Franklin County Gentrification Trends 1990-2015




**Note: This was originally posted on March 8, 2016. However, the data went to 2014 rather than 2015 and I actually posted it without adding all the maps and other information intended.

I saw this post (http://www.citylab.com/housing/2016/03/mapping-the-resegregation-of-diverse-neighborhoods-in-4-us-cities/472086/) the other day about changing neighborhood demographics in certain cities, particularly when it comes to racial segregation and gentrification. Surprisingly, of all the maps and posts I’ve done on demographics, I hadn’t thought to do one like this. Well, now I have.

A bit of an explanation is needed for the color coding:
-For those categories marked “Steady”, the demographic listed has been the majority throughout the period, with little to no change of other demographics.
-For those mixed categories of one decline and one rise, it means that the majority demographic has declined at least 5 percentage points, while a secondary demographic has risen at least 5 percentage points.
-For the category of recent or steady integration, there are at least 2 demographics at 10% or more of the total population, as well as a 3rd demographic reaching at least 5% of the population.

A few things that stand out to me: The eastern half of the county is in much greater flux than the western half, and integration is respectable county-wide. These neighborhoods of demographic equilibrium are largely the result of increasing Hispanic and Asian populations, particularly on the Northeast and West Sides, as well as the Whitehall area. In the center core, almost all of the High Street corridor has remained Steady White, suggesting that other demographics have, so far, been unable to tap into the building boom along and adjacent to this corridor. One other thing I notice is that there are FAR more tracts with a growing black population than there are with a growing White population, suggesting that perhaps the idea of Whites moving into neighborhoods and displacing residents is not quite as big of an issue as some might believe.

Here are the integrated tracts by year, based the above criteria, and their racial breakdown.

Top 10 Tracts with the Highest White Population

1990
1. 7205: 99.6%
2. 98: 99.1%
3. 7207: 98.9%
4. 120, 9240: 98.8%
5. 7201, 7203, 80: 98.7%
6. 7922, 9440, 9752: 98.6%
7. 9751, 10601: 98.5%
8. 110, 8141, 8821, 9711, 9740: 98.4%
9. 9450, 9800: 98.3%
10. 6230, 7210: 98.2%
2015
1. 65: 98.7%
2. 6810: 97.4%
3. 6822, 9712: 97.0%
4. 98: 96.0%
5. 6721, 6950: 95.9%
6. 220: 95.8%
7. 9497: 95.6%
8. 66: 95.5%
9. 6330: 94.8%
10. 7394: 94.7%

Breakdown of # of Tracts by % of White Population
1990
95% or Higher: 80
90%-94.9%: 73
80%-89.9%: 64
70%-79.9%: 10
60%-69.9%: 11
50%-59.9%: 6
Total Majority White Tracts: 244
40%-49.9%: 7
30%-39.9%: 9
20%-29.9%: 5
10%-19.9%: 9
0.1%-9.9%: 9
0%: 0
Total Minority White Tracts: 39
2015
95% or Higher: 11
90%-94.9%: 35
80%-89.9%: 62
70%-79.9%: 52
60%-69.9%: 30
50%-59.9%: 19
Total Majority White Tracts: 209
40%-49.9%: 11
30%-39.9%: 17
20%-29.9%: 25
10%-19.9%: 15
0.1%-9.9%: 6
0%: 0
Total Minority White Tracts: 74

Top 10 Tracts with the Highest Black Population
1990
1. 730: 94.2%
2. 5420: 93.4%
3. 15, 28: 92.3%
4. 36: 91.8%
5. 5410: 91.4%
6. 7551: 91.1%
7. 7512: 90.9%
8. 23: 89.0%
9. 2520: 87.4%
10. 29: 87.2%
2015
1. 7512: 88.1%
2. 9337: 87.7%
3. 730: 84.9%
4. 7511: 83.6%
5. 23: 82.2%
6. 15: 81.9%
7. 55: 81.4%
8. 5420, 9332: 81.0%
9. 29: 80.9%
10. 8813: 79.1%

