NewGeography.com blogs
The historical core municipality of the Detroit metropolitan area, the city of Detroit, continued its steep population decline between 2000 and 2010. The new census count indicates that the city dropped to 733,000 residents, from 951,000 in 2000. This drop of 25 percent was the largest in any census period since 1950, when the city peaked at a population of 1,850,000. Even so, the percentage decline from 1950 of 61.4 percent remains less than that of city of St. Louis, which has experienced the steepest population decline of any municipality that has reached 500,000 population in modern times (62.7 percent).
The decline did not extend to the suburbs, which gained a modest 2.3 percent between 2000 and 2010. Suburban growth has also been substantial since 1950, with 2.2 million new residents added.
However, the suburban growth was not enough to erase the impact of the city of Detroit decline. The Detroit metropolitan area fell from 4,452,000 in 2000 to 4,296,000 in 2010, a loss of 3.6 percent. The loss was the greatest among major metropolitan areas reporting up to this time. Nonetheless, even with the huge city of Detroit loss, the Detroit metropolitan area has grown more than 30 percent and more than 1,000,000 people.
The new 2010 census results for the Boston metropolitan area show the historical core municipality, the city of Boston, increasing its population at a greater rate than that of its suburbs. Thus far, Boston is the only historical core municipality with essentially the same boundaries as in 1950 that has experienced a growth rate greater than the suburbs in the 2000 to 2010 period. Boston grew from 589,000 to 617,000, an increase of 4.8 percent. Even so, the city remained more than 20 percent below its historic peak of 801,000 in 1950. Further, even with its faster growth, the city of Boston captured only 18 percent of the metropolitan area growth between 2000 and 2010. The city of Boston contains 14 percent of the metropolitan area population.
By comparison, the suburbs grew 3.5 percent and accounted for 82 percent of the metropolitan area growth.
Overall, the Boston metropolitan area, which stretches from Massachusetts into New Hampshire grew from 4,391,000 to 4,552,000, for a growth rate of 3.7 percent, approximately one-third of the national growth rate between 2000 and 2010. This growth rate is the same as in Los Angeles and Milwaukee, which were the slowest growing major metropolitan areas (population over 1,000,000) reporting so far, with the exception of Cleveland, Detroit and Pittsburgh, which lost population.
Boston retains its position as the nation’s 10th largest metropolitan area, having passed losing Detroit and been passed by Atlanta.
The historical core municipality of the Cincinnati metropolitan area, the city of Cincinnati, continued its population loss string stretching back to the 1970 census and dropped below 300,000 population for the first time since the 1890 census. The city peaked at 504,000 in 1950.
In 2010, the census counted 297,000 residents, down 10 percent from the 2000 figure of 331,000. The city of Cincinnati has essentially the same borders (city limits) as in 1950. Hamilton County, which is the core county and includes the city of Cincinnati lost 43,000 people, with a net loss of 9,000 in the portions outside the city.
All growth was in the suburbs, which grew at a rate of 9 percent. The fastest growing counties were Boone in Kentucky at 38 percent and Warren in Ohio at 34 percent. Combined, these two counties captured more than two-thirds of the metropolitan area growth.
The Cincinnati metropolitan area, which stretches from Ohio into Kentucky and Indiana grew 6 percent, from 2,010,000 to 2,130,000.
New 2010 census data for the highly suburbanized historic core municipalities of the major metropolitan areas of Tennessee and Kentucky indicates mixed results. The historic core municipality of Louisville (Louisville/Jefferson County) captured just under one half of the metropolitan area’s growth, yet grew more slowly than the historic core municipality of Nashville/Davidson County, which captured 20 percent of the metropolitan area’s growth. The historic core municipality of Memphis, which annexed substantial suburban areas, experienced a loss.
The majority of population growth was in the suburbs in all three metropolitan areas.
