The Recovery of Downtown vs Cleveland and Cincinnati Part #1- Update




**Updated with 2016 data, originally posted 2013.

Columbus’ downtown has seen many many changes, especially over the last decade. Developments like the Arena District, Columbus Commons, the Scioto Mile and more have brought new life to the area. Dozens of new restaurants have opened the past year or two alone, and a new grocery store will be opening for area residents in February. More developments coming up include the Scioto River restoration project that will create acres of new Downtown park space and pathways, and the redevelopment of the Scioto Peninsula behind COSI should connect the two sides of the river. All of this had led to rising population, now approaching 8,500. Nearly 3,000 residential units are currently under construction or planned. So the question I was wondering is how has population been changing not only in Columbus’ downtown, but in comparison to Cleveland and Cincinnati. Both of those cities have also seen major projects in their downtown cores and are seeing an uptick in their downtown populations.

First, I examined the 1950 city limits for all three cities. This was the last census year before sprawl really took hold and changed the city dynamics and growth patterns. 1950 is also when most cities in Ohio reached their peak urban population, so I thought it would be interesting to see how those old boundaries had changed over the years. I went to the US census website and began to look up all the census tracts that existed in each city in 1950. Those would represent my base area that I would use to see the changes in the city core. All of the 3-Cs have grown beyond those 1950 boundaries, especially Columbus, but these areas were the hardest hit when the urban decline came the last 50-60 years while the suburbs grew. The results are both sobering and hopeful.

1950 Boundary Population Change 1950-2016
Cincinnati: -224,119
Cleveland: -540,935
Columbus: -138,491

1950 Boundary Population Change 2010-2016
Cincinnati: +1,370
Cleveland: -7,028
Columbus: +2,637

1950 Boundary Population % Change 1950-2016
Cincinnati: -44.5%
Cleveland: -59.1.%
Columbus: -36.9%

1950 Boundary Population % Change 2010-2016
Cincinnati: +0.5%
Cleveland: -1.9%
Columbus: +1.1%

So what do these numbers show? Well, it’s clear that all 3 cities had urban core population declines the past 65+ years just like just about every other city in the nation did. This was mostly a result of the suburban movement.
In Cleveland, the rate of loss had gradually been slowing down since the 1970s, but suddenly skyrocketed again in the 2000s. I’m not sure what exactly caused this. The double recessions made it more difficult for people to move, so if anything, the losses should’ve not accelerated. Cleveland lost over 90,000 people in its urban core from 2000-2010, the highest lost by % and total of any Ohio city.
In Cincinnati, population loss had peaked in the 1970s and the rate of loss fell substantially the following decade. However, the past 2 decades have actually seen a gradual acceleration of losses. The 2000-2010 period saw the second biggest total loss for the urban core, but there has been a significant turnaround (if estimates are correct) and the city is seeing growth now.
For Columbus, it’s been the opposite picture. Like the other 2-Cs, losses peaked in the 1970s. Since then, the urban core losses have been in gradual decline. The 2000-2010 period had the smallest rate and total loss of any decade the past 65+ years, and since 2010, there has been net growth.

So interesting results, but these numbers don’t show any trends of what’s going on inside the 1950 boundaries, especially not the relatively small part that would be the downtowns. So let’s break the numbers down to the tract level.

# of Tracts in 1950*
Cincinnat: 107
Cleveland: 201
Columbus: 48

*The number of tracts changed from 1950 on as some were split or consolidated. This made it more complicated, but luckily the Census gives lists on how tracts changed over time, so one can figure out what tract became what and reasonably keep up with the same boundaries that existed in 1950.

So with this breakdown, we can see more of the trends within the 1950 boundaries. In Cincinnati, a long decline was followed by a recovery in 1990, only to have the next 20 years show an increasing decline. The 2010 census showed the fewest number of tracts growing on record. This is the worst performance of the 3-Cs. Cleveland also had a steep decline followed by a recovery, but it too declined more at the last census, but not nearly to the low point it reached in the 1970s and 1980s.

Meanwhile, Columbus also faced an initial steep decline and barely had any tracts growing during the 1970s. Since then, the trend has been up. The 16 growing tracts in 2010 were the highest since the 1940s. This is the best performance of the 3-Cs, and Columbus had the highest % of growing tracts in its core. Still, those 16 represent less than 1/3rd of the total tracts within the 1950 boundaries. However, in the case of all 3 cities, the 2010-2016 has greatly increased the number of growing tracts, again if we are to believe the Census estimates.