Breakdown of # of Tracts by % of Black Population
1990
95% or Higher: 0
90%-94.9%: 7
80%-89.9%: 10
70%-79.9%: 4
60%-69.9%: 8
50%-59.9%: 6
Total Majority Black Tracts: 35
40%-49.9%: 7
30%-39.9%: 10
20%-29.9%: 9
10%-19.9%: 32
0.1%-9.9%: 190
0%: 0
Total Minority Black Tracts: 248
2015
95% or Higher: 0
90%-94.9%: 0
80%-89.9%: 9
70%-79.9%: 8
60%-69.9%: 28
50%-59.9%: 9
Total Majority Black Tracts: 52
40%-49.9%: 20
30%-39.9%: 17
20%-29.9%: 24
10%-19.9%: 44
0.1%-9.9%: 126
0%: 0
Total Minority Black Tracts: 231

Top 10 Tracts with the Highest Asian Population
1990
1. 7820: 23.3%
2. 1122: 11.2%
3. 1110: 10.8%
4. 105: 9.0%
5. 1810: 8.2%
6. 6372: 7.6%
7. 6384: 7.3%
8. 1121: 7.2%
9. 6386: 6.9%
10. 6395: 6.8%
2015
1. 7820: 34.1%
2. 7721: 26.8%
3. 6230: 26.7%
4. 1122: 21.9%
5. 7830: 17.0%
6. 1110: 16.6%
7. 105: 16.2%
8. 6395: 15.5%
9. 6372: 15.3%
10. 6386: 14.9%

Breakdown of # of Tracts by % of Asian Population
1990
95% or Higher: 0
90%-94.9%: 0
80%-89.9%: 0
70%-79.9%: 0
60%-69.9%: 0
50%-59.9%: 0
Total Majority Asian Tracts: 0
40%-49.9%: 0
30%-39.9%: 0
20%-29.9%: 1
10%-19.9%: 2
0.1%-9.9%: 273
0%: 7
Total Minority Asian Tracts: 283
2015
95% or Higher: 0
90%-94.9%: 0
80%-89.9%: 0
70%-79.9%: 0
60%-69.9%: 0
50%-59.9%: 0
Total Majority Asian Tracts: 0
40%-49.9%: 0
30%-39.9%: 1
20%-29.9%: 4
10%-19.9%: 17
0.1%-9.9%: 215
0%: 46
Total Minority Asian Tracts: 283

Top 10 Tracts with the Highest Hispanic Population
1990
1. 7820: 2.9%
2. 1122, 7209: 2.5%
3. 1810, 30: 2.3%
4. 8163, 9323, 9336: 2.1%
5. 6352, 7830: 2.0%
6. 1110, 1121, 2750: 1.9%
7. 10, 32, 40, 42, 7533: 1.8%
8. 12, 17, 1901, 6353, 7041, 7199: 1.7%
9. 6, 1820, 6945, 7531, 7551, 7721, 9326, 99: 1.6%
10. 13, 2710, 6933, 7120, 7532, 8164, 8230, 8730, 103: 1.5%
2015
1. 8230: 39.3%
2. 8164: 28.7%
3. 8163: 26.4%
4. 26: 24.2%
5. 9321: 22.7%
6. 8210: 22.6%
7. 99: 21.4%
8. 9230: 21.0%
9. 7043: 19.8%
10. 6945: 18.9%

Breakdown of # of Tracts by % of Hispanic Population
1990
95% or Higher: 0
90%-94.9%: 0
80%-89.9%: 0
70%-79.9%: 0
60%-69.9%: 0
50%-59.9%: 0
Total Majority Hispanic Tracts: 0
40%-49.9%: 0
30%-39.9%: 0
20%-29.9%: 0
10%-19.9%: 0
0.1%-9.9%: 278
0%: 5
2015
95% or Higher: 0
90%-94.9%: 0
80%-89.9%: 0
70%-79.9%: 0
60%-69.9%: 0
50%-59.9%: 0
Total Majority Hispanic Tracts: 0
40%-49.9%: 0
30%-39.9%: 1
20%-29.9%: 7
10%-19.9%: 33
0.1%-9.9%: 241
0%: 9

Integrated Tracts By Year
1990: 2
2015: 98

Most Integrated Tract by Year
1990
1122: White: 76.6% Black: 9.6% Asian: 11.2% Hispanic: 2.5%
2015
7721: White: 33.9% Black: 31.2% Asian: 26.8% Hispanic: 10.1%

All in all, the data shows that the county is much less racially stratified/segregated now than it was in 1990, and that it doesn’t appear that gentrification is really affecting many areas in terms of forcing out one racial group for another.

