Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Pennsylvania > Pittsburgh
 [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 08-24-2016, 01:41 PM
 
Location: Pittsburgh
6,782 posts, read 9,536,279 times
Reputation: 10246

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Katarina Witt View Post
That doesn't make sense to me. Omaha is newer, should have more people in the burbs. But it doesn't. Pittsburgh is at about 1/8.
It makes complete sense because it is effectively impossible for Pittsburgh to have grown (in territory) during the period when automobile-based suburbanization happened.

Last edited by Moby Hick; 08-24-2016 at 01:45 PM.. Reason: added parenthetical clarification
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-24-2016, 01:56 PM
 
Location: Pittsburgh, PA (Morningside)
14,361 posts, read 16,894,348 times
Reputation: 12390
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moby Hick View Post
It was indeed a different era. For example, when Pittsburgh last annexed another city, the automobile was a novelty. That's why Omaha has a metro area where the about half of the people in the metro area live in the city and Pittsburgh is under 1/5th.
Pittsburgh continued to annex small amounts of land through the mid 1950s, but all the major neighborhoods were annexed by 1925 or so, IIRC.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2016, 02:30 PM
 
5,110 posts, read 7,112,966 times
Reputation: 3116
Omaha is newer and the city has large land boundaries which is why its % of metro population is so high.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2016, 02:34 PM
 
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
6,327 posts, read 9,106,926 times
Reputation: 4048
Quote:
Originally Posted by eschaton View Post
Pittsburgh continued to annex small amounts of land through the mid 1950s, but all the major neighborhoods were annexed by 1925 or so, IIRC.
I believe that's correct too. I know Carrick was one of the last big neighborhood annexes made and that was in the late 20's.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2016, 02:52 PM
 
2,269 posts, read 3,779,955 times
Reputation: 2133
Quote:
Originally Posted by bradjl2009 View Post
I believe that's correct too. I know Carrick was one of the last big neighborhood annexes made and that was in the late 20's.
Carrick, Knoxville, and St. Clair Borough, all around 1926-27. It was the costs of laying sewer lines that drove them to ask the city for relief.

As for mergers in the Midwest, both Indy, and Columbus absorbed most of Marion, and Franklin counties in the 1970s.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2016, 03:03 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
90,316 posts, read 120,259,082 times
Reputation: 35920
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeP View Post
Omaha is newer and the city has large land boundaries which is why its % of metro population is so high.
Do follow along. They're the poster child for rapacious annexation of land.

Omaha is newer, yes, but not as much as you might think. Pittsburgh was founded in 1758. Omaha July 4, 1854. 96 years younger, but still well before the auto. By 1940, prior to near-universal auto ownership, it had 223,844 people.

Last edited by Katarina Witt; 08-24-2016 at 03:12 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2016, 05:58 PM
 
5,110 posts, read 7,112,966 times
Reputation: 3116
Quote:
Do follow along.
What are you even referring to?

Quote:
They're the poster child for rapacious annexation of land.
Yes, but that it's irrelevant. Stats were brought up about city as a % of metro population.

Quote:
Omaha is newer, yes, but not as much as you might think. Pittsburgh was founded in 1758. Omaha July 4, 1854. 96 years younger, but still well before the auto. By 1940, prior to near-universal auto ownership, it had 223,844 people.
I was not referring to its technical age, but its growth pattern age dynamic.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2016, 06:17 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
90,316 posts, read 120,259,082 times
Reputation: 35920
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeP View Post
What are you even referring to?



Yes, but that it's irrelevant. Stats were brought up about city as a % of metro population.



I was not referring to its technical age, but its growth pattern age dynamic.
I was referring to the fact that it has large land boundaries b/c it has annexed a lot of land, whole towns actually.

We're not arguing stats, in fact, I couldn't tell you what we're arguing except the incessant whine that Pittsburgh is hemmed in and can't grow (which is untrue) while every other city in the country west of the Indiana-Ohio state line, apparently, can annex at will, which is also untrue. Pittsburgh did annex, as shown, into the 1950s.

