Will Columbus, OH surpass Indianapolis, IN in population in the next 20 years? (Dayton: low income, how much)

[msamhunter]

Originally Posted by jbcmh81

Granted that population growth rates won't stay the same from the last decade (6.1% vs 10.6%), but if they did, Columbus would pass Indianapolis in city population in 2022, a mere 9 years away. By 2030, Columbus would lead by 35,000.

The 2011 estimate growth rate, which is also not going to stay consistent, was 0.9% vs 1.3%, Indianapolis and Columbus, respectively. If you went by these growth rates, Columbus would pass Indianapolis by 2024, and by 2030 would lead by 26,000.

City Decadal Growth Rates 1950-2010
1950-1960
Columbus: 25.4%
Indianapolis: 11.5%
1960-1970
Columbus: 14.5%
Indianapolis: 56.3% (county-city merger)
1970-1980
Columbus: 4.7%
Indianapolis: -5.9%
1980-1990
Columbus: 12.0%
Indianapolis: 4.4%
1990-2000
Columbus: 12.4%
Indianapolis: 6.9%
2000-2010
Columbus: 10.6%
Indianapolis: 6.1%

So yeah, the only time Indianapolis' population grew faster the last 60 years was when it merged with its county. You guys do the math. This is not a new trend.

You also have to extrapolate all of the annexations Columbus has done over the years to reflect % of population gain. Indianapolis did it once and can't do it again as it is landlocked, Columbus is just doing it in bits and pieces and strong arming at that (nothing like being the only sewage and water provider) in particular going after the townships with the annex or no water.

[Evergrey]

It depends on who can annex the most land.

Both Columbus and Indianapolis... despite their bloated core city boundaries... are smaller metros... smaller than Cleveland, Cincinnati and Kansas City.

[Cleveland_Collector]

Does it really matter? Besides, Cleveland still has a much higher population density than either city. It's more than double that of Indy.

[jbcmh81]

Originally Posted by msamhunter

You also have to extrapolate all of the annexations Columbus has done over the years to reflect % of population gain. Indianapolis did it once and can't do it again as it is landlocked, Columbus is just doing it in bits and pieces and strong arming at that (nothing like being the only sewage and water provider) in particular going after the townships with the annex or no water.

The amount of land and population added with the merger is significantly more than everything Columbus has annexed since the 1950s. Indy went from 70 square miles to 351, and has since grown to 365 through 2010. Even today, Indianapolis is almost 150 square miles larger. If that hadn't occurred, Columbus would already be the bigger city in terms of population. In fact, if Columbus did the same merger, it's population would be about 1.2 million. And as I've mentioned here before, Columbus has annexed less land since 1980 (about 37 square miles) than it did in 1970-1980 alone. It's just not the significant growth factor that people make it out to be, and the last decade was the lowest rate since the 1940s.

And you don't understand how the annexation process works. Columbus doesn't go to townships, cities, or suburbs and demand they annex. The request is made by these other places first. Why should Columbus provide services with no return? If an area wants city services, they should be part of the city and paying for it like everyone else. This is not strong arming. This is a pretty common business practice.

[jbcmh81]

Originally Posted by Cleveland_Collector

Does it really matter? Besides, Cleveland still has a much higher population density than either city. It's more than double that of Indy.

No one is discussing Cleveland here, though, so why bring it up? But if you must...

Here is Cleveland's density since 1950
1950: 12, 197
1960: 11,542
1970: 9,893
1980: 7,264
1990: 6,566
2000: 6,166
2010: 5,113

And Columbus in the same period.
1950: 9,541
1960: 5,430
1970: 4,008
1980: 3,123
1990: 3,315
2000: 3,383
2010: 3,556

If Cleveland continues to deal with significant population loss, and if Columbus is able to keep growing like it is, at some point they're going to pass each other going in opposite directions, especially since Columbus is not annexing much anymore and artificially holding its density down, which is what occured from 1950-1980. For a city like Columbus that is so much larger in size compared to Cleveland, these numbers should be nowhere near each other, and yet they are getting closer each year. I honestly hope Cleveland recovers, but I wouldn't be going around tooting my horn under the circumstances.

[bjimmy24]

Originally Posted by jbcmh81

If Cleveland continues to deal with significant population loss, and if Columbus is able to keep growing like it is, at some point they're going to pass each other going in opposite directions, especially since Columbus is not annexing much anymore and artificially holding its density down, which is what occured from 1950-1980. For a city like Columbus that is so much larger in size compared to Cleveland, these numbers should be nowhere near each other, and yet they are getting closer each year. I honestly hope Cleveland recovers, but I wouldn't be going around tooting my horn under the circumstances.

Cleveland is not going to lose another 15% of its population by next census. Yes, it's been losing for decades, but based on all the progress I have seen, I think you will see this density trend reverse. I also don't really consider 3,500 close to 5,100. And with so much less land area than Columbus (77 vs. 210 sq miles), it will go up pretty quickly. The change is real, guys! Proof is everywhere. It's an exciting place to be right now, in my opinion.

