U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [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 05-24-2016, 07:05 AM
 
5,546 posts, read 5,890,410 times
Reputation: 3795

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by mjtinmemphis View Post
Austin is fun but doesn't feel like it's that big
That's because it's not that big of a city. 270 square miles is a massive land area for a population of that size. 3,358 ppsm is suburban-level density.

That goes for many of the fastest growing cities. It's kind of easy to get a high population and a rapid rate of growth when your boundaries include the suburbs. Not that any of these municipalities are necessarily in competition with other cities on the list. And I'm not saying they're not real cities, they're just smaller than they appear on paper.

If anyone wants to see the truly largest cities, look at a combination of density and city population. A list of the truly largest cities look something like:

NYC
LA
Chicago
Philadelphia
Boston
San Fran
Washington DC
Miami
Seattle
etc.

And they feel and act large when you're in them. Some promote metro area, but there are a ton of metros on the list that include 10,000 square miles. An absurd amount of land.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-24-2016, 07:28 AM
 
Location: Greater Orlampa CSA
4,612 posts, read 3,904,839 times
Reputation: 3326
Forgive me if this has already been said, but some of the cities listed really tend to take away from the meaning of the city pop. rankings, at least IMO.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2016, 07:52 AM
 
Location: Jonesboro
3,644 posts, read 3,702,704 times
Reputation: 4679
Default 2015 City Proper..

That was an interesting contribution which called attention to some of Washington State's typically "over-looked" newer developing urban population centers as well as to Seattle's city proper population surge.
What is particularly remarkable about the huge population gain that Seattle proper has witnessed in recent decades is that it has done it w/out annexation & essentially after prognosticators thought that Seattle had permanently topped out in a population peak at the 1960 census at 530,000.
From the 1960 to the 1980 census, Seattle slid downward by 64,000 that put it under 1/2 million for the 1980 count.
With the decade of the 1980's, Seattle began a population turn-around that has largely been what one would call "infill" in nature and without annexation. As a result, it's density has risen sharply.
Denver can thank it's similar post-1990 population turn around, after it had lost roughly 10 % of it's population during the prior 2 decades, largely to 2 factors. One is due to infill housing & the other is due to a large annexation that was precipitated by the bringing into Denver proper of a huge open & undeveloped land area that brought the future site of the new DIA into it's city limits.
The annexation not only added the airport site into Denver proper but also brought in huge open swaths of land that subsequently have seen massive suburban style developments on a scale that Denver had not experienced since the 1950's.








2014 (98,404)
2010 (90,927)

By 2020 I predict that WA will add another 2 cities to that list making it 10 cities. Those would be Federal Way, WA and Spokane Valley, WA

Federal Way
2015 (95,171)
2014 (93,544)
2010 (89,306)

Spokane Valley
2015 (94,919)
2014 (93,162)
2010 (89,755)

another city that might squeeze in is Yakima
2015 (93,701)
2014 (93,361)
2010 (91,067)

Also Seattle has made some huge strides and it's very possible that by 2020 Seattle will be over 700,000
2015 (684,451)
2014 (669,112)
2010 (608,660)

Denver is also having a similar growth pattern and might even over take Seattle by 2020.
2015 (682,545)
2014 (663,963)
2010 (600,158)[/quote]
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2016, 08:11 AM
 
Location: Louisville
4,422 posts, read 4,235,758 times
Reputation: 7604
Quote:
Originally Posted by AJNEOA View Post

And they feel and act large when you're in them. Some promote metro area, but there are a ton of metros on the list that include 10,000 square miles. An absurd amount of land.
MSA definitely has it's flaws being county based and doesn't always tell the whole story. You have very sprawled MSA's like Atlanta which is roughly spread out over 8,400 sq mi in 28 counties. You also have MSA's like Phoenix which is about 14,500sq mi in 2 counties. Only about 15% of the Phoenix MSA is actually developed, the rest of it is uninhabitable desert. To put it in context the urbanized portion of Phoenix is 4million people in 1220 sq mi. That's basically the equivalent of having 4million people in Rhode Island.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2016, 08:19 AM
 
5,546 posts, read 5,890,410 times
Reputation: 3795
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjlo View Post
MSA definitely has it's flaws being county based and doesn't always tell the whole story. You have very sprawled MSA's like Atlanta which is roughly spread out over 8,400 sq mi in 28 counties. You also have MSA's like Phoenix which is about 14,500sq mi in 2 counties. Only about 15% of the Phoenix MSA is actually developed, the rest of it is uninhabitable desert. To put it in context the urbanized portion of Phoenix is 4million people in 1220 sq mi. That's basically the equivalent of having 4million people in Rhode Island.
Yeah, 3278 ppsm isn't bad for metro area density. And Phoenix's metro area will continue to grow rapidly because of the remaining vacant land that's automatically included.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2016, 10:54 AM
 
