HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #61  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2022, 3:49 PM
Wigs's Avatar
Wigs Wigs is offline
Great White Norf
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Niagara Region
Posts: 10,820
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yuri View Post
But that was the case for pretty much every single corner of the world, not only on "declining metro areas". The thing is they were relatively (and in many cases absolute) bigger and had much more influence nation and worldwide.

Another reason to look at them, we're about to leave a 200-year period where population growth was insane to enter a age where population decline will be the rule everywhere. Looking to those metro areas, their challenges, their dynamics will help us to speculate about what happen with other metro areas start to decline as well.
That's the only silver lining. The first "legacy" cities in North America to decline are also the ones now on the rebound while other cities may struggle now or in the future.
With immigration I don't see USA or Canada declining in population any time soon.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #62  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2022, 4:04 PM
iheartthed iheartthed is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 9,787
Quote:
Originally Posted by hipster duck View Post
This debate over which downtowns that are not NYC and Chicago would have felt the biggest in 1950 is an interesting one.

I would actually like to know what yardsticks people at the time would have used to gauge the urbanness of a city. Did they even care about urbanity? This would have been at a time in American history where most downtowns were at their peak vibrancy and people might have taken bustling sidewalks and intact streetwalls of soon-to-be-demolished Victorian and Beaux Arts commercial blocks for granted, while yearning to leave for greener pastures.

And while I'm stereotyping based on my limited knowledge of the time period, it seems like American downtowns - vibrant and central as they were - were kind of a lather, rinse, repeat of diners and department stores, with the bigger cities having bigger and more lavish examples, but no city's downtown being kind of a radical departure from this template.

So, for this reason - and maybe it's my 21st century bias speaking - I would have been most impressed by downtown San Francisco among the non-NYC, Chicago cities. It would have had a thriving Chinatown and a Beat counterculture scene in neighbouring North Beach. That would mix things up a little bit and, after 24 hours on a Scenicruiser bus, coming down the ramps from the Bay Bridge and into Transbay terminal, I would feel like I had arrived in a mini-Manhattan on the west coast.
Detroit's Chinatown sat just out of frame in the 1950s photo of downtown Detroit that I posted, to the top right. No remnant of it has survived because it was condemned and cleared by the city of Detroit in the 1950s, and partially demolished for expanding roads and building freeways. The center of it was located right about here: https://goo.gl/maps/XmdD8T6tRc7amauSA

Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed View Post
This was almost certainly one of the top 4 downtowns in 1950s America:



source: https://digital.library.wayne.edu/

About 70% of the buildings in this photo were lost to freeways, stadiums, surface parking lots, urban renewal, or just neglect. The locations of Little Caesars Arena and Comerica Park are close to the center of this photo. Without adding a single building, it would arguably still be a top 5 - 7 downtown today.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #63  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2022, 4:09 PM
Wigs's Avatar
Wigs Wigs is offline
Great White Norf
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Niagara Region
Posts: 10,820
Detroit lost a Chinatown? Dayuuum.

That was one of the coolest things about living in Calgary. The small yet densely populated Chinatown with legit Chinese cuisine (as opposed to the General Tso Americanized type) and cultural centre to do everything from learn Mandarin or Cantonese to celebrate Chinese New Year. Also tai chi in the park!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #64  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2022, 4:53 PM
Yuri's Avatar
Yuri Yuri is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,478
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wigs View Post
That's the only silver lining. The first "legacy" cities in North America to decline are also the ones now on the rebound while other cities may struggle now or in the future.
With immigration I don't see USA or Canada declining in population any time soon.
In the 1990's, the US has grown 13% and they still had declining metro areas (Pittsburgh and Buffalo the biggest ones). In the 2020's, where the US growth will be around 3%, chances of having more declining metro areas increase.

And with the current immigration levels, the US will be declining by the end of this decade when baby boomers will start to die out. If they want population increases, attitudes towards immigration must change otherwise decline is inevitable.
__________________
London - São Paulo - Rio de Janeiro - Londrina - Frankfurt
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #65  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2022, 5:17 PM
thoughtcriminal thoughtcriminal is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: philadelphia
Posts: 467
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yuri View Post
In the 1990's, the US has grown 13% and they still had declining metro areas (Pittsburgh and Buffalo the biggest ones). In the 2020's, where the US growth will be around 3%, chances of having more declining metro areas increase.