Gee mom, all the other states have these laws that just let the alpha city annex all the land it can, and we can't do that! Even ******** limits ***** to ******* County. An amendment to the ******** constitution has made it very difficult for ****** to annex land. Annexing the land for a new airport required a vote of both the annexing county and the county wishing to annex. Virtually no land, save for the airport has been annexed since that amendment was passed in 1974. But all the other states, mom!

And if I posted anything about O****'s growth dynamic, it wouldn't be that either, it would be something else.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2016, 07:35 PM
 
Location: Delaware, OH
38 posts, read 53,025 times
Reputation: 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katarina Witt View Post
I was referring to the fact that it has large land boundaries b/c it has annexed a lot of land, whole towns actually.

We're not arguing stats, in fact, I couldn't tell you what we're arguing except the incessant whine that Pittsburgh is hemmed in and can't grow (which is untrue) while every other city in the country west of the Indiana-Ohio state line, apparently, can annex at will, which is also untrue. Pittsburgh did annex, as shown, into the 1950s.

Gee mom, all the other states have these laws that just let the alpha city annex all the land it can, and we can't do that! Even ******** limits ***** to ******* County. An amendment to the ******** constitution has made it very difficult for ****** to annex land. Annexing the land for a new airport required a vote of both the annexing county and the county wishing to annex. Virtually no land, save for the airport has been annexed since that amendment was passed in 1974. But all the other states, mom!

And if I posted anything about O****'s growth dynamic, it wouldn't be that either, it would be something else.
I think I understand the thinking on this board. According to the Pittsburgh posters any city experiencing growth is nothing but a big new suburb with no character. Pretty much a lame argument that holds no water. Then there is the argument about how dense the city limits are and somehow it makes Pittsburgh superior to other cities experiencing growth. I didn't realize living on top of each other in stick built row houses is how most of America wants to live. Apparently if you don't live in that dense of an environment you aren't a real city.

You bring up up some very good points about merging. Dating back to the 1930s till present day plenty of studies have been done on Pittsburgh annexing. Those studies 80 years ago said the same thing as mid 2000s. The only way Pittsburgh can grow is by annexation. If Pittsburgh merged with allegheny county it would be a a city of 1.2 million. However the density and character arguments would be less so than they already are. A good part of allegheny county is cookie cutter ranch houses with new developments on the outskirts. The population density of the new Pittsburgh would drop from 5,000 persons a sq mile to 1,700. Pittsburgh would then be the least dense city over 1 million people in the country.

Interestingly enough Pittsburgh stopped growing in the 1930s. The population growth was 0 from 1930 to 1950 where the last annexations padded numbers from the population losses starting 20 years earlier. That doesn't matter because that was forgotten or not known by current posters

Pittsburgh studied the consolidation of Louisville my with surrounding Jefferson county. This was back in the early 2000s. The study said Pittsburgh should do it.

Again Denver, Columbus, Charlotte, Raleigh, Houston and Dallas ft work are cities that are below Pittsburgh. They aren't real cities because they are just one big new growing cooking cutter suburb. In the end that is what matters. Not the fact it is growing and has jobs with good wages.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2016, 08:50 PM
 
8,090 posts, read 6,905,336 times
Reputation: 9225
Quote:
Originally Posted by Delco21 View Post

Again Denver, Columbus, Charlotte, Raleigh, Houston and Dallas ft work are cities that are below Pittsburgh. They aren't real cities because they are just one big new growing cooking cutter suburb. In the end that is what matters. Not the fact it is growing and has jobs with good wages.
LOL. Columbus and Raleigh to not belong in the discussion with those other cities, and no one claimed Pittsburgh was on the same tier as Dallas or Houston. FWIW, Denver falls somewhere between Dallas/Houston and Pittsburgh.

In the meantime, enjoy whichever employment center you've chosen to call home.
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 > Pennsylvania > Pittsburgh

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, 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