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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-19-2019, 07:47 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
87,207 posts, read 103,193,714 times
Reputation: 33257

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by eschaton View Post
Denver is in a somewhat unique circumstance, being a consolidated city-county. The city can't expand unless the county expands. A better example would be the growth of a suburban city like Aurora due to repeated municipal annexations. Aurora was planning one such annexation of 51 square miles of Arapahoe County earlier this decade.

My general impression is in states where unincorporated county land exists (basically, when there is land within a county not part of any city, town, civil township, or borough) it is relatively easy for municipalities to annex unincorporated county land provided the property owner okays it. This typically means land will be annexed prior to development, because a property owner wants to have coverage by things such as city water and trash pickup, which will help make the new subdivision/office park/industrial park (or whatever) more marketable. Of course the details of this vary considerably from state to state however.
Your interpretation is incorrect. Here is a very brief but concise description of the Poundstone Amendment that changed the way Denver could do its annexations.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poundstone_Amendment There is much more, but if I say too much about Denver, everyone jumps my case.

Part of Aurora is in Arapahoe County - all of the city south of Colfax Avenue. There has been talk of Aurora, which is part of two counties, the northern portion being in Adams County, combining into a city/county like Broomfield did in 2001. Not sure what your point is.

What large city has undeveloped land right outside its boundaries?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-20-2019, 10:24 AM
 
249 posts, read 125,250 times
Reputation: 302
Quote:
What large city has undeveloped land right outside its boundaries?
Well, "large" might be questioned, but OKC, Tulsa, Jacksonville and similar cities have empty land around them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-20-2019, 01:16 PM
 
Location: North Beach, MD on the Chesapeake
34,111 posts, read 42,558,896 times
Reputation: 43625
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteelCityRising View Post
I've done some more analysis below on a "City vs. City" sub-forum thread using the most recently-available population estimates for each jurisdiction.

This varies because for some reason the U.S. Census Bureau ignores doing annual population estimates for PA's townships the way it does for its boroughs and cities.

Here's how we'd look if we just annexed the municipalities contiguous with the current city limits (including water boundaries):

Pittsburgh 2018 Estimated Population: 301,048 in 55.38 square miles (5,436/square mile)
Penn Hills Township 2017 ACS Estimated Population: 41,838 in 19.12 square miles (2,188/square mile)
Mount Lebanon Township 2017 ACS Estimated Population: 32,760 in 6.08 square miles (5,388/square mile)
Ross Township 2017 ACS Estimated Population: 30,869 in 14.47 square miles (2,133/square mile)
Shaler Township 2017 ACS Estimated Population: 28,481 in 11.07 square miles (2,573/square mile)
West Mifflin 2018 Estimated Population: 19,703 in 14.21 square miles (1,387/square mile)
Baldwin 2018 Estimated Population: 19,464 in 5.77 square miles (3,373/square mile)
Scott Township 2017 ACS Estimated Population: 16,847 in 3.91 square miles (4,309/square mile)
Wilkinsburg 2018 Estimated Population: 15,448 in 2.25 square miles (6,866/square mile)
Robinson Township 2017 ACS Estimated Population: 13,657 in 15.22 square miles (897/square mile)
Whitehall 2018 Estimated Population: 13,648 in 3.33 square miles (4,098/square mile)
Munhall 2018 Estimated Population: 11,081 in 2.30 square miles (4,818/square mile)
Brentwood 2018 Estimated Population: 9,329 in 1.45 square miles (6,434/square mile)
O'Hara Township 2017 ACS Estimated Population: 8,809 in 7.02 square miles (1,255/square mile)
Swissvale 2018 Estimated Population: 8,689 in 1.20 square miles (7,241/square mile)
Dormont 2018 Estimated Population: 8,319 in 0.76 square miles (10,946/square mile)
Castle Shannon 2018 Estimated Population: 8,255 in 1.60 square miles (5,159/square mile)
Bellevue 2018 Estimated Population: 8,097 in 1.01 square miles (8,017/square mile)
Kennedy Township 2017 ACS Estimated Population: 8,058 in 5.48 square miles (1,470/square mile)
Carnegie 2018 Estimated Population: 7,844 in 1.62 square miles (4,842/square mile)
Stowe Township 2017 ACS Estimated Population: 6,282 in 1.98 square miles (3,173/square mile)
McKees Rocks 2018 Estimated Population: 5,885 in 1.06 square miles (5,552/square mile)
Crafton 2018 Estimated Population: 5,763 in 1.14 square miles (5,055/square mile)
Green Tree 2018 Estimated Population: 4,854 in 2.08 square miles (2,334/square mile)
Millvale 2018 Estimated Population: 3,593 in 0.62 square miles (5,795/square mile)
Etna 2018 Estimated Population: 3,338 in 0.73 square miles (4,573/square mile)
Sharpsburg 2018 Estimated Population: 3,337 in 0.48 square miles (6,952/square mile)
Reserve Township 2017 ACS Estimated Population: 3,300 in 2.06 square miles (1,602/square mile)
Mount Oliver 2018 Estimated Population: 3,293 in 0.34 square miles (9,685/square mile)
Ingram 2018 Estimated Population: 3,225 in 0.43 square miles (7,500/square mile)
Homestead 2018 Estimated Population: 3,138 in 0.57 square miles (5,505/square mile)
Edgewood 2018 Estimated Population: 3,012 in 0.59 square miles (5,105/square mile)
Aspinwall 2018 Estimated Population: 2,712 in 0.35 square miles (7,749/square mile)
Baldwin Township 2017 ACS Estimated Population: 2,039 in 0.51 square miles (3,998/square mile)
West Homestead 2018 Estimated Population: 1,881 in 0.92 square miles (2,045/square mile)
Thornburg 2018 Estimated Population: 440 in 0.43 square miles (1,023/square mile)
Rosslyn Farms 2018 Estimated Population: 415 in 0.56 square miles (741/square mile)

"New Pittsburgh": 668,751 in 188.10 square land miles (3,555/square mile)

^ That's a pitiful population density, especially considering I only used LAND square mileage in all of these calculations. I mean "New Pittsburgh" would also have a lot of ravines and rugged terrain that could not be developed; however, even accounting for that we might be able to "cheat" our way up to 4,000/square mile population density. That 668,751 figure is roughly half of the 2018 estimated population of 1,218,452 for Allegheny County overall. The majority of the above municipalities are declining in population, too, which means that density would only be decreasing.


