The US Census Bureau thread

[Crawford]

What's going on with St. Louis? While I get that the annual estimates are likely way off, the general trends are plausibly informative, and the super rusty city propers seem to finally be growing, excepting STL. IMO the best parts of STL proper have a lot better urbanity than the best parts of Detroit or Cleveland. Seems to have the bones for the same trends as everywhere else. Downtown seems notably worse than Detroit or Cleveland tho.

[Steely Dan]

I loved moved all of housing discussion over to a new thread:

https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/sho...d.php?t=261753

Please continue that discussion there.

Let's keep this one on track about US census talk.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Downtown seems notably worse than Detroit or Cleveland tho.

That's my best guess too. Cities like Detroit really seem to be turning the ship around from the downtown out. St. Louis seems to be struggling with that


I've made the point before, but I really do honestly believe that the existence of downtown Clayton hurts St. Louis' downtown more than similar such secondary urban office nodes hurt their central city's downtown.

Downtown St. Louis hasn't seen a new class A office tower built in nearly 4 decades now. Meanwhile Clayton has built many such towers during that time.

[The North One]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

If these growth rate estimates are anywhere close to accurate then this is likely the first time in a century that Detroit has outpaced Austin or Dallas in rate of growth in a single year. I take these census estimates with a grain of salt but if this is accurate that would be an astounding shift for Detroit.

It's not really surprising that Detroit is growing when you consider the fact the city has reoccupied 20k+ vacant homes just in the last few years.

https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/...hab-in-detroit

Also the main factor for population losses in the city over the last 15+ years was tax foreclosure. Foreclosures have shrunk to basically nothing today.

[sopas ej]

Interestingly, NYC had the largest numerical growth, adding 87,184 people. Houston was #2, which added 43,217 people. Los Angeles was third, adding 31,276 people.

Source: United States Census Bureau

[DCReid]

Originally Posted by galleyfox

TFR is are probably starting to drop in Texas cities, while Detroit is either stable or bottomed out at this time.

What does TFR stand for?

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by DCReid

What does TFR stand for?

Total Fertility Rate

The total fertility rate (TFR) of a population is the average number of children that are born to women over their lifetime, if they were to experience the exact current age-specific fertility rates (ASFRs) through their lifetime, and they were to live from birth until the end of their reproductive life.

Source: wikipedia

[Steely Dan]

Interesting tidbit someone over at SSC posted about.

If Columbus's estimate of 933,263 is accurate, it's not just the largest municipality in Ohio (duh), it's now the largest municipality Ohio has ever had, surpassing Cleveland's 1950 high-water mark of 914,808.

Now, the land areas are way out of balance (220 sq. miles for Columbus vs. 78 sq. miles for Cleveland and Cincy), so it's nowhere near an apples to apples thing, but still interesting from a trivia standpoint.

Columbus is also the 2nd largest municipality in the Midwest after Chicago (and it appears to have put some distance between it and Indy over the last handful of years), and it's the 3rd largest ever in history after Detroit. I don't think Columbus will ever surpass Detroit's 1950 peak, barring crazy annexation expansion.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by sopas ej

Interestingly, NYC had the largest numerical growth, adding 87,184 people. Houston was #2, which added 43,217 people. Los Angeles was third, adding 31,276 people.

Source: United States Census Bureau

NYC and Houston have had the largest numerical growths for much of the past two decades, so that's not surprising. But it's been a while since Los Angeles has grown like that.

[Steely Dan]

According to the 2024 CB city estimates, there are now 93 municipalities over 250K people in the US.

And according to those same estimates, 25 of them are still below their per-pandemic 2020 population.



