Tale of seven Ohio cities

In the 1980s...

• Columbus grew in the 1980s because areawide construction and household growth were in balance, and 59.1% of all new housing was built in the city.
• Cincinnati's population decline was small, even though construction in the city was a low 5.6% of the area, because areawide construction and growth were nearly in balance.
• Population decline in Toledo and Akron was reduced by the amount of construction in the city. Toledo had 22.9% of its area total; Akron had 19.1%.
• Youngstown, Dayton and Cleveland had the greatest losses because little housing was built in each city and areawide construction exceeded household growth by a wide margin.

In the 1990s...

• Household growth declined in the 1990s—thus new housing exceeded growth by wider margins and exacerbated outmigration.
• Columbus and Cincinnati are projected to continue past trends. Other cities could have increased population loses as suburban growth continues. Losses in Youngstown
  (-27.2%), Dayton (-20.9%) and Cleveland (-17.8%) could be most severe.
• By the year 2000, the population of the City of Columbus could be 630,000 and Cleveland 419,000.
• Surplus housing could increase in Youngstown, Dayton and Cleveland: 20-25% of all housing occupied in 1980 could be abandoned by 2000. Major surpluses also could occur in Akron (15%) and Toledo (10%).

Source: "Suburbanization of Ohio Metropolitan Areas, 1980-2000," Ohio Housing Research Network.

Back to top

Back to Corn Fields contents