Nashville: The Nashville (Tennessee) metropolitan area grew 21 percent, from 1,312,000 in 2000 to 1,590,000 in 2010, according to the recent census count. The historical core municipality (city of Nashville) grew from 570,000 to 627,000, for a growth rate of 10 percent. The city of Nashville is combined with Davidson County and is of a largely suburban form, and includes rural areas. Between 1960 and 1970, the consolidation increased Nashville’s land area nearly 20 fold, from 29 square miles to 508 square miles, while the population less than tripled. Nashville/Davidson County covers 1.6 times the land area of the city of New York, which has more than 10 times the population. Nashville/Davidson County captured 20 percent of the metropolitan area growth, above the average thus far of less than 10 percent.
Growing at a rate of nearly 30 percent, the suburbs captured 80 percent of the metropolitan area growth. The suburbs account for nearly 40 percent of the metropolitan population. Williamson and Rutherford counties were the fastest growing, at approximately 45 percent. Combined, the two counties represented one-half of the metropolitan area growth.
Louisville: The Louisville (Kentucky-Indiana) metropolitan area grew 9 percent, from 1,162,000 in 2000 to 1,267,000 in 2010, according to the recent census count. The historical core municipality (the combined city of Louisville and Jefferson County) grew from 693,000 to 741,000, for a growth rate of 7 percent. The city of Louisville is combined with Jefferson County and is of a largely suburban form, and includes rural areas. Between 2000 and 2010, the consolidation increased Louisville’s land area five times, from 62 square miles to 385 square miles, while the population nearly tripled. Louisville/Jefferson County covers nearly three times the land area of the city of Philadelphia, which has a population twice as large. Louisville/Jefferson County captured 45 percent of the metropolitan area growth, well above the average thus far of less than 10 percent.
The suburbs grew at rate of 12 percent and captured 55 percent of the metropolitan area. Suburban Desoto County, Mississippi grew by 50 percent and accounted for one-half of the metropolitan area’s growth.
Memphis: Memphis (Tennessee-Mississippi-Arkansas) was alone among the major metropolitan areas with historic core municipalities in Kentucky and Tennessee that lost population between 2000 and 2010. The 2000 population for the present land area of the historical core municipality, the city of Memphis declined six percent, from 691,000 to 647,000. The city of Memphis has a principally post-World War II urban form, having expanded its land area more than 150 percent, and covers more than five times the land area of the larger city of San Francisco.
Overall, the Memphis metropolitan area grew from 1,205,000 in 2000 to 1,316,000 in 2010, a growth rate of 9 percent, slightly below the national average. The suburbs grew 21 percent and captured all of the growth.
Alaska’s largest metropolitan area, Anchorage, is spreading out like its major metropolitan area counterparts in the Lower 48. The historical core municipality of Anchorage grew from 262,000 in 2000 to 291,000 in 2010, a growth rate of 12 percent. Anchorage is largely post-World War II suburban.
Suburban Matanuska-Susitna Borough, to the north nearly equaled Anchorage’s 31,000 population growth, adding 30,000 residents, though on a much smaller base. Matanuska-Susitna grew from 59,000 to 89,000, for a growth rate of 51 percent..
Miami: The Miami metropolitan area grew 11 percent between 2000 and 2010 according to the recently released census count. The population growth was from 5,008,000 in 2000 to 5,575,000 in 2010. This growth, only modestly above the national average, caused Miami to slip behind Dallas-Fort Worth and Houston, to become the nation’s 7th largest metropolitan area. The Miami metropolitan area was expanded after the 2000 census to include not only the core county of Miami-Dade, but also Broward (Fort Lauderdale) and Palm Beach (West Palm Beach) counties.
The historical core municipality, the city of Miami, grew from 362,000 to 399,000 and accounted for 7 percent of the metropolitan area growth. Miami is unique among the nation’s historic core municipalities in having densified in every census period since 1960, despite not annexing new territory and not having substantial greenfield space for development.
The suburbs captured 93 percent of the growth. Growth was modest in all counties, but was the greatest in the most outlying, Palm Beach, at 17 percent.