City | 2024 estimate | 2020 count | % change

1. St. Louis | 279,695 | 301,578 | −7.26%
2. New Orleans | 362,701 | 383,997 | −5.55%
3. San Francisco | 827,526 | 873,965 | −5.31%
4. New York | 8,478,072 | 8,804,190 −3.70%
5. Memphis | 610,919 | 633,104 | −3.50%
   
   
6. Long Beach | 450,901 | 466,742 | −3.39%
7. Baltimore | 568,271 | 585,708 | −2.98%
8. Portland | 635,749 | 652,503 | −2.57%
9. Milwaukee | 563,531 | 577,222 | −2.37%
10. Cleveland | 365,379 | 372,624 | −1.94%
    
    
11. Toledo | 265,638 | 270,871 | −1.93%
12. Philadelphia | 1,573,916 | 1,603,797 | −1.86%
13. Honolulu | 344,967 | 350,964 | −1.71%
14. San Jose | 997,368 | 1,013,240 | −1.57%
15. Saint Paul | 307,465 | 311,527 | −1.30%
    
    
16. Virginia Beach | 454,808 | 459,470 | −1.01%
17. Chicago | 2,721,308 | 2,746,388 | −0.91%
18. Albuquerque | 560,326 | 564,559 | −0.75%
19. Anaheim | 344,561 | 346,824 | −0.65%
20. Buffalo | 276,617 | 278,349 | −0.62%
    
    
21. Anchorage | 289,600 | 291,247 | −0.57%
22. Los Angeles | 3,878,704 | 3,898,747 | −0.51%
23. Boston | 673,458 | 675,647 | −0.32%
24. Minneapolis | 428,579 | 429,954 | −0.32%
25. Corpus Christi | 317,317 | 317,863 | −0.17%

the good news is that this list got a lot shorter than last year, and 9 of the above are less the 1% off of 2020, which has got to be WELL within whatever margin or error these estimates come with.

And, as always, take EVERYTHING regarding CB estimates with a giant grain of salt.

[ColDayMan]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

Interesting tidbit someone over at SSC posted about.

If Columbus's estimate of 933,263 is accurate, it's not just the largest municipality in Ohio (duh), it's now the largest municipality Ohio has ever had, surpassing Cleveland's 1950 high-water mark of 914,808.

Now, the land areas are way out of balance (220 sq. miles for Columbus vs. 78 sq. miles for Cleveland and Cincy), so it's nowhere near an apples to apples thing, but still interesting from a trivia standpoint.

Columbus is also the 2nd largest municipality in the Midwest after Chicago (and it appears to have put some distance between it and Indy over the last handful of years), and it's the 3rd largest ever in history after Detroit. I don't think Columbus will ever surpass Detroit's 1950 peak, barring crazy annexation expansion.

While I agree comparing the "legacy" city boundaries of Cincinnati and Cleveland isn't comparable to the annexation boundaries of Columbus, it is notable that of all the annexation-happy cities in the United States, Columbus is doing quite well, density-wise.

2024 Top 25 Cities (Annexation-Happy ones, not like NYC or Chicago or something):

San Jose (178 sq mi) = 5,603
Las Vegas (141 sq mi) = 4,815
San Diego (325 sq mi) = 4,321
Columbus (220 sq mi) = 4,242
Dallas (339 sq mi) = 3,911
Houston (640 sq mi) = 3,734
Phoenix (518 sq mi) = 3,230
Austin (319 sq mi) = 3,114
San Antonio (498 sq mi) = 3,065
Charlotte (308 sq mi) = 3,063
Fort Worth (347 sq mi) = 2,905
El Paso (258 sq mi) = 2,642
Indianapolis (361 sq mi) = 2,469
Nashville (475 sq mi) = 1,484
Jacksonville (747 sq mi) = 1,351
Oklahoma City (606 sq mi) = 1,176

So aside from California cities and Las Vegas (which might as well be one), Columbus is doing "the best" for all the annexation-friendly cities. And you're right, we'll never reach Detroit's highest peak...because we're aiming for São Paulo, fool!!!!

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by ColDayMan

While I agree comparing the "legacy" city boundaries of Cincinnati and Cleveland isn't comparable to the annexation boundaries of Columbus, it is notable that of all the annexation-happy cities in the United States, Columbus is doing quite well, density-wise.

