That's really NOT that good. A square mile is 640 acres...so, in the past 2 years Columbia hasn't even annexed 1 whole square mile of property into the city. But still, out size is not that bad, except for the fact the we have an Army base that takes up more than have of the city land. What we need to work on is density, its a weak 928 persons per square mile.
Just to put everything in comparison, these are the stats some of our bigger neighbors. (Source: Wikipedia)
Charlotte - 280.5 square miles / 2232 per square mile (density)
Atlanta - 132.4 square miles / 3162 per square mile (density)
I know density calculations for Columbia can be difficult since Fort Jackson does not contribute much to the size of the city. Also, I don't know whether or not Fort Jackson's population is counted in the census data for Columbia. So, heres my attempt at adjusting the stats.
Population of Columbia: 120,000 (est.)
Fort Jackson Land Area: 81.25 square miles
Land Area of Columbia without FJ: 50.75
First assumption - Fort Jackson contributes no people to Columbia's population as counted in the census.
120,000/50.75 = 2364 persons per square mile for Columbia [NOT BAD!]
Opposite Assumption - Fort Jackson population is counted in Columbia population.
The population of FJ is 13600.
120000-13600 = 106400
106400/50.75=2096 persons per square mile
Let me know if my math is wrong. But if I am right...either way, we're not that for behind Charlotte.
