US Census Bureau data for Austin and other cities

[The ATX]

City census estimates are out:

Still, Austin ranked No. 6 on the list of U.S. cities with the greatest numeric increases, adding an estimated 12,504 people in 2018 to bring its total population to 964,254 — or just under 1 million.

https://www.statesman.com/news/20190523/...rowth-in-central-texas-census-data-shows

[The ATX]

Here are the top 15 most populated Cities according to the 2018 census numbers:


https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/...d-of-san-francisco-in-populous-city-list

[KevinFromTexas]

So, at the rate Fort Worth is growing, they would pass Austin again in 10 years by 1,234 people. They're growing at 19,552 a year while we're growing at 12,504 a year.

19,552 x 10 + 895,008 = 1,090,528

12,504 X 10 + 964,254 = 1,089,294

[murfnut]

I have followed population trends for years. Keep in mind metro vs city. San Antonio keeps annexing land and spreading out so it has room to grow. Dallas is landlocked and will probably shrink over time as its suburbs continue to grow. Austin is more like Dallas then SA, it will be landlocked by its suburbs to the north, south, east and lake areas to the west. Not sure how much space FW has to spread out before it runs out of space because of surrounding suburbs. Notice cities like Miami, Boston and other major metros are not on the list. They are landlocked and not that big vs their metro area. San Antonio's metro area is not that big relative to the size of the city. Case in point, Columbus is shown larger then San Francisco.

[GoldenBoot]

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

So, at the rate Fort Worth is growing, they would pass Austin again in 10 years by 1,234 people. They're growing at 19,552 a year while we're growing at 12,504 a year.

19,552 x 10 + 895,008 = 1,090,528

12,504 X 10 + 964,254 = 1,089,294

First, it is an "estimate." We're not sure why they estimated those specific numbers. Furthermore, a one-year snap shot is quite an elementary way to develop an actual pattern.

FW has grown by 20.75% since the 2010 census and Austin has grown by 21.997% over the same timeframe. So, based on estimates, Austin is actually separating itself from FW (city population speaking). The delta between Austin and FW expresses this quite nicely; 2010: 𝚫=49,184; 2018: 𝚫=69,246.

[The ATX]

Don't forget that the State effectively stopped cities from annexing populated areas in December 2017. So it is virtually impossible to come up with comparable growth rates for Texas cities since the 2010 census due to varying annexation strategies. Fort Worth and San Antonio city proper growth rates have been significantly helped by annexations this decade. Austin and Houston to a much lower degree and no help to Dallas.
Austin's 2020 annexation of the Shady Hollow MUD was grandfathered in under the 2017 annexation law change.

[KevinFromTexas]

Fort Worth has been growing faster over the last several years after having more modest growth in years past before the time that Austin passed them. It's pointless really to worry much over city populations since they aren't even an accurate measure of a city versus the more accurate metro measure. Still, Fort Worth is about 75 square miles larger than Austin is, and with Texas squashing the ability of cities to annex, it'll mean both cities will have to build as much infill as possible to keep up with each others city proper populations. So in that regard, Fort Worth has the upper hand with more available land. Plus, it's much flatter than Austin is and is less environmentally sensitive.

[GoldenBoot]

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

Fort Worth has been growing faster over the last several years after having more modest growth in years past before the time that Austin passed them. It's pointless really to worry much over city populations since they aren't even an accurate measure of a city versus the more accurate metro measure. Still, Fort Worth is about 75 square miles larger than Austin is, and with Texas squashing the ability of cities to annex, it'll mean both cities will have to build as much infill as possible to keep up with each others city proper populations. So in that regard, Fort Worth has the upper hand with more available land. Plus, it's much flatter than Austin is and is less environmentally sensitive.

The majority of Fort Worth's "recent" growth occurred between 2000 and 2010. Since 1999, Austin's annual growth and FW's have been virtually the same. In 2000, Austin had roughly 122,000 more residents than FW. That shrunk to ~49,000 in 2010. And, has sense widened back ups to ~69,000 in 2018. So, is it possible they close the gap in 10 years...sure. Is it likely? I, personally, do not think so.

More importantly, if it's "pointless," then why even state that claim?

As one who has watched (and continues to monitor) population and demographic patterns throughout the world, I am, again, confident that the city of FW will not pass the city of Austin by 2028 in city proper population. But, then again...who really should care (as you have already pointed out)? Metro/CSA population is more of a true measure of a city/region's size. One might also review its "urban" population. That is pretty interesting too.

