U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Colorado
 [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)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 05-02-2016, 04:12 PM
 
Location: We_tside PNW (Columbia Gorge) / CO / SA TX / Thailand
22,401 posts, read 39,713,740 times
Reputation: 23426

Advertisements

KS and NE are excellent states, but will never see CO overflow.

If OP wants a sparse density, plenty can be had (forever) in all of the mtn and great plain states (and many other states too).

NV is an income tax free state that will forever have many desolate regions. From mtns to desert... Go and get it!

 
Old 05-03-2016, 11:17 AM
 
Location: The Springs
1,770 posts, read 2,124,672 times
Reputation: 1845
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hschlick84 View Post
By 2050, the front range will have roughly 10 million people.

Front Range - America 2050
That same illustration shows JUST southern and northern California urban areas at 60 million. That's a 20M increase above CA's current population. No thanks.
 
Old 05-03-2016, 11:20 AM
 
Location: Denver, CO
758 posts, read 581,635 times
Reputation: 1477
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kar54 View Post
That same illustration shows JUST southern and northern California urban areas at 60 million. That's a 20M increase above CA's current population. No thanks.
What is interesting is the lack of growth in the Portland/Seattle region. I am guessing the COL will hit a point to where it just simply cannot grow any further.
 
Old 05-03-2016, 11:50 PM
 
191 posts, read 134,643 times
Reputation: 411
Quote:
Originally Posted by MN_Ski View Post
What is interesting is the lack of growth in the Portland/Seattle region. I am guessing the COL will hit a point to where it just simply cannot grow any further.
What lack of growth. I have a photo I took of downtown Seattle two months ago, with six construction cranes visible. Seattle and Portland join Denver as the fastest-appreciating cities, and S and D each added 60,000 plus last year. Was that some sarcasm I missed from a previous post.

One flight over the Front Range reveals how tightly packed we are, and how much open space surrounds the cities. We'll never "run out of room" before we run our of water. The air pollution and energy costs of all this commuting are catching up to us already. The Front Range is almost unique, in that virtually every other town and city within a 500-mile radius is a depopulated and declining agricultural area. Almost all the educated an ambitious graduates of surrounding universities wind up drawn here. (I know-- I've visited over 400 homes as a real estate photographer, and I've seen their degrees on the wall.)

It's a sad irony that job and residential growth hasn't been more dispersed towards the southern Front Range, or spread across the plains. Many of us would love that kind of lifestyle, and hold a good job.
 
Old 05-04-2016, 08:26 AM
 
Location: Denver, CO
758 posts, read 581,635 times
Reputation: 1477
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wheatridger View Post
What lack of growth. I have a photo I took of downtown Seattle two months ago, with six construction cranes visible. Seattle and Portland join Denver as the fastest-appreciating cities, and S and D each added 60,000 plus last year. Was that some sarcasm I missed from a previous post.

One flight over the Front Range reveals how tightly packed we are, and how much open space surrounds the cities. We'll never "run out of room" before we run our of water. The air pollution and energy costs of all this commuting are catching up to us already. The Front Range is almost unique, in that virtually every other town and city within a 500-mile radius is a depopulated and declining agricultural area. Almost all the educated an ambitious graduates of surrounding universities wind up drawn here. (I know-- I've visited over 400 homes as a real estate photographer, and I've seen their degrees on the wall.)

It's a sad irony that job and residential growth hasn't been more dispersed towards the southern Front Range, or spread across the plains. Many of us would love that kind of lifestyle, and hold a good job.
I was actually just referring to what was said on the America2050 website.

Principal Cities: Portland, Seattle, Vancouver
Population 2010 (U.S. Portion): 8,367,519
Percent of U.S. Population: 3%
Population 2025: 8,748,143
Population 2050: 11,864,378

Projected Growth (2010 - 2050): 41.8% (3,496,859)
2005 GDP: $337,405,000,000
Percent U.S. GDP: 3%

Compared to Front Range:
Principal Cities: Albuquerque, Santa Fe, Colorado Springs, Denver
Population 2010: 5,467,633
Percent U.S. Population: 2%
Population 2025: 6,924,457
Population 2050: 10,222,370

Projected Growth (2010 - 2050): 87.0% (4,754,737)
2005 GDP: $229,202,000,000
Percent of U.S. GDP: 2%

That is why I was so shocked to see those numbers.
 
