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 06-04-2013, 06:45 AM
 
Location: Jonesboro
3,266 posts, read 3,246,820 times
Reputation: 3697

Advertisements

I don't really see the St. Louis potential that was mentioned. It was truly large & very important on the national stage for a long time but it's time has come & gone.
The city proper has declined from around 850,000 at the end of WW2 down to 318,000 in a July 2012 estimate. Does that remind anyone of the much-discussed Detroit population collapse?
In the most recent decades, it's suburban growth has even slowed to the point where it's largest suburban county has pretty much peaked & estimates show that the 1 moderately growing far west suburban county is growing very slowly now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-04-2013, 09:25 PM
 
Location: Saint Louis
189 posts, read 306,145 times
Reputation: 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by atler8 View Post
I don't really see the St. Louis potential that was mentioned. It was truly large & very important on the national stage for a long time but it's time has come & gone.
The city proper has declined from around 850,000 at the end of WW2 down to 318,000 in a July 2012 estimate. Does that remind anyone of the much-discussed Detroit population collapse?
In the most recent decades, it's suburban growth has even slowed to the point where it's largest suburban county has pretty much peaked & estimates show that the 1 moderately growing far west suburban county is growing very slowly now.
Although the devastation of Detroit and the plight of St. Louis superficially appear to be similar, they actually are incomparable in scale and severity. Detroit, being previously of a much larger population and contained in a larger land area has much larger portions of blight compared to St. Louis. The housing stock of Detroit has been largely of wood construction so that homes became irretrievably damaged after a few decades of abandonment. St. Louis housing stock, being mostly brick and stone housing from the Victorian era, has better "bones" and much of the vacant housing can wait decades and even a century for renovations and still be functional. I live in a 1908 townhome in St. Louis and I could easily see how this place could last for another century. Although vacant lots exist, St. Louis has not undergone the large scale urban demolition that Detroit has because most of its homes are not "too far gone." Given future population growth, most of these homes and neighborhoods can be reoccupied, renovated, and be fully functional for extraordinarily low cost. For example, some homes in my neighborhood that sold for not over a thousand dollars just two decades ago are worth half a million now and this continues to happen neighborhood to neighborhood all over town. St. Louis has a much more diversified economy and unemployment here is almost half that of detroit. There are significant finance, energy, healthcare, R&D, and even media industry in town. If you look at the St. Louis area, downtown has doubled in population over the last few years and redevelopment projects are being announced nearly every week. The largest county, St. Louis County, population has been stable because there is no more land to develop but in the counties further out such as St. Charles, there is still rapid growth.

As for the question of whether St. Louis will ever become a nationally dominant city again, the answer is probably not in our lifetimes unless the 21st century's greatest growth industry is developed in town. Very long term things like sea level rise and the lack of fresh water in the arid west suggest that the midwest should see great population growth in the time span lasting centuries. A thousand years from now when New Orleans is long forgotten and when the bay area and New York City are under the sea, St. Louis might still be here and chugging along. But if the question is whether St. Louis could become a bustling medium size city that people strongly desire to move to for opportunities and a new life (Something like a Boston of the midwest) then yes, that is certainly an achievable goal within a few decades. The trajectory is already pointing in that direction.

Personally, I moved here a few years ago from the east coast and recently had the opportunity to transfer back east or to the bay area. I decided to stay here. I crunched the numbers and decided that I currently enjoy a quality of life here that is essentially unaffordable anywhere in the major coastal metro areas.

Last edited by JuanHamez; 06-04-2013 at 09:36 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2013, 06:40 AM
 
1,593 posts, read 1,828,819 times
Reputation: 3353
Quote:
Originally Posted by fltonc12 View Post
Neither are sleeping though.
Good point really.

Let's put together a list of sleeping cities and decide on the one most likely to wake.

Have we defined the lowest population point? Cities above 100,000?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2013, 07:30 AM
 
Location: Jonesboro
3,266 posts, read 3,246,820 times
Reputation: 3697
Juan
That's an interesting reply to my thoughts on St. Louis. But, I grew up in a neighboring state & thought that St. Louis proper was poised to begin a rebound in the 1960's and I was terribly wrong. St. Louis may indeed have a much better housing stock overall than Detroit but those 2 cities stand out as the 2 worst performers in terms of post WW2 population loss out of all of the formerly largest cities in the U.S. Cleveland would also be right in there pretty close company.
I don't know what it would take to kick start St. Louis proper & it's metro into a higher gear again but it ain't happening now.
The "moderately growing" far western suburban county I referenced is St. Charles County, which you referenced as having rapid growth now. I saw an article online at the St. Louis paper that specifically mentioned the drastic slow down that has even affected the growth in St. Charles County to the point that it is crawling along now. As a result, the metro was up like a thousand or two in population.
On the plus side, the estimate for St. Louis proper was that it was basically flat which is encouraging given the utter collapse in it's post WW2 population history.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2013, 10:29 AM
 
Location: Old Hyde Park, Kansas City,MO
1,145 posts, read 2,077,471 times
Reputation: 565
I think Minneapolis is a Sleeping Giant because it has a pretty large metro population and a great economic base but a lot of people don't really know. People think its a metro on the level of Milwaukee and Kansas City. The Twin Cities have a great economic balance corporation-wise with a mix of Health Care, Banking and some sleeping giant companies like General Mills, 3M, Cargill, and Carlson Companies.