Pittsburgh, at an estimated population of 301,048 in 2018, is currently estimated to be the nation's 66th-largest city.

New Pittsburgh, at an estimated population of 668,751 in 2018, would be the nation's 25th-largest city---a smidge below Nashville and a bit above Portland, OR.

For comparison purposes Nashville houses an estimated 669,053 (2018) within 473.3 square miles of land (1,414/square mile) (This seems incorrect, to me, as Nashville is supposedly this poster child of new urbanism, no?)

For comparison purposes Portland houses an estimated 653,115 (2018) within 133 square miles of land (4,911/square mile)


P.S. This analysis was done just for "fun" (yes, we nerds find this amusing!) I mean I know if Pittsburgh tried to gobble up Etna tyovan4 would be running up and down Grant Street with a protest sign.

I wish Pittsburgh could even just annex the "struggling" suburbs---Wilkinsburg and Mt. Oliver---both of which would greatly benefit from being part of the city. Most of these other suburban jurisdictions seem to be able to handle themselves well, despite their declining populations.
Why on God's green Earth would a Pittsburgh, which most of you on here describe as struggling or at least being on the bubble of it, want to annex other struggling jurisdictions?

That's across the board from municipal government to schools to services.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-20-2019, 01:54 PM
gg
 
Location: Pittsburgh
18,040 posts, read 18,411,703 times
Reputation: 11549
Quote:
Originally Posted by North Beach Person View Post
Why on God's green Earth would a Pittsburgh, which most of you on here describe as struggling or at least being on the bubble of it, want to annex other struggling jurisdictions?

That's across the board from municipal government to schools to services.
Wilkinsburg would take off like gangbusters if it was part of Pittsburgh. Great for all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-20-2019, 03:07 PM
 
Location: Pittsburgh, PA (lovely hills but no ocean...)
1,188 posts, read 636,213 times
Reputation: 1339
Quote:
Originally Posted by gg View Post
Wilkinsburg would take off like gangbusters if it was part of Pittsburgh. Great for all.
What justifies Wilkinsburg's currently obscene taxes?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-20-2019, 03:15 PM
gg
 
Location: Pittsburgh
18,040 posts, read 18,411,703 times
Reputation: 11549
Quote:
Originally Posted by zalewskimm View Post
What justifies Wilkinsburg's currently obscene taxes?
Dirt cheap assessments. No money.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-21-2019, 06:08 AM
 
Location: Pittsburgh, PA (Morningside)
12,553 posts, read 12,087,031 times
Reputation: 10638
Quote:
Originally Posted by gg View Post
Dirt cheap assessments. No money.
Yeah. It's the typical spiral that overwhelmingly poor small cities just outside of big cities get into. They're reliant upon property taxes to stay afloat, but don't have any major commercial/industrial taxpayers, and lack enough wealthy neighborhoods (Wilkinsburg has a few, which puts it above Camden or East St. Louis). Thus property taxes are continually raised in order to avoid insolvency, which in turn means that property values become more depressed, which causes there to be further need to raise property taxes.

Going into Pittsburgh - and especially PPS - would make a big difference for Wilkinsburg. Pittsburgh is more reliant upon income taxes than property taxes, which means property taxes are lower than in most suburbs, and that the city inadvertently subsidizes major property owners who don't pay personal income tax (like businesses). Operating under this tag regimen would make it feasible to invest in real estate in Wilkinsburg, along with open new businesses there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-21-2019, 07:33 AM
 
Location: Great White North Hills
11,406 posts, read 14,305,479 times
Reputation: 9074
Quote:
Originally Posted by zalewskimm View Post
What justifies Wilkinsburg's currently obscene taxes?

Value of homes is low, so millage has to be high.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-21-2019, 08:17 AM
gg
 
Location: Pittsburgh
18,040 posts, read 18,411,703 times
Reputation: 11549
Quote:
Originally Posted by eschaton View Post
Yeah. It's the typical spiral that overwhelmingly poor small cities just outside of big cities get into. They're reliant upon property taxes to stay afloat, but don't have any major commercial/industrial taxpayers, and lack enough wealthy neighborhoods (Wilkinsburg has a few, which puts it above Camden or East St. Louis). Thus property taxes are continually raised in order to avoid insolvency, which in turn means that property values become more depressed, which causes there to be further need to raise property taxes.

Going into Pittsburgh - and especially PPS - would make a big difference for Wilkinsburg. Pittsburgh is more reliant upon income taxes than property taxes, which means property taxes are lower than in most suburbs, and that the city inadvertently subsidizes major property owners who don't pay personal income tax (like businesses). Operating under this tag regimen would make it feasible to invest in real estate in Wilkinsburg, along with open new businesses there.
I thought they were going to pps already?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-21-2019, 10:36 AM
 
Location: Pittsburgh, PA (Morningside)
12,553 posts, read 12,087,031 times
Reputation: 10638
Quote:
Originally Posted by gg View Post
I thought they were going to pps already?
Wilkinsburg SD still exists, they just closed their high school and pay PPS a flat fee to send high-school age kids to Westinghouse.
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

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 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
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