The Recovery of Ohio’s 3-C Downtowns: Revisit

A little more than 4 years ago, I posted numbers on how Columbus, Cincinnati and Cleveland were recovering in their urban cores. See that post here: http://allcolumbusdata.com/?p=289 and here: http://allcolumbusdata.com/?p=312 That post has proven to be one of the site’s most popular. I figured it was time to take a look at their continuing changes.

You can see by the chart for the 1950 Boundary population, the urban core of each city, that all 3-Cs suffered population losses post-1950. However, the rate of losses gradually declined, and 2 of the cities, Columbus and Cincinnati, appear to be growing in this boundary since at least 2010. Cleveland continues to lose.

This is shown further by the chart below.

As far as the actual Downtowns of each, here are the population trends.

For the most part, population declines in the 3-Cs peaked around 1980, give or take a decade. Since then, all of them have seen increases, with Cleveland seeing the most rapid increase and Cincinnati the least. Columbus has seen steady, but increasingly rapid growth with each subsequent decade since 1980.

Here is the chart for Downtown growth by decade.

Census Tract Population Density 2015

The US Census recently released population data for census tracts. I figured midway through the decade would be a good point to update where these stand because they give greater insight in smaller-scale population changes. I looked at all the census tracts in Franklin County and came up with the following map series.

First, the population in 2015.

Next, the population density of tracts in 2010, as reference.

And now 2015.

On the surface, it’s difficult to see the changes, but put side by side, you can tell there have been a lot of increases across the county. To make this more visible, I made the following maps.

You can see that some of the strongest density increases occurred around Downtown and the Short North, New Albany, parts of the Campus area, and Dublin.

The map above gives a straightforward look at where the density increased and decreased. As you can see, the increases FAR outweighed the decreases. Most of the latter were scattered except across the Far South Side and parts of the Whitehall area.

Here were the top 20 most dense census tracts in 2015.
1. 1810: 29,508.2 South Campus/Victorian Village
2. 1121: 25,287.9 Main Campus
3. 13: 21,961.4 Campus/Indianola Terrace
4. 1110: 18168.6 North Campus/Tuttle Park
5. 10: 17386.3 Campus/SoHud
6. 12: 16,981.9 Campus/Iuka Ravine
7. 20: 13,030.5 Short North/Victorian Village
8. 17: 12,872.3 Weinland Park
9. 6: 12,153.6 Old North Columbus
10. 21: 10,853.5 Short North/High Street
11. 8163: 10,255.3 Lincoln Village/Southwest Columbus
12: 4810: 9,557.4 South Central Hilltop
13. 47: 9,492.7 North Central Hilltop
14. 6352: 9,434.0 Northwest Columbus/Henderson Road
15. 57: 9,257.4 Brewery District/South German Village
16. 5: 9,177.9 Old North Columbus
17. 6933: 9,090.9 Forest Park East
18. 16: 8,980.5 Weinland Park
19. 4620: 8,928.6 North Central Hilltop
20. 1820: 8743.3 Victorian Village

It’s obvious that the High Street corridor is the most dense of the city, racking up most of the top 20.

Now here are the 20 tracts with the largest density increases 2010-2015.
1. 1121: 4,375.9
2. 6: 2,178.5
3. 21: 1,934.9
4. 22: 1,478.1
5. 40: 1,107.7 South Downtown
6. 1820: 1,044.1
7. 20: 921.7
8. 38: 904.3 Old Towne East
9. 5: 861.2
10. 210: 833.9 Clintonville
11. 32: 751.1 Arena District West/West Victorian Village
12. 730: 736.9
13. 7551: 656.0 Somerset/South Easton
14. 7951: 610.4 West Columbus
15. 6372: 574.6 Hayden Falls/Sawmill Road
16. 7209: 514 New Albany
17. 7395: 497.6 Blacklick/East Broad
18. 10: 492.8
19. 8230: 449.3 Westland
20. 710: 447.3 West-Central Linden

