In Franklin County, the immigrant- or foreign-born- population has been growing rapidly for the last few decades. Latin American immigration was dominant for many years, but has recently taken secondary position to even faster Asian growth. But where does the immigrant population live, exactly? Where they end up in the county is perhaps not where common belief would always suggest. The interactive map below breaks down not only the main continent of origin for immigrants by census tract, but also gives the top 5 specific origin nations. While at first glance, the continents seem heavily grouped together, a deeper look at nations of origin indicate that immigrant populations are much more diverse and spread out much more evenly than it appears.
One of the most interesting things about the last census- at least to me- was the data on what demographic groups were moving where in Columbus. The following series of maps show the central core of Columbus and how the 4 major racial/ethnic groups have been changing in the area, both in 2000 and 2010.
While I can’t directly post images, the best way to look at the following map series is to open the 2000 and 2010 versions and do a side by side comparison.
White Demographic 2000 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/nation/census/2010/?custommap=1,0,1,0,40.00535,-83.0034,11 In the 2000 map above, you could almost count the number of urban tracts with a growing White population on one hand. Even as far out as the I-270 corridor, there was a distinct lack of tracts where this group was growing. The vast majority of the growth in this demographic was in the far suburbs. 2010 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/nation/census/2010/?custommap=1,0,2,0,40.00535,-83.0034,11 By 2010, there had been some interesting changes. First, the ring of strong suburban growth seems to have lessened some, or at the very least, spread out more. Meanwhile, the tracts that were losing the White demographic pushed further out as well into some of these suburban areas. In the city’s urban core, the White population has clearly also been on the rise. While there were just a few positive tracts in 2000, just about every tract between Merion Village and Clintonville was growing in White population by 2010, as well as strong growth in the Near East Side, the Easton area and Downtown. Even a few tracts in the southern portions of Linden saw increases.
The question is, how will the map look in 2020? If the trends continue, the urban core should continue to expand its growth in this demographic. Sort of a reverse donut hole growth pattern.
Asian Demographic 2000 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/nation/census/2010/?custommap=1,3,1,0,40.00535,-83.0034,11 In 2000, Asian growth was fairly widespread, even in the urban core. There were weak spots, but not nearly as bad as the ones above. 2010 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/nation/census/2010/?custommap=1,3,2,0,40.00535,-83.0034,11 By 2010, though, there were some big changes. Out of the 4 demographic groups looked at, Asians were the only group which looks to have left the urban core more in the 2000s than they did in the 1990s. While other groups are increasing their presence in the city, Asians are doing just the opposite. There are still strong pockets of growth, and it’s still not as bad as Whites, but clearly there is a different dynamic to their moving patterns than with the other 3.
It seems clear from these maps that the urban areas of Columbus are starting to become more attractive, or at least were the previous decade. Recent years have only seemed to strengthen this trend.
To see census tract data for Columbus going back to 1930, visit here: Census Tract Maps
In Part 1 of this comparison, I looked at overall metro area densities.
For tracts, I looked over the maps of all cities within metros that had populations between 1.5 and 2.5 million (based on 2010 census). I then found every tract that had a population density of 5,000 people per square mile or higher, but I tried to stay within the core city and its immediate surroundings. In most cases, this was just within the central metro county, but some cities are split between county borders and even state borders, so I tried to use an equal approximation.
