metro Beyond 20 Miles in 2010, highest to lowest. Cincinnati: 537,246 Cleveland: 527,441 Columbus: 404,469 Youngstown: 94,185 Toledo: 93,210 Dayton: 83,879 Akron: 29,546 Canton: 15,618 % of Metro Population that is Beyond 20 Miles from "City Hall" in 2010, highest to lowest. Cleveland: 25.4% Cincinnati: 25.2% Columbus: 22.0% Youngstown: 16.6% Toledo: 14.4% Dayton: 10.0% Akron: 4.2% Canton: 3.9%

Aggregate Population Change by Metro and Mile Marker, 2000-2010, best to worst. Mile 0 Cleveland: +3,158 Columbus: +1,598 Toledo: +170 Cincinnati: -285 Dayton: -633 Youngstown: -847 Akron: -1,109 Canton: -1,861 Mile 1 Cleveland: +3,174 Columbus: -1,049 Cincinnati: -6,112 Youngstown: -6,734 Canton: -7,350 Akron: -8,916 Toledo: -10,118 Dayton: -10,165 Mile 2 Cleveland: -3,388 Columbus: -6,004 Canton: -8,255 Youngstown: -13,928 Cincinnati: -15,749 Akron: -15,874 Toledo: -16,771 Dayton: -20,826 Mile 3 Columbus: -8,509 Canton: -10,180 Youngstown: -17,821 Akron: -18,107 Toledo: -21,469 Cleveland: -23,287 Cincinnati: -24,548 Dayton: -27,652 Mile 4 Canton: -9,323 Columbus: -9,650 Akron: -18,533 Youngstown: -21,468 Toledo: -22,039 Dayton: -31,173 Cincinnati: -32,342 Cleveland: -41,948 Mile 5 Columbus: -7,924 Canton: -8,830 Akron: -19,405 Youngstown: -23,659 Toledo: -26,094 Dayton: -33,066 Cincinnati: -38,698 Cleveland: -70,067 Mile 10 Columbus: +59,873 Canton: -2,402 Akron: -6,207 Dayton: -17,223 Toledo: -21,636 Youngstown: -24,698 Cincinnati: -39,767 Cleveland: -120,862 Mile 15 Columbus: +150,907 Akron: +3,334 Cincinnati: +967 Canton: -1,906 Dayton: -9,702 Toledo: -14,738 Youngstown: -35,096 Cleveland: -113,959 Mile 20 Columbus: +183,014 Cincinnati: +46,813 Akron: +8,625 Canton: -2,841 Dayton: -7,484 Toledo: -14,112 Youngstown: -36,548 Cleveland: -88,522

Metro Comparisons 2010 Aggregate Population By Mile Marker in Order from Highest to Lowest Mile 0 Cincinnati: 17,681 Akron: 12,479 Cleveland: 9,471 Dayton: 9,182 Toledo: 8,304 Canton: 7,488 Columbus: 7,416 Youngstown: 3,080 Mile 1 Cincinnati: 65,254 Toledo: 55,739 Akron: 53,715 Columbus: 49,667 Canton: 45,165 Dayton: 41,053 Cleveland: 32,193 Youngstown: 20,686 Mile 2 Cincinnati: 138,235 Columbus: 134,826 Akron: 122,395 Dayton: 101,817 Toledo: 94,058 Canton: 67,791 Cleveland: 64,721 Youngstown: 55,642 Mile 3 Columbus: 221,466 Cincinnati: 205,624 Akron: 177,674 Toledo: 166,569 Dayton: 152,789 Cleveland: 139,945 Canton: 107,182 Youngstown: 103,109 Mile 4 Cincinnati: 315,665 Columbus: 314,557 Akron: 227,825 Cleveland: 227,309 Dayton: 214,614 Toledo: 213,539 Youngstown: 144,305 Canton: 136,084 Mile 5 Columbus: 404,642 Cincinnati: 400,254 Cleveland: 361,475 Akron: 296,787 Toledo: 271,187 Dayton: 262,069 Youngstown: 181,065 Canton: 170,995 Mile 10 Columbus: 993,957 Cleveland: 918,511 Cincinnati: 862,932 Dayton: 586,178 Akron: 502,710 Toledo: 454,859 Youngstown: 308,585 Canton: 302,212 Mile 15 Columbus: 1,334,289 Cleveland: 1,298,074 Cincinnati: 1,227,419 Dayton: 700,402 Akron: 607,428 Toledo: 498,058 Youngstown: 426,839 Canton: 370,746 Mile 20 Cincinnati: 1,592,905 Cleveland: 1,549,799 Columbus: 1,432,067 Dayton: 727,623 Akron: 675,654 Toledo: 553,219 Youngstown: 471,588 Canton: 388,804