Old 05-04-2016, 11:14 AM
 
1,822 posts, read 1,390,065 times
Reputation: 2087
No one can accurately forecast what any city will look like over time, including 34 years into the future. If you've been around for awhile, you can see the growing volatility as we move into the future, both nationally and globally. Relying on statistics can get one into some serious fantasizing. I for one wouldn't put any stock into the above numbers. History has shown these types of forecasts and news items to be along the lines of predicting end-of-the-world events, etc. It's better to focus on reality and what we know currently than resorting to the crystal ball.
 
Old 05-04-2016, 03:35 PM
 
3,797 posts, read 3,987,784 times
Reputation: 2566
The America2050 website is not being updated regularly (3 tweets in year, no updates in various site sections in 2.5 years, etc.). it is not totlally clear from quick glance but the regional population projections appear to have been publish 9 years ago and may be based on work 13 years old. It may be straight projected based on past rather than projected via super careful estimate of changing birth, death, immigration and migration rates. I would suggest that a newer study might be better than continued reference to this site. My impression is that US population projections are being revised downward with passing years but I should check that thought out further.

Last edited by NW Crow; 05-04-2016 at 03:44 PM..
 
Old 05-04-2016, 09:34 PM
 
3,797 posts, read 3,987,784 times
Reputation: 2566
US Census last projected 2030 population by state in 2005 and their site now says "The U.S. Census Bureau does not have a current set of state population projections and currently has no plans to produce them."

They did project in 2014 & 2015 that total US population would reach about 400 million by 2050. In 2008 they predicted 440 million, so it has dropped. In 2000 the 2050 projection was 320-550 million with 400 million being the middle guess.

Last fall the State Demography Office projected CO population to reach 8.7 million by 2050. The model has a slow drop in annual % increases over the period. The CO Water Conservation Office has an estimated range of 8.5 million to 10.5 million for their planning work.

Last edited by NW Crow; 05-04-2016 at 09:57 PM..
 
Old 05-05-2016, 09:17 AM
 
3,797 posts, read 3,987,784 times
Reputation: 2566
U.S. population currently at about 324 million. So Census Bureau is expecting growth of 76 million by 2050. 23% growth in 34 years. It is a lot of people (couple million a year) but if it goes this way it will probably be the slowest growth period on a percentage basis of anytime in the country's history outside of maybe some of the very earliest days.


The America2050 projection for a front range megaregion that includes north and central New Mexico is probably pretty good after all. Back out non-frontrange CO and add the NM part and the current and projection numbers are about right.

Last edited by NW Crow; 05-05-2016 at 09:36 AM..
 
Old 05-06-2016, 08:24 AM
 
Location: Hays, Kansas
723 posts, read 901,123 times
Reputation: 677
Quote:
Originally Posted by NW Crow View Post
It is expected Elbert County will start to fill up with some of the growth that can't fit fast enough in the existing urban areas. Adams County should end up with more too eventually. Pueblo or "Pueblo North" will probably get some more, eventually. All told, probably half a million to a million more per decade. As usual, for a long time past (since 1950) and into the foreseeable future. Already pretty close to 500,000 in first 5 years of this decade (425,000).
Where are they going to get the water for all of this?! I know families in Elbert County who've had to drill new wells several times because they've ran dry.The Springs and Denver are going to run out of water rights to poach from the Ark River Valley in the near future, and Pueblo was an idiot to allow any other municipality to tap into their lake if they want growth. Kansas will be breathing down Colorado's back again if the pumping up to The Springs affects river flow.

Colorado is a beautiful state, but it's on the fast track to ruin that with the exploding population growth on top of the tourism.

Last edited by empires228; 05-06-2016 at 08:33 AM..
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.


Closed Thread


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

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 > Colorado
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:03 PM.

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