PA City/Borough Population Estimates (2017) (Philadelphia, Pittsburgh: apartment complexes, condos, violent crime)

[g500]

Below are population estimates for the largest 20 PA cities. Estimates are for cities only (even though the title says Borough). The second column is the Original 2016 data.

...City Name...........2010.............2016(Original).... ....2017(New)..........Net Change 16-17

1. Philadelphia....1,526,006..........1,567,872...... ........1,580,863.............+12,991
2. Pittsburgh.........305,704.............303,625.... ............302,407................-1,218
3. Allentown .........118,032.............120,443.............. ..121,283.................+840
4. Erie..................101,786...............98,593 ..................97,369...............-1,224
5. Reading..............88,082...............87,575.. ................88,423.................+848

6. Scranton..........76,089..................77,291.. ................77,605................+314
7. Bethlehem........74,982................ 75,293....................75,707..............+414
8. Lancaster..........59,322.................59,218.. .................59,708................+490
9. Harrisburg........49,528.................48,904... ................49,192................+288
10. York...............43,718.................43,859.. .................44,132................+273

11. Altoona...........46,320................44,589.... ................44,098.................-491
12. Wilkes-Barre....41,498................40,569............. .......40,806...............+237
13. Chester...........33,972................33,988.... ................34,077.................+89
14. Williamsport ....29,381...............28,834................... .28,462.................-372
15. Easton ...........26,800................26,978........... .........27,109................+131

16. Lebanon..........25,477................25,726..... .................25,770...............+44
17. Hazleton..........25,340................24,659.... .................24,723................+64
18. New Castle.......23,273................22,142......... ............22,069.................-73
19. Johnstown........20,978................19,726..... ................19,643.................-83
20. Mckeesport.......19,731................19,273..... ................19,245.................-28

[eschaton]

Pittsburgh's population decline was due almost entirely to the closure of the state prison on the north side. It housed nearly 2,000 inmates, and is now completely shuttered.

[trackstar13]

Originally Posted by eschaton

Pittsburgh's population decline was due almost entirely to the closure of the state prison on the north side. It housed nearly 2,000 inmates, and is now completely shuttered.

While this may be cause for the loss it should also be noted that Pittsburgh is not increasing in population and even a modest increase could have offset a loss of 2,000. I still think much of the population decline issue in Pittsburgh is related to natural decline or more births than deaths. A very good friend of mine recently moved to Lawrenceville and I have been spending a significant amount of time in his neighborhood. I have noticed that he is surrounded by people under 40 and very few of them have any kids. I know this is anecdotal evidence, but I wonder what will happen as Pittsburgh continues to gentrify and more and more houses that use to house families are occupied by 1 or 2 people. I didn't think that Pittsburgh could fall below 300,000 in population, but it may happen by 2020.

[trackstar13]

I am not surprised by Erie's population decline, but I am surprised at how fast Erie is declining. At this rate Reading could pass Erie in the early 2020's and hopefully some of the recent downtown Erie developments will help to slow these losses. The fragmented development in Erie county is truly sad and I am honestly shocked at how much construction there is in Fairview, HarborCreek, and Summit while the city continues to decline at nearly 1% per year. It is even more shocking when you consider how much vacant land/houses there are in the city currently. Also, violent crime in the city of Erie continues to decline.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by trackstar13

While this may be cause for the loss it should also be noted that Pittsburgh is not increasing in population and even a modest increase could have offset a loss of 2,000. I still think much of the population decline issue in Pittsburgh is related to natural decline or more births than deaths. A very good friend of mine recently moved to Lawrenceville and I have been spending a significant amount of time in his neighborhood. I have noticed that he is surrounded by people under 40 and very few of them have any kids. I know this is anecdotal evidence, but I wonder what will happen as Pittsburgh continues to gentrify and more and more houses that use to house families are occupied by 1 or 2 people. I didn't think that Pittsburgh could fall below 300,000 in population, but it may happen by 2020.

It's also worth noting that Pittsburgh's 2016 population was revised upward by 1,392, to 305,017. Thus the census is now saying that Pittsburgh's population grew in 2016, even though it shrunk in 2017. Of course that means the 2017 drop is larger than the first post indicates. But that may also be revised upward.

When neighborhoods start to gentrify, populations do indeed decline due to smaller household size, along with some chopped-up houses being restored to single-family status. However, Lawrenceville is past that, and has had hundreds of units of new housing - both major new apartment complexes and infill townhouses - added since 2010. It's almost certainly going to post a population gain by the 2020 census as a whole, although Upper Lawrenceville (where there's been less infill) might be more on the bubble.

Here's a quick neighborhood map of Pittsburgh. The dark blue neighborhoods have all added at least a hundred (in some cases more) units of new housing, and are sure to have population increases by 2020. The cyan ones are iffy, but will probably post a gain. Upper Lawrenceville and Central Oakland are unclear because there might not be enough new housing units, and East Liberty because although it's seen substantial new construction since 2010, it also saw the demolition of a large low-income apartment complex. The rest of the city hasn't seen any substantial construction other than infill houses here and there, or are bad neighborhoods which have seen some affordable housing built, but likely not enough to make up for the loss in older housing. Most of these neighborhoods will likely shrink at least a little bit, but a few may post gains.

