Seattle no longer America's fastest-growing big city (2014, homes)

[caliguy92832]

Wow ..... Seattle no longer America.

"Remember all the hubbub around Seattle’s being the fastest-growing big city in the U.S.?

Well, uh … never mind.

It’s true that we held the title for a year, but our reign came to an abrupt end on Thursday with the release of 2014 population estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau. Austin, Texas, is now back in the top spot among large cities, as it had been before Seattle’s brief surge."

[Chris Meyers]

Yeah.. good f'in riddance. No native Seattlite wants this to be the fastest growing anything. Stay where you are people, don't come here. Its rainy and youll commit suicide :-P

[PollyGlott]

Ha ha. You would think, from the OPs post, that we had sunk to the bottom of the barrel - somewhere below Detroit, say.
In fact, I think we're at number 3.
But as Chris Meyers points out, being "number one" isn't so great - there are many folks who use that criterion alone as a reason to move somewhere.
Let them go to #1 Austin - admittedly a fabulous city, but one that has grown far too big, IMHO.

[homesinseattle]

Chris, unfortunately we seem to be the unlikely beneficiaries of global warming. I've been in Seattle 26 years and it really seems to be getting sunnier.

[mkarch]

Originally Posted by homesinseattle

Chris, unfortunately we seem to be the unlikely beneficiaries of global warming. I've been in Seattle 26 years and it really seems to be getting sunnier.

I'm noticing that as well. The original projections I read were that Seattle would get even more cloudy and rainy with the rise in temperature. It's too soon to tell but that doesn't seem to be the major symptom. Instead, it's DRY.

[CrazyDonkey]

Probably because of the current low housing inventory.

Seattle is over twice as dense; Austin has more room to spread out:

Austin: 912,791, 271 sq mi, 3,358.32/sq mi
Seattle: 608,660, 142.5 sq mi, 7,969/sq mi

[homesinseattle]

Yup, just build another freeway in Austin. I always tell my clients, in Seattle we are blessed and cursed by topography and water. I think that is a good thing.

[GraniteStater]

Originally Posted by CrazyDonkey

Probably because of the current low housing inventory.

Seattle is over twice as dense; Austin has more room to spread out:

Austin: 912,791, 271 sq mi, 3,358.32/sq mi
Seattle: 608,660, 142.5 sq mi, 7,969/sq mi

Will Austin have enough water supply to account for exponential growth, though? They are also as far south in latitude as a comparable country in northern Africa, so no chance in the world that I would ever consider moving there as the sun angle is far too strong given the fact I have fair skin. I am at about my far southern tolerable latitude extent at 38-39N where I'm at now.

[Seacove]

This is cause for celebration. Seattle does not want to be the fastest growing city, nor does it want to be third fastest. It would be better for us to promote Austin and hope people keep going there. The Bay Area is nice in so many ways but there are just too many people crammed into that space. We don't want that here.

[CityWok]

Could it be the severe lack of SFH inventory (and news of absurd bidding wars) causing folks to look elsewhere?

I fear Seattle could become a city primarily made of transients which would be devastating for its future, that is, if businesses adapt and allow people to live someplace else. I'm already seeing it happen around tech.

Why pay higher wages to offset the insane housing prices when you can pay lower wages for the same work performed elsewhere.