And with the current immigration levels, the US will be declining by the end of this decade when baby boomers will start to die out. If they want population increases, attitudes towards immigration must change otherwise decline is inevitable.
don't conflate people's attitudes toward immigration with their attitudes toward *illegal* immigration. big difference. most Americans are descendants of immigrants, if not immigrants themselves. most have done so legally, going through the process. it's the open border that most people object to, letting in millions of people illegally.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #66  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2022, 5:24 PM
iheartthed iheartthed is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 9,787
Quote:
Originally Posted by thoughtcriminal View Post
don't conflate people's attitudes toward immigration with their attitudes toward *illegal* immigration. big difference. most Americans are descendants of immigrants, if not immigrants themselves. most have done so legally, going through the process. it's the open border that most people object to, letting in millions of people illegally.
There was no process before lol. The process was get on a boat and come (unless you were brought here against your will).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #67  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2022, 5:25 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is offline
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 29,635
Here in the hollowed-out cities of the rust-belt, we'll gladly take any human body with a beating heart who's willing to live here. Many of the native white and black citizens have thrown in the towel on them.

Mexican immigrants, of both the legal and illegal varieties, have saved vast swaths of Chicago from going full urban apocalypse. They can't be thanked enough!
__________________
"Missing middle" housing can be a great middle ground for many middle class families.

Last edited by Steely Dan; Nov 28, 2022 at 6:57 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #68  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2022, 5:40 PM
Yuri's Avatar
Yuri Yuri is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,478
Quote:
Originally Posted by thoughtcriminal View Post
don't conflate people's attitudes toward immigration with their attitudes toward *illegal* immigration. big difference. most Americans are descendants of immigrants, if not immigrants themselves. most have done so legally, going through the process. it's the open border that most people object to, letting in millions of people illegally.
Legal or illegal is completely irrelevant as @iheartthed said after your post. You’re either positive towards immigrants or you’re negative. The rest is technicalities. And the US is so negative right now that even the ones for immigration became silent.

And I’m not doing any judgement here, I’m just stating a fact. If this anti-immigration stance doesn’t go away, the US will start to shrink within 10 years.
__________________
London - São Paulo - Rio de Janeiro - Londrina - Frankfurt
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #69  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2022, 6:53 PM
3rd&Brown 3rd&Brown is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,333
Quote:
Originally Posted by thoughtcriminal View Post
don't conflate people's attitudes toward immigration with their attitudes toward *illegal* immigration. big difference. most Americans are descendants of immigrants, if not immigrants themselves. most have done so legally, going through the process. it's the open border that most people object to, letting in millions of people illegally.
The quotas for *legal* immigration are too low to support continued growth, period.

So yes, big difference. One party doesn't want any more immigration, period. And they sure as hell don't want to do anything to support working families, so the birthrate of native born citizens will continue to plummet.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #70  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2022, 6:56 PM
3rd&Brown 3rd&Brown is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,333
Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed View Post
There was no process before lol. The process was get on a boat and come (unless you were brought here against your will).
Seriously. You bought a ticket for a boat and were allowed to enter if you weren't visibly sick and had a place to stay (i.e. informal sponsor), period.

Never has immigrating been harder than it is now.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #71  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2022, 6:59 PM
TempleGuy1000 TempleGuy1000 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,225
Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed View Post
There was no process before lol. The process was get on a boat and come (unless you were brought here against your will).
Thank you for stating this. Estimates show 98% of immigrates were accepted and only around 2% were denied before immigration reform and the period of isolationism took place in the 1920s.

Last edited by TempleGuy1000; Nov 28, 2022 at 7:31 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #72  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2022, 7:09 PM
Wigs's Avatar
Wigs Wigs is offline
Great White Norf
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Niagara Region
Posts: 10,820
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
Here in the hollowed-out cities of the rust-belt, we'll gladly take any human body with a beating heart who's willing to live here. Many of the native white and black citizens have thrown in the towel on them.

Mexican immigrants, of both the legal and illegal varieties, have saved vast swaths of Chicago from going full urban apocalypse. They can't be thanked enough!
and turned Chicago into a Mexican food capital with tortilla factories and everything
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #73  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2022, 7:18 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is offline
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 29,635
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wigs View Post
and turned Chicago into a Mexican food capital with tortilla factories and everything
made in Pilsen since 1950:


source: https://www.amazon.com/EL-MILAGRO-Sa.../dp/B00LPEZKZA


Started by a mexican immigrant who came to chicago back in the '40s as a trackman on the old illinois central RR.