The Midwest Beat the South in Regional Domestic Migration in 2016

For years, if not decades, we’ve been hearing a familiar tale- that anyone and everyone is moving from the Midwest and Northeast to the South and West. This trend began during and after the collapse of Northern manufacturing, and as higher cost of living began to make the lower-cost South more attractive in particular. However, a lot of the South’s growth over the years- indeed a majority- never had anything to do with region-to-region migration. Instead, it was due largely to natural growth (births vs. deaths) and international migration, particularly from Central America. What received all the attention, though, was the belief that people were packing up and moving to the South from places like Ohio and other struggling Northern states. While that may have been true for a while, that is increasingly looking like it is no longer the case.

The Midwest, especially, has been derided as the region no one wants to live in. Despite its growing population approaching 66 million people, the common refrain was that its colder winters, flailing economies and questionable demographic future meant that it was simply a region being left behind by the booming Southern states.

Recently, the US Census released estimates for 2015-2016 geographic mobility, and they tell a very different story altogether.

First, let’s look at the total domestic migration moving to the Midwest from other regions.
South to Midwest: +309,000
West to Midwest: +72,000
Northeast to Midwest: +61,000
Total to Midwest: +442,000

And then compare that to the total that the Midwest sends to other regions.
Midwest to South: -254,000
Midwest to West: -224,000
Midwest to Northeast: -34,000
Total from Midwest: -512,000

Net difference by region.
Midwest vs. South: +55,000
Midwest vs. West: -152,000
Midwest vs. Northeast: +27,000
Total Net: -70,000

So while the Midwest is seeing and overall net domestic migration loss, it is entirely to the Western states.

This could just be an off year, as almost all recent years showed losses to the South, but then again, maybe not. The South has been in a boom for several decades now, and in that time, the region still lags the other 3 in almost every quality of life metric used. All booms end eventually, and the South’s 2 biggest perceived advantages, low cost of living and business-friendly climate, have been gradually eroding over time. As Census surveys show, people don’t actually move for a change in weather, so it’s the economic factors that are going to make the biggest impacts long-term. The Midwest now has many cities and several states that are doing well economically, including Columbus, and perhaps they are becoming more attractive than they have in many years. Time will tell, but last year, the narrative of an unattractive Midwest vs. South was at least temporarily shelved.

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.

2016 County and Metro Area Population Estimates

The numbers for July 1, 2016 population estimates came out this morning. Nationally, it seems that overall growth rates slowed down from where they were the year prior, and there were some surprising results in a few cases.

First, let’s take a look at the core counties for Columbus and its peer/Midwest counterparts nationally. The core city is in parenthesis.