Location: Seattle WA, USA
4,776 posts, read 3,050,627 times
Reputation: 3369
Quote:
Originally Posted by atler8 View Post
That was an interesting contribution which called attention to some of Washington State's typically "over-looked" newer developing urban population centers as well as to Seattle's city proper population surge.
What is particularly remarkable about the huge population gain that Seattle proper has witnessed in recent decades is that it has done it w/out annexation & essentially after prognosticators thought that Seattle had permanently topped out in a population peak at the 1960 census at 530,000.
From the 1960 to the 1980 census, Seattle slid downward by 64,000 that put it under 1/2 million for the 1980 count.
With the decade of the 1980's, Seattle began a population turn-around that has largely been what one would call "infill" in nature and without annexation. As a result, it's density has risen sharply.
Denver can thank it's similar post-1990 population turn around, after it had lost roughly 10 % of it's population during the prior 2 decades, largely to 2 factors. One is due to infill housing & the other is due to a large annexation that was precipitated by the bringing into Denver proper of a huge open & undeveloped land area that brought the future site of the new DIA into it's city limits.
The annexation not only added the airport site into Denver proper but also brought in huge open swaths of land that subsequently have seen massive suburban style developments on a scale that Denver had not experienced since the 1950's.
Seattle's density in 2010 was 7264.98/sq mi and no in 2015 it is 8169.6/sq mi.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2016, 12:28 PM
 
Location: The Springs
1,773 posts, read 2,412,702 times
Reputation: 1857
Quote:
Originally Posted by iknowftbll View Post
I think (hopefully) the area is a long way off from functioning as a CSA. There is still a lot of open real estate between the north end of Pueblo and the south end of Colorado Springs. I'd like to see it stay that way. In Colorado Springs' case it would probably be helpful if the population growth slowed a little.

I definitely agree with you that these cities will always be in Denver's shadow. But there's nothing wrong with that. If Colorado Springs grew to the size of Denver they'd overlap and be one continuous metropolitan mess. I'm not anti growth (I know it may sound like it on this post) I'd just rather not see the Front Range become one massive city. Colorado Springs can forge a great identity as a smaller, cleaner alternative to Denver. It has a great setting, a downtown loaded with potential (mostly untapped as of now) and the population base to be an attractive draw to a variety of businesses.

Pueblo's growth is pretty slow, but it is still at a higher population than ever before, so that is a positive. When I last lived in Colorado Pueblo was beginning to show some signs of life with the river walk downtown. Of course, it takes more than a river walk to make a place worthwhile, but it's a critical step in the right direction. Seems a lot of street fairs are centered in that part of town: a definite positive. The place has come a long way since the late 1990s, that's for sure. Pueblo was just a big Trinidad back then. (If you're a Colorado guy you know that's about as severe an insult as you can dish out.) It really has come a long way in the last 15 years.
Agree with your assessment overall. COS/PUB may eventually become a CSA, but not in my lifetime. The region is a DMA currently.

We could end up as the Inland Empire of Colorado as Denver's growth is double that of the Springs. People are moving to the north part of town/Tri Lakes area and commuting to the DTC because of the high housing prices up north. Ironically, some are living in Pueblo and working in the Springs for the same reason. A $750k home in Denver is a $375k home here and $200k in Pueblo.

Our ongoing issue is we don't have a diversified economy and can't retain highly educated young professionals and entrepreneurs. Much of our growth is still coming service-based industries such as call centers and active/retired military.

We'll continue to grow, but I think more slowly than in the past.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2016, 12:37 PM
 
Location: Alexandria, Commonwealth of Virginia
2,217 posts, read 1,609,002 times
Reputation: 3030
Using the new 2015 Census estimates, here are the 2020 Projections for Florida's 22 Cities over 100k (assuming aggregate growth is constant from 2010-2015 levels)



The top 6 will stay largely the same: Jacksonville, Miami, Tampa, Orlando, Saint Petersburg, Hialeah.

After that, there will be battle royale for #7 b/w Cape Coral, Fort Lauderdale, Port Saint Lucie and Tallahassee. In the end Cape Coral will likely win.

Cape Coral Population Growth
1960: 0
1970: 10,193
1980: 32,103
1990: 74,991
2000: 102,286
2010: 154,305
2020 Est: 194,160
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2016, 12:50 PM
 
Location: Scary dark alleyways
21 posts, read 16,770 times
Reputation: 24
Within 15 years I see Houston proper overtaking Chicago proper in city Population. BIG DADDY meets Chicago transplants everywhere he goes.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2016, 12:54 PM
 
Location: The City
22,402 posts, read 34,288,453 times
Reputation: 7845
Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG-DADDY View Post
Within 15 years I see Houston proper overtaking Chicago proper in city Population. BIG DADDY meets Chicago transplants everywhere he goes.


it would be far more impressive if Harris county overtook Cook county in population given the vastly different sized cities, at least they are more comparable land area wise (counties I mean)
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:

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. > City vs. City

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2021, 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