2024 Top 25 Cities (Annexation-Happy ones, not like NYC or Chicago or something):

San Jose (178 sq mi) = 5,603
Las Vegas (141 sq mi) = 4,815
San Diego (325 sq mi) = 4,321
Columbus (220 sq mi) = 4,242
Dallas (339 sq mi) = 3,911
Houston (640 sq mi) = 3,734
Phoenix (518 sq mi) = 3,230
Austin (319 sq mi) = 3,114
San Antonio (498 sq mi) = 3,065
Charlotte (308 sq mi) = 3,063
Fort Worth (347 sq mi) = 2,905
El Paso (258 sq mi) = 2,642
Indianapolis (361 sq mi) = 2,469
Nashville (475 sq mi) = 1,484
Jacksonville (747 sq mi) = 1,351
Oklahoma City (606 sq mi) = 1,176

So aside from California cities and Las Vegas (which might as well be one), Columbus is doing "the best" for all the annexation-friendly cities. And you're right, we'll never reach Detroit's highest peak...because we're aiming for São Paulo, fool!!!!

Nashville, Indianapolis, and Jacksonville do not belong in this list as they cannot legally annex anything any longer, all three being consolidated/merged city-counties.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

According to the 2024 CB city estimates, there are now 93 municipalities over 250K people in the US.

And according to those same estimates, 25 of them are still below their per-pandemic 2020 population.



City | 2024 estimate | 2020 count | % change

1. St. Louis | 279,695 | 301,578 | −7.26%
2. New Orleans | 362,701 | 383,997 | −5.55%
3. San Francisco | 827,526 | 873,965 | −5.31%
4. New York | 8,478,072 | 8,804,190 −3.70%
5. Memphis | 610,919 | 633,104 | −3.50%
   
   
6. Long Beach | 450,901 | 466,742 | −3.39%
7. Baltimore | 568,271 | 585,708 | −2.98%
8. Portland | 635,749 | 652,503 | −2.57%
9. Milwaukee | 563,531 | 577,222 | −2.37%
10. Cleveland | 365,379 | 372,624 | −1.94%
    
    
11. Toledo | 265,638 | 270,871 | −1.93%
12. Philadelphia | 1,573,916 | 1,603,797 | −1.86%
13. Honolulu | 344,967 | 350,964 | −1.71%
14. San Jose | 997,368 | 1,013,240 | −1.57%
15. Saint Paul | 307,465 | 311,527 | −1.30%
    
    
16. Virginia Beach | 454,808 | 459,470 | −1.01%
17. Chicago | 2,721,308 | 2,746,388 | −0.91%
18. Albuquerque | 560,326 | 564,559 | −0.75%
19. Anaheim | 344,561 | 346,824 | −0.65%
20. Buffalo | 276,617 | 278,349 | −0.62%
    
    
21. Anchorage | 289,600 | 291,247 | −0.57%
22. Los Angeles | 3,878,704 | 3,898,747 | −0.51%
23. Boston | 673,458 | 675,647 | −0.32%
24. Minneapolis | 428,579 | 429,954 | −0.32%
25. Corpus Christi | 317,317 | 317,863 | −0.17%

the good news is that this list got a lot shorter than last year, and 9 of the above are less the 1% off of 2020, which has got to be WELL within whatever margin or error these estimates come with.

And, as always, take EVERYTHING regarding CB estimates with a giant grain of salt.

Detroit being one of the only 20th century legacy cities that is above 2020 population is a pretty huge change in trajectory. I think Pittsburgh is the only other one that is estimated to be above 2020?

Originally Posted by ColDayMan

And you're right, we'll never reach Detroit's highest peak...because we're aiming for São Paulo, fool!!!!

Columbus will have to annex the entire state to do that lol

[The ATX]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

Nashville, Indianapolis, and Jacksonville do not belong in this list as they cannot legally annex anything any longer, all three being consolidated/merged city-counties.

...and the Texas cities were effectively stopped from annexing populated areas in 2018 by the State Legislature.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

I think Pittsburgh is the only other one that is estimated to be above 2020?

DC, Cincy, Newark and Jersey City probably qualify as "legacy cities >250K" too.

They're all now estimated above 2020 as well, along with Detroit & Pittsburgh.

[Wigs]

I'm calling bollocks on the Great Lakes cities estimates. Buffalo grew by 17,000 between 2010-2020 but in 2024 is -2,200 people

benp usually keeps track of how many new units of housing are being constructed and infill is happening in most parts of the city. There's been quite a bit of development collectively across the city limits in the past 5 years.

[Velvet_Highground]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Detroit being one of the only 20th century legacy cities that is above 2020 population is a pretty huge change in trajectory. I think Pittsburgh is the only other one that is estimated to be above 2020?