And finally, the top 20 largest declines 2010-2015.
1. 13: -2,964.3
2. 12: -1,625.1
3. 42: -1,620.8 Scioto Peninsula/East Franklinton
4. 920: -902.2 Northeast Linden
5. 17: -775.4
6. 50: -554.4 Franklinton
7. 61: -485.7 South High Street
8. 59: -441.9 Near South Side/Deshler Park
9. 4620: -380.4
10. 720: -380.2
11. 4610: -335.4
12. 820: -305.4 North Linden
13. 7721: -305.2 North Linden
14. 45: -258.1 North Hilltop
15. 60: -253.2 Vassor Village
16. 810: North Central Linden
17. 7532: -240.3 Morse Road/Easton
18. 2520: -240.1 Near East Side/King-Lincoln
19. 47: -206.6
20. 9333: -194.9 Linwood

So there you have it.

Census Tract Income 2010-2015

The US Census recently released demographic information for census tracts for 2015. Here are some quick maps for Franklin County for median household income.

First, median household income for both 2010 and 2015.

And the % change between 2010-2015.

As can be seen, a lot of the greatest improvements over the 5-year period were around Downtown, the Near East Side, North High, South High and around some of the higher-income suburbs like Upper Arlington and the New Albany area.

Columbus City Diversity and Comparison to Peers

In the 2nd post related to the recently-released Census demographic data, I’ll look at city diversity and how it’s been changing since 2005.

Rank by City of Total White, non-Hispanic Population by Year
2005————————————–2010————————————-2015

1. Chicago, IL: 819,215————1. Chicago: 853,910—————1. Chicago: 879,318
2. Indianapolis, IN: 491,044——2. Indianapolis: 482,195———–2. Columbus: 491,602
3. Columbus: 442,958————-3. Columbus: 470,971————-3. Indianapolis: 479,376
4. Portland, OR: 382,033———-4. Portland: 417,876—————4. Portland: 449,552
5. San Antonio, TX: 356,420—–5. Austin: 384,065——————5. Austin: 444,638
6. Austin, TX: 347,013————-6. San Antonio: 351,420———-6. Nashville: 365,542
7. Nashville, TN: 314,518——–7. Nashville: 339,030————–7. San Antonio: 364,707
8. Charlotte, NC: 302,789——-8. Charlotte: 331,357—————8. Charlotte: 356,507
9. Virginia Beach, VA: 290,891–9. Virginia Beach: 282,812——9. Omaha: 293,631
10. San Jose, CA: 281,822—–10. Las Vegas: 280,604——-10. Virginia Beach: 281,686
11. Las Vegas, NV: 281,679—-11. Omaha: 277,606————–11. Las Vegas: 278,444
12. Omaha, NE: 267,685——–12. San Jose: 265,311————12. San Jose: 268,948
13. Kansas City, MO: 249,123—13. Kansas City: 247,473——13. Kansas City: 261,360
14. Milwaukee, WI: 219,891——14. Minneapolis: 242,848——14. Minneapolis: 243,709
15. Minneapolis, MN: 216,975—-15. Milwaukee: 221,514——-15. Milwaukee: 216,755
16. Toledo: 183,746—————–16. Pittsburgh: 203,622——–16. Pittsburgh: 192,187
17. Pittsburgh, PA: 180,725——-17. Toledo: 177,341————17. Toledo: 164,305
18. Sacramento, CA: 160,599—-18. Sacramento: 165,610—–18. Sacramento: 155,784
19. Cleveland: 147,359————19. Cincinnati: 143,120——–19. Cincinnati: 147,360
20. St. Louis, MO: 143,590——–20. Cleveland: 137,977——–20. St. Louis: 138,178
21. Cincinnati: 138,486————-21. St. Louis: 134,146———-21. Cleveland: 133,998
22. Akron: 128,976——————22. Akron: 120,800————22. Grand Rapids: 119,128
23. Grand Rapids, MI: 113,791—23. Grand Rapids: 104,636—-23. Akron: 117,587
24. Orlando, FL: 92,326————24. Orlando: 96,867————24. Orlando: 102,822
25. Detroit, MI: 77,163————–25. Dayton: 72,663————-25. Dayton: 75,539
26. Dayton: 67,581——————26. Providence: 64,284——-26. Detroit: 64,511
27. Providence, RI: 64,223——–27. Detroit: 55,298————-27. Providence: 61,492

Columbus moved from 3rd to 2nd over the 10-year period for total White, non-Hispanic population.