But back to the point of the thread, I think focusing on numbers is pointless. Quality is what is important with cities, and I just think Columbus is a much better, more fun, and more interesting city than Indianapolis. Let Indy have 5 million people, I don't care.

[pontiac51]

Columbus will probably surpass Indy by the next census. And while these cities are very similar, Columbus is a better looking city than Indy, in my opinion.

[jbcmh81]

Originally Posted by bjimmy24

Cleveland is not going to lose another 15% of its population by next census. Yes, it's been losing for decades, but based on all the progress I have seen, I think you will see this density trend reverse. I also don't really consider 3,500 close to 5,100. And with so much less land area than Columbus (77 vs. 210 sq miles), it will go up pretty quickly. The change is real, guys! Proof is everywhere. It's an exciting place to be right now, in my opinion.

But back to the point of the thread, I think focusing on numbers is pointless. Quality is what is important with cities, and I just think Columbus is a much better, more fun, and more interesting city than Indianapolis. Let Indy have 5 million people, I don't care.

I really hope it doesn't, though I wouldn't put money on it either way. The worst is probably over, but it's also probably going to take awhile to actually see growth because too much of the city is still losing people. If we're just talking about the immediate Downtown and some adjacent areas, yeah, things are getting better. It's just going to take a decade or so at least for it to spread out to all these other neighborhoods. 77 square miles is still a lot of area. This is not just true in Cleveland, though. All major cities, including Columbus, have areas that are going to take time to recover now that urban trends are reversing.

It's a lot closer than they should be given the size difference. Columbus will likely hit 4,000 at least by 2020, if not higher. Even if Cleveland sees a population loss at even a third of the rate of 2000-2010, Cleveland will also be into the 4,000s by 2020. The difference is just not as great as it's made out to be. Historically, they used to be much further apart.

And I do agree with you, quality is better.

[streetcreed]

Indianapolis has more square miles of land. I believe it's population will become larger than Columbus' simply for this reason.

As others have said, if Columbus included all of the sq miles into their city limits (as indy) its population would be 1.2 million. Columbus is already more dense, less spread out, and has less sq miles to fill in.

Also, Columbus has made it clear that annexation is mostly a thing of the past. Ever since the city went from Republican to Democrat control (under democrat mayor Michael Coleman in 2000) the cities rate of annexation has stalled or been slow.

They have only annexed for some subdivisions, but mostly large developments. Like distribution centers, office parks, or the new casino (things that don't really raise the population but increase the income tax base)

Indianapolis has tons of county land included in cities limits that will be developed with sprawling homes and included in their population as the years go on. Columbus will have many areas that will decline (70s/60s suburban unattractive areas for example) included in its limits, and it won't be annexing to make up for this. It will only make up if the sought after urban neighborhoods continue exploding in growth.

[jbcmh81]

Originally Posted by streetcreed

Indianapolis has more square miles of land. I believe it's population will become larger than Columbus' simply for this reason.

Not sure that makes much sense. First, Indy already has a higher population, so it's not something that will happen in the future. Second, Columbus is not boxed in. It has just as much land to expand. Not to mention that much of the land already developed can be greatly densified, so it's not like it's built out either way.

As others have said, if Columbus included all of the sq miles into their city limits (as indy) its population would be 1.2 million. Columbus is already more dense, less spread out, and has less sq miles to fill in.

That's if it merged with Franklin County. I'm not sure where this limit is that you're talking about. It can and already has expanded past the borders of Franklin County.

Also, Columbus has made it clear that annexation is mostly a thing of the past. Ever since the city went from Republican to Democrat control (under democrat mayor Michael Coleman in 2000) the cities rate of annexation has stalled or been slow.

Glad I'm not the only one who has seemed to notice this. Still, the city has continued to grow by double digits even though annexation was the slowest since the entire policy started. The good economy and back to the city movement should not allow city growth to really slow, imo.

They have only annexed for some subdivisions, but mostly large developments. Like distribution centers, office parks, or the new casino (things that don't really raise the population but increase the income tax base)

Indianapolis has tons of county land included in cities limits that will be developed with sprawling homes and included in their population as the years go on. Columbus will have many areas that will decline (70s/60s suburban unattractive areas for example) included in its limits, and it won't be annexing to make up for this. It will only make up if the sought after urban neighborhoods continue exploding in growth.

Not sure why these areas would necessarily decline. What would be the driving force there? Suburbanization/annexation is what drove the urban decline, and if that's not as strong a force or is reversed, that would argue the exact opposite. Also, any decline and population loss that might occur in these areas is probably going to be made up by urban areas that are now growing. Consider as well that the land that Columbus would've annexed on the outskirts of the city is either rural/farm or low-density development, meaning it wouldn't be adding tens of thousands of people that way, anyway. Just not seeing it, man.