2010—————————————————2015———————————2016
1. Cook (Chicago): 5,194,675————-1. Cook: 5,224,823————-1. Cook: 5,203,499
2. Clark (Las Vegas): 1,951,269———-2. Clark: 2,109,289————-2. Clark: 2,155,664
3. Wayne (Detroit): 1,820,584————-3. Santa Clara: 1,910,105—-3. Bexar: 1,928,680
4. Santa Clara (San Jose): 1,781,642—4. Bexar: 1,895,482—4. Santa Clara: 1,919,402
5. Bexar (San Antonio): 1,714,773——-5. Wayne: 1,757,062———5. Wayne: 1,749,366
6. Sacramento (Sac.): 1,418,788–6. Sacramento: 1,496,664–6. Sacramento: 1,414,460
7. Cuyahoga (Cleveland): 1,280,122—7. Orange: 1,284,864——–7. Orange: 1,314,367
8. Allegheny (Pittsburgh): 1,223,348—8. Cuyahoga: 1,255,025—-8. Franklin: 1,264,518
9. Franklin (Columbus): 1,163,414—–9. Franklin: 1,250,269—–9. Cuyahoga: 1,249,352
10. Hennepin (Minn.): 1,152,425—10. Allegheny: 1,229,298—-10. Hennepin: 1,232,483
11. Orange (Orlando): 1,145,951—11. Hennepin: 1,220,459—-11. Allegheny: 1,225,365
12. Travis (Austin): 1,024,266——12. Travis: 1,174,818——12. Travis: 1,199,323
13. Milwaukee (Mil): 947,735–13. Mecklenburg: 1,033,466–13. Mecklenburg: 1,054,835
14. Mecklenburg (Charl.): 919,628–14. Milwaukee: 956,314—14. Milwaukee: 951,448
15. Marion (Indianapolis): 903,393—15. Marion: 938,058———–15. Marion: 941,229
16. Hamilton (Cincinnati): 802,374—16. Hamilton: 807,748——–16. Hamilton: 809,099
17. Multnomah (Portland): 735,334–17. Multnomah: 789,125—17. Multnomah: 799,766
18. Jackson (Kansas City): 674,158–18. Jackson: 686,373——-18. Jackson: 691,801
19. Davidson (Nashville): 626,667—19. Davidson: 678,323——-19. Davidson: 684,410
20. Providence (Providence): 626,671–20. Kent: 636,095———20. Kent: 642,173
21. Kent (Grand Rapids): 602,622–21. Providence: 632,488—-21. Providence: 633,673
22. Summit (Akron): 541,781———22. Douglas: 549,168——–22. Douglas: 554,995
23. Montgomery (Dayton): 535,153–23. Summit: 541,316——–23. Summit: 540,300
24. Douglas (Omaha): 517,110–24. Montgomery: 531,567——24. Dane: 531,273
25. Sedgwick (Wichita): 498,365–25. Dane: 522,878———–25. Montgomery: 531,239
26. Dane (Madison): 488,073——-26. Sedgwick: 510,360——26. Sedgwick: 511,995
27. Lucas (Toledo): 441,815——–27. Polk: 466,688————–27. Polk: 474,045
28. Virginia Beach (VB): 437,994–28. Virginia Beach: 451,854–28. Vir. Beach: 452,602
29. Polk (Des Moines): 430,640—-29. Lucas: 433,496————-29. Lucas: 432,488
30. Allen (Fort Wayne): 355,359—30. Allen: 368,040————-30. Allen: 370,404
31. St. Louis (St. Louis): 319,294–31. St. Louis: 314,875———31. St. Louis: 311,404
32. Lancaster (Lincoln): 285,407—32. Lancaster: 305,705——-32. Lancaster: 309,637
33. Mahoning (Youngstown): 238,823–33. Mahoning: 231,767–33. Mahoning: 230,008

Franklin County moved up one spot to 8th most populated core county of the group.

Total Core County Growth of the 33 Cities Census July 1, 2015 to July 1, 2016
1. Clark-Las Vegas: +46,375
2. Bexar-San Antonio: +33,198
3. Orange-Orlando: +29,503
4. Travis-Austin: +24,505
5. Mecklenburg-Charlotte: +21,369
6. Sacramento-Sacramento: +17,816
7. Franklin-Columbus: +14,249
8. Hennepin-Minneapolis: +12,024
9. Multnomah-Portland: +10,641
10. Santa Clara-San Jose: +9,297
11. Dane-Madison: +8,395
12. Polk-Des Moines: +7,357
13. Davidson-Nashville: +6,087
14. Kent-Grand Rapids: +6,078
15. Douglas-Omaha: +5,827
16. Jackson-Kansas City: +5,428
17. Lancaster-Lincoln: +3,932
18. Marion-Indianapolis: +3,171
19. Allen-Fort Wayne: +2,364
20. Sedgwick-Wichita: +1,635
21. Hamilton-Cincinnati: +1,351
22. Providence-Providence: +1,185
23. Virginia Beach-Virginia Beach: +748
24. Montgomery-Dayton: -328
25. Lucas-Toledo: -1,008
26. Summit-Akron: -1,016
27. Mahoning-Youngstown: -1,759
28. St. Louis-St. Louis: -3,471
29. Allegheny-Pittsburgh: -3,933
30. Milwaukee-Milwaukee: -4,866
31. Cuyahoga-Cleveland: -5,673
32. Wayne-Detroit: -7,696
33. Cook-Chicago: -21,324

