Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
While annexation is certainly understandable and typical, how does it retroactively affect a baseline population? Wouldn't the population just be added in the year of the annexation? Lots of cities annex land but I haven't found other examples with this sort of disparity. Maybe there's someone from Omaha that can chime in here on the issue?
I lived in Omaha a while back, and this was still a sort of big deal. Nebraska law allows a larger city to entirely annex a smaller one without a referendum by the smaller city if the smaller city has fewer than 10000 people. There was a town (Elkton I think) that became paranoid for no good reason about Omaha annexing it. Elkton started annexing a lot of land to try to get to 10000 people, and it would have done a lot to choke off any chance Omaha had of annexing land in the future based on what was being annexed. Omaha told them they had no intention of annexing Elkton, but they would if the town kept annexing land. Elkton kept annexing land, and Omaha annexed all of Elkton before they could break the 10000 person mark. It left a lot of bad feeling all around.
On the flip side we have Pittsburgh. I'm a "booster" of the city and have had to eat some crow over the past several days after seeing that both the city and its surrounding Allegheny County nosedived from 2013-2014. I was so confident we were growing since it seems like traffic has only become more congested here with each passing year, and there are new buildings going up everywhere.
We went from gains in the city proper from 2010-2013 to a LOSS in the city proper of 290 residents from 2010-2014 just because the city nosedived from 2013-2014 after several years of consistent growth.
The county went from steady growth since 2010 to a significant decline from 2013-2014. The county is still up 7,907 residents since 2010, though.
I've been very depressed by these figures and haven't been on here much since their release. What good is all of the "good things" that are supposedly happening here in Pittsburgh if the city is still in decline? If we dip below 300,000 I'm going to fall into deep depression.
I wouldn't call those numbers a loss. It's virtual stagnation from the last properly recorded census. If anything the census guessers probably don't know exactly what Pittsburgh is doing which is why they've left the population mostly unchanged.
Any revised information on the metro area population? If that is still increasing that would explain the increased activity and construction IN Pittsburgh.
^ I always imagined cities like Pittsburg, Cincinnati, and St. Louis are on the brink of rebounding. I don't know why I feel this way, I just do. St. Louis is by far the worst example of decline of these three. I believe that city peaked at ~850,000 in 1950 and risks dropping below 300,000 soon. Pitt and Cincy both reached 600,000 and 500,000 respectively. Pittsburg risks dropping below 300,000 and Cincy already has.
I live in Virginia, but I'm from Colorado. I'm interested to see the estimates showing Colorado's largest cities trending upward. Denver at 663,000, Colorado Springs at 446,000, Aurora at 353,000...Colorado is a state of about 5.5 million, with most of them living on the front range. For example, between the Denver CSA and Colorado Springs MSA there are over 4 million people. It definitely seems a lot of the state's growth is centered in this area, with the Denver area really being the epicenter. Colorado Springs, paling in comparison to Denver, is a distant second. Beyond this corridor, the state does not seem to be growing. And I think that's a good thing. I'd rather see the cities grow rather than remote mountain areas converted to condos or tract housing. If you go to the Colorado forum you won't have to look far before you see some native dating back to 1948 lamenting the state's growth. Such is life when you're a desirable location, I guess. Growth is sometimes inevitable. Keeping it where it minimizes its impact and preserves what makes Colorado Colorado is the important thing. At least to me it is.
Meanwhile Fredericksburg, where I currently live in Virginia, is a city of about 28,000 with the addition of extensive unincorporated areas surrounding it, totaling about 175,000 or so. It's a big commuter community to D.C. and Northern Virginia. I'm happy here, but there are days I would like to carpet bomb some neighborhoods. If I see one more dollar store, Goodwill, or payday advance store open I think I'll lose my mind! This place could be really nice, but its zoning is really a head scratcher. And while it has plenty about it to like, it does have its problems. I wouldn't mind seeing the area work to realize some of its potential. It has a lot of the right ingredients: location, scenery, a lot of people with moderate to high income levels, some great neighborhoods, etc. But it also seems content to cater to a very low-class of people. It's mind boggling, really.