Rank by City of Total Black, non-Hispanic Population by Year
2005—————————————–2010———————————2015

1. Chicago: 938,097—————–1. Chicago: 895,294———–1. Chicago: 834,048
2. Detroit: 683,999——————–2. Detroit: 587,707————-2. Detroit: 536,527
3. Milwaukee: 222,040————–3. Charlotte: 251,274———-3. Charlotte: 282,456
4. Cleveland: 221,797—————4. Milwaukee: 230,473——–4. Indianapolis: 234,338
5. Charlotte: 205,216—————-5. Indianapolis: 226,314——-5. Columbus: 233,320
6. Indianapolis: 193,948————6. Columbus: 216,486———6. Milwaukee: 231,304
7. Columbus: 179,197—————7. Cleveland: 208,528———7. Cleveland: 194,350
8. St. Louis: 168,768—————-8. Nashville: 171,104———–8. Nashville: 178,293
9. Nashville: 148,051—————-9. St. Louis: 157,382———–9. St. Louis: 146,925
10. Kansas City: 131,694———-10. Kansas City: 138,461—–10. Kansas City: 140,515
11. Cincinnati: 131,010————-11. Cincinnati: 131,909——–11. Cincinnati: 125,621
12. Pittsburgh: 81,758————–12. Virginia Beach: 79,583—-12. San Antonio: 98,876
13. Virginia Beach: 80,004——–13. San Antonio: 79,307——13. Virginia Beach: 85,867
14. Orlando: 73,736—————–14. Toledo: 75,033————-14. Minneapolis: 78,861
15. Toledo: 72,190——————-15. Pittsburgh: 71,539——–15. Toledo: 76,173
16. Sacramento: 71,452————16. Orlando: 70,988————16. Pittsburgh: 73,012
17. San Antonio: 70,723————17. Minneapolis: 63,749——17. Las Vegas: 68,777
18. Dayton: 60,196——————-18. Sacramento: 61,976——18. Austin: 68,061
19. Akron: 59,810——————–19. Austin: 61,833————–19. Sacramento: 63,477
20. Las Vegas: 59,780————–20. Dayton: 61,402————-20. Orlando: 61,955
21. Austin: 59,583——————-21. Akron: 60,653—————-21. Akron: 58,716
22. Minneapolis: 57,499————22. Las Vegas: 60,187———22.  Omaha: 57,546
23. Omaha: 50,333——————23. Omaha: 55,086————-23. Dayton: 51,896
24. Grand Rapids: 40,408———24. Grand Rapids: 41,848—–24. Portland: 35,362
25. Portland: 30,828—————25. Portland: 37,355————-25. Grand Rapids: 32,423
26. San Jose: 27,446————–26. San Jose: 29,831———–26. San Jose: 30,068
27. Providence: 18,794————27. Providence: 19,265——–27. Providence: 21,484

Columbus moved up from 7th to 5th in total Black, non-Hispanic during the period.

Rank by City of Total Asian, non-Hispanic Population by Year
2005————————————-2010——————————————2015