And Total Core County Population Change Census 2010 to July 1, 2016 for the 33
1. Bexar: +213,907
2. Clark: +204,395
3. Travis: +175,057
4. Orange: +168,416
5. Santa Clara: +137,760
6. Mecklenburg: +135,207
7. Franklin: +101,104
8. Sacramento: +95,672
9. Hennepin: +80,058
10. Multnomah: +64,432
11. Davidson: +57,729
12. Polk: +43,405
13. Dane: +43,200
14. Kent: +39,551
15. Douglas: +37,885
16. Marion: +37,836
17. Lancaster: +24,230
18. Jackson: +17,643
19. Allen: +15,075
20. Virginia Beach: +14,608
21. Sedgwick: +13,630
22. Cook: +8,824
23. Providence: +7,006
24. Hamilton: +6,725
25. Milwaukee: +3,713
26. Allegheny: +2,017
27. Summit: -1,481
28. Montgomery: 3,914
29. St. Louis: -7,890
30. Mahoning: -8,815
31. Lucas: -9,327
32. Cuyahoga: -30,770
33. Wayne: -71,218

Here are the metro populations for the above 33 cities.

2010—————————————————————————–2016
1. Chicago: 9,461,105———————————————–1. Chicago: 9,512,999
2. Detroit: 4,296,250————————————————-2. Detroit: 4,297,617
3. Minneapolis: 3,348,859——————————————3. Minneapolis: 3,551,036
4. St. Louis: 2,787,701———————————————-4. St. Louis: 2,807,002
5. Pittsburgh: 2,356,285——————————————–5. Charlotte: 2,474,314
6. Portland: 2,226,009———————————————–6. Orlando: 2,441,257
7. Charlotte: 2,217,012———————————————-7. San Antonio: 2,429,609
8. Sacramento: 2,149,127——————————————8. Portland: 2,424,955
9. San Antonio: 2,142,508——————————————9. Pittsburgh: 2,342,299
10. Orlando: 2,134,411———————————————-10. Sacramento: 2,296,418
11. Cincinnati: 2,114,580——————————————–11. Cincinnati: 2,165,139
12. Cleveland: 2,077,240——————————————–12. Las Vegas: 2,155,664
13. Kansas City: 2,009,342——————————————13. Kansas City: 2,104,509
14. Las Vegas: 1,951,269——————————————-14. Austin: 2,056,405
15. Columbus: 1,901,974——————————————–15. Cleveland: 2,055,612
16. Indianapolis: 1,887,877——————————————16. Columbus: 2,041,520
17. San Jose: 1,836,911———————————————-17. Indianapolis: 2,004,230
18. Austin: 1,716,289————————————————–18. San Jose: 1,978,816
19. Virginia Beach: 1,676,822—————————————19. Nashville: 1,865,298
20. Nashville: 1,670,890———————————————20. Virginia Beach: 1,726,907
21. Providence: 1,600,852——————————————21. Providence: 1,614,750
22. Milwaukee: 1,555,908——————————————-22. Milwaukee: 1,572,482
23. Grand Rapids: 988,938—————————————–23. Grand Rapids: 1,047,099
24. Omaha: 865,350————————————————-24. Omaha: 924,129
25. Dayton: 799,232————————————————-25. Dayton: 800,683
26. Akron: 703,200—————————————————26. Akron: 702,221
27. Wichita: 630,919————————————————-27. Madison: 648,929
28. Toledo: 610,001————————————————–28. Wichita: 644,672
29. Madison: 605,435————————————————29. Des Moines: 634,725
30. Des Moines: 569,633——————————————-30. Toledo: 605,221
31. Youngstown: 565,773——————————————31. Youngstown: 544,746
32. Fort Wayne: 416,257——————————————-32. Fort Wayne: 431,802
33. Lincoln: 302,157————————————————-33. Lincoln: 326,921

The Columbus metro fell one spot in this list, but should recover it next year.