This is very common with smaller southern cities, haven't quite figured out why. It's especially common in the rural areas where Walmarts are far and few between and Targets only exist in the big city suburbs, Dollar General and Family Dollar will sprout up along rural county roads to service the most basic needs of the locals.
I lived in Omaha a while back, and this was still a sort of big deal. Nebraska law allows a larger city to entirely annex a smaller one without a referendum by the smaller city if the smaller city has fewer than 10000 people. There was a town (Elkton I think) that became paranoid for no good reason about Omaha annexing it. Elkton started annexing a lot of land to try to get to 10000 people, and it would have done a lot to choke off any chance Omaha had of annexing land in the future based on what was being annexed. Omaha told them they had no intention of annexing Elkton, but they would if the town kept annexing land. Elkton kept annexing land, and Omaha annexed all of Elkton before they could break the 10000 person mark. It left a lot of bad feeling all around.
Is that a true story!? That's quite hilarious. So when a town is annexed, does it cease to exist? Does The larger city assume control?
This is very common with smaller southern cities, haven't quite figured out why. It's especially common in the rural areas where Walmarts are far and few between and Targets only exist in the big city suburbs, Dollar General and Family Dollar will sprout up along rural county roads to service the most basic needs of the locals.
Sprout up...like weeds...
Where I live we have some pretty decent options, though. It's not really a small town here, though certainly not a big city, either. The zoning is a bit confusing, too. As in nonexistent. Still, despite the flaws my wife and I are both very happy in this area. There is a lot to like about it too and we do try to focus on the good things more than the bad.
I lived in Omaha a while back, and this was still a sort of big deal. Nebraska law allows a larger city to entirely annex a smaller one without a referendum by the smaller city if the smaller city has fewer than 10000 people. There was a town (Elkton I think) that became paranoid for no good reason about Omaha annexing it. Elkton started annexing a lot of land to try to get to 10000 people, and it would have done a lot to choke off any chance Omaha had of annexing land in the future based on what was being annexed. Omaha told them they had no intention of annexing Elkton, but they would if the town kept annexing land. Elkton kept annexing land, and Omaha annexed all of Elkton before they could break the 10000 person mark. It left a lot of bad feeling all around.
Okay, that's a bit funny lol. Don't mess with Omaha apparently.
Minneapolis has grown by 25,600 since 2010, St Paul by 12,500. It is likely that St Paul will pass Cincinnati within a year or two and maybe Anchorage a little after that. Minneapolis looks like it is locked into its slot for a while. The combined core of the Twin Cities at approximately 705,000. This is the first time either city has had significant growth since the rise of the suburbs. Minneapolis proper is now the fastest growing municipality in the metro which hasn't happened since before WWII.
Last edited by Drewcifer; 05-25-2015 at 09:16 PM..
On the flip side we have Pittsburgh. I'm a "booster" of the city and have had to eat some crow over the past several days after seeing that both the city and its surrounding Allegheny County nosedived from 2013-2014. I was so confident we were growing since it seems like traffic has only become more congested here with each passing year, and there are new buildings going up everywhere.
I think Pittsburgh's issue is its demographic profile. The Pittsburgh MSA has so many old people that it is the only metro in the US that is experiencing natural decline (more deaths than births). Given those demographic headwinds, stagnation in Pittsburgh means that there is some underlying growth going on. I just wont be reflected in the numbers for another generation until the city has a more normal age breakdown.
I think Pittsburgh's issue is its demographic profile. The Pittsburgh MSA has so many old people that it is the only metro in the US that is experiencing natural decline (more deaths than births). Given those demographic headwinds, stagnation in Pittsburgh means that there is some underlying growth going on. I just wont be reflected in the numbers for another generation until the city has a more normal age breakdown.
I have seen a few posters throw this card out there before, suggesting Pittsburgh has such an incredibly high senior citizen population that the deaths are outweighing the births and new movers...I'm not sure where this data comes from or if there is any proof of it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
