Well, many of us probably aren't all that surprised.

 

http://www.columbusunderground.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=7938

The largest city in the state of ohio has 283,776 residents... hmm.

Well, if you're talking old/urban Columbus (1950 boundaries), that sounds about right.

 

Why yes, yes I am.

Hah. In Columbus, if its not on High street or right off of it, then its probably not that great!

 

 

Good thing Columbus was smart enought to see the way the wind was blowing and annex! annex! annex! so it was not hemmed in and areas like Polaris(unfortunately these developments happening and urban sprawl in general is beyond the control of one city council and mayor) are in Columbus and the city has at least been able to cash in on some of the sprawl rather than miss out on it entirely. Not excusing the bad decisions that have hurt neighborhoods and downtown(retail anyone?) ..but would the city be better off now if it was still 40 square miles and with 244,000 people???

 

And alot of the decrease is not only due to suburban flight/abandonment/razing of neighborhoods('urban renewal') but family size has shrunk as well. Would be interesting to see HOUSEHOLD number comparisons for then and now

Ya, of course Columbus' central city lost population

White flight happened in columbus' urban neighborhoods during the late 50's, 60's, and 70's just like everywhere else.

 

Italian VIllage was once yes all Italian families, now you have ONE or maybe TWO people living in a house that was once occupied by entire large family.  The rest of central city columbus works the same way, most of the gentrification is replacing or moving families out further to newer annexed areas or suburbs.

 

I think that the general idea is that Columbus seems to have less empty, boarded up homes, or decayed homes (than some of the other cities in the region.)  Really other than Franklinton and some parts of the near east side, most buildings are being used, even if its for a single person.

 

SO i really believe that most of Columbus urban city population loss is due to changing demographics (more singles, gays, older people with no kids, couples without children) living in the older neighborhoods that once had families.  Also, some of the central city has changed from family homes (near the university district and N. campus) to student housing for OSU students or professors. 

C-Dawg, you mention perhaps the key point people miss in the population decline numbers: average household size fell dramatically in the 20th century.  Even if all those old inner city homes had never been abandoned, population still would have shrunk considerably just due to this.

 

How was Columbus able to keep annexing when other areas didn't?  I find it interesting that Columbus was able to get ahold of places like Polaris and not lose them to suburban towns.  What was different in Columbus?

 

^ I don't know how accurate it is, but I remember in grad school discusssions about federal requirements requiring that central cities provide water services to suburbs. As the story went, Columbus chose to forego some substantial federal funds and subsequently was able to negotiate annexation in exchange for basic services. Cleveland and Cincy both chose to accept the federal funding and were prohibited from using water services as a bargaining chip for annexation.

 

Again, not sure how accurate this is, but it always sounded pretty interesting. I'm sure that political willpower has a lot to do with it. Interested in what some of the other persectives are on how Columbus and Indy and Louisville have successfully annexed when municipalities in Northeast Ohio spend years weighing the pros and cons of even small consolidations of fire departments.

It all has to do with water.  Cincy and Cleveland also had some adverse court rulings regarding annexation that Columbus did not.

Just out of curiosity, were there restrictions on cities annexing across county lines?  When I lived in Ohio in the 1980s, a lot of cities stopped at county lines.  When I moved back to Ohio 15 years later, some of those cities had annexed land across county borders.  Did the rules change? (I thought I heard somewhere where a restriction on cities crossing county lines was lifted, but I could be wrong.)  Maybe since Columbus, located in the center of the county, had more opportunity to annex before hitting a county line?

 

Ohio law says that cities can only annex unincorporated areas (townships).  Columbus was mostly surrounded by townships at the time when much of their annexation took place. Thus, they were able to annex more than Cincy or Cleveland, which both have older, more established cities, villages, and towns abutting the city limits. 

 

At the turn of the century, Cincy was able to annex other towns (Clifton, Hyde Park, etc.), but in this day in age, that would never work.

^ I don't know how accurate it is, but I remember in grad school discusssions about federal requirements requiring that central cities provide water services to suburbs. As the story went, Columbus chose to forego some substantial federal funds and subsequently was able to negotiate annexation in exchange for basic services.