Total Metro Area Population Change July 1,2015 to July 1, 2016 for the 33
1. Orlando: +59,125
2. Austin: +58,301
3. Charlotte: +49,671
4. San Antonio: +47,906
5. Las Vegas: +46,375
6. Portland: +40,148
7. Nashville: +36,337
8. Minneapolis: +32,784
9. Sacramento: +28,830
10. Columbus: +21,376
11. Kansas City: +20,045
12. Indianapolis: +17,688
13. Des Moines: +12,145
14. San Jose: +10,238
15. Omaha: +9,861
16. Cincinnati: +9,747
17. Grand Rapids: +8,762
18. Madison: +8,315
19. Lincoln: +4,094
20. Virginia Beach: +3,439
21. Fort Wayne: +2,430
22. Providence: +2,176
23. Wichita: +1,656
24. Dayton: +883
25. Detroit: +79
26. Toledo: -358
27. Akron: -1,137
28. St. Louis: -1,328
29. Milwaukee: -1,867
32. Cleveland: -4,317
31. Youngstown: -4,644
32. Pittsburgh: -8,972
33. Chicago: -19,570

And the Total Metro Area Population Change Census 2010 to July 1, 2016
1. Austin: +340,085
2. Orlando: +306,858
3. San Antonio: +287,093
4. Charlotte: +257,340
5. Las Vegas: +204,395
6. Minneapolis: +202,177
7. Portland: +198,943
8. Nashville: +194,415
9. Sacramento: +147,274
10. San Jose: +141,875
11. Columbus: +139,517
12. Indianapolis: +116,148
13. Kansas City: +95,171
14. Des Moines: +65,092
15. Omaha: +58,773
16. Grand Rapids: +58,159
17. Chicago: +51,449
18. Cincinnati: +50,388
19. Virginia Beach: +50,090
20. Madison: +43,492
21. Lincoln: +24,764
22. St. Louis: +19,243
23. Milwaukee: +16,528
24. Fort Wayne: +15,548
25. Wichita: +13,753
26. Providence: +13,550
27. Dayton: +1,464
28. Detroit: +1,304
29. Akron: -982
30. Toledo: -4,780
31. Pittsburgh: -13,992
32. Youngstown: -21,053
33. Cleveland: -21,646

Now let’s take a closer look at Ohio only.

Top 20 Most-Populated Ohio Counties

2010————————————————-2016
1. Cuyahoga: 1,280,122—————-1. Franklin: 1,264,518
2. Franklin: 1,163,414——————-2. Cuyahoga: 1,249,352
3. Hamilton: 802,374——————–3. Hamilton: 809,099
4. Summit: 541,781———————-4. Summit: 540,300
5. Montgomery: 535,153—————5. Montgomery: 531,239
6. Lucas: 441,815————————6. Lucas:  432,488
7. Stark: 375,586————————-7. Butler: 377,537
8. Butler: 368,130————————8. Stark: 373,612
9. Lorain: 301,356———————–9. Lorain: 306,365
10. Mahoning: 238,823—————-10. Mahoning: 230,008
11. Lake: 230,041———————–11. Lake: 228,614
12. Warren: 212,693——————–12. Warren: 227,063
13. Trumbull: 210,312——————13. Clermont: 203,022
14. Clermont: 197,363——————14. Trumbull: 201,825
15. Delaware: 174,214—————–15. Delaware: 196,463
16. Medina: 172,332——————–16. Medina: 177,221
17. Licking: 166,492———————17. Licking: 172,198
18. Greene: 161,573———————18. Greene: 164,765
19. Portage: 161,419——————–19. Portage: 161,921
20. Fairfield: 146,156——————–20. Fairfield: 152,597

Top 10 Fastest-Growing Counties July 1, 2015 to July 1, 2016
1. Franklin: +14,249
2. Delaware: +3,579
3. Warren: +2,624
4. Butler: +2,078
5. Licking: +1,439
6. Hamilton: +1,351
7. Fairfield: +1,271
8. Clermont: +1,231
9. Lorain: +1,152
10. Union: +1,142

Top 10 Fastest-Declining Counties July 1, 2015 to July 1, 2016
1. Cuyahoga: -5,673
2. Trumbull: -1,806
3. Mahoning: -1,759
4. Stark: -1,253
5. Clark: -1,029
6. Summit: -1,016
7. Lucas: -1,008
8. Columbiana: -998
9. Madison: -684
10. Scioto: -664

Top 10 Fastest-Growing Counties Census 2010 to July 1, 2016
1. Franklin: +100,989
2. Delaware: +22,274
3. Warren: +14,195
4. Butler: +9,402
5. Hamilton: +6,731
6. Fairfield: +6,420
7. Licking: +5,706
8. Clermont: +5,659
9. Lorain: +5,009
10. Medina: +4,888

Top 10 Fastest-Declining Counties Census 2010 to July 1, 2016
1. Cuyahoga: -30,757
2. Lucas: -9,327
3. Mahoning: -8,799
4. Trumbull: -8,493
5. Columbiana: -4,156
6. Montgomery: -3,897
7. Clark: -3,547
8. Scioto: -3,411
9. Richland: -3,368
10. Ashtabula: -3,257

2015 City Population Estimates

The latest city estimates came out today, so let’s take a look at them.