Columbus will have to annex the entire state to do that lol

Would that really be such a bad thing?

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by ColDayMan

it is notable that of all the annexation-happy cities in the United States, Columbus is doing quite well, density-wise.

there are also a few "tweener" cases like Milwaukee that annexed a bunch of land in the post-war period, but didn't go full Columbus or Indianapolis.

in the '50s, Milwaukee nearly doubled in land area, going from 50 to 96 square miles as it gobbled up unincorporated county land before running into the suburban "wall".

in 2020, Milwaukee had a population of 577,222, for an average pop. density of 6,013 ppsm

what's intersting though is how low-density suburban the annexed land remains to this day.

"old city" milwaukee 2020: 418,206/50 sq. miles = 8,364 ppsm

"annexed land" Milwaukee 2020: 159,016/46 sq. miles = 3,457 ppsm


Milwaukee owes the lion's share of respectable population density to the old city. The annexed land is nothing more than a boat anchor on the overall density figure. Had the city been able to annex 150 sq. miles of suburban land instead of only 46, you can imagine how much lower its average density would be today.

Originally Posted by wwmiv

Nashville, Indianapolis, and Jacksonville do not belong in this list as they cannot legally annex anything any longer, all three being consolidated/merged city-counties.

chris is using "annexation-happy" informally, not technically.

when we talk about "land-annexers" on SSP, we're usually talking about any large city that has grown by a considerable amount of land area in the post-war era (regardless of the precise mechanism by which the new land was brought under municipal control), as a differentiator to the "legacy" cities, which are still largely constrained to their pre-1950 borders.

Originally Posted by Wigs

I'm calling bollocks on the Great Lakes cities estimates. Buffalo grew by 17,000 between 2010-2020 but in 2024 is -2,200 people

benp usually keeps track of how many new units of housing are being constructed and infill is happening in most parts of the city. There's been quite a bit of development collectively across the city limits in the past 5 years.

Remember, these are just estimates.

They might be on the money.

They might also be way off target.

The CB's estimating history with Chicago proves that they sometimes don't have the first fucking clue what's really going on until they go out and actually count the people.


Though I will note that it's entirely possible for a city to build a lot of new housing units and still lose overall population. It's all about what's happening to the average household size.

[ColDayMan]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Columbus will have to annex the entire state to do that lol

Don't tempt us.

[benp]

Originally Posted by Wigs

I'm calling bollocks on the Great Lakes cities estimates. Buffalo grew by 17,000 between 2010-2020 but in 2024 is -2,200 people

benp usually keeps track of how many new units of housing are being constructed and infill is happening in most parts of the city. There's been quite a bit of development collectively across the city limits in the past 5 years.

Yeah, there's something screwy about how they calculate estimates. In my Census Tract, for instance, which is a very stable neighborhood in North Buffalo primarily of doubles, singles, and a few apartments, a change between the last 2 ACS estimates showed a drop of 582 residents, or 12.5% of the tract population!

There is no way that our neighborhood saw a sudden 12.5% drop, or maybe any drop at all. Home sales are brisk, few vacancies, many new children. The neighborhood is fully built out, and there have been zero properties torn down or taken off the market. Knowing the neighborhood, the change in occupancy numbers makes no sense.

When looking at other tracts, it looks like many of these numbers were pulled out of a hat. Some tracts show double digit percentage changes up, others double digit down.

Regarding housing, my best estimate is that just over 3000 new units were completed in the city limits since 2020. The latest ACS estimates for Buffalo show an increase of over 4000 new units, with an increase of 4,228 occupied housing units since 2020. Based on the increase in occupied units, it would certainly be expected to be reflected in an associated population increase. For reference, in 2020 there was an increase of 6583 units, an average of 2.6 people per new unit added. If that per-person number is applied to the latest ACS estimates, it would total about 11,000 new residents since 2020.

As I stated when the 2020 Census results came out, I think that the Census estimators have a difficult time estimating population of cities with high vacancy rates, as their algorithms primarily base population changes on "new" units rather that re-occupation of long-vacant units. Per the last estimates prior to 2020, Buffalo was expected to have lost around 5000, but the actual count showed a gain of 17,000 - an error of 23,000.

To sum it all up - who the hell knows what the real numbers will show in 2030.