1. San Jose: 269,186————–1. San Jose: 303,227—————–1. San Jose: 355,777
2. Chicago: 127,686—————-2. Chicago: 148,280——————2. Chicago: 166,771
3. Sacramento: 80,307————3. Sacramento: 84,556————-3. Sacramento: 88,422
4. Portland: 36,278—————–4. Austin: 46,575———————-4. Austin: 69,696
5. Austin: 35,239——————–5. Portland: 43,185——————-5. Charlotte: 50,142
6. Columbus: 27,125—————6. Las Vegas: 37,406—————-6. Portland: 49,811
7. Las Vegas: 25,077————–7. Charlotte: 37,181——————7. Columbus: 42,933
8. Charlotte: 23,356—————-8. Columbus: 35,468—————-8. San Antonio: 41,988
9. Virginia Beach: 22,501———9. San Antonio: 29,200————-9. Las Vegas: 41,782
10. San Antonio: 20,492———10. Virginia Beach: 27,303—–10. Virginia Beach: 28,358
11. Minneapolis: 20,189———-11. Milwaukee: 22,670————11. Minneapolis: 26,958
12. Milwaukee: 19,596————12. Minneapolis: 21,426———–12. Indianapolis: 25,264
13. Nashville: 16,943—————13. Indianapolis: 17,137———-13. Milwaukee: 22,497
14. Indianapolis: 12,312———–14. Nashville: 17,045————–14. Nashville: 20,577
15. Providence: 10,751————15. Pittsburgh: 12,036————-15. Pittsburgh: 18,067
16. Pittsburgh: 10,727————–16. Providence: 11,497———–16. Omaha: 15,243
17. Kansas City: 10,674———-17. Kansas City: 10,263———–17. Kansas City: 13,552
18. Detroit: 9,577——————-18. St. Louis: 8,717—————–18. Providence: 10,842
19. St. Louis: 7,046—————–19. Omaha: 8,397——————19. St. Louis: 8,920
20. Omaha: 6,971——————20. Orlando: 7,870——————20. Detroit: 8,790
21. Cincinnati: 6,874—————21. Detroit: 6,549——————–21. Akron: 8,006
22. Cleveland: 6,289————–22. Cincinnati: 5,938—————–22. Orlando: 7,949
23. Orlando: 5,528—————–23. Cleveland: 5,392—————–23. Cleveland: 7,874
24. Toledo: 4,150——————-24. Akron: 4,567———————-24. Cincinnati: 6,259
25. Akron: 3,497——————–25. Grand Rapids: 3,695———–25. Toledo: 5,008
26. Grand Rapids: 2,847———26. Toledo: 3,125——————-26. Grand Rapids: 4,451
27. Dayton: 1,827——————27. Dayton: 1,231——————-27. Dayton: 1,548

Columbus fell from 6th to 7th in Asian, non-Hispanic population.

Rank by City of Total Hispanic Population by Year

2005——————————————–2010————————————2015

1. Chicago: 778,234—————1. San Antonio: 853,654———-1. San Antonio: 937,607
2. San Antonio: 735,458———–2. Chicago: 763,968—————2. Chicago: 787,725
3. San Jose: 279,420————–3. San Jose: 318,389————–3. San Jose: 331,232
4. Austin: 223,361——————4. Austin: 288,130——————4. Austin: 327,680
5. Las Vegas: 153,813————5. Las Vegas: 181,923————-5. Las Vegas: 204,913
6. Sacramento: 111,559———6. Sacramento: 124,461———–6. Sacramento: 150,153
7. Milwaukee: 80,945————-7. Milwaukee: 104,619————-7. Charlotte: 113,731
8. Providence: 60,008————-8. Charlotte: 96,246—————-8. Milwaukee: 110,335
9. Charlotte: 58,466—————9. Indianapolis: 78,467————-9. Orlando: 89,306
10. Indianapolis: 47,764———10. Providence: 76,645————10. Indianapolis: 83,426
11. Detroit: 46,993—————–11. Nashville: 61,212————–11. Providence: 77,968
12. Orlando: 43,978—————12. Portland: 58,986—————12. Nashville: 67,526
13. Portland: 43,324—————13. Orlando: 56,061—————13. Omaha: 63,516
14. Omaha: 39,674—————–14. Omaha: 53,661—————14. Portland: 61,064
15. Nashville: 37,463—————15. Kansas City: 49,800———15. Detroit: 53,980
16. Minneapolis: 37,017———–16. Detroit: 45,580—————-16. Columbus: 46,855
17. Kansas City: 35,995———–17. Columbus: 43,276————17. Kansas City: 46,037
18. Grand Rapids: 32,368———18. Cleveland: 36,067———-18. Cleveland: 40,603
19. Cleveland: 32,085————–19. Minneapolis: 34,504——-19. Minneapolis: 39,981
20. Columbus: 24,607———–20. Grand Rapids: 30,659——20. Virginia Beach: 36,309
21. Virginia Beach: 20,803——–21. Virginia Beach: 29,206—-21. Grand Rapids: 31,282
22. Toledo: 18,404——————22. Toledo: 21,346————–22. Toledo: 23,614
23. St. Louis: 8,268—————–23. St. Louis: 11,207————-23. St. Louis: 12,261
24. Pittsburgh: 5,018—————24. Cincinnati: 8,710————-24. Pittsburgh: 9,266
25. Cincinnati: 3,855—————25. Pittsburgh: 7,282————-25. Cincinnati: 9,121
26. Akron: 3,485——————–26. Akron: 3,990——————-26. Dayton: 4,945
27. Dayton: 1,693——————-27. Dayton: 3,180—————–27. Akron: 3,684

Columbus moved up from 20th to 16th in the total Hispanic population.

