Columbus adds population for 5th straight year « Columbus Underground Messageboard

Columbus Underground Messageboard » General Columbus Discussion

Columbus adds population for 5th straight year

[20 posts] [11 contributors]

Topic Rating:

(Total Ratings: )
Rate this topic:

Started 1 year ago by futureman
Latest reply from futureman

Tags:

No tags yet. Add them below.

futureman
Grandview Heights
Login to Send PM

No else has mentioned latest U.S. Census Bureau estimates, so I thought I might start a thread about it. See below for articles from Business First Columbus and The Toledo Blade.

Columbus adds population for 5th straight year
BUSINESS FIRST OF COLUMBUS

ColumbusÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ population growth continued at a modest pace last year to keep the city among the 20 largest in the nation, according to new data.

The U.S. Census Bureau on Tuesday said ColumbusÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ population as of July 1, 2009, was estimated at 769,360, up 1.3 percent from 759,390 a year ago. That makes the city the 16th-largest in the nation but puts its growth rate just outside the top 100 at No. 102.

The cityÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s growth rate is virtually unchanged from a year ago, when its population grew 1.1 percent. The cityÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s population has grown each of the past five years.

READ MORE

Most of the Blades article focuses around Toledo, but it does have a nice graphic for the breakdown for each large Ohio City.

Census estimate shows a decline in Toledo population
City stays above key mark of 300,000 for 1-year period
By TOM HENRY
BLADE STAFF WRITER

If you live in Toledo, you're part of a city in decline.
Bummer. We've heard it before. Over and over and over. Toledo is hurting.

The latest set of U.S. Census Bureau estimates - not to be confused with the official 2010 Census count, which is still being tabulated - shows Toledo's population probably eroded 0.2 percent between July 1, 2008, and July 1, 2009.

...

Robert Groves, Census Bureau director, said, "Census numbers govern the distribution of more than $400 billion in federal funds each year and serve as the baseline for future post-Census population estimates. Local governments use census data to plan new roads, schools, and emergency services. Businesses use the data to develop new economic opportunities."

READ MORE

Posted 1 year ago #
Mercurius
First Avenue
Login to Send PM

I think the real surprise here is that Detroit lost less people than Cleveland. That's gotta hurt.

Posted 1 year ago #
futureman
Grandview Heights
Login to Send PM

I'd also be more interested to see the MSA's of each city, I think they are more useful numbers.

Posted 1 year ago #
Tenzo
Chicago Lakeshore
Login to Send PM

Poeple still live in Detroit!?

Posted 1 year ago #
thepiece
merion village
Login to Send PM

I'm curious what the 2010 census figures will say, all of these numbers are estimates produced by the American Community Survey and not real 100% population counts for each city.
My gut feeling is the actual 2010 population figures may show more growth.

Posted 1 year ago #
Tenzo
Chicago Lakeshore
Login to Send PM

Census records are supposed to be unsealed after 72 years.
Is their a website that has the info, or is it all non-digitized?

Posted 1 year ago #
thepiece
merion village
Login to Send PM

It's in electronic format in some places.
I know Ancestry.com has a lot of it searchable on their system (but you have to pay to search), I was able to find scanned copies of the actual forms filled out for my great grandparents (the forms are a little weird though...they look like tables filled in by the census taker.

Posted 1 year ago #
Columbusite
Minneapolis
Login to Send PM

Fools gold. Populations of various inner-city neighborhoods dropped and rose from 1990-2000.

Downtown gained around 2,000 residents in this period. Meanwhile:

Linden lost over 10% or over 4,000 residents.

The Near South side lost 10% or around 2,000 residents.

Franklinton gained 4.1% nearing 16,000 residents.

The Hilltop gained over 2,500 residents.

Milo-Grogan lost 6% or over 150 residents.

Clintonville lost 4% or over 1,300 residents.

I couldn't find numbers for the East or South Side areas. The population likely being added is in the form of more sprawl on the outskirts that is still encouraged by the city. That figure says nothing about the situation of our urban core, which may or may not have lost more people than it gained.

Posted 1 year ago #
rus

Login to Send PM

Columbusite wrote >>
Fools gold.

So, population growth for Columbus only counts if it's near a bike rack?

Posted 1 year ago #
futureman
Grandview Heights
Login to Send PM

Columbusite wrote >>
Fools gold. Populations of various inner-city neighborhoods dropped and rose from 1990-2000.
Downtown gained around 2,000 residents in this period. Meanwhile:
Linden lost over 10% or over 4,000 residents.
The Near South side lost 10% or around 2,000 residents.
Franklinton gained 4.1% nearing 16,000 residents.
The Hilltop gained over 2,500 residents.
Milo-Grogan lost 6% or over 150 residents.
Clintonville lost 4% or over 1,300 residents.
I couldn't find numbers for the East or South Side areas. The population likely being added is in the form of more sprawl on the outskirts that is still encouraged by the city. That figure says nothing about the situation of our urban core, which may or may not have lost more people than it gained.

You might want to actually read those documents -

"Population Forecasts
Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission (MORPC) estimates
that the 2005 population for Clintonville was 30,570 persons.
This would reflect a 1.7% increase over the 2000 population.
The 2030 population projection is estimated at 30,089 persons,
representing a 1.6% decrease from the 2005 population. These
results indicate only very minor fluctuations in population
growth and decline over the next 23 years, characteristic of a
stable population."

Posted 1 year ago #
Cookie
Flyntonville
Login to Send PM

Oh hey, now Clintonville is an inner city neighborhood.

