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.
I know that people are moving out of michigan rapidly and esp. places like Flint and Detroit, but I highly doubt Detroit has lost 150,000 plus since the 2008 estimate.
I would say city proper will be somewhere in the area of 820,000 to 880,000.
The 2008 estimate for Detroit, which was 912,000. Was very generous and not reality in my opinion.
In 2000, Detroit's population was at 951,000. I remember reading a Free Press article about 6 or so months ago saying that about 100,000 Detroiter's in the last decade had moved from the city to the suburbs for better schools and other reasons. Plus, who knows who many others didn't move to the suburbs but out of the metropolitan area altogether.
In 2000, Detroit Public Schools had approx. 145,000 students enrolled in the district. In 2006, 117,000. And in 2009, 88,000. Where could all those students be going?
I could change my estimate to ~800,000, but that's as high as I'm going to go. Detroit's condition does lead me to believe anything else.
Longmont, Colorado
Current city pop: ~85,000
Metro (Boulder County): ~280,000
Estimates:
City: 90,000-95,000
Metro: 325,000
Border Changes: I think Longmont will incorperate more land north of Highway 66 (our current north border) as well as more land to the east and the south.
I was thinking the same thing. San Jose is LARGER than San Francisco, no?
Yeah, by 200,000 or so people. To be fair, SF was much larger than San Jose for a really long time (SJ passed SF in population in 1990 i think), and SJ hasn't been all that well known nationally as a big "real" city in it's own right until pretty recently in my opinion. I think a lot people are pretty ignorant of SJ, and just assume that it's basically a gigantic suburb (and i can see how it might be easy to think that if you're don't know much about SJ, and get fooled by downtown's height limits, and the low density of many of it's neighborhoods). Also, SF and SJ are both the Bay Area...which technically is the "San Francisco" Bay Area, and SF is still much more well known than SJ. It's annoying to hear SJ called "SF" or if the opposite were to happen, or whatever, but it is understandable coming from a visitor. Not many metros can claim such a unique layout as the Bay Area, as well as claim 3 major cities...i mean there isn't even really one core city of the bay Area. The core is more or less the development that lines the bay, from SF to SJ, and back up to Oakland and Richmond, etc, with the suburbs radiating out from there, rather than the typical layout of one core city (or maybe two neighboring core cities) with surrounding suburbs...The Bay Area is definitely a confusing place to a lot of people.
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.
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.
Houston?
