Posted July 10, 200816 yr Subcounty Population Estimates for July 1, 2007 http://www.census.gov/popest/cities/tables/SUB-EST2007-04-39.xls
July 10, 200816 yr I put together the estimates for cities with 50,000+ residents; Mansfield fell off the list this time around. Let me know if I missed any. 2007 2006 747,755 742,976 Columbus 438,042 443,109 Cleveland 332,458 331,632 Cincinnati 295,029 297,806 Toledo 207,934 209,316 Akron 155,461 156,691 Dayton 78,785 79,688 Parma 78,319 78,669 Canton 73,818 75,006 Youngstown 70,124 69,998 Lorain 62,417 62,875 Springfield 62,285 61,767 Hamilton 55,059 55,241 Elyria 54,136 54,586 Kettering 51,739 51,593 Mentor 51,305 51,985 Lakewood 51,303 51,072 Middletown 51,008 50,628 Cuyahoga Falls
July 10, 200816 yr So Columbus, Cincinnati, Lorain, Mentor, and Middletown are the only places to post gains. Cincinnati's is already being challenged, by local officials, again. I suspect that the population number for Cincinnati will grow after that challenge.
July 10, 200816 yr You just edited that...because your list originally had Hamilton as just barely losing population.
July 10, 200816 yr ^Nope; look at my last edit time, it is nearly an hour before your post. Perhaps you transposed the numbers, which would be easy to do.
July 10, 200816 yr The 2007 Census Estimates (with 2006 numbers listed 2nd) for MSA are Cincinnati MSA: 2,133,678 2,121,128 Cleveland MSA: 2,096,471 2,105,319 Columbus MSA: 1,754,337 1,734,563
July 10, 200816 yr ^Nope; look at my last edit time, it is nearly an hour before your post. Perhaps you transposed the numbers, which would be easy to do. You're right...for some reason I looked at the time you edited and compared to your original post time, and didn't cross check to my post time. I must have mixed up the numbers. Either way I'm glad Hamilton gained as well...I was actually kind of surprised when I thought I read that they lost population. Go Cincinnati-Hamilton-Middletown MSA!
July 10, 200816 yr Here's the Columbus Dispatch article link for this: http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2008/07/10/census.html?sid=101 "Columbus grows while rest of Ohio shrinks - Latest census data bad for Cleveland, OK for Columbus"
July 10, 200816 yr Since so much of this data is based on housing rather than folks, these numbers will likely be more crappy than usual, the sprawling suburbs will show growth that simply isn't there, though the neighborhoods in the city hit by foreclosure will likely show more stability than really exists.
July 10, 200816 yr ^Interesting to see that Cincinnati wasn't included in their comparison charts. Yeah, it would have been more interesting and meaningful to include Cincinnati compared with Columbus and Cleveland in the same way. Especially since Columbus and Cincinnati were the only large Ohio cities to post an increase. Still, I thought the population change maps were telling. The five population decreases in the central Ohio region were all the "inner-city suburbs" (Bexley, UA, Grandview, Worthington and Whitehall). Those areas are all doing pretty well economically, with the exception of a more mediorce Whitehall. But all those suburbs are landlocked and can't growth outward anymore. So more of the population decrease in those inner-city suburbs is because of decreasing household sizes. The rest of the Columbus urbanized areas stayed above water. And then some of the outlying high-growth suburbs showed continued population increases (continuing trend - nothing new this year). Although I was kinda surprised at the high percent increase in the City of Delaware.
July 11, 200816 yr Dear God. Youngstown is now under Canton!??! "You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers
July 11, 200816 yr I wouldn't be all too surprised to see Youngstown drop below Lorain sometime either. Springfield is following a trend to drop below Hamilton soon as well. I was surprised to see the population loss Kettering has been experiencing since 2000.
July 11, 200816 yr Let's put this in some context here. The city of Chicago, which has experienced what is probably urban America's largest central city condo boom, with literally thousands of new units coming online ever single year, has lost population since the 2000 census and was up a measly 5,000 last year. Interestingly, they have not challenged the census. Pretty much all land locked cities are seeing population flatline or decline.
July 11, 200816 yr Arenn, Cleveland is in a different position. they've had reports done by local banks and drill down reports that suggest the population is approximately 90-100k more than what the census is showing. My personal situation, which I've discussed earlier, is that the census workers listed many people in my building as living in Shaker Heights, not Cleveland. So there are problems.
July 11, 200816 yr I'm not sure what reports you are looking at, but I have done what exploration I can of the social compact methodology, and it is underwhelming. They have projected 40% undercounting in some neighborhoods in some cities. But if that's true, it should be possible to go out and find some actual bodies. The fact that no one has tried to do a partial special census on these areas (which is allowed, btw) to capture that population and the associated revenue is telling. Most suburbs that grew 40% would be doing just that. If Cleveland is really understated by 100,000 people, a special census to update the county would be well worthwhile.
July 11, 200816 yr A lot of that shrinkage is demographic rather than mobility based (and the nature of how the census bureau does these estimates). What is often going on is shrinking households, kids go away to college and the like. Housing is still basically full, but there may only be 2 people in a household that once held 3-5.
July 11, 200816 yr And in many "up and coming" neighborhoods you have population decline because affluent singles and childless couples are moving in where working class or poor large families had been, sometimes combining multiple units that held families larger than the ones moving in.
July 11, 200816 yr Don't they publish the # of households in each area? All the census reporting I saw in upstate NY in the past decade always listed the # of households in addition to the # of residents. I agree that places like Kettering are probably seeing a significant increase in the number of empty nestors, due to the aging of the population. But the # of housholds is probably pretty consistant.
July 12, 200816 yr Just two years ago they said Youngstown had an increase to 83,000, now it's 73,000... Lets wait til 2010 to see the 'REAL' results.
Create an account or sign in to comment