U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [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)
 
 
Old 01-04-2011, 08:12 PM
 
Location: Texarkana
674 posts, read 1,348,112 times
Reputation: 176

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by milquetoast View Post
Who says Toronto will be annexed to the U. S.? That's, by 2030? I heard that Canadiens live mostly on the American boarder because, well, they are planning an invasion..shhhh...
As far as Toronto is concerned does anyone foresee growth along the horseshoe connecting Toronto,Burlington, Hamilton, St. Catherines and Buffalo?
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-04-2011, 09:02 PM
 
2,601 posts, read 4,074,417 times
Reputation: 2275
Quote:
Originally Posted by Omahahonors View Post
I'm not disputing that Raleigh/Durham deserve to be one metro at all. I think it is a blunder from the OMB office for splitting them, as a matter of fact. Omaha/Lincoln is in a grey area while Raleigh/Durham is not and therefore I am not at all comparing the two.

I have absolutely no idea as to why you think anbody is 'arguably' comparing the two and I frankly never had an interest to do so. All I am saying is that Omaha/Lincoln are rapidly growing straight for each other as are the cities in between. Some of the outlying counties meet the criteria to be a part of the MSA for both as well.

The difference:
Raleigh/Durham shouldn't have any grey area and I believe it was a mistake to separate them.
Omaha/Lincoln is in a grey area that is quickly approaching to not being a grey area.
I don't really get your logic. Twenty three miles of nothingness is going to take a long time to fill up. I grew up in Omaha, and I think Lincoln and Omaha are too far apart to ever be considered one metro.

Chicago and Milwaukee have metros that touch. My brother lives closer to Milwaukee in Wisconsin, but he is in the Chicago metro. Even though their metros touch, they'll never be considered one metro.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2011, 02:59 PM
 
Location: Somewhere
213 posts, read 378,210 times
Reputation: 166
NO, LA will NEVER pass NYC in population!
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2011, 04:42 PM
 
Location: The State Of California
9,471 posts, read 12,317,065 times
Reputation: 3596
Quote:
Originally Posted by BuffalonianPride View Post
NO, LA will NEVER pass NYC in population!
I think that they were talking Metro not city proper
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2011, 08:10 PM
 
9,385 posts, read 9,548,809 times
Reputation: 5790
Quote:
Originally Posted by Howest2008 View Post
I think that they were talking Metro not city proper
well if he still has Pride in Buffalo, he probalby doesnt know, or care.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-08-2011, 11:08 AM
 
Location: Guangzhou, China
9,779 posts, read 13,363,470 times
Reputation: 11309
Quote:
Originally Posted by BuffalonianPride View Post
NO, LA will NEVER pass NYC in population!
A hundred years ago, I'm sure no one in NY thought LA would have well over a million people in it, but now, it sure does.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-08-2011, 11:14 AM
 
Location: The City
22,331 posts, read 32,176,306 times
Reputation: 7739
Quote:
Originally Posted by BuffalonianPride View Post
NO, LA will NEVER pass NYC in population!

Agree to me is highly doubtful.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-08-2011, 08:03 PM
 
Location: Fairfax County, VA
3,718 posts, read 4,788,682 times
Reputation: 1454
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewYorkcapitaloftheworld View Post
This is my list the top ten largest American cities in 2030.
1. LA - 26 million
2. NYC - 25 million
3. Houston - 14.5 million
4. Chicago - 14.3 million
5. DFW - 14 million
6. D.C. - 13.5 million
7. SF Bay Area - 13 million
8. Boston - 12.8 million
9. Atlanta - 12.5 million
10. Miami - 11 million
I really hope that Houston and DFW invest in heavy rail/rapid transit. Light rail can only do so much, even if they decide to build more light rail. Commuter rail could also help but more of it.

As for LA, NYC, Chicago, DC Area, SF Bay Area, Boston, Atlanta and Miami...I hope that they expand their heavy rail/rapid transit systems. The building and expansion of light rail plus commuter rail could help too.

All in all, these MSA's need adequate transit systems if those population predictions are true.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-08-2011, 08:09 PM
 
9,385 posts, read 9,548,809 times
Reputation: 5790
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewYorkcapitaloftheworld View Post
This is my list the top ten largest American cities in 2030.
1. LA - 26 million
2. NYC - 25 million
3. Houston - 14.5 million
4. Chicago - 14.3 million
5. DFW - 14 million
6. D.C. - 13.5 million
7. SF Bay Area - 13 million
8. Boston - 12.8 million
9. Atlanta - 12.5 million
10. Miami - 11 million
Thats more in line for the high estimates for the CSA's. also i would hate for a Boston of 13 million, we never, ever expand our highways or Transit fast enough to hold that growth.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-08-2011, 08:16 PM
 
6,419 posts, read 10,869,759 times
Reputation: 6696
2030 is a long time off...a lot can happen to an area in 20 years...both good and bad.

For Nashville, things seem to be on the up and up...we're growing at a pretty quick pace. Things could either take off to an even higher level (say, Atlanta/Charlotte/Raleigh for regional comparison) or they could level off/stay the same...or of course it's possible that something will affect our local economy and growth will become stagnant. I don't see the area losing population over the next 20 years, though.

