U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-30-2017, 10:39 AM
 
Location: South Beach and DT Raleigh
11,810 posts, read 18,728,534 times
Reputation: 11123

Advertisements

These are the fastest growing Urban Areas since 2010 based on 2017 estimates from Demographia. Only those Urban Areas that have grown by 10% or more (rounded to the 1/10 of percent) are listed and are categorized by the following groups:
1,000,000 - 1,999,999
2,000,000 - 2,999,999
3,000,000 - 3,999,999
4,000,000 - 4,999,999
5,000,000 - 9,999,999
Please note that neither Urban Area over 10M grew by 10% of more so far this decade but both NYC and LA had impressive gains of over 800,000 ppl each. (more on that at the end)
UAs are listed in each category by percentage growth followed by raw number increase.

1,000,000 - 1,999,000
  1. Austin: 1,665,000, 22.2% Growth (+303,000)
  2. Raleigh: 1,460,000, 18.5% Growth (+228,000)
  3. Charlotte: 1,470,000, 17.7% Growth (+221,000)
  4. Nashville: 1,090,000, 12.4% Growth (+120,000)
  5. Columbus: 1,515,000, 10.7% Growth (+147,000)

2,000,000 - 2,999,999
  1. Orlando: 2,160,000, 15.7% Growth (+293,000)
  2. San Antonio: 2,025,000, 15.2% Growth (+267,000)
  3. Denver: 2,705,000, 13.9% Growth (331,000)
  4. Las Vegas: 2,095,000, 11.1% growth (+209,000)
  5. Portland: 2,045,000, 10.5% Growth (+195,000)
  6. Tampa-St. Petersburg: 2,685,000, 10.0% Growth (+243,000)

3,000,000 - 3,999,999
  1. Seattle: 3,800,000, 11.4% Growth (+389,000)

4,000,000 - 4,999,999
  1. Phoenix: 4,295,000, 11.7% Growth (+449,000)

5,000,000 - 9,999,999
  1. Houston: 6,155,000, 16.3% Growth (+864,000)
  2. Dallas-Ft. Worth: 6,475,000, 14.4% Growth (+817,000)
  3. Atlanta: 5,240,000, 11.9% Growth (+556,000)
  4. Washington DC: 5,100,000, 11.2% Growth (+513,000)
  5. Miami: 6,105,000, 11.0% Growth (+603,000)

Top 5 growth in absolute numbers
  1. New York: +885,000
  2. Houston: +864,000
  3. Los Angeles: +833,000
  4. Dallas-Ft. Worth: +817,000
  5. Miami: +603,000

Top 5 growth by rate
  1. Austin: +22.2%
  2. Raleigh: +18.5%
  3. Charlotte: +17.7%
  4. Houston: +16.3%
  5. Orlando: +15.7%

Houston is the only UA that is top 5 in both absolute numerical and rate increase.
Moderator cut: Link removed, linking to competitor sites is not allowed

Last edited by Yac; 08-23-2017 at 06:23 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-30-2017, 04:21 PM
 
Location: Tokyo, Japan
6,617 posts, read 8,275,490 times
Reputation: 7561
Quote:
Originally Posted by rnc2mbfl View Post

5,000,000 - 9,999,999
  1. Houston: 6,155,000, 16.3% Growth (+864,000)
  2. Dallas-Ft. Worth: 6,475,000, 14.4% Growth (+817,000)
  3. Atlanta: 5,240,000, 11.9% Growth (+556,000)
  4. Washington DC: 5,100,000, 11.2% Growth (+513,000)
  5. Miami: 6,105,000, 11.0% Growth (+603,000)
LOL.

What's funny about this is that all 5 of these are in the same census defined region, whether rightfully or not.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2017, 07:20 AM
 
Location: South Beach and DT Raleigh
11,810 posts, read 18,728,534 times
Reputation: 11123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Facts Kill Rhetoric View Post
LOL.