Posted 1 year ago #
dmerkow
Uptown Westerville
Login to Send PM

Census data is available in many places on the interwebs. http://www.socialexplorer.com is probably one of the most fun, since it uses maps to give you data. This data is pretty useless at this point - mostly based on births and deaths and some other stuff. The real numbers are just around the corner.

Posted 1 year ago #
thepiece
merion village
Login to Send PM

Columbusite wrote >>
Fnumbers for the East or South Side areas. The population likely being added is in the form of more sprawl on the outskirts that is still encouraged by the city. That figure says nothing about the situation of our urban core, which may or may not have lost more people than it gained.

I wouldn't say that's the case, or something we will know until Census 2010 comes out. Most of the movement back into those neighborhoods didn't start until after 2000, plus its not like most of central Ohio's sprawling growth can be found in the city's boundaries...that would belong to our region's suburbs. You can't blame the city for everything....

Population growth isn't necessarily a good gauge for the health of an individual neighborhood. Many of the redeveloped urban neighborhoods have experienced population decline, from the conversion of multi-family units back to single family and also from basic demographic change (fewer large families living in the city, younger singles or couples without kids moving in and an aging population of existing residents which usually means smaller households).

Posted 1 year ago #
MikeReed

Login to Send PM

I wonder if we're retaining brains. This chart would seem to indicate that the median age is on the rise over the last decade. If the median age is trending upward, and the population is growing consistently as well- we can assume that either younger people are moving away or the population increase represent disproportionately old people.

Image from Community Research Partners.

Here's the population break out totals from 2000 and 2008 for age groups
....................2000.............2008 -------------------------------------------- Under 5.............53,774..........58,962 5-9 yrs.............49,801..........47,824 10-14 yrs...........49,801..........45,003 15-19 yrs...........39,504..........49,587 20-24 yrs...........71,100..........68,121 25-34 yrs..........132,144.........127,551 35-44 yrs..........106,515.........109,975 45-54 yrs...........78,175..........94,764 55-59 yrs...........25,144..........36,328 60-64 yrs...........19,619..........27,878 65-74 yrs...........34,763..........33,409 75-84 yrs...........20,501..........21,607 85-older.............5,504...........8,360

What age group constitutes the young professionals we're trying to retain? We snagged a heap of 45-64 year olds.

Posted 1 year ago #
futureman
Grandview Heights
Login to Send PM

Could you also do a similar graph/breakdown of Austin and Portland? I'd love to see data.

Posted 1 year ago #
MikeReed

Login to Send PM

Sure. might take me a second... I'll have to eek out some time later this morning. Also, to correct myself, that is 2002-2008. Not 2000. I goofed.

I was alarmed at the number of 5-14 year olds who are disappearing from our city. The children are the future, after all.

Posted 1 year ago #
Walker
The KLD / Downtown
Login to Send PM

MikeReed wrote >>
I was alarmed at the number of 5-14 year olds who are disappearing from our city. The children are the future, after all.

Best post of the day. ;)

Posted 1 year ago #
MikeReed

Login to Send PM

Portlanders are getting older. Austin-landers (?) are holding steady.

Austin, TX
...........................2000.............2008 ------------------------------------------------- Under 5 years.............51,815............60,941 5 to 9 years..............38,572............48,708 10 to 14 years............44,253............40,649 15 to 19 years............36,771............49,173 20 to 24 years............72,849............75,330 25 to 34 years...........144,848...........148,812 35 to 44 years...........105,206...........119,665 45 to 54 years............78,001............95,136 55 to 59 years............22,580............35,540 60 to 64 years............18,243............24,235 65 to 74 years............22,096............25,465 75 to 84 years............18,427............15,314 85 years and over..........4,027.............7,867

Austin Median Age, 2002: 31.7 yrs
Austin Median Age, 2008: 31.4 yrs

Portland, OR
...........................2000.............2008 ------------------------------------------------- Under 5 years............36,047.............36,810 5 to 9 years.............31,568.............33,428 10 to 14 years...........29,923.............28,945 15 to 19 years...........25,369.............30,570 20 to 24 years...........36,030.............32,340 25 to 34 years...........96,822.............88,257 35 to 44 years...........87,808.............92,781 45 to 54 years...........77,914.............84,556 55 to 59 years...........26,935.............40,152 60 to 64 years...........16,679.............26,290 65 to 74 years...........25,968.............28,263 75 to 84 years...........22,219.............18,885 85 years and over.........7,044..............9,949

Portland Median Age 2002: 35.5 yrs
Portland Median Age 2008: 37.5 yrs

If I ever get some time I would like to make a data visualization showing where populations of what ages are growing/shrinking over time. I'm looking forward to the 2010 census data being released. It will be interesting to look at some highly granular data from different facets/angles over time.

Posted 1 year ago #
Neil Jaye

Login to Send PM

futureman wrote >>
I'd also be more interested to see the MSA's of each city, I think they are more useful numbers.

+1

Posted 1 year ago #
futureman
Grandview Heights
Login to Send PM

MikeReed wrote >>

If I ever get some time I would like to make a data visualization showing where populations of what ages are growing/shrinking over time. I'm looking forward to the 2010 census data being released. It will be interesting to look at some highly granular data from different facets/angles over time.

Thanks for digging up the numbers. It's curious what's going on with Portland in the 20-24 and 24-34 age category. I'd didn't expect to see a decrease with either of those groups considering the draw that area has with post graduates. I'm not too surprised with Austin, they have had tremendous population growth over the years - averaging in the high 30% range increase per 10 year for the last 30 or so years.

Posted 1 year ago #