First, the total number of tracts with 5,000+ densities by city and rank. 1. Las Vegas: 290 2. San Jose: 285 3. Cleveland: 211 4. Milwaukee: 198 5. Portland: 174 6. Sacramento: 168 7. Pittsburgh: 147 8. San Antonio: 118 9. Columbus: 98 10. Virginia Beach: 92 11. Cincinnati: 84 12. Providence: 84 13. Austin: 61 14. Orlando: 47 15. Indianapolis: 46 16. Kansas City: 44 17. Nashville: 21 18. Charlotte: 16
Average Density for all Tracts that have 5,000+ Densities by Rank 1. Milwaukee: 10,394.2 2. Providence: 10,163.5 3. San Jose: 10,114.8 4. Pittsburgh: 8,753.8 5. Las Vegas: 8,604.4 6. Austin: 7,981.4 7. Cleveland: 7,882.1 8. Columbus: 7,821.8 9. Portland: 7,679.8 10. Cincinnati: 7,586.7 11. Sacramento: 7,397.3 12. Virginia Beach: 7,304.1 13. San Antonio: 6,736.5 14. Kansas City: 6,703.7 15. Orlando: 6,689.5 16. Charlotte: 6,678.2 17. Nashville: 6,558.7 18. Indianapolis: 6,170.7
Average Density of Top 15 Most Dense Tracts by Rank Milwaukee: 23,786.4 San Jose: 22,225.5 Pittsburgh: 18,581.4 Las Vegas: 18,227.8 Providence: 16,701.2 Portland: 15,401.5 Columbus: 14,733.6 Austin: 13,660.0 Cleveland: 13,458.6 Cincinnati: 12,443.9 Virginia Beach: 12,396.5 Sacramento: 12,261.4 San Antonio: 9,497.6 Orlando: 8,955.3 Kansas City: 8,476.5 Indianapolis: 7,294.0 Nashville: 7,113.9 Charlotte: 6,787.5
Columbus doesn’t do too badly with these numbers and certainly better than I was really expecting. In general, it’s more dense in parts than it gets credit for being. Las Vegas stands out as the most surprising to me, but I guess the built environment there is pretty dense when you think about it, at least in the urban core that these numbers measured. Charlotte, Indianapolis and Nashville have incredibly low densities for being major, moderate-fast growing metros/cities. Columbus and Indianapolis are often called twin cities and compared regularly, but this is one area where there’s a pretty stark difference. I plan to do a formal comparison of the two metros at some point in the future.
In regards to the 5,000+ density tracts, here’s a further breakdown.
All Tracts with a Density of 25,000 or More and % of Total 5,000+ Tracts by Rank 1. Austin: 2 3.3% 2. Milwaukee: 4 2.0% 3. San Jose: 4 1.4% 4. Virginia Beach: 1 1.1% 5. Columbus: 1 1.0% 6. Pittsburgh: 1 0.7% 7. Portland: 1 0.6% 8. Charlotte: 0 0.0% 9. Cincinnati: 0 0.0% 10. Cleveland: 0 0.0% 11. Indianapolis: 0 0.0% 12. Kansas City: 0 0.0% 13. Las Vegas: 0 0.0% 14. Nashville: 0 0.0% 15. Orlando: 0 0.0% 16. Providence: 0 0.0% 17. Sacramento: 0 0.0% 18. San Antonio: 0 0.0%
All Tracts with a Density of 20,000 or More and % of Total 5,000+ Tracts by Rank 1. Milwaukee: 13 6.6% 2. Austin: 3 4.9% 3. Columbus: 3 3.1% 4. Pittsburgh: 4 2.7% 5. San Jose: 6 2.1% 6. Las Vegas: 4 1.4% 7. Providence: 1 1.2% 8. Portland: 2 1.1% 9. Virginia Beach: 1.1% 10. Cleveland: 1 0.5% 11. Charlotte: 0 0.0% 12. Cincinnati: 0 0.0% 13. Indianapolis: 0 0.0% 14. Kansas City: 0 0.0% 15. Nashville: 0 0.0% 16. Orlando: 0 0.0% 17. Sacramento: 0 0.0% 18. San Antonio: 0 0.0%
All Tracts with a Density of 15,000 or More and % of Total 5,000+ Tracts by Rank 1. Milwaukee: 32 16.2% 2. Providence: 12 14.3% 3. San Jose: 31 10.9% 4. Austin: 5 8.2% 5. Pittsburgh: 12 8.2% 6. Columbus: 6 6.1% 7. Las Vegas: 13 4.5% 8. Portland: 6 3.4% 9. Sacramento: 3 1.8% 10. Cincinnati: 1 1.2% 11. Virginia Beach: 1 1.1% 12. Cleveland: 2 0.9% 13. Charlotte: 0 0.0% 14. Indianapolis: 0 0.0% 15. Kansas City: 0 0.0% 16. Nashville: 0 0.0% 17. Orlando: 0 0.0% 18. San Antonio: 0 0.0%