My projections are based on Nashville having a pretty stable growth pattern. The suburban counties that ring around Nashville should continue to boom, and the core county will probably see steady growth (I could see it going up or down a little depending on more national trends of suburban vs. urban living). My projections are purely statistical, so they're not going to be perfect. It in no way forecasts the potential for certain areas to grow, due to addition of jobs, or for growth to slow down, due to economic or geographic constraints. I think the smaller, more rural counties are the hardest to predict. They could have stagnant growth, or they could easily double or even triple their population in a short time.

First off, current MSA counties:

county - 2010 population - 2030 projection (change)

Cannon - 13,801 - 15,059 (+1,258)
Cheatham - 39,105 - 42,702 (+3,597)
Davidson - 626,681 - 739,103 (+112,422)
Dickson - 49,666 - 61,894 (+12,228)
Hickman - 24,690 - 27,907 (+3,127)
Macon - 22,248 - 24,663 (+2,415)
Robertson - 66,283 - 89,439 (+23,156)
Rutherford - 262,604 - 432,330 (+169,726)
Smith - 19,166 - 21,016 (+1,850)
Sumner - 160,645 - 222,551 (+61,906)
Trousdale - 7,870 - 8,728 (+858)
Williamson - 183,182 - 301,734 (+118,552)
Wilson - 113,993 - 166,386 (+52,393)
MSA total - 1,589,934 - 2,153,512 (+563,578)

Counties that could be added into the MSA by 2030:
Very likely (currently in CSA):

Maury - 80,956 - 102,258 (+21,302)

Somewhat likely (outlying micropolitan areas):

Bedford - 45,058 - 60,151 (+15,093)
Marshall - 30,617 - 37,628 (+7,011)

MSA total (with new additions) - 1,746,565 - 2,353,549 (+606,984)
Counties that could be added to the CSA (currently MSAs)

Montgomery* - 172,331 - 249,104 (+76,773)
Warren, KY** - 113,792 - 159,043 (+45,251)
Simpson, KY*** - 17,327 - 19,002 (+1,675)

*Clarksville's MSA currently includes Stewart County, TN, and Christian and Trigg Counties in KY. I did not include the other counties

**Bowling Green's MSA currently includes Edmonson County, KY, which I did not include in the projections.

***Simpson County is the geographic link between Bowling Green's MSA and Nashville's MSA - currently it is not assigned to either one...it has a small workforce, and is roughly split between the two metros...but not enough (at last check) to be included in either.

Possible new CSA total - 2,050,015 - 2,780,698 (+730,683)


Methodology:

I took the populations from the previous two Censuses (1990 & 2000) as the base for the growth projection. I did not use percentage growth (it can get really tricky with wildly changing percentages), but instead used the raw growth number patterns.

I started with the raw growth from 1990-2000 and from 2000-2010 and averaged them (column 1).
Then I took the 2000-2010 growth, and subtracted the 1990-2000 growth to get a "trend" direction (column 2).
I then took the average growth number and added it to the trend to get an idea of the future direction (column 3).
I thought this was better than adding the trend from the most recent raw number (which would make for more extreme acceleration or loss of growth). I then multiplied the average + trend by two to give me a 20 year figure (2030 projection - column 4).
I also multiplied the most recent raw growth by two (for a 20 year total - column 5) to act as a check against rising or lowering trends (just because a county gained 5,000 fewer than it did over the previous Census doesn't mean it will continue to gain even 5,000 less than that in the next Census - same can be said for counties that grew more than in previous years).
Then I took the average between the two 20 year growth numbers (average + trend and 2010 growth x2) to give me the final growth number (column 6 - rounded up on decimals) and added that to the 2010 Census population (column 7) to give me the overall projection for 2030.

Here are the figures, county by county, for those curious:

Cannon - (90) 10,467 - (00) 12,826 - (10) 13,801 - +2,349 90-00 - +975 00-10 - +1,667 average - (-1,384) trend - +283 average+trend - +566 20 year - +1,950 2010x2 - +1,258 (averaged) - 15,059

Cheatham - (90) 27,140 - (00) 35,912 - (10) 39,105 - +8,772 90-00 - +3,193 00-10 - +5,982.5 average - (-5,579) trend - +403.5 average+trend - +807 20 year - +6,386 2010x2 - +3,597 (averaged) - 42,702

Davidson - (90) 510,784 - (00) 569,891 (10) 626,681 - +59,107 90-00 - +56,790 00-10 - +57,948.5 average - (-2,317) trend - +55,631.5 average+trend - +111,263 20 year - +113,580 2010x2 - +112,422 (averaged) - 739,103

Dickson - (90) 35,061 - (00) 43,156 - (10) 49,666 - +8,095 90-00 - +6,510 00-10 - +7,302.5 average - (-1,585) trend - +5,717.5 average+trend - +11,435 20 year - +13,020 2010x2 - +12,228 (averaged) - 61,894

