Census Results! (St. Paul, Rochester, Brooklyn Park: appointed, neighborhoods, schools)

[knke0204]

Originally Posted by City Data Guy

It's rural flight. People are moving away from rural areas to urban areas. I think a majority of the human population lives in cities now, too. I looked at the population growth for counties in Kansas, and I noticed that almost all the rural counties with small populations declined while the urban eastern counties gained population.

Cool stat. In 1920 25% of Americans lived and worked on Farms. That number is around 2% now.

[knke0204]

Originally Posted by kazoopilot

Do you guys think Rochester will eventually pass St. Paul in population? I know it won't happen any time soon, but with the way things are going it could happen in 40 or 50 years.

I could see that. Rochester still has plenty of room to grow, and is a very attractive community. Another housing and job boom, it could happen. Look at Sioux Falls, SD....

I think it's interesting at how big St. Cloud is. I lived there, so I have an idea as to how big it is, but I don't understand why people always compare the area to Mankato. St. Cloud is now twice the size of Mankato, not sure why they draw comparisons. Duluth only has 20,000 more residents than St. Cloud. However Duluth seems like a much, much, much bigger town than St. Cloud. Maybe it's the regional independence Duluth has, or maybe those 20,000 really make a difference.

[Kebinminn]

Originally Posted by kazoopilot

It's sad how the entire western and southwestern sections of Minnesota lost population, except for Lyon, Clay and Nobles counties. It just mirrors the growing trend of rural flight across the Great Plains. The only places in that part of the state that grew were Marshall, Moorhead and Worthington. The non-Plains rural areas of Minnesota mostly saw population increases. Why do people hate the prairie so much?

I used to live in south central MN and we have family in western MN.

There's not a lot of opportunity in that area so people leave and there's not much to bring new people in.

[1stpontiac]

Another factor is the rural-to-urban shift is that now many families are looking for two career opportunities. Its one thing to imagine moving to a small town with a single manufacturing plant if Dad is an engineer and mom is going to stay at home or work as a bank teller. But if Dad is an engineer and Mom is a biologist, you're almost automatically looking at more urban areas. This certainly applies to my wife and I.

Possibly another factor is the increased rate of changing jobs. You are probably less likely to move to a one-company-town if most people change jobs within 5 years, versus if people stayed with one job/company for 30 years.

[knke0204]

Some things that jump out to me is how huge the suburbs are! Nothing like LA or TX suburbs, but still pretty impressive...

Woodbury is quite surprising too, with 61,000 slipping into the top ten. Woodbury still has A LOT of open space and room to grow. I could Definitely see Woodbury passing 100,000 some time in the next 25 years.

The top 25 is littered with Suburbs. That's something that hurts MN, imo. I wish that MN was more of a balanced state with bigger communites outside of the metro, like Wisconsin's towns.

Shakopee is pretty interesting, growing 17,000 to 37,000

1 Minneapolis 382,578
2 St. Paul 285,068
3 Rochester 106,769
4 Duluth 86,265
5 Bloomington 82,893
6 Brooklyn Park 75,781
7 Plymouth 70,576
8 St. Cloud 65,842
9 Eagan 64,206
10 Woodbury 61,961
11 Maple Grove 61,567
12 Coon Rapids 61,476
13 Eden Prairie 60,797
14 Burnsville 60,306
15 Blaine 57,186
16 Lakeville 55,954
17 Minnetonka 49,734
18 Apple Valley 49,084
19 Edina 47,941
20 St. Louis Park 45,250
21 Mankato 39,309
22 Moorhead 38,065
23 Maplewood 38,018
24 Shakopee 37,076
25 Richfield 35,228

[west336]

I thought Shakopee was in the 20's in 2000? Also, they were expecting Shakopee to grow to about 45K to 50K by 2010, so this is actually a SHORTFALL based on their 2000 projections. I know they had a building moratorium for a year or two while the city was trying to catch up with the infrastructure demand, so maybe that hindered it, as well as the housing bust/recession, obviously. I can easily see Shakopee doubling in size in 15-20 years as long as it continues to be a working class destination for the Twin Cities, somewhat unique IMO for outlying suburbs.

[northstar22]

St. Cloud's growth is pretty much because it's becoming a suburb of the Cities. It's only about 20 miles from the Rogers/Otsego/Elk River/Dayton area, and a lot of people commute from STC to the NW burbs for work.

Mankato doesn't really have an equivalent in Minnesota, maybe Marshall. Moorhead is the same size, but is also a suburb -- of Fargo.

[srsmn]

Originally Posted by City Data Guy

I never said it like that. O_O Burnsville is a nice suburb, so I'm wondering why would over 7,000 people move away? I think that's a lot for a city its size.

Oh, sorry. I misread you then.

I don't know. Foreclosures? People bit off more than they could chew, I bet, and had to move places cheaper.

Inner ring suburbs and the core cities (where presumably property values are pretty low) remained stable, so that may be part of it, right there...

[Globe199]

Originally Posted by west336

I thought Shakopee was in the 20's in 2000? Also, they were expecting Shakopee to grow to about 45K to 50K by 2010, so this is actually a SHORTFALL based on their 2000 projections. I know they had a building moratorium for a year or two while the city was trying to catch up with the infrastructure demand, so maybe that hindered it, as well as the housing bust/recession, obviously. I can easily see Shakopee doubling in size in 15-20 years as long as it continues to be a working class destination for the Twin Cities, somewhat unique IMO for outlying suburbs.

I'd like to see Shakopee's growth year-by-year. I imagine 90% of the boom came in the first half of the decade. The property values there have fallen off a cliff, partially because of the housing bubble, but also because they WAY overbuilt. Look at the endless supply of townhomes along Hwy 169. I think being on the wrong side of the river hurts them too. The commutes are probably awful.

My friend bought a house in Shakopee for $255k back in 2004. He'd be lucky to get $200k now.

[audadvnc]

My parents bought a house in New Jersey for $20K back in 1964. They'd be lucky to get $750K for it now... same house, different year.