Youngstown Distance in Miles, 2010 Population, Change since 2000. 0. 3,080 -847 1. 17,606 -5,887 2. 34,956 -7,194 3. 47,467 -3,893 4. 41,196 -3,647 5, 36,760 -2,191 6. 45,214 +2,070 7. 27,255 -932 8. 11,649 -686 9. 3,997 -50 10. 39,405 -1,441 11. 32,527 -2,343 12. 17,683 -2,924 13. 31,501 -2,242 14. 22,706 -2,157 15. 13,837 -732 16. 18,145 -731 17. 20,024 -507 18. 2,863 -121 19. 0 +0 20. 3,717 -93 Total Aggregate Population in 2010 and Change since 2000. 0. 3,080 -847 1. 20,686 -6,734 2. 55,642 -13,928 3. 103,109 -17,821 4. 144,305 -21,468 5. 181,065 -23,659 10. 308,585 -24,698 15. 426,839 -35,096 20. 471,588 -36,548 Total Metro Population Beyond 20 Miles in 2010: 94,185 Total Population Change in the Metro Area Beyond 20 Miles, 2000-2010: -723 Mile Marker with the Largest Population in 2000: 3 Mile Marker with the Largest Population in 2010: 3 Mile Marker with the Lowest Population in 2000: 18 Mile Marker with the Lowest Population in 2010: 18 Mile Marker with the Largest Growth 2000-2010: 6 +2,070 Mile Marker with the Biggest Loss 2000-2010: 2 -7,194 Total # of Miles that Metro Population Extends: 32

Toledo Distance in Miles, 2010 Population, Change since 2000. 0. 8,304 +170 1. 47,435 -10,288 2. 38,319 -6,653 3. 72,511 -4,698 4. 46,960 -570 5. 57,658 -4,055 6. 35,286 +170 7. 63,534 +662 8. 34,871 +974 9. 22,790 +1,049 10. 27,191 +1,603 11. 23,377 +9,465 12. 3,928 -5,559 13. 5,555 +2,272 14. 8,741 +686 15. 1,598 +34 16. 5,211 +1,381 17. 12,681 -327 18. 0 +0 19. 20,788 -987 20. 16,481 +559 Total Aggregate Population in 2010 and Change since 2000. 0. 8,304 +170 1. 55,739 -10,118 2. 94,058 -16,771 3. 166,569 -21,469 4. 213,529 -22,039 5. 271,187 -26,094 10. 454,859 -21,636 15. 498,058 -14,738 20. 553,219 -14,112 Total Metro Population Beyond 20 Miles in 2010: 93,210 Total Population Change for Metro Area Beyond 20 Miles, 2000-2010: +1,342 Mile Marker with the Highest Population in 2000: 3 Mile Marker with the Highest Population in 2010: 3 Mile Marker with the Lowest Population in 2000: 15 Mile Marker with the Lowest Population in 2010: 15 Mile Marker with the Largest Growth 2000-2010: 11 +9,465 Mile Marker with the Biggest Loss 2000-2010: 1 -10,288 Total # of Miles that Metro Population Extends: 41

Dayton Distance in Miles, 2010 Population, Change since 2000. 0. 9,182 -633 1. 31,871 -9,532 2. 60,764 -10,661 3. 50,972 -6,826 4. 61,825 -3,521 5. 47,455 -1,893 6. 87,282 +2,965 7. 56,003 -1,649 8. 54,947 +1,625 9. 78,022 +3,980 10. 47,855 +8,922 11. 44,426 +4,559 12. 6,523 +576 13. 34,905 +1,952 14. 13,652 -16 15. 14,718 +450 16. 11,201 -500 17. 7,292 +1,125 18. 10,557 -122 19. 10,033 +289 20. 18,138 +1,426 Total Aggregate Population in 2010 and Change since 2000. 0. 9,182 -633 1. 41,053 -10,165 2. 101,817 -20,826 3. 152,789 -27,652 4. 214,614 -31,173 5. 262,069 -33,066 10. 586,178 -17,233 15. 700,402 -9,702 20. 757,623 -7,484 Total Metro Population Beyond 20 Miles in 2010: 83,879 Total Population Chance in Metro Area Beyond 20 Miles, 2000-2010: +677 Mile Marker with the Highest Population in 2000: 6 Mile Marker with the Highest Population in 2010: 6 Mile Marker with the Lowest Population in 2000: 24 Mile Marker with the Lowest Population in 2010: 24 Mile Marker with the Largest Growth 2000-2010: 10 +8,922 Mile Marker with the Biggest Loss 2000-2010: 2 -10,661 Total # of Miles Metro Population Extends: 31

