Possible Population Growth in Pittsburgh area? (Washington, Butler: movers, neighborhoods, schools)

[raubre]

Saw this on KDKA last night. From thier website...

"For the first time since 1991, census projections find that more people are moving into the Pittsburgh metro area than moved away last year."

More of the article at Pittsburgh Metro Area Sees Increase In Population - kdka.com (http://kdka.com/local/Pittsburgh.population.growth.2.1587886.html - broken link)

[Craziaskowboi]

There's been an increase in domestic migration, not population. More people moved to Pittsburgh than from, but the population dropped very slightly nonetheless. There are four components to population growth:

- People moving in
- People moving out
- Births
- Deaths

If you subtract the number of people moving out from the number of people moving in, that number has now become positive for the Pittsburgh metropolitan area. However, if you subtract the number of deaths from the number of births, then that number is still negative, and actually more negative than the migration number was positive. Or, another way to look at it is, if you add the number of births to the difference between movers in and movers out, the number of deaths still exceeded that number by a few hundred. That's one of the consequences of having a larger-than-normal elderly population: more deaths than normal. The good news is, according to the Brookings Institute two years ago, the two most rapidly-shrinking segments of the population are the elderly, and whites with no college education, while the two most rapidly-growing segments of the population are ethnic minorities, and whites with college degrees. That means that in spite of the population loss, the region is becoming more educated and more diverse in the process -- and possibly younger too. More good news is that Allegheny, Butler and Washington Counties all gained population, which signifies that the core of the metro area is doing OK.

[BrianTH]

The birth/death imbalance is also mostly a holdover from the steel bust, because it was disproportionately young adults who moved away leaving their parents and grandparents here. So while that is still working its way through the numbers, it is slowly fading out. I also don't find the Metro Area numbers to be the most significant because most of the net losses are out in the rural/exurban areas, not the core area.

Meanwhile, I'm going to be really interested to see the results of the upcoming Census. As I have noted before, I think the central core area will likely be a bit more populous and younger than the estimates are suggesting (for reasons I won't repeat unless someone wants me to).

[TelecasterBlues]

The 2000 to 2010 numbers are still going to look bad overall and probably show another 5-10% population loss during that time span, it's easy to see that just by looking at the yearly trends. However, I do think that within the next 1-3 years the Pittsburgh core itself will either flatline entirely or post small gains. It'll happen, but it's going to take time. By the 2020 census, my guess is that the metro itself will have leveled off and the actual residential population of Pittsburgh will be gaining a couple hundred per year. We're still a huge metro area, so I don't really care about those numbers, I just hope that the city's residential population can hold off long enough to avoid dropping below 300K people. I think the 2009 estimate was at 307,000...that's going to be cutting it close over the next couple of years. But in the big picture, Pittsburgh itself will turn the corner by 2020 along with smaller areas in Washington County and whatnot...however, areas like Fayette, Butler, etc are more or less lost causes when it comes to population decline and might skew the metro's numbers for quite a long time.

[Craziaskowboi]

Originally Posted by TelecasterBlues

The 2000 to 2010 numbers are still going to look bad overall and probably show another 5-10% population loss during that time span, it's easy to see that just by looking at the yearly trends. However, I do think that within the next 1-3 years the Pittsburgh core itself will either flatline entirely or post small gains. It'll happen, but it's going to take time. By the 2020 census, my guess is that the metro itself will have leveled off and the actual residential population of Pittsburgh will be gaining a couple hundred per year. We're still a huge metro area, so I don't really care about those numbers, I just hope that the city's residential population can hold off long enough to avoid dropping below 300K people. I think the 2009 estimate was at 307,000...that's going to be cutting it close over the next couple of years. But in the big picture, Pittsburgh itself will turn the corner by 2020 along with smaller areas in Washington County and whatnot...however, areas like Fayette, Butler, etc are more or less lost causes when it comes to population decline and might skew the metro's numbers for quite a long time.

Butler County is the fastest-growing county in the region. The "lost causes" are Armstrong and Fayette Counties. Beaver County is iffy too. The three healthiest counties are Allegheny, Butler and Washington. That's where most of the growth will be.

[sr1234]

I rely on facts and not estimates. The fact is that today it was announced that two schools will be closing in Pittsburgh. That doesn't sound like the city is gaining population.

[Hopes]

Those two schools are in somewhat less desirable neighborhoods where people with children are less likely to live.

[Craziaskowboi]

Originally Posted by sr1234

I rely on facts and not estimates. The fact is that today it was announced that two schools will be closing in Pittsburgh. That doesn't sound like the city is gaining population.

Well, if the city isn't, then the county is, and there are facts to prove it.

[TelecasterBlues]

Originally Posted by Gnutella

Butler County is the fastest-growing county in the region. The "lost causes" are Armstrong and Fayette Counties. Beaver County is iffy too. The three healthiest counties are Allegheny, Butler and Washington. That's where most of the growth will be.

My bad, meant to type Beaver instead of Butler.

[BrianTH]

What about estimates based on facts? One way or another that is all we have to work with between Censuses.

Speaking of which, I think there is a decent chance the City itself started growing around 2003 or so. That is what the American Community Survey (also conducted by the Census) suggests, and for reasons I won't get into again unless asked, I think the ACS methodology is likely more accurate in this case.