First of all, let’s look at the top 25 cities in Ohio on July 1, 2015, and the population change from July 1, 2014.
1. Columbus: 850,106 +12,175
2. Cleveland: 388,072 -1,788
3. Cincinnati: 298,550 +509
4. Toledo: 279,789 -803
5. Akron: 197,542 -557
6. Dayton: 140,599 -235
7. Parma: 79,937 -119
8. Canton: 71,885 -395
9. Youngstown: 64,628 -438
10. Lorain: 63,647 -104
11. Hamilton: 62,407 -44
12. Springfield: 59,680 -246
13. Kettering: 55,525 -117
14. Elyria: 53,775 -179
15. Lakewood: 50,656 -297
16. Cuyahoga Falls: 49,146 -123
17. Middletown: 48,760 -6
18. Newark: 47,986 +140
19. Euclid: 47,676 -242
20. Mentor: 46,901 +35
21. Mansfield: 46,830 -5
22. Beavercreek: 46,227 +217
23. Dublin: 45,098 +794
24. Cleveland Heights: 44,962 -243
25. Strongsville: 44,668 -9

Only a handful of the top 25 saw growth.

Now let’s look at the Columbus metro overall, and the change since July 1, 2014.

1. Columbus: 850,106
2. Newark (Licking): 47,986
3. Dublin: 45,098
4. Lancaster (Fairfield): 39,766
5. Grove City: 39,388
6. Westerville: 38,384
7. Delaware (Delaware): 37,995
8. Reynoldsburg: 37,158
9. Upper Arlington: 34,907
10. Gahanna: 34,590
11. Hilliard: 33,649
12. Marysville (Union): 22,817
13. Pickerington (Fairfield): 19,745
14. Whitehall: 18,694
15. Pataskala (Licking): 15,245
16. Worthington: 14,498
17. Bexley: 13,654
18. Circleville (Pickaway): 13,857
19. Powell (Delaware): 12,927
20. Heath (Licking): 10,489
21. London (Madison): 10,060
22. New Albany: 9,879
23. Canal Winchester: 7,818
24. Grandview Heights: 7,328
25. Logan (Hocking): 7,117
26. Granville (Licking): 5,747
27. Groveport: 5,737
28. Sunbury (Delaware): 5,097
29. Johnstown (Licking): 4,918
30. Obetz: 4,761
31. New Lexington (Perry): 4,727
32. Plain City (Madison): 4,302
33. West Jefferson (Madison): 4,279
34. Ashville (Pickaway): 4,190
35. Mount Gilead (Morrow): 3,653
36. Baltimore (Fairfield): 2,970
37. Buckeye Lake (Licking): 2,760
38. Crooksville (Perry): 2,498
39. Hebron (Licking): 2,409
40. Richwood (Union): 2,281
41. Utica (Licking): 2,196
42. Cardington (Morrow): 2,047
43. South Bloomfield (Pickaway): 1,851
44. Mount Sterling (Madison): 1,745
45. Commercial Point (Pickaway): 1,611
46. Somerset (Perry): 1,464
47. Bremen (Fairfield): 1,437
48. Ashley (Delaware): 1,361
49. Lithopolis (Fairfield) 1,351
50. Minerva Park: 1,318
51. Hanover (Licking): 1,131
52. Williamsport (Pickaway): 1,051
53. Millersport (Fairfield): 1,049
54. Urbancrest: 1,033
55. Thornville (Perry): 997
56. Pleasantville (Fairfield): 958
57. New Holland (Pickaway): 836
58. Milford Center (Union): 823
59. Junction City (Perry): 810
60. Amanda (Fairfield): 747
61. Shawnee Hills (Delaware): 735
62. New Straitsville (Perry): 715
63. Ostrander (Delaware): 688
64. Galena (Delaware): 684
65. Shawnee (Perry): 646
66. Valleyview: 636
67. Thurston (Fairfield): 610
68. Marble Cliff: 584
69. Corning (Perry): 573
70. Riverlea: 569
71. Stoutsville (Fairfield): 566
72. Kirkersville (Licking): 541
73. Carroll (Fairfield): 520
74. Laurelville (Hocking): 517
75. Alexandria (Licking): 523
76. Murray City (Hocking): 435
77. Edison (Morrow): 435
78. Sugar Grove (Fairfield): 431
79. Hartford (Licking): 402
80. St. Louisville (Licking): 376
81. South Solon (Madison): 361
82. Marengo (Morrow): 346
83. Harrisburg: 334
84. Midway (Madison): 327
85. Rushville (Fairfield): 305
86. Tarlton (Pickaway): 290
87. Orient (Pickaway): 275
88. Magnetic Springs (Union): 276
89. Fulton (Morrow): 261
90. Lockbourne: 247
91. Unionville Center (Union): 239
92. Chesterville (Morrow): 230
93. Darbyville (Pickaway): 229
94. Gratiot (Licking): 224
95. Glenford (Perry): 177
96. Sparta (Morrow): 163
97. Hemlock (Perry): 156
98. West Rushville (Fairfield): 135
99. Brice: 120
100. Rendville (Perry): 36

