U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Pennsylvania > Pittsburgh
 [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 08-13-2021, 11:36 AM
 
Location: Marshall-Shadeland, Pittsburgh, PA
31,921 posts, read 73,541,906 times
Reputation: 18021

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul2421 View Post
the city essentially displaced black people to the burbs and replaced them with tech and ed employees from other cities (likely)
I do think back to my "Great East End Housing Crisis" days years ago and how much I was mocked on here about how gentrification wasn't truly a big deal in this city, and then I see that the 2010-2020 census results mirror what I was kvetching about.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-13-2021, 11:42 AM
 
Location: The canyon (with my pistols and knife)
13,848 posts, read 20,999,304 times
Reputation: 16513
Quote:
Originally Posted by eschaton View Post
Okay, it took some time, but I managed to crunch the numbers by census tract. This doesn't give us neighborhood-level granularity everywhere. I believe that all Pittsburgh neighborhoods were based upon census tracts back in 2000, but the Census has been merging low-population tracts for some time, meaning I can't crunch the numbers of the smaller neighborhoods. on the other hand, some of the bigger neighborhoods can be given added granularity here. It looks like the actual boundaries changed a bit (beyond mergers) in Lincoln-Lemington-Belmar and the South Side Slopes, so those numbers may be off.

For every tract, I listed the numeric gain/loss. The map also uses blue and red to signify percentage gains and losses, with darker shades of red meaning deeper losses, and darker shades of blue bigger gains. Colors are in 5% increments.



Going round the city:

Central: Simply massive growth in Downtown and the Strip District. Surprisingly there was some growth in parts of the Hill District, but this was canceled out by losses elsewhere. Oakland's gains were more mediocre than I had expected, which may have to do with the pandemic and less students being in housing. Uptown had a big decline, which is probably due to variance in the population of the County Jail.

Upper East End: Notable nodes of growth in Lower/Central Lawrenceville, East Liberty, Bakery Square area, and parts of Bloomfield (by the new apartment building. Garfield came very close to growing, which really surprised me. The Greater Homewood area continued to hemorrhage population however, other than Homewood South, where the new construction came very close to ending the decline.

Lower East End: Overall modest growth here. The large growth in a portion of North of Forbes surprised me. This is the area around Chatham's campus, and may have to do with student housing. The most student-slummy portion of Squirrel Hill shrunk a bit, but the rest grew. Greenfield as a whole came very close to growing. Hazelwood is still declining significantly.

South Pittsburgh: As expected, little to no growth outside of South Side Flats, but the rate of decline was lower than I expected. Carrick actually gained population - I have to wonder if the Nepalese refugees played a role, as the tract with significant growth is now the most Asian part of Carrick (8.7%).

West End: Shockingly, the Greater West End grew over the last decade - albeit only by 7 people. It's hard to say where this growth was with the data I have, because so many neighborhoods are merged by the Census in the West End.

North Side: Very disappointing numbers overall, even taking out of consideration the massive decline caused by the closure of SCI prison. It looks like the additional inhabited apartment in Allegheny Center did cause significant growth - and unlike what I said last night, Central North Side did grow a bit. But almost everywhere else in the North Side experienced steep declines. I'm not sure what's going on in the tract which includes Northview Heights and Summer Hill. There was a new mini-development in Summer Hill this decade, but I thought it only had maybe two dozen houses. I suppose more people are living in Northview Heights? Most of the North Side seems to have declined at a rate between 5% and 10% for the decade, with Fineview declining more (due to the paring down of Allegheny Dwellings) and Brighton Heights and Marshall Shadeland (excepting the prison) declining by less.
Wow, the North Side didn't do nearly as well as I thought it would. I do think it's well-positioned for the future, though, especially west of I-279. Eventually, the Central North Side will be fully redeveloped, and adjacent neighborhoods will get more of the action.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-13-2021, 11:46 AM
 
208 posts, read 101,695 times
Reputation: 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteelCityRising View Post
Some selected outer suburban/exurban areas:

Hempfield Township (2010): 43,241
Hempfield Township (2020): 41,466

^ What happened here? Aren't there still a lot of new homes being built here?

Cranberry Township (2010): 28,098
Cranberry Township (2020): 33,096

North Huntingdon Township (2010): 30,609
North Huntingdon Township (2020): 31,880

Peters Township (2010): 21,213
Peters Township (2020): 22,946

Murrysville (2010): 20,079
Murrysville (2020): 21,006

North Strabane Township (2010): 13,408
North Strabane Township (2020): 15,700

Adams Township (2010): 11,652
Adams Township (2020): 14,844

Cecil Township (2010): 11,271
Cecil Township (2020): 14,609

Center Township (Beaver) (2010): 11,795
Center Township (Beaver) (2020): 11,648

South Strabane Township (2010): 9,346
South Strabane Township (2020): 9,613

Buffalo Township (Sarver) (2010): 7,307
Buffalo Township (Sarver) (2020): 7,900

Middlesex Township (2010): 5,390
Middlesex Township (2020): 6,820
Some other ones worth mentioning include:

Penn Township (Westmoreland) (2010): 20,005
Penn Township (Westmoreland) (2020): 20,079

Hopewell Township (2010): 12,593
Hopewell Township (2020): 13,495

Lower Burrell (2010): 11,761
Lower Burrell (2020): 11,758

^ Was surprised to see this one do this well.

