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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-20-2011, 11:40 AM
 
1,017 posts, read 2,120,793 times
Reputation: 729

Advertisements

These are the 50 biggest cites ranked for there population growth from 2000 to 2010, highest to lowest.

1. Raleigh, NC 46.3%
2. Fort Worth, TX 38.6%
3. Charlotte, NC 35.2%
4. Las Vegas, NV 22.0%
5. Albuquerque, NM 21.7%
6. Austin, TX 20.4%
7. San Antonio, TX 16.0%
8. Fresno, CA 15.7%
9. Colorado Springs, CO 15.4%
10. EL Paso, TX 15.2%
11. Oklahoma City, OK 14.6%
11. Sacramento, CA 14.6%
13. Jacksonville, FL 11.7%
14. Wichita, KS 11.1%
15. Mesa, AZ 10.8%
16. Columbus, OH 10.6%
17. Portland, OR 10.3%
18. Miami, FL 10.2%
18. Nashville, TN 10.2%
20. Arlington, TX 9.8%
21. Phoenix, AZ 9.4%
22. Denver, CO 8.2%
23. Seattle, WA 8.0%
24. Houston, TX 7.5%
25. San Diego, CA 6.9%
25. Tucson, AZ 6.9%
27. Louisville, KY 6.8%
28. San Jose, CA 5.7%
29. Washington DC 5.2%
30. Indianapolis, IN 4.9%
30. Omaha, NE 4.9%
32. Boston, MA 4.8%
33. Kansas City, MO 4.1%
34. San Francisco, CA 3.7%
35. Virginia Beach, VA 3.0%
36. Los Angeles, CA 2.6%
37. New York City, NY 2.1%
38. Atlanta, GA 0.8%
38. Dallas, TX 0.8%
40. Philadelphia, PA 0.6%
41. Long Beach, CA 0.2%
42. Minneapolis, MN 0.0%
43. Tulsa, OK -0.3%
44. Milwaukee, WI -0.4%
45. Memphis, TN -0.5%
46. Oakland, CA -2.2%
47. Baltimore, MD -4.6%
48. Chicago, IL -6.9%
49. Cleveland, OH -17.1%
50. Detroit, MI -25.0%
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-20-2011, 05:53 PM
 
Location: Carrboro and Concord, NC
964 posts, read 2,046,048 times
Reputation: 1230
I like the numbers in the "contained" cities - cities that can't expand their borders like Miami, Washington and Boston (among others) - I would like to see that continue, and I bet it will. Good to see some Midwest cities (Wichita, Columbus & Kansas City) doing well also - the Midwest is sometimes negatively stereotyped. I'd like to see the metro numbers as well - I'm sure Minneapolis-St Paul has far better numbers than the city-limits % shown. I also wonder what Vegas' numbers for this decade will look like, as the Great Recession (and it's real estate fallout) doesn't seem to be in any hurry to get out of our lives.

And I like the numbers in my home state as well. Seeing Raleigh and Charlotte transform into what they have become has been fascinating, and had this kind of growth been forecast in the 1980s when I was growing up, I wouldn't have believed that either city would have exploded into major metropolises.

As for Detroit - I'm (seriously) rooting for you. It's been a great city and a historic city in both arts and industry, and it hope it can pull back from the brink. The precipitous decline is a real national tragedy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-20-2011, 08:21 PM
 
Location: South Beach and DT Raleigh
11,810 posts, read 18,796,055 times
Reputation: 11136
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidals View Post
I like the numbers in the "contained" cities - cities that can't expand their borders like Miami, Washington and Boston (among others) - I would like to see that continue, and I bet it will. Good to see some Midwest cities (Wichita, Columbus & Kansas City) doing well also - the Midwest is sometimes negatively stereotyped. I'd like to see the metro numbers as well - I'm sure Minneapolis-St Paul has far better numbers than the city-limits % shown. I also wonder what Vegas' numbers for this decade will look like, as the Great Recession (and it's real estate fallout) doesn't seem to be in any hurry to get out of our lives.

And I like the numbers in my home state as well. Seeing Raleigh and Charlotte transform into what they have become has been fascinating, and had this kind of growth been forecast in the 1980s when I was growing up, I wouldn't have believed that either city would have exploded into major metropolises.

As for Detroit - I'm (seriously) rooting for you. It's been a great city and a historic city in both arts and industry, and it hope it can pull back from the brink. The precipitous decline is a real national tragedy.
I think that Miami doesn't get enough credit/visibility on its ability to grow significantly within its tiny borders. Miami managed the grow 1000 people per square mile in the decade and this is only the official number. The city thinks it was under-reported by tens of thousands.