Columbus Distance in Miles, 2010 Population, Change since 2000. 0. 7,416 +1,598 1. 42,251 -2,647 2. 85,159 -4,955 3. 86,940 -2,505 4. 93,091 -1,141 5. 90,085 +1,726 6. 107,681 +4,156 7. 124,355 +7,965 8. 158,988 +19,241 9. 92,262 +5,849 10. 106,029 +30,586 11. 110,143 +21,667 12. 73,951 +15,995 13. 67,844 +20,001 14. 62,177 +22,559 15. 26,217 +10,812 16. 33,012 +8,903 17. 14,328 +7,149 18. 28,424 +11,574 19. 9,747 +688 20. 12,267 +3,813 Total Aggregate Population in 2010 and Chance since 2000. 0. 7,416 +1,598 1. 49,667 -1,049 2. 134,826 -6,004 3. 221,466 -8,509 4. 314,557 -9,650 5. 404,642 -7,924 10. 993,957 +59,873 15. 1,334,289 +150,907 20. 1,432,067 +183,014 Total Metro Population Beyond 20 Miles in 2010: 404,469 Total Population Change in Metro Area Beyond 20 Miles, 2000-2010: +40,524 Mile Marker with the Highest Population in 2000: 8 Mile Marker with the Highest Population in 2010: 8 Mile Marker with the Lowest Population in 2000: 30 Mile Marker with the Lowest Population in 2010: 30 Mile Marker with the Largest Growth 2000-2010: 10 +30,586 Mile Marker with the Biggest Loss 2000-2010: 3 -4,955 Total # of Miles Metro Population Extends: 50

Cleveland Distance in Miles, 2010 Population, Change since 2000. 0. 9,471 +3,158 1. 22,722 +16 2. 32,528 -6,562 3. 75,224 -19,899 4. 87,364 -18,661 5. 134,166 -28,119 6. 120,890 -19,843 7. 108,965 -12,484 8. 127,888 -7,636 9. 101,630 -6,712 10. 97,663 -4,120 11. 87,554 -4,243 12. 105,635 +362 13. 63,769 +920 14. 65,601 +3,207 15. 57,004 +6,657 16. 63,940 +3,750 17. 45,224 +527 18. 54,369 +8,951 19. 49,567 +9,953 20. 38,625 +2,256 Total Aggregate Population in 2010 and Change since 2000. 0. 9,471 +3,158 1. 32,193 +3,174 2. 64,721 -3,388 3. 139,945 -23,287 4. 227,309 -41,948 5, 361,475 -70,067 10. 918,511 -120,862 15. 1,298,074 -113,959 20. 1,549,799 -88,522 Total Metro Population Beyond 20 Miles in 2010: 527,441 Total Population Change in the Metro Area Beyond 20 Miles, 2000-2010: +17,744 Mile Marker with the Highest Population in 2000: 5 Mile Marker with the Highest Population in 2010: 5 Mile Marker with the Lowest Population in 2000: 36 Mile Marker with the Lowest Population in 2010: 36 Mile Marker with the Largest Growth 2000-2010: 19 +9,953 Mile Marker with the Biggest Loss 2000-2010: 5 -28,119 Total # of Miles the Metro Population Extends: 41

Cincinnati Distance in Miles, 2010 Population, Change 2000-2010. 0. 17,681 -285 1. 47,573 -5,827 2. 72,981 -9,637 3. 67,389 -8,799 4. 110,041 -7,794 5. 84,589 -6,356 6. 79,231 -1,550 7. 101,221 -4,363 8. 105,252 +467 9. 77,558 +1,693 10. 99,416 +2,684 11. 103,560 +13,765 12. 82,272 +17,433 13. 73,797 +4,432 14. 42,371 +2,888 15. 62,487 +2,216 16. 77,824 +6,774 17. 74,796 +9,348 18. 86,357 +13,816 19. 68,887 +8,139 20. 57,622 +7,769 Total Aggregate Population by Distance Markers in 2010 and Change since 2000. 0. 17,681 -285 1. 65,254 -6,112 2. 138,235 -15,749 3. 205,624 -24,548 4. 315,665 -32,342 5. 400,254 -38,698 10. 862,932 -39,767 15. 1,227,419 +967 20. 1,592,905 +46,813 Total Metro Population Beyond 20 Miles in 2010: 537,246 Total Population Change for Metro Area Beyond 20 Miles, 2000-2010: +73,679 Mile Marker with the Highest Population in 2000: 4 Mile Marker with the Highest Population in 2010: 4 Mile Marker with the Lowest Population in 2000: 40 Mile Marker with the Lowest Population in 2010: 40 Mile Marker that saw the Highest Growth 2000-2010: 12 +17,433 Mile Marker that saw the Biggest Loss 2000-2010: 2 -9,637 Total # of Miles the Metro Population Extends: 49