Rostraver Township (2010): 11,363
Rostraver Township (2020): 11,393

Economy (2010): 8,970
Economy (2020): 9,098

Brighton Township (2010): 8,227
Brighton Township (2020): 8,790

Chartiers Township (2010): 7,818
Chartiers Township (2020): 8,632

Allegheny Township (Westmoreland) (2010): 8,164
Allegheny Township (Westmoreland) (2020): 8,328

Union Township (Finleyville) (2010): 5,700
Union Township (Finleyville) (2020) 5,374

^ What happened here? Aren't there still some new homes being built here?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-13-2021, 11:53 AM
 
Location: Pittsburgh, PA (Morningside)
13,917 posts, read 15,203,291 times
Reputation: 11831
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul2421 View Post
how does this disporve that? the areas that gained are placed upper income singles would move to. and Allegheny county gained substantially. the city essentially displaced black people to the burbs and replaced them with tech and ed employees from other cities (likely)
It shows there is no simple answer when it comes to cities right now. Some are doing well, some are doing poorly, some are mixed, like Pittsburgh. I personally feel optimistic because the city is doing better by just about every metric now than 2010, but we will have to wait and see. But it's clearly not a 1970 redux like some people would have you believe.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Craziaskowboi View Post
Wow, the North Side didn't do nearly as well as I thought it would. I do think it's well-positioned for the future, though, especially west of I-279. Eventually, the Central North Side will be fully redeveloped, and adjacent neighborhoods will get more of the action.
I believe Manchester gentrified considerably, becoming much whiter. The now merged census tract with Manchester and California-Kirkbride is only 60% black. I think it's safe to presume that California-Kirkbride is still blacker than Manchester, meaning Manchester itself is probably only in the range of 50% black now. Black families replaced by white singles (plus continued decline due to blight in California-Kirkbride) means a population decline.

The East Allegheny numbers are more surprising to me. There has been a lot of infill projects across the neighborhood in the last decade, with even some new housing built to the east of 279. Again, falling household size may play a role, since I don't think there was any additional abandonment.

But as I said upthread, Brighton Heights and Marshall-Shadeland are actually holding up pretty well, with similar declines to areas like Highland Park, Morningside, and Mt. Washington. There is potential for them to return to growth with a little bit of infill construction.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-13-2021, 12:02 PM
 
1,577 posts, read 1,144,134 times
Reputation: 1107
Quote:
Originally Posted by eschaton View Post
It shows there is no simple answer when it comes to cities right now. Some are doing well, some are doing poorly, some are mixed, like Pittsburgh. I personally feel optimistic because the city is doing better by just about every metric now than 2010, but we will have to wait and see. But it's clearly not a 1970 redux like some people would have you believe.
how do you reckon with the massive displacement of black people? i mean I guess that is "good" for the city if you think losing diversity and low income folks is good, but is it an improvement for those people?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-13-2021, 12:11 PM
 
611 posts, read 282,211 times
Reputation: 527
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul2421 View Post
how do you reckon with the massive displacement of black people? i mean I guess that is "good" for the city if you think losing diversity and low income folks is good, but is it an improvement for those people?



Kind of a weird take to assume that black residents maybe didn't choose to leave because they found something that they preferred in the burbs... you know, like white people have done since WW2.


Also some of the increases in the city have been other minorities.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-13-2021, 12:20 PM
 
Location: Pittsburgh, PA (Morningside)
13,917 posts, read 15,203,291 times
Reputation: 11831
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul2421 View Post
how do you reckon with the massive displacement of black people? i mean I guess that is "good" for the city if you think losing diversity and low income folks is good, but is it an improvement for those people?
The number of white people also fell in the city, with growth entirely attributable to a rise in Asians, Latinos, and multiracial people. Hence you cannot say the city lost diversity simply because it lost black people.


That said, even with the understanding that the loss of Pittsburgh black residents was apparently driven by suburbanization of the black population...no, of course I don't think it's a good thing. I wish we had growth but also stemmed the declines in Greater Homewood. If we had did that, the city would have grown for the decade.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-13-2021, 01:52 PM
 
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
6,329 posts, read 8,517,705 times
Reputation: 4023
Well, apparently the Census said comparing racial changes between 2010 and 2020 should be done with some caution.

https://twitter.com/hansilowang/stat...675076613?s=19
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-13-2021, 02:01 PM
 
Location: Pittsburgh, PA (Morningside)
13,917 posts, read 15,203,291 times
Reputation: 11831
Quote:
Originally Posted by bradjl2009 View Post
Well, apparently the Census said comparing racial changes between 2010 and 2020 should be done with some caution.

https://twitter.com/hansilowang/stat...675076613?s=19
Yeah, I saw this. It's not surprising, as nationally 30% of all Latinos changed their racial identification from white to something else, which seemed...odd. I guess the Census asked somewhat leading questions this time around which led people to make different choices.