Regarding Raleigh, my family moved there when it was smaller than its current largest suburb. It's just astounding what's happened in Wake County since the 70s. For those who might think that Raleigh just annexed its way to its growth rate, consider that its county (Wake) grew at a similar rate and that Raleigh ended the decade more densely populated than it started the decade....albeit, it wasn't anything near what Miami achieved. Raleigh will soon run out of annexable land as its adjacent municipalities hem them on all sides.
Right now, Raleigh has over 1300 housing units (all rental) planned/approved or under construction in its core. I suspect that to this will be a big part of the story that Raleigh will write this decade. I also suspect that the city will end this decade with at least another 125,000 added to its city limits and that those limits will cap somewhere near 180 square miles (up from about 143 square miles now).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-21-2011, 08:08 PM
 
Location: Carrboro and Concord, NC
964 posts, read 2,046,048 times
Reputation: 1230
^
Wake and Mecklenburg Counties both have annexation agreements between all incorporated towns/cities, so Raleigh, Cary, Garner, et. al.; and Charlotte, Huntersville, Cornelius, et. al. all have ultimate boundaries already clearly mapped out. Charlotte doesn't have a huge amount of annexable land left either.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-22-2011, 11:16 AM
 
1,054 posts, read 1,833,379 times
Reputation: 699
The 'city' of Omaha grew by 4.9%, but the 'metro' grew by 13%..

This decade will see the Omaha city limit grow by at least 15% as there are many suburban neighboorhoods paying off their debts that are not part of a city yet. Omaha can only annex developments or cities under 10,000 people within the county of Douglas.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-22-2011, 11:22 AM
 
9,378 posts, read 9,534,811 times
Reputation: 5786
WOW Boston grew faster than LA, New York, Atlanta, and Long Beach CA.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-23-2011, 08:40 AM
 
Location: South Beach and DT Raleigh
11,810 posts, read 18,796,055 times
Reputation: 11136
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidals View Post
^
Wake and Mecklenburg Counties both have annexation agreements between all incorporated towns/cities, so Raleigh, Cary, Garner, et. al.; and Charlotte, Huntersville, Cornelius, et. al. all have ultimate boundaries already clearly mapped out. Charlotte doesn't have a huge amount of annexable land left either.
True, but Charlotte is already more than twice the land area of Raleigh. In fact Fayetteville (NC) is larger in land area than Raleigh.

Do you have a link to the future municipal mapping of Wake County? I'd be interested in seeing it. I am tota geek when it comes to maps.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-23-2011, 10:33 AM
 
Location: IN
20,846 posts, read 35,937,611 times
Reputation: 13287
A growth of 11.1% in Wichita? What a joke! The area has seen no job growth in the past 10 years. The only reason that Wichita is growing is due to the very high birth rate and much younger demographics compared to the national average.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-23-2011, 01:10 PM
 
Location: Carrboro and Concord, NC
964 posts, read 2,046,048 times
Reputation: 1230
Quote:
Originally Posted by rnc2mbfl View Post
True, but Charlotte is already more than twice the land area of Raleigh. In fact Fayetteville (NC) is larger in land area than Raleigh.

Do you have a link to the future municipal mapping of Wake County? I'd be interested in seeing it. I am tota geek when it comes to maps.
I do not - this is something I remember seeing in the News & Observer a few years ago. I know the watersheds around Falls Lake and Lake Wheeler are excluded zones, with future development discouraged, and no further extensions of water & sewer, so Raleigh's city limits will not go north of I-540, and Wake Forest won't go far west of US 1; the remainder of the NW quadrant of Wake County, including all the low-density development north of 540 will be unincorporated, and from a service perspective will be left as-is. A lot of Raleigh's future annexation will be NE, SE and filling in donut holes around the Neuse River. There's about a 3 mile radius around Lake Wheeler that's off-limits to Raleigh, Garner, Cary, or Apex. The agreement map would correspond to the ETJ (extraterritorial jurisdiction) areas of each city in Wake County.

Sidestepping potential changes in NC's annexation laws, Wilmington has adopted the Charlotte policy - every other year annexations of areas with the required level of density. If the annexation laws don't change, Wilmington could easily grow by 30,000-50,000 people during the decade - New Hanover County is 2nd to Mecklenburg as the most dense in the state, and apparently 90% of the county already meets the density requirements for annexation into Wilmington.

That's what Fayetteville did. Fayetteville was legally blocked from any annexations from 1959-1990, and the suburban sprawl that spread beyond the city limits was blocked from incorporating - some strange quirk in annexation laws that were changed in 1990. Fayetteville just swallowed up everything that met the average population density, pushing the city limits from the All-American Freeway out to the Hoke County line, which tripled or quadrupled the area of the city.

Charlotte did something similar in 1974, annexing a ring of densely built suburbs 4 miles deep running 3/4 of the way around the previous city limits.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-23-2011, 01:14 PM
 
1,054 posts, read 1,833,379 times
Reputation: 699
Quote:
Originally Posted by GraniteStater View Post
A growth of 11.1% in Wichita? What a joke! The area has seen no job growth in the past 10 years. The only reason that Wichita is growing is due to the very high birth rate and much younger demographics compared to the national average.
Those are city limit growth rates. The metro of Wichita did not sustain such growth. The reversal was true for Omaha. The Omaha city limit grew by 4.9% in population while the metro area grew approximately 13%
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.
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