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.
It's interesting for sure, but it seems to really be capturing growth that's already occurred, not growth that will continue to occur. You can tell because much of the growth still seems focused on metro area's fringe suburbs, which I really don't feel will grow at nearly the same clip as they did in the 1990's and 2000's. Same with cities showing steep declines, like Cleveland, St. Louis, Pittsburgh, and even core Chicago. I think those cities will slow down and stem the decline for the most part, and many will show positive growth again.
It's interesting for sure, but it seems to really be capturing growth that's already occurred, not growth that will continue to occur. You can tell because much of the growth still seems focused on metro area's fringe suburbs, which I really don't feel will grow at nearly the same clip as they did in the 1990's and 2000's. Same with cities showing steep declines, like Cleveland, St. Louis, Pittsburgh, and even core Chicago. I think those cities will slow down and stem the decline for the most part, and many will show positive growth again.
Well the map only shows predicted growth until 2017 -- what you describe may happen but it's likely to happen sometime further down the road. Basically the areas where growth is predicted is those areas where residential development is currently going down.
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.