All Tracts with a Density of 10,000 or More and % of Total 5,000+ Tracts by Rank 1. Providence: 37 44.0% 2. San Jose: 112 39.3% 3. Milwaukee: 52 26.3% 4. Pittsburgh: 36 24.5% 5. Las Vegas: 67 23.1% 6. Cleveland: 37 17.5% 7. Cincinnati: 14 16.7% 8. Austin: 9 14.8% 9. Nashville: 3 14.3% 10. Portland: 21 12.1% 11. Virginia Beach: 8 8.7% 12. Orlando: 4 8.5% 13. Columbus: 8 8.2% 14. Sacramento: 13 7.7% 15. Charlotte: 1 6.3% 16. San Antonio: 3 2.5% 17. Kansas City: 1 2.3% 18. Indianapolis: 0 0.0%
All Tracts with a Density of 9,000 or More and % of Total 5,000+ Tracts by Rank 1. Providence: 47 56.0% 2. San Jose: 132 46.3% 3. Las Vegas: 101 34.8% 4. Milwaukee: 65 32.8% 5. Pittsburgh: 47 32.0% 6. Cleveland: 52 24.6% 7. Cincinnati: 19 22.6% 8. Austin: 13 21.3% 9. Portland: 29 16.7% 10. Columbus: 16 16.3% 11. Nashville: 3 14.3% 12. Sacramento: 24 14.3% 13. Kansas City: 6 13.6% 14. Charlotte: 2 12.5% 15. Virginia Beach: 10 10.7% 16. Orlando: 5 10.6% 17. San Antonio: 9 7.6% 18. Indianapolis: 0 0.0%
All Tracts with a Density of 8,000 or More and % of Total 5,000+ Tracts by Rank 1. San Jose: 183 64.2% 2. Providence: 52 61.9% 3. Las Vegas: 136 46.9% 4. Pittsburgh: 63 42.9% 5. Milwaukee: 82 41.4% 6. Cleveland: 87 41.2% 7. Sacramento: 49 29.2% 8. Austin: 17 27.9% 9. Cincinnati: 23 27.4% 10. Columbus: 26 26.5% 11. Portland: 41 23.6% 12. Kansas City: 10 22.7% 13. Orlando: 10 21.3% 14. Virginia Beach: 19 20.7% 15. San Antonio: 17 14.4% 16. Nashville: 3 14.3% 17. Charlotte: 2 12.5% 18. Indianapolis: 2 4.3%
All Tracts with a Density of 7,000 or More and % of Total 5,000+ Tracts by Rank 1. San Jose: 222 77.9% 2. Providence: 58 69.0% 3. Las Vegas: 185 63.8% 4. Cleveland: 119 56.4% 5. Milwaukee: 111 56.1% 6. Pittsburgh: 80 54.4% 7. Sacramento: 83 49.4% 8. Cincinnati: 38 45.2% 9. Columbus: 42 42.9% 10. Virginia Beach: 39 42.4% 11. Portland: 71 40.8% 12. Austin: 23 37.7% 13. Charlotte: 5 31.3% 14. Kansas City: 13 29.5% 15. San Antonio: 32 27.1% 16. Orlando: 12 25.5% 17. Nashville: 4 19.0% 18. Indianapolis: 8 17.4%
All Tracts with a Density of 6,000 or More and % of Total 5,000+ Tracts by Rank 1. San Jose: 260 91.2% 2. Las Vegas: 235 81.0% 3. Providence: 68 81.0% 4. Pittsburgh: 113 76.9% 5. Sacramento: 122 72.6% 6. Cleveland: 153 72.5% 7. Milwaukee: 142 71.7% 8. Columbus: 66 67.3% 9. Portland: 113 64.9% 10. Cincinnati: 54 64.3% 11. Orlando: 29 61.7% 12. San Antonio: 71 60.2% 13. Virginia Beach: 55 59.8% 14. Austin: 35 57.4% 15. Kansas City: 25 56.8% 16. Nashville: 10 47.6% 17. Charlotte: 7 43.8% 18. Indianapolis: 20 43.5%
Top 20 Most Dense Tracts from all 18 Metros 1. 48,971.9: Virginia Beach #38 2. 48,602.1: San Jose #500902 3. 32,306.4: Pittsburgh #404 4. 31,919.9: Milwaukee #11 5. 31,627.6: Milwaukee #147 6. 29,072: Columbus #181 7. 28,922.9: San Jose #509107 8. 27,544.8: Milwaukee #164 9. 26,825.8: Portland #56 10. 25,543.1: Austin #603 11. 25,271.2: Milwaukee #146 12. 25,229.7: Austin #604 13. 25,195.3: San Jose #509403 14. 25,053.2: San Jose #503118 15. 24,925.7: Columbus #13 16. 24,882.3: Las Vegas #2996 17. 24,666.9: Pittsburgh #9822 18. 24,481.1: Pittsburgh #406 19. 24,043.4: Portland #48 20. 24,025.6: Las Vegas #2207