Finally, let’s take a look at population growth ranking between Census 2010 and July 1, 2015.

1. Columbus: +63,073
2. Hilliard: +5,214
3. Grove City: +3,813
4. Dublin: +3,347
5. Delaware: +3,242
6. Westeville: +2,264
7. New Albany: +2,155
8. Powell: +1,472
9. Pickerington: +1,454
10. Gahanna: +1,342
11. Reynoldsburg: +1,265
12. Upper Arlington: +1,136
13. Lancaster: +986
14. Worthington: +923
15 Grandview Heights: +792
16. Marysville: +723
17. Canal Winchester: +717
18. Sunbury: +708
19. Whitehall: +632
20. Bexley: +597
21. Circleville: +543
22. Newark: +413
23. Groveport: +374
24. Johnstown: +286
25. Pataskala: +283
26. Lithopolis: +245
27. Obetz: +229
28. Hanover: +210
29. Heath: +179
30. London: +156
31. South Bloomfield: +107
32. Granville: +101
33. Ashville: +93
34. Plain City: +77
35. Urbancrest: +73
36. Hebron: +73
37. Utica: +64
38. West Jefferson: +57
39. Shawnee Hills: +54
40. Richwood: +52
41. Minverva Park: +46
42. Galena: +45
43. Ostrander: +45
44. New Holland: +35
45. Milford Center: +31
46. Ashley: +31
47. Commercial Point: +29
48. Williamsport: +28
49. Riverlea: +24
50. Kirkersville: +16
51. Valleyview: +16
52. Buckeye Lake: +14
53. Harrisburg: +14
54. Bremen: +12
55. Marble Cliff: +11
56. Amanda: +10
57. Lockbourne: +10
58. Tarlton: +8
59. Magnetic Springs: +8
60. Darbyville: +7
61. Brice: +7
62. Thurston: +6
63. Alexandria: +6
64. Stoutsville: +6
65. Unionville Center: +6
66. Thornville: +6
67. Millersport: +5
68. Orient: +5
69. Sugar Grove: +5
70. Hartford: +5
71. South Solon: +5
72. Somerset: +5
73. Midway: +5
74. Marengo: +4
75. Baltimore: +4
76. Glenford: +4
77. Fulton: +3
78. Gratiot: +3
79. St. Louisville: +3
80. Rushville: +3
81. Chesterville: +2
82. Sparta: +2
83. West Rushville: +1
84. Hemlock: +1
85. Cardington: 0
86. Rendville: 0
87. Pleasantville: -2
88. Edison: -2
89. Carroll: -4
90. New Lexington: -4
91. Mount Gilead: -7
92. New Straitsville: -7
93. Junction City: -9
94. Shawnee: -9
95. Corning: -10
96. Laurelville: -10
97. Murray City: -14
98. Logan: -35
99. Mount Sterling: -37
100. Crooksville: -37

So 86 of the metro’s 100 places have either grown or held steady in population since 2010. That is an increase from 70 places during the 2000s.