What's funny about this is that all 5 of these are in the same census defined region, whether rightfully or not.
Save for Columbus, OH, all of the fastest growing Urban Areas are either in the South (12) or the West (5). That said, the Northeast has the UA that has added the most people (NYC).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2017, 12:15 PM
 
6,816 posts, read 6,921,909 times
Reputation: 5485
Kind of crazy to think New York still added over 800k people since 2010.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2017, 01:22 PM
 
1,803 posts, read 1,229,349 times
Reputation: 1774
So DFW has, according to this source, surpassed San Francisco to become the fifth largest urban area in the US, and started to get closer to Boston. Maybe at some point, the ranking of UAs will match that of MSAs.

Also, I expected Philadelphia and New York to be combined, guess not though.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2017, 02:32 PM
 
148 posts, read 102,838 times
Reputation: 197
Sorry to be pedantic... but these are the fastest growing metro areas. If you are talking growth in the actual "urban" part the rankings would be much different, because a lot of regional growth has been suburbia.

For example, Chicago is shrinking as a city and static as a metro... but it is gaining downtown core residential population at what by one measure is the fastest from both 2000-2010 and 2010-2015:

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/artic...sides-plummets

Quote:
The city center now is growing faster than ever, having gained an estimated 42,423 people from 2010-15.
Quote:
The new data come from the 2015 American Community Survey, which is conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau
Quote:
The annual ACS data traditionally are not as accurate as the decennial census but have gained status in recent years. For instance, ACS and census findings for the city's overall population differed by only about 1 percentage point.
Quote:
the central area, defined as neighborhoods generally within 2 miles of City Hall... gained an estimated 42,423 people in 2010-2015, according to the survey.
The Census Bureau in 2012 reported this area grew faster in the first decade of the century than any downtown in the country, adding 48,000 people. But with an unprecedented construction wave underway, growth has hit the gas, with the area—roughly the Loop, plus the Near North, Near South and Near West sides—growing almost as much in five years as it did in the previous 10.

The area now is home to an estimated 238,259 residents.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2017, 07:28 PM
 
1,803 posts, read 1,229,349 times
Reputation: 1774
"Urban" doesn't exclusively mean walkable or dense like Manhattan. Just as popular as a definition is basically a town or city. Many people consider suburbs "urban areas."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2017, 08:14 PM
 
148 posts, read 102,838 times
Reputation: 197
Just pointing out that the the thread is really talking about metro area growth as opposed to the title "fastest Growing Urban Areas." And a lot of these metro areas have heavy growth in the Suburbs.

No doubt there are "urban suburbs" in many cities (Seattle comes to mind with areas like Fremont, West Seattle and Wallingford that are in the city limit, somewhat urban feeling but still full of single family homes." But vast suburbia is not urban in any sense of the word, and a lot of these cities have a ton of growth in these areas. I'm not trying to slight the suburbs, just saying they often don't represent "Urban Growth."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2017, 11:16 PM
 
1,803 posts, read 1,229,349 times
Reputation: 1774
Quote:
Originally Posted by tkz4 View Post
Just pointing out that the the thread is really talking about metro area growth as opposed to the title "fastest Growing Urban Areas." And a lot of these metro areas have heavy growth in the Suburbs.

No doubt there are "urban suburbs" in many cities (Seattle comes to mind with areas like Fremont, West Seattle and Wallingford that are in the city limit, somewhat urban feeling but still full of single family homes." But vast suburbia is not urban in any sense of the word, and a lot of these cities have a ton of growth in these areas. I'm not trying to slight the suburbs, just saying they often don't represent "Urban Growth."
You completely missed the point. You have absolutely no idea what urban means here. Just Google the word's definition.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-01-2017, 06:29 AM
 
148 posts, read 102,838 times
Reputation: 197
Suburban is derived from urban in order to differentiate it. Obviously the term urban can be used differently depending on context.

My only point was that the title is misleading... and the term metro area would be more accurate, since that is what the OP is about.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:56 AM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top