[trackstar13]

Originally Posted by eschaton

When neighborhoods start to gentrify, populations do indeed decline due to smaller household size, along with some chopped-up houses being restored to single-family status. However, Lawrenceville is past that, and has had hundreds of units of new housing - both major new apartment complexes and infill townhouses - added since 2010. It's almost certainly going to post a population gain by the 2020 census as a whole, although Upper Lawrenceville (where there's been less infill) might be more on the bubble.

You are definitely right about all of the new housing in Lawrenceville and my friend lives very close to Arsenal Park. Some of the new construction actually looks very odd blended with the old rowhouses. I am actually in Lawrenceville right now and I am looking forward to trying all the coffee shops to figure out which one I like best. So far I think Constellation is the best, but I haven't tried Espress A Mano yet. I am just glad my friend has off street parking, because parking in Lawrenceville is crazy and I plan on being here for a few weeks so it is nice to be able to come and go without worry about paying or getting a ticket. I feel like the population decline in Pittsburgh has to be close to bottoming out and I hope Pittsburgh does not fall below 300,000 because I assume that would be a national news story promoting doom and gloom when in fact Pittsburgh is really starting to turn the corner and is poised for significant growth going forward.

[Craziaskowboi]

For what it's worth, the 2007 population estimates had Pittsburgh with less than 300,000 population, and that turned out to be very wrong.

[SteelCityRising]

Originally Posted by eschaton

Pittsburgh's population decline was due almost entirely to the closure of the state prison on the north side. It housed nearly 2,000 inmates, and is now completely shuttered.

Excuses. Excuses. Excuses. Other cities sustain things like prison closures, and it doesn't affect their population growing vs. declining.

[SteelCityRising]

Originally Posted by trackstar13

While this may be cause for the loss it should also be noted that Pittsburgh is not increasing in population and even a modest increase could have offset a loss of 2,000. I still think much of the population decline issue in Pittsburgh is related to natural decline or more births than deaths. A very good friend of mine recently moved to Lawrenceville and I have been spending a significant amount of time in his neighborhood. I have noticed that he is surrounded by people under 40 and very few of them have any kids. I know this is anecdotal evidence, but I wonder what will happen as Pittsburgh continues to gentrify and more and more houses that use to house families are occupied by 1 or 2 people. I didn't think that Pittsburgh could fall below 300,000 in population, but it may happen by 2020.

I live walking distance from Lawrenceville. A lot of inhabitants of this part of the city these days are well-educated, well-earning, younger people without children. For some reason in our city poor people who should NOT be having many children because they can't support them financially DO have many children, and then affluent people who can easily afford to have 3, 4, or 5 kids are generally having 1, at best. As more poor people with high birth rates are priced out to the suburbs due to gentrification and being replaced by rich people with low birth rates, this natural population decline will continue.

This doesn't explain why Pittsburgh is in decline, though. San Francisco and Arlington, VA are both growing like weeds. Both have MANY more single and/or DINK households than Pittsburgh.

[trackstar13]

Originally Posted by SteelCityRising

I live walking distance from Lawrenceville. A lot of inhabitants of this part of the city these days are well-educated, well-earning, younger people without children. For some reason in our city poor people who should NOT be having many children because they can't support them financially DO have many children, and then affluent people who can easily afford to have 3, 4, or 5 kids are generally having 1, at best. As more poor people with high birth rates are priced out to the suburbs due to gentrification and being replaced by rich people with low birth rates, this natural population decline will continue.

This doesn't explain why Pittsburgh is in decline, though. San Francisco and Arlington, VA are both growing like weeds. Both have MANY more single and/or DINK households than Pittsburgh.

Lawrenceville is a very nice neighborhood and I like some of the aspects of what it has become, but I also find it a bit odd. I have been staying in Lawrenceville for the past few days and I have walked around the neighborhood quite a bit. I finally met a few people with kids and one of the couples I spoke with told me they are moving to the North Hills as they want better schools for their kids when they get older. One of the things I find odd about Lawrenceville is how there are some very large houses with very few people occupying them. For instance, a few of the houses around my friend's house are 4 and 5 bedroom houses and they only have one resident. I am not sure if this is common in many other cities. I am not saying that everyone should live in a crowded apartment building, but it seems strange to me that someone would want that much space on their own, especially in a place as expensive as Lawrenceville. Additionally, the development in Lawrenceville is very different than what I have seen in other cities and while other posters have mentioned some of the apartments, it seems that there are many houses that have been torn down to simply be replaced by new, modern single family homes instead of duplexes, condos, or apartments. While other cities may have more single or DINK households than Pittsburgh, I wonder if Pittsburgh is unique in that some of the neighborhoods like Lawrenceville seem to have many large, single family homes that are occupied by one or two people.