Stereotypes like the weather, the Cohen Brothers who made Fargo and the 4 major sports teams labeled as small market will kind of keep Minneapolis a sleeping giant for many years.

Slow and Steady wins the race; something Minneapolis has been doing that for quite awhile now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2013, 12:56 PM
 
7,238 posts, read 10,893,462 times
Reputation: 5583
Quote:
Originally Posted by JuanHamez View Post
Although the devastation of Detroit and the plight of St. Louis superficially appear to be similar, they actually are incomparable in scale and severity. Detroit, being previously of a much larger population and contained in a larger land area has much larger portions of blight compared to St. Louis. The housing stock of Detroit has been largely of wood construction so that homes became irretrievably damaged after a few decades of abandonment. St. Louis housing stock, being mostly brick and stone housing from the Victorian era, has better "bones" and much of the vacant housing can wait decades and even a century for renovations and still be functional. I live in a 1908 townhome in St. Louis and I could easily see how this place could last for another century. Although vacant lots exist, St. Louis has not undergone the large scale urban demolition that Detroit has because most of its homes are not "too far gone." Given future population growth, most of these homes and neighborhoods can be reoccupied, renovated, and be fully functional for extraordinarily low cost. For example, some homes in my neighborhood that sold for not over a thousand dollars just two decades ago are worth half a million now and this continues to happen neighborhood to neighborhood all over town. St. Louis has a much more diversified economy and unemployment here is almost half that of detroit. There are significant finance, energy, healthcare, R&D, and even media industry in town. If you look at the St. Louis area, downtown has doubled in population over the last few years and redevelopment projects are being announced nearly every week. The largest county, St. Louis County, population has been stable because there is no more land to develop but in the counties further out such as St. Charles, there is still rapid growth.

As for the question of whether St. Louis will ever become a nationally dominant city again, the answer is probably not in our lifetimes unless the 21st century's greatest growth industry is developed in town. Very long term things like sea level rise and the lack of fresh water in the arid west suggest that the midwest should see great population growth in the time span lasting centuries. A thousand years from now when New Orleans is long forgotten and when the bay area and New York City are under the sea, St. Louis might still be here and chugging along. But if the question is whether St. Louis could become a bustling medium size city that people strongly desire to move to for opportunities and a new life (Something like a Boston of the midwest) then yes, that is certainly an achievable goal within a few decades. The trajectory is already pointing in that direction.

Personally, I moved here a few years ago from the east coast and recently had the opportunity to transfer back east or to the bay area. I decided to stay here. I crunched the numbers and decided that I currently enjoy a quality of life here that is essentially unaffordable anywhere in the major coastal metro areas.
Very good post Juan.

Yeah, as bad as Cleveland and St. Louis' decline is, Detroit's decline is in a league if its own
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2013, 07:26 PM
 
Location: northern Vermont - previously NM, WA, & MA
9,425 posts, read 18,324,231 times
Reputation: 11902
I'm going to go out on a limb and say that climate change will exponentially affect the outcome of the census population statistics in 50 years. Some say duh! Some haven't thought about it, and some say that they are lies. Nonetheless there hasn't been a lot of discussion about it in this thread. Cities at or below sea level or cities with water resources drying up will have some very serious challenges in coming decades. I think topographic and geographic stability will play a very large roll in what the boomtowns of the mid to late 21st century will be.

Last edited by Desert_SW_77; 06-05-2013 at 08:04 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2013, 09:46 PM
 
Location: Upper East Side of Texas
12,521 posts, read 23,103,688 times
Reputation: 4890
San Antonio, Texas

It is the 7th largest US city eclipsing San Diego recently & is on track to becoming larger than Phoenix for 6th.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2013, 09:48 PM
 
1,547 posts, read 2,351,264 times
Reputation: 435
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metro Matt View Post
San Antonio, Texas

It is the 7th largest US city eclipsing San Diego recently.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2013, 11:03 PM
 
Location: Charlotte
1,356 posts, read 2,295,213 times
Reputation: 605
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metro Matt View Post
San Antonio, Texas

It is the 7th largest US city eclipsing San Diego recently & is on track to becoming larger than Phoenix for 6th.
Relies too much on tourism. The Orlando of Texas.
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