Railroad work was a very common path for the earliest mexican immigrants who came to chicago back in the day.
__________________
"Missing middle" housing can be a great middle ground for many middle class families.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #74  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2022, 8:45 PM
wwmiv wwmiv is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Austin -> San Antonio -> Columbia -> San Antonio -> Chicago -> Austin -> Denver
Posts: 5,271
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wigs View Post
That's the only silver lining. The first "legacy" cities in North America to decline are also the ones now on the rebound while other cities may struggle now or in the future.
With immigration I don't see USA or Canada declining in population any time soon.
The first legacy cities to decline have never recovered:

Scranton-Wilkes Barre, Wheeling, etc
__________________
HTOWN: 2305k (+10%) + MSA suburbs: 4818k (+26%) + CSA exurbs: 190k (+6%)
BIGD: 1304k (+9%) + MSA div. suburbs: 3826k (+26%) + adj. CSA exurbs: 394k (+8%)
FTW: 919k (+24%) + MSA div. suburbs: 1589k (+14%) + adj. CSA exurbs: 90k (+12%)
SATX: 1435k (+8%) + MSA suburbs: 1124k (+38%) + CSA exurbs: 18k (+11%)
ATX: 962k (+22%) + MSA suburbs: 1322k (+43%)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #75  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2022, 8:55 PM
jmecklenborg jmecklenborg is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yuri View Post
In the 1990's, the US has grown 13% and they still had declining metro areas (Pittsburgh and Buffalo the biggest ones). In the 2020's, where the US growth will be around 3%, chances of having more declining metro areas increase.
The U.S. population is estimated to grow by 150 million between 1990 and 2090.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #76  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2022, 8:56 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is offline
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 29,635
Quote:
Originally Posted by wwmiv View Post
The first legacy cities to decline have never recovered:

Scranton-Wilkes Barre, Wheeling, etc
from the context of the thread, it was pretty clear to me that Wigs was talking about major metro areas when he said "cities".

so using a cut-off of 1M+ MSAs, the first major US metro areas that experienced population decline were detroit, cleveland, pittsburgh, and buffalo, all whom experienced their first decade of metro area loss in the '70s.
__________________
"Missing middle" housing can be a great middle ground for many middle class families.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #77  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2022, 8:57 PM
Austinlee's Avatar
Austinlee Austinlee is offline
Chillin' in The Burgh
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Spring Hill, Pittsburgh
Posts: 13,094
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yuri View Post
Pittsburgh



Area: 9,944 km²

Population
1890: - 841,349
1900: 1,140,808 --- 35.6%
1910: 1,544,490 --- 35.4%
1920: 1,837,259 --- 19.0%
1930: 2,103,749 --- 14.5%
1940: 2,170,146 ---- 3.2%
1950: 2,310,556 ---- 6.5%
1960: 2,520,074 ---- 9.1%
1970: 2,529,186 ---- 0.4%
1980: 2,411,806 --- -4.6%
1990: 2,249,460 --- -6.7%
2000: 2,210,051 --- -1.8%
2010: 2,150,738 --- -2.7%
2020: 2,176,568 ---- 1.2%

Population peak: 1970 *

Decline from the peak: -13.6%

Largest decline: -14.7% (1970-2010)

* I use to say Pittsburgh start to decline in the 1960's. That's because the back then metro area definition didn't include Butler County. By the four-county definition, Pittsburgh peaked in 1960 with 2,405,435 falling to 2,401,245 in 1970.

Pittsburgh is the most emblematic case of a major metro area in the US. Absolute decline kicked very early and they lost population every single census, only recovering now in 2020. Note that relative decline started in the beginning of the 20th century, with its growth rates slowing down in 1930's and not rebounding on the 1940's- 1960's as happened everywhere in the US.

Unlike Detroit posted above, Pittsburgh rises way earlier (it was the US 5th largest metro area by the turn of the 20th century). In 1910, it had twice the size of Detroit. Pittsburgh was not a case of boom and bust either: their slowdown was a smooth process that happened over several decades. On the other hand, they experienced very big declines over two decades (1970's and 1980's).

And in a time the US reaches their smallest population growth ever (2010-2020), Pittsburgh, even with a very aged population (lots of deaths), resumes its growth.

Where are you getting these metro numbers? Your number is missing 200k residents. (2.17m vs our current 2.37m)

The current MSA (Metropolitan Statistical Area) population of Pittsburgh should be around 2.37m as of 2020 down from a peak of 2.76m in 1960. So the Pittsburgh metro has lost 300k since 1960.