Hickman - (90) 16,754 - (00) 22,295 - (10) 24,690 - +5,541 90-00 - +2,395 00-10 - +3,968 average - (-3,146) trend - +822 average+trend - +1,644 20 year - +4,790 2010x2 - +3,217 (averaged) - 27,907

Macon - (90) 15,906 - (00) 20,386 - (10) 22,248 - +4,480 90-00 - +1,862 00-10 - +3,171 average - (-2,618) trend - +553 average+trend - +1,106 20 year - +3,724 2010x2 - +2,415 (averaged) - 24,663

Robertson (90) 41,494 - (00) 54,433 - (10) 66,283 - +12,939 90-00 - +11,850 00-10 - +12,394.5 average - (-1,089) trend - +11,305.5 average+trend - +22,611 20 year - +23,700 2010x2 - +23,156 (averaged) - 89,439

Rutherford - (90) 118,570 - (00) 182,023 - (10) 262,604 - +63,453 90-00 - +80,581 00-10 - +72,017 average - +17,128 trend - +89,145 average+trend - +178,290 20 year - +161,162 2010x2 - +169,726 (averaged) - 432,330

Smith - (90) 14,143 - (00) 17,712 - (10) 19,166 - +3,569 90-00 - +1,454 00-10 - +2,511 average - (-2,115) trend - +396 average+trend - +792 20 year - +2,908 2010x2 - +1,850 (averaged) - 21,016

Sumner
- (90) 103,281 - (00) 130,449 - (10) 160,645 - +27,168 90-00 - +30,196 00-10 - +28,682 average - +3,028 trend - +31,710 average+trend - +63,420 20 year - +60,392 2010x2 - +61,906 (averaged) - 222,551

Trousdale - (90) 5,920 - (00) 7,259 - (10) 7,870 - +1,339 90-00 - +611 00-10 - +975 average - (-728) trend - +247 average+trend - +494 20 year - +1,222 2010x2 - +858 (averaged) - 8,728

Williamson - (90) 81,021 - (00) 126,638 - (10) 183,182- +45,617 90-00 - +56,544 00-10 - +51,080.5 average - +10,927 trend - +62,007.5 average+trend - +124,015 20 year - +113,088 2010x2 - +118,552 (averaged) - 301,734

Wilson - (90) 67,675 - (00) 88,809 - (10) 113,993 - +21,134 90-00 - +25,184 00-10 - +23,159 average - +4,050 trend - +27,209 average+trend - +54,418 20 year - +50,368 2010x2 - +52,393 (averaged) - 166,386

non-MSA

Bedford - (90) 30,411 - (00) 37,586 - (10) 45,058 - +7,175 90-00 - +7,472 00-10 - +7,323.5 average - +297 trend - +7,620.5 average+trend - +15,241 20 year - +14,944 2010x2 - +15,093 (averaged) - 60,151

Marshall
- (90) 21,539 - (00) 26,767 - (10) 30,617 - +5,228 90-00 - +3,850 00-10 - +4,439 average - (-1,378) trend - +3,161 average+trend - +6,322 20 year - +7,700 2010x2 - +7,011 (averaged) - 37,628

Maury
- (90) 54,812 - (00) 69,498 - (10) 80,956 - +14,686 90-00 - +11,458 00-10 - +13,072 average - (-3,228) trend - +9,844 average+trend - +19,688 20 year - +22,916 2010x2 - +21,302 (averaged) - 102,258

Montgomery
- (90) 100,498 - (00) 134,768 - (10) 172,331 - +34,270 90-00 - +37,563 00-10 - +35,916.5 average - +3,293 trend - +39,209.5 average+trend - +78,419 20 year - +75,126 2010x2 - +76,773 (averaged) - 249,104

Simpson, KY
- (90) 15,145 - (00) 16,405 - (10) 17,327 - +1,260 90-00 - +922 00-10 - +1,091 average - (-338) trend - +753 average+trend - +1,506 20 year - +1,844 2010x2 - +1,675 (averaged) - 19,002

Warren, KY
- (90) 76,673 - (00) 92,522 - (10) 113,792 - +15,849 90-00 - +21,270 00-10 - +18,559.5 average - +5,421 trend - +23,980.5 average+trend - +47,961 20 year - +42,540 2010x2 - +45,251 - 159,043
Key:
(90) = 1990 Census population
(00) = 2000 Census population
(10) = 2010 Census population
90-00 = raw growth from the 1990 to the 2000 Census
00-10 = raw growth from the 2000 to the 2010 Census
average = average raw growth per Census
trend = 2000-2010 growth minus 1990-2000 growth (shows increase or decrease of growth)
average+trend average raw growth + trend #
20 year = average+trend # multiplied by 2
2010x2 = growth from 2000-2010 multiplied by two
(averaged) = the sum of the 20 year growth numbers divided by two


So my prediction would be about 2.4 million for the MSA (with additions)...a low of 2.0 and a high of 2.9. The CSA would be about 2.8 with a low of 2.4 and a high of 3.4.
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.


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

All times are GMT -6.

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