[KevinFromTexas]

The reason I say it's pointless is that it's not an accurate measurement of a city's true size since it relies on arbitrary manmade drawn boundaries. Also, the emotions that surround city boosterism related to city proper populations is another reason I said it was pointless. It's largely the reason why I'm considerably less interested in the subject now than I used to be. I used to enjoy it purely on a statistical/numbers level, but now it's become something that people argue over, which I think is unfortunate.

[the Genral]

When the CoA reaches 1 million residents, and I am picturing the many mentions it will bring on local news and newspapers, it will be an amazing stat for me considering there were only 363k in Austin when I moved here in the early 80s. Really nothing more and nothing less. I also look at it as though 637K will have followed my lead. Sorry about that Austin, but I couldn't keep it a secret

[NYC2ATX]

Originally Posted by The ATX

Don't forget that the State effectively stopped cities from annexing populated areas in December 2017.

Austin's 2020 annexation of the Shady Hollow MUD was grandfathered in under the 2017 annexation law change.

Hold on, can anyone share a bit more info on this annexation law? Does it make it impossible for cities to annex land or just more difficult? Unorganized and unclaimed developed lands are a pet peeve of mind

[JACKinBeantown]

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

The reason I say it's pointless is that it's not an accurate measurement of a city's true size since it relies on arbitrary manmade drawn boundaries.

Generally, yes, but there are also considerations such as city taxes, police and fire services, etc. Aside from a few minor technicalities, here is the only list that really matters as far as determining the size of a city's population when considering traffic, business opportunities, and other things that are affected by population.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_metropolitan_statistical_areas

And percentage of population growth means nothing when comparing cities. Look at the actual numbers. San Antonio metro grew by 375,000 over 8 years, and Boston metro grew by 325,000. But as a percentage SA grew by 17.5% and Boston grew by 7% even though the actual numbers are relatively close.

[The ATX]

In case anyone else was wondering about this with the 2020 census coming up. The CB will still release 2019 population estimates - in March for Metros (Counties) and May for Cities.

[427MM]

Originally Posted by The ATX

Don't forget that the State effectively stopped cities from annexing populated areas in December 2017.

This is a big deal! Coupled with the state implementing revenue caps on cities, it is doubtful we will be able to continue getting away with such pathetic zoning. Every time a single family home is redeveloped as a single family home where we should be building 4-10 homes, every time we build a five story building where we should have a ten story building, we lose out on tax base. This drives up the cost of living and hurts our transit ridership not to mention how it feeds sprawl and reduced air quality.

Someday soon something will click and we'll stop electing NIMBYs to city council, or perhaps I'm delusional and we'll all be fine limiting Austin to the top 20% of income earners...

[urbancore]

Originally Posted by 427MM

This is a big deal! Coupled with the state implementing revenue caps on cities, it is doubtful we will be able to continue getting away with such pathetic zoning. Every time a single family home is redeveloped as a single family home where we should be building 4-10 homes, every time we build a five story building where we should have a ten story building, we lose out on tax base. This drives up the cost of living and hurts our transit ridership not to mention how it feeds sprawl and reduced air quality.

Someday soon something will click and we'll stop electing NIMBYs to city council, or perhaps I'm delusional and we'll all be fine limiting Austin to the top 20% of income earners...

Man I wish. Sadly I think your last statement is closer to probably 10%. Zilker is on a torrid pace to be a millionaire enclave. Barton Hills is next.

[Jdawgboy]

I came across this site a couple days ago.

http://worldpopulationreview.com/us-cities/

Welcome to the million pop club everyone!!!

[Benhudd01]

Wow, Houston’s city limit is twice the size of Austin and Dallas, no wonder it has so many more people. Never realized that.

[JoninATX]

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

I came across this site a couple days ago.

http://worldpopulationreview.com/us-cities/

Welcome to the million pop club everyone!!!

It was bound to happen this year!

[Jdawgboy]

Originally Posted by Benhudd01

Wow, Houston’s city limit is twice the size of Austin and Dallas, no wonder it has so many more people. Never realized that.

They have hundreds of square miles more and that includes SA too. I prefer a more compact city (though even Austin isn't exactly compact compared to some other cuties) but it's more compact than the other big Texas cities.

[the Genral]

That puts us tantalizingly close to top 10 status.