Rank by City of Total Other, non-Hispanic Population by Year

2005——————————————-2010———————————————–2015

1. Chicago: 38,694—————1. Chicago: 37,379————————–1. Chicago: 54,694
2. San Jose: 29,456————2. San Jose: 32,439————————2. San Jose: 40,894
3. Sacramento: 21,370———-3. Sacramento: 30,900——————-3. Portland: 36,398
4. Portland: 21,164————–4. Portland: 28,027————————4. Columbus: 34,357
5. Indianapolis: 20,242———-5. Las Vegas: 24,521—————–5. Sacramento: 32,909
6. Columbus: 20,096————-6. Columbus: 23,738——————6. Las Vegas: 29,853
7. San Antonio: 19,130———-7. San Antonio: 20,778—————7. San Antonio: 26,646
8. Minneapolis: 18,580———-8. Minneapolis: 20,753—————-8. Indianapolis: 26,019
9. Detroit: 18,324—————–9. Virginia Beach: 20,268————-9. Charlotte: 24,285
10. Las Vegas: 18,304———-10. Indianapolis: 20,086————–10. Nashville: 22,658
11. Virginia  Beach: 16,685—-11. Charlotte: 18,360——————11. Austin: 21,765
12. Milwaukee: 14,476———-12. Detroit: 16,776——————–12. Minneapolis: 21,426
13. Kansas City: 13,399——–13. Milwaukee: 16,311———–13. Virginia Beach: 20,525
14. Austin: 13,261—————-14. Omaha: 15,519—————-14. Milwaukee: 19,263
15. Charlotte: 11,771————-15. Austin: 14,915—————–15. Omaha: 13,951
16. Omaha: 8,552—————–16. Kansas City: 14,668———-16. Kansas City: 13,897
17. Toledo: 7,447——————17. Nashville: 14,227————-17. Detroit: 13,316
18. Cincinnati: 7,315————–18. Pittsburgh: 12,080————18. Pittsburgh: 11,853
19. Cleveland: 7,004————–19. Toledo: 10,134—————-19. Cleveland: 11,234
20. Providence: 6,488————-20. Akron: 9,020——————20. Toledo: 10,678
21. Pittsburgh: 6,138————–21. Cleveland: 8,276—————21. Cincinnati: 10,176
22. St. Louis: 6,058—————-22. St. Louis: 7,704—————22. Akron: 9,560
23. Orlando: 5,731—————–23. Grand Rapids: 7,376——-23. St. Louis: 9,401
24. Nashville: 5,687—————24. Orlando: 7,251————–24. Orlando: 8,885
25. Akron: 4,431——————–25. Cincinnati: 7,230———–25. Grand Rapids: 7,815
26. Grand Rapids: 4,154———26. Providence: 6,471———-26. Providence: 7,418
27. Dayton: 1,382——————27. Dayton: 3,025—————27. Dayton: 6,669

Finally, Columbus moved up from 6th to 4th in the total of Other, non-Hispanic population. Overall, Columbus ranks fairly well in totals vs. its peers, as one might expect given that it is one of the largest cities in the grouping. However, to truly find out how it compares with these other cities, you have to look at percentages, which tells how much of the city’s population is made up of each group.

Columbus had the 8th highest White, non-Hispanic % of total population of the city in 2015.

Columbus had the 12th highest Black, non-Hispanic % of total population.

Columbus also had the 12th highest Asian, non-Hispanic % of total population.

Columbus ranks poorly with Hispanics in the group, having only the 22nd highest % of population.

Finally, Columbus ranks 8th again in Other, non-Hispanic % of population.

So what’s the final ranking for where Columbus is with diversity compared to its peers? To find out, I assigned points based on ranked position in each 5 racial categories. The final total determined where the cities ranked overall.

So based on this, Columbus is the 6th most racially diverse city of the 27 cities measured. This is no doubt surprising, but not so much when you get to the numbers.

*Note: Normally, Youngstown would be included, but the data was not available.