U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Minnesota > Minneapolis - St. Paul
 [Register]
Minneapolis - St. Paul Twin Cities
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 06-26-2012, 08:21 PM
 
1,807 posts, read 2,897,535 times
Reputation: 1511

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cruz Azul Guy View Post
Interesting find, this certainly disproves my theory that the zoning for freeways resulted in a decreased number of total housing units in the city and strongly supports the argument that the population loss was caused by a steady decrease in average houshold size in the last 60 years.
I don't know if it necessarily *disproves* your theory-- hundreds of people (at least) would have been displaced by 94. But the decrease in household size is certainly a larger factor.

This is general nationwide when you compare 1950's populations to today's. Cities stopped being attractive to families; suburbs became more attractive to families. Cities became more attractive to young people/young professionals. Couple that with the fact that family sizes nationwide are down because people are having fewer kids, and you get your explanation in a nutshell.

Also bear in mind: re-zoning. There's a lot of commercial space in Minneapolis that was once residential.

Also, also bear in mind: foreclosure/urban prairie. Just because you see a housing unit doesn't mean it's fit to occupy. And there are a few pockets where residential properties have sat in foreclosure for so long that they've simply been torn down, particularly on the Northside.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-27-2012, 05:05 AM
 
20,793 posts, read 58,812,200 times
Reputation: 10671
There were 155,155 households in Minneapolis in 2008. In the 50's, having 4 kids was pretty common and probably close to average, now, that number is 2, that is 300,000 fewer kids in Minneapolis also just based on average household size. That pretty much explains the drop in numbers.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-28-2012, 08:57 PM
 
Location: Minneapolis, MN
10,244 posts, read 15,245,934 times
Reputation: 5283
Quote:
Originally Posted by srsmn View Post
I don't know if it necessarily *disproves* your theory-- hundreds of people (at least) would have been displaced by 94. But the decrease in household size is certainly a larger factor.
Yeah, of course it had some kind of impact but the steady decrease of average houshold size is a far more significant factor. This is explained more if you read the entire article, located here:
Holy numbers, holy grail « Getting Around Minneapolis

Specifically, this data:
Year___All Dwelling Units___Population___Avg Houshold Size
1950___161974___________521,7156____3.08
1960___173155___________482,872_____2.8
1970___167196___________434,400______2.58
1980___168828___________370,951______2.19
1990___172666___________368,383_____2.19
2000___168606___________382,747_____2.25
2010___178287___________382,578_____2.23
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-28-2012, 09:45 PM
 
1,807 posts, read 2,897,535 times
Reputation: 1511
I read that article some time ago.

Did you notice the slight increase in household size between 1980 and now? New immigrant groups, typically with large families. Minneapolis is somewhere around 15% foreign-born at this point, and that population is incredibly young-- high schools are shutting down while elementary schools are expanding.

St. Paul even more so, I believe. I think St. Paul Public Schools surpassed Minneapolis as the largest in the state in student body population (Unless Anoka-Hennepin is bigger?).

The metropolitan area will be about 40% minority (comparable to the core cities now) by 2030. My gut instinct is that the core cities will be over around 20% foreign-born and probably 50% minority by that time. That might even be conservative.

Those populations are *great* for the sustainability of the cities and their populations, which we are in desperate need of. Albeit, more people, younger people, higher-need people (recent immigrants, English Language Learners) are a bit of a strain on the infrastructure. But in the long run, the diversity is very, very good.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2012, 04:55 AM
 
Location: Nesconset, NY
2,202 posts, read 4,064,851 times
Reputation: 2153
Quote:
Originally Posted by Milesperhour View Post
I haven't been able to figure out why the rental vacancy rate in Minneapolis is so low. If Minneapolis' population has shrunk since 1950 when we hit 521,000, and then stabilized in the last decade, how can the city be so full up? Is it the ratio of owners to renters? Someone help me out here.
You seem to assume there are fewer people but everything else (# of renters & # of rental units) stayed the same. What if there are fewer people, fewer rental units, and more renters?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2012, 11:09 AM
 
10,629 posts, read 25,549,624 times
Reputation: 6756
Quote:
Originally Posted by LIGuy1202 View Post
You seem to assume there are fewer people but everything else (# of renters & # of rental units) stayed the same. What if there are fewer people, fewer rental units, and more renters?
Great point. I think this makes tremendous sense, and it would be fascinating to see what the actual numbers look like over the years.

Obviously there's been big changes over the decades (lots of houses and apartments lost, but also lots of higher-density buildings, both rental and condo, added in locations like Loring Park, on both sides of the river, etc.; older one-time single family houses in dense neighborhoods like the Wedge and Whittier razed and replaced with apartment buildings or converted into duplexes or triplexes, etc.). And it was fairly recently -- maybe past 10 years or so? -- that the concept of condos really exploded in Minneapolis. Certainly in some neighborhoods (like Uptown) a LOT of apartments were turned into condos in a fairly short time, some of which are still available as rentals (by owner), some of which are not. Those are also neighborhoods that are often popular with renters, including both renters who can't afford to buy as well as those who simply prefer not to do so.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2012, 08:13 PM
 
1,080 posts, read 2,164,431 times
Reputation: 597
More yuppies + More students + More hipsters + More empty nesters + Less Large families = Smaller population with no decrease in housing demand.

In think this has been sufficiently explained.
Rate this post positively 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:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 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 > Minnesota > Minneapolis - St. Paul
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:08 AM.

© 2005-2022, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top