 

That is correct. Columbus has, and still uses their water services in acquiring land for annexation. Keep in mind too, the majority of the land annexed by Columbus was undeveloped upon being annexed. Currently, the only annexation attempt on the table is an area of land in Norwich Township close to Dublin. A developer wants to build 2,000-some homes on the land, which would be incorporated into the City of Columbus in exchange for the water and sewer services. The development is also to take part in Columbus' "pay as you grow" program, which requires developers to assist in paying for such things as road maintenance and parks.

 

Just out of curiosity, were there restrictions on cities annexing across county lines?   When I lived in Ohio in the 1980s, a lot of cities stopped at county lines.  When I moved back to Ohio 15 years later, some of those cities had annexed land across county borders.  Did the rules change? (I thought I heard somewhere where a restriction on cities crossing county lines was lifted, but I could be wrong.)  Maybe since Columbus, located in the center of the county, had more opportunity to annex before hitting a county line?

 

I guess the rules did change. Similar to the scenario in Norwich Township, when developers planned to contruct Polaris and the surrounding areas, the land was annexed by the City of Columbus. The area includes land in southern Delaware County.

 

Ohio law says that cities can only annex unincorporated areas (townships).  Columbus was mostly surrounded by townships at the time when much of their annexation took place. Thus, they were able to annex more than Cincy or Cleveland, which both have older, more established cities, villages, and towns abutting the city limits. 

 

At the turn of the century, Cincy was able to annex other towns (Clifton, Hyde Park, etc.), but in this day in age, that would never work.

 

That's correct also. Columbus, being a much less mature city than Cleveland and Cincinnati, not to mention without the geographical constraints of a lake or hills, was able to annex more easily than it's couterparts to the north and south. Like Cincinnati and Cleveland, there are older, established cities adjacent to Columbus pre-1950s city limits. Those cities and villages, such as Upper Arlington, Marble Cliff, Whitehall, and Bexely, remain and nowadays are pretty-much surrounded by land governed by Columbus.

Also to put it in perspective what annexing can do for a city/economy:

 

Cleveland 78 sq. miles

Cincinnati 78 sq. miles

Columbus 210 sq. miles

 

Cleveland and Cincy have to knock down to rebuild while Columbus can still build on open land.  On paper, I believe that's what really helps Columbus in many ways.

 

Also to put it in perspective what annexing can do for a city/economy:

 

Cleveland 78 sq. miles

Cincinnati 78 sq. miles

Columbus 210 sq. miles

 

Cleveland and Cincy have to knock down to rebuild while Columbus can still build on open land.  On paper, I believe that's what really helps Columbus in many ways.

 

 

Actually Columbus is at 225.9 sq. miles(if not slightly more) and still growing.

 

http://development.columbus.gov/Bizdevelopment/Demographics/Columbus/CityColumbus.asp

Thanks for the info.  People in Indiana like to cite Ohio as the type of state with the annexation laws they'd like to see since Ohio doesn't allow involuntary annexations.  But I do know that Ohio allows a city to force annexation if someone receives water service.  That isn't the case in Indiana.  (Indiana municipalities can use sewer service as a lever, but it is pretty easy for developers to put in their own sewage facilities to get by.  It's harder to do with water).  It looks like Columbus really used water to their advantage.

 

Indiana annexations are typically done pre-development in order to get sewer service and/or to obtain rezoing from agricultural.  In the case of Indianapolis, city-county consolidation was passed as a special state law during a rare alignment where the mayor (Richard Lugar, incidentally), governor, and state legislature were all Republicans.  (Today the city is becoming almost solidly democrat as the republicans flee to the collar counties).  However, the "consolidation" was far from a real consolidation.  It did not affect schools (12 districts I think), police (just consolidated last year, over 30 years later), or fire departments (9 or 10 of these out there) among other things.  It was really annexation in name only.  The primary consolidated entities were administration, parks, and streets.  However, it also prevented independent city and county governments from fighting over development and such, as you see happening in Cincinnati all time for example.

 

BTW: In Indiana, townships do not fight annexation because townships are an independent layer of government.  The township does not disappear or lose territory just because a city annexs territory in it.  Indiana townships appear to be less powerful than Ohio ones.

 

 

^ nice remarks arenn and you nailed it. the success of columbus is not just annexation, but a combination of annexation and water rights leverage, something that cleveland for example basically gave away for nothing.

 

interesting about indy, i always took it as a twin of columbus in that regard, but it's more of a variation than i had thought.