Canton Distance in Miles, 2010 Population, Change since 2000. 0. 7,488 -1,861 1. 37,677 -5,489 2. 22,626 -905 3. 39,391 -1,925 4. 28,902 +857 5. 34,911 +493 6. 26,667 +1,921 7. 41,439 +401 8. 35,325 +1,529 9. 3,950 -178 10. 23,836 +2,755 11. 7,624 +1,029 12. 22,892 +329 13. 16,477 -250 14. 3,960 -211 15. 17,581 -401 16. 18,058 -935 17-20. 0 +0 Total Aggregate Population By Distance Markers in 2010 and Change since 2000. 0. 7,488 -1,861 1. 45,165 -7,350 2. 67,791 -8,255 3. 107,182 -10,180 4. 136,084 -9,323 5. 170,995 -8,830 10. 302,212 -2,402 15. 370,746 -1,906 20. 388,804 -2,841 Total Metro Population Beyond 20 Miles in 2010: 15,618 Total Population Change of Metro Area Beyond 20 Miles, 2000-2010: +288 Mile Marker with the Highest Population in 2000: 2 Mile Marker with the Highest Population in 2010: 7 Mile Marker with the Lowest Population in 2000: 24 Mile Marker with the Lowest Population in 2010: 24 Mile Marker that saw the Highest Growth 2000-2010: 10 +2,755 Mile Marker that saw the Biggest Loss 2000-2010: 2 -5,489 Total # of Miles the Metro Population Extends: 27

Regarding the recent report as far as city population in relation to distance from "City Hall", here is a metro by metro profile in Ohio for the first 20 miles, as well as a general stats picture. Akron Distance in Miles, 2010 Population, and Change since 2000. 0. 12,479 -1,109 1. 41,236 -7,807 2. 68,680 -6,958 3. 55,279 -2,233 4. 50,151 -426 5. 68,962 -872 6. 41,207 +1,141 7. 42,612 +1,551 8. 36,646 +3,252 9. 62,043 +6,849 10. 23,415 +405 11. 22,094 +887 12. 2,619 +124 13. 15,217 +979 14. 35,662 +4,528 15. 29,126 +3,023 16. 5,453 -410 17. 24,303 +2,809 18. 20,451 +1,650 19. 16,019 +1,242 20. 0 +0 Total Aggregate Population By Distance Markers in 2010 and Change Since 2000. 0. 12,479 -1,109 1. 53,715 -8,916 2. 122,395 -15,874 3. 177,674 -18,107 4. 227,825 -18,533 5. 296,787 -19,405 10. 502,710 -6,207 15. 607,428 +3,334 20. 673,654 +8,625 Total Population of Metro Area Beyond 20 Miles in 2010: 29,546 Total Population Change of Metro Area beyond 20 Miles, 2000-2010: -413 Mile Marker with the Highest Population in 2000: 2 Mile Marker with the Highest Population in 2010: 5 Mile Marker with the Lowest Population in 2000: 12 Mile Marker with the Lowest Population in 2010: 12 Mile Marker that saw the Largest Growth from 2000-2010: 9 +6,849 Mile Marker that saw the Largest Loss from 2000-2010: 1 -7,807 Total number of miles the metro population extends: 27

Wouldn't help Cleveland's stats with what? Cincinnati and Dayton aren't the same metro.

So let me get this straight... sales tax revenue is up, exports through the port of Cleveland is up, the Red Line has more riders than they have had in fifteen years... but we're still shrinking? Has anyone ever actually participated in these surveys used to generate the numbers? You can have all those things WITHOUT a growing population. It doesn't mean that Cleveland isn't growing now, but those conditions can and do exist even if there aren't more people.