Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
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 08-14-2021, 11:28 AM
 
Location: Chicago, IL
424 posts, read 465,530 times
Reputation: 662

Advertisements

The results from the 2020 census indicate that New York City grew by roughly 600,000 people, bringing New York City's total population to 8.8 million.


On the other hand, Los Angeles only grew by roughly 100,000 people, bringing LA's population to 3.9 million.


What happened to Los Angeles? 600,000 vs 100,000 people...what did NYC do to attract so many more people? What is LA doing wrong?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-14-2021, 11:37 AM
 
Location: Edmonds, WA
8,975 posts, read 10,203,209 times
Reputation: 14247
Quote:
Originally Posted by sf_arkitect View Post
The results from the 2020 census indicate that New York City grew by roughly 600,000 people, bringing New York City's total population to 8.8 million.


On the other hand, Los Angeles only grew by roughly 100,000 people, bringing LA's population to 3.9 million.


What happened to Los Angeles? 600,000 vs 100,000 people...what did NYC do to attract so many more people? What is LA doing wrong?
My guess is less NIMBYism in New York… they can put up a new residential tower and add thousands of new people fairly quickly, and it’s sorta par for the course for them. LA doesn’t really do that on the same scale. I could be wrong but that’s my educated guess for part of the reason why NYC was able to add so many people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2021, 11:50 AM
 
Location: Bergen County, New Jersey
12,158 posts, read 7,985,265 times
Reputation: 10123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluefox View Post
My guess is less NIMBYism in New York… they can put up a new residential tower and add thousands of new people fairly quickly, and it’s sorta par for the course for them. LA doesn’t really do that on the same scale. I could be wrong but that’s my educated guess for part of the reason why NYC was able to add so many people.
LA also has a lot of tract SFH homes. Harder to change the zoning, whereas in NYC you have swaths of land you can throw up Yuppy Fishtanks or high rises with 1,000+ beds.

I do suspect LA growth to pick up this decade with the Olympics and massive wave of development. NYC will also probably keep up this growth because Queens and Brooklyn have so much.. soo much space to build on. The Bronx is also picking up as well.

NYC
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7498...7i16384!8i8192
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7503...7i16384!8i8192
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7332...7i16384!8i8192
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2021, 01:01 PM
 
1,798 posts, read 1,121,551 times
Reputation: 2479
Quote:
Originally Posted by sf_arkitect View Post
The results from the 2020 census indicate that New York City grew by roughly 600,000 people, bringing New York City's total population to 8.8 million.

What happened to Los Angeles? 600,000 vs 100,000 people...what did NYC do to attract so many more people? What is LA doing wrong?
In general, most of urban Southern California spent the last decade laying the groundwork for high-density development for the next few decades in response to the continued housing affordability crisis-- changes such as upzoning, community plan updates, transit investments, etc.

Expect significant growth in multi-family infill in the 2020s. Speaking for San Diego, the city has recently achieved multiple community plan updates that will support tens of thousands of additional units in each of these communities to allow for high-density infill and retrofitting suburban development patterns. Even smaller suburban municipalities have been actively working to support higher-density developments in their core.

Also, California's environmental laws are unfortunately used to stop urban infill, which ironically leads to suburban sprawl in the Inland Empire and central valley.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2021, 01:07 PM
 
Location: New York, NY
496 posts, read 350,944 times
Reputation: 641
Maybe in general density is conducive to population growth...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-15-2021, 01:40 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles, CA
5,003 posts, read 5,974,451 times
Reputation: 4323
LA is lagging NYC in many areas and this is just one example. And by "lagging" I mean that LA is about 5-7 years behind in building. LA didn't really start to accelerate housing permits until 2013 and then it's a couple years before they actually get built. A 100,000 person increase sounds about right for LA by 2020 and I wouldn't have been shocked had it been 70,000. But I also would be shocked to see another 100,000 by 2023. LA has permitted about 130,000 new units in the last 7 years. If 100,000 of those actually get built by 2023, that's 200,000 more people.


Source: https://www.lamayor.org/expanding-supply-housing
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-16-2021, 10:35 PM
 
Location: Brooklyn the best borough in NYC!
3,559 posts, read 2,396,143 times
Reputation: 2813
These articles from all types of journalist that told us people are fleeing both cities should probably focus on other topics in the next census because it was all BS.


How can a place with a population increase = people fleeing. Even if people are fleeing it’s not fleeing if they are replaced by even more people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-16-2021, 10:44 PM
 
Location: Houston, TX
8,320 posts, read 5,481,561 times
Reputation: 12279
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrooklynJo View Post
These articles from all types of journalist that told us people are fleeing both cities should probably focus on other topics in the next census because it was all BS.


How can a place with a population increase = people fleeing. Even if people are fleeing it’s not fleeing if they are replaced by even more people.
1) One group of people may be leaving while another may be moving in. In LA that is probably happening.

2) Some groups of people can flee a place while others move in. It doesn’t mean no one is fleeing.
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.

© 2005-2024, 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