I don't think this has much to do with the fall in the number of white people in the city itself though - the Latino population here is too small to have made an appreciable difference.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-13-2021, 07:13 PM
 
Location: In Transition
3,829 posts, read 1,292,963 times
Reputation: 1455
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteelCityRising View Post
Thank you. It takes a big person to be able to admit when they made a mistake. I was praying the city wouldn't even drop to 299,999 because "while only a number..." it is STILL something psychological to see a once-proud city drop below a milestone of 300,000. I mean I feel very badly for Erie. Well under 100,000 residents now, AND it slipped below Reading to become the 5th-largest city in PA after losing the title of 3rd-largest city in PA to Allentown not all that long ago. At least Pittsburgh will continue to be the 2nd-largest city in PA for all of our lifetimes---Allentown will be lucky to hit 200,000 before I die.

In any event I am very, very happy for Buffalo more than anything. I was NOT expecting that massive population turnaround. The city is nice, but, again, I thought with Upstate NY in general "rumored" to be imploding and with people always whining about the cold and the snow and Cuomo and taxes and whatnot I thought Buffalo would post another small loss.
It’s great news for the Pittsburgh. Best census in a lifetime. Growth was very good in the predictable east end areas. I will say that I am very disappointed with the North Side, especially the Manchester, Allegheny West, Mexican war streets and east Allegheny on the west side of the parkway. I expected very good growth with those areas. I must say I am let down by that. I expected more for sure. Had that part of the city performed better Pittsburgh would’ve probably gained residents for the first time in 80 years.

One thing I want to point out. The south side posted modest growth. Outside of that the population is stagnant or declining. The booming growth of the popular east end neighborhoods alone is not enough to boost the entire city. We need growth in the entire city. It is what I said all along. We need the whole city to move forward to boost population. Now you see the tremendous growth in a few areas. But still lost population overall. It takes a lot to grow a city population. We can’t lose sight of that. All 90 neighborhoods need to participate or it won’t turn the corner for real. That’s why I have been so critical of concentrating on a few neighborhoods. Broad economic growth and job creation is needed in addition to high tech.

If you look at Buffalo’s census tracts most of the city neighborhoods were participating in the growth. Both small and large. That’s how it added 18,000 residents over 10 years.

They are getting a strong look for high tech much like Pittsburgh. People are going to invest in Western NY. Big news. This was big news for them in April.

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-rele...301279319.html

Quote:
Originally Posted by SteelCityRising View Post
Pittsburgh needs to follow suit. I am sure a lot of people from NYC, NoVA/DC/MD, and CA would move to Pittsburgh if they realized they could still work remotely and boost their quality-of-life by enjoying big-city amenities at a FRACTION of the price.

I mean even our trendy areas like Lawrenceville or Shadyside are still cheaper than normal neighborhoods in those other places.
Agreed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jbraybarten65 View Post
Again, it's got quite a challenge and needs to make a lot happen. You mention 79 and yes, access is critical.


That said, Westmoreland had very modest gains in migration, offset greatly by natural decline.
So people are moving to Westmoreland, just more deaths than births. They didn’t lose as much as anticipated. Projections had them must worse. 347,000 I believe and they did a lot better. Westmoreland is probably tops when it comes to scenery with Fayette a close second. It’s gonna be hard to get those places growing, but greensburg is a nice city and would be a great place to live and is attractive to small town living folks.

Access is critical thank the I-79 corridor for ending 60 years of county population declines.

Quote:
Originally Posted by runpens1 View Post
True most of the growth in Allegheny County is in the north and western portions, while many other municipalities in the more southeast/east portions continued to decline. The exception were Jefferson Hills/South Park and Oakmont/Ohara areas. Monroeville actually had a small gain, possibly due to construction of apartment buildings. In Westmoreland, the only growth was in some of the townships across the Allegheny line, and the city of Greensburg actually saw a modest gain as well. The rest of the county has been what has been costing it population.
How much did Greensburg City gain? I am not surprised they have a great downtown. It’s an attractive place for those liking a smaller urban environment.

How did Washington and butler cities do? Any gains with them?

I’m not surprised at Monroeville holding its own and growing. That is probably the best eastern Allegheny county for living with a decent school district other than maybe oakmont and plum.

Anybody know how Mercer County did this census? Any growth in Sharon City or Hermitage?
Rate this post positively 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:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

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 > Pennsylvania > Pittsburgh

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2022, 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