Ohio 2010 Census population change by county map (Columbus, Cleveland: best cities, how much) - (OH) - City-Data Forum

BelieveInCleve · 03-09-2011, 02:17 PM

Just released today.

masterwood89 · 03-09-2011, 02:41 PM

Wikipedia has Cincinnati's population at 296,943 for 2010 (I know may not be reliable and true). Does anybody have Cleveland's population?

Nevermind wikipedia has Cleveland at 396,815 for 2010. If these numbers are accurate then that sucks for Ohio's two best cities and for the midwest as a whole.

austiNati · 03-09-2011, 04:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by masterwood89

Wikipedia has Cincinnati's population at 296,943 for 2010.

EMBARASSING

Quote:

Originally Posted by masterwood89

wikipedia has Cleveland at 396,815 for 2010. If these numbers are accurate then that sucks for Ohio's two best cities and for the midwest as a whole.

FAIL

I was really hoping this wouldn't be the case, but I'm not really suprised. I mean, when has any city in Ohio ever truely grown (not counting Columbus's annexations) I lived here my entire life and this has just become normal to me. Didn't expect C-Town to drop below 400 k and didn't expect Cincy to drop below 300 k, although i was expecting a population loss.

jbcmh81 · 03-09-2011, 04:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by austiNati

EMBARASSING

FAIL

I was really hoping this wouldn't be the case, but I'm not really suprised. I mean, when has any city in Ohio ever truely grown (not counting Columbus's annexations) I lived here my entire life and this has just become normal to me. Didn't expect C-Town to drop below 400 k and didn't expect Cincy to drop below 300 k, although i was expecting a population loss.

Just curious, but do you have any numbers on how much Columbus has annexed since 2000? I know living here, it feels much busier overall than it used to and I've read that annexation has slowed down quite a bit from the 1990s, so I don't think that annexation explain all the growth. Plus, the entire MSA gained more than 200,000 people, and the state only grew by 180,000 total, so it would appear that the majority of the growth in the state, both internal and external, was in the Columbus area.

But yeah, I was really surprised by the numbers overall. I did not expect them to be this bad, especially not for Cincinnati. I had predicted growth there.

Cleveland_Collector · 03-09-2011, 05:25 PM

Embarrassing? Fail? You seem shocked. This should not come as a surprise to anyone. It has been the trend for decades. It will not turn around overnight.

jbcmh81 · 03-09-2011, 06:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cleveland_Collector

Embarrassing? Fail? You seem shocked. This should not come as a surprise to anyone. It has been the trend for decades. It will not turn around overnight.

Some good news and bad news with this. The good news is that I have a hard time seeing it continue to drop at this rate. With all the existing infrastructure and housing, it's hard to imagine seeing this happen for decades to come. And Cleveland is doing things to revitalize the central core, which I think is an extremely important step. The bad news is that this continues to hurt the overall image of the city. Cleveland lost over 81,000 people, which is nearly 3x the rate it lost from 1990-2000 and is the 3rd worst decade since the decline began in 1950. The city is going to have to take some drastic steps to turn this all around even if this really is bottom, which I really hope it is.

Cincy's loss has been slower and started a bit later, but still significant. It's approaching a 50% population loss. I was really thinking, with what was going on there, that it would've stayed steady or seen a slight increase.

Even Columbus has reason to worry a bit. The 10.4% growth rate was the 4th slowest since 1830-40. It's only ahead of 1930-40 with 5.3%, 1970-80 with 4.7% and 1850-60 with 3.8%.

Overall, a really sh*tty census for Ohio.

wrightflyer · 03-09-2011, 06:38 PM

Is it possible for cities to challenge the census numbers just as they can with the yearly population estimates? If so, I expect these cities to do exactly that and dispute the numbers.

jbcmh81 · 03-09-2011, 06:39 PM

It is interesting, though, that the majority of the counties that had growth were along/near I-71.

jbcmh81 · 03-09-2011, 06:43 PM

Also, by my count, 54 of the 88 counties had population gains, not losses. So it's possible that, while there's not a huge influx of people from outside the state, the population is just tending to move out of the major cities more than out of state. Not necessarily a good thing, but more glass-half-full than empty.

buzzards27 · 03-09-2011, 08:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jbcmh81

Just curious, but do you have any numbers on how much Columbus has annexed since 2000? I know living here, it feels much busier overall than it used to and I've read that annexation has slowed down quite a bit from the 1990s, so I don't think that annexation explain all the growth. Plus, the entire MSA gained more than 200,000 people, and the state only grew by 180,000 total, so it would appear that the majority of the growth in the state, both internal and external, was in the Columbus area.

I think that growing suburban ring around Columbus will be in for a bit of a shock with the way Kasich is gutting the state government. Lots of yuppies are going to find themselves in bread lines in the next few years.