Orlando: The Orlando metropolitan area grew nearly 30 percent between 2000 and 2010 according to the recently released census count. Orlando grew from 1,645,000 in 2000 to 2,134,000 in 2010. The historical core municipality, the city of Orlando, grew from 194,000 to 238,000 and accounted for 9 percent of the metropolitan area growth. The suburbs captured 91 percent of the metropolitan area growth, expanding their population by 31 percent. Outlying (Osceola 55 percent) and Lake (41 percent) counties grew the fastest.
Tampa-St. Petersburg: The Tampa-St Petersburg metropolitan area grew 16 percent between 2000 and 2010 according to the recently released census count. The population growth was from 2,396,000 in 2000 to 2,448,000 in 2010. The historical core municipality, the city of Tampa grew from 303,000 to 336,000 and accounted for 8 percent of the metropolitan area growth. The suburbs captured 92 percent of the growth. The fastest growing counties were both outlying, Pasco (35 percent) and Hernando (32 percent).
Jacksonville: The Jacksonville metropolitan area grew nearly 20 percent between 2000 and 2010 according to the recently released census count. Jacksonville grew from 1,123,000 in 2000 to 1,346,000 in 2010. The historical core municipality, the city of Jacksonville, grew from 736,000 to 822,000 and accounted for 39 percent of the metropolitan area growth. The city of Jacksonville is essentially combined with Duval County has a largely suburban form and includes rural areas. The consolidation occurred between the 1960 and 1970 censuses, with the new jurisdiction covering nearly 25 times that of the old (768 square miles as opposed to 32 square miles), while the population of the new jurisdiction was somewhat more than 2.5 times that of the old. Jacksonville covers more than twice the land area than New York City and has approximately one-tenth the population.
The suburbs captured 61 percent of the growth. The fastest growing counties were both outlying, St. John’s (54 percent) and Clay (36 percent), which captured more than one-half of the metropolitan area growth.
The historical core municipalities of the Twin Cities area, Minneapolis and St. Paul experienced modest population declines between 2000 and 2010, according to the latest census count. All of the growth in the metropolitan area was in the suburbs.
The Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan (Minnesota-Wisconsin) area grew from 2,969,000 in 2000 to 3,280,000 in 2010, an increase of 10.5 percent. The city of Minneapolis lost 40 residents, with a population of 382,618 in 2000 and 382,578 in 2010. The city of St. Paul lost 2,000 residents, from 287,000 to 285,000. Both historic core cities reached their population peaks in 1950, at 522,000 in Minneapolis and 311,000 in St. Paul. Each of the core cities have maintained essentially the same boundaries (city limits) as in 1950.
The suburbs grew 13.6 percent. The strongest growth was in Scott County (MN) at 45 percent, Wright County (MN) at 38 percent, Sherburne County (MN) at 37 percent, St. Croix County (WI) at 34 percent, Chisago County (MN) at 31 percent and Carver County (MN) at 30 percent. These counties combined to attract nearly one-half of the population growth, despite accounting for less than 15 percent of the population in 2000, indicating the continuing dispersion of the Twin Cities.
Chandra Bhan Prasad, a political activist from Northern part of India, has recently constructed a temple enshrining “Goddess English” in Bankagaon, near Lakhimpur in Utter Pradesh, India. The statue resembles the Statue of Liberty (but no crown; just a hat), carries a copy of the Indian constitution, and holds a fountain pen. Representing the unshaken belief by many Indians that English is a passport for good education, well respected and good paying jobs, and a modern outlook, no wonder the Goddess English stands on a personal computer. The temple will have symbols and formulae of chemistry, mathematics and physics engraved on the walls, and current plans are to build the staircase in the form of a computer keyboard replica.
India is a country with over 1,652 languages spoken by its 1.2 billion residents. Hindi is one of its two official languages, spoken by about 350 million people, and the primary language of North India. But about 300 to 350 million Indians speak English. Most linguists rank India as the largest English language user in the world.
Knowledge of English is one of the key factors in India’s new prosperity. You can feel the correlation between English language acceptance and personal income. India’s haves and have-nots are basically divided by their knowledge of the English language.
Do we see similar pattern in the border states of the United States? The USA, as a single language country, has been engulfed in multi-language education controversies, especially in California, Arizona and Texas. A very unacceptable high school dropout rate can be observed in school districts where English is not spoken well, and the per capita income of the non-English speaking Latino population is substantially lower than US median household income.
Is there a lesson to be learned?
Census results released today show again show losses, though small, in historical core municipalities. The city of Minneapolis lost 40 people, between 2000 and 2010, falling from 382,618 to 382,578. The city of St. Paul, also a historical core city of the Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan area fell from 287,000 to 285,000.
The historical core municipality of Memphis dropped from 650,000 to 647,000, despite the fact that much of the city is of a post-World War II suburban form.
The US Department of Transportation has announced a competitive grant program to reallocate funding that was refused by Florida for a proposed high speed rail line from Tampa to Orlando. The line was cancelled by Governor Rick Scott because of the prospect for billions of dollars of unplanned obligations that could have become the responsibility of the state's taxpayers.
Eligibility: Eligible applicants are states, groups of states, Amtrak or other government agencies that authorized to "provide intercity or high-speed rail service on behalf of states or a group of states. The grant program requires recipients of grants (read "taxpayers") to provide financial support to intercity and high speed rail passenger rail programs in the event that cost and ridership projections are optimistic (a routine occurrence).
Obligation to Pay for Cost Overruns: As in the program announced in 2009. the state, group of states, government agency will be required to demonstrate its financial capacity (that is, the capacity of their taxpayers) to pay for cost overruns (page 9). This open-ended liability led Governor Chris Christie of New Jersey to cancel a new transit-Hudson River rail tunnel, which had costs that were escalating out of control that would be the obligation of the state's taxpayers. Governor Christie and Governor Scott were both aware of the disastrous record of major infrastructure cost overruns, such as in the Boston Big Dig project, the Korean high-speed rail program and the overwhelming majority of passenger rail projects in North America and Europe, according to a team led by Oxford University Professor Bent Flyvbjerg.
Obligation to Pay Operating Costs: Moreover, inaccurate passenger and revenue forecasts have been pervasive in high-speed rail systems, as has been documented by Flybjerg, who found that cost overruns occurred in nine out of ten projects:
... we conclude that the traffic estimates used in decision making for rail infrastructure development are highly, systematically and significantly misleading.![](http://www.assoc-amazon.com/e/ir?t=&l=as2&o=1&a=0521009464)
This is illustrated by the fact that even a decade and one-half after the Eurostar London to Paris and London service was opened, ridership remains 60 percent below projection. Ridership on the Taiwan and Korea high speed rail systems has been one-half or more below projections. Our analysis of the Tampa to Orlando line revealed exceedingly high ridership projections, which were inexplicably raised even higher in a new report just released. Failure to achieve ridership projections increases the likelihood that a line will need operating subsidies, which would be the ultimate responsibility of taxpayers under the USDOT program.
Federal Grant Repayment Obligation: Moreover, taxpayers of any grant recipient would be required to repay part or all of the federal grant if a sufficient level of service is not maintained for a period of 20 years (page 41). The operation of this provision is illustrated by recent Florida experience. Tri-Rail, the Miami area's commuter rail service only narrowly escaped having to repay $250 million when its service level was deemed to not meet requirements of a federal grant by early in the Obama presidency. Tri-Rail was rescued by a state subsidy of nearly $15 million annually, which restored an artificially high level of service.
Intercity and High Speed Rail Program: The federal intercity and high-speed rail program is largely limited to upgrades of Amtrak-type service. Before Governor Scott's decision, only two of the programs (Florida and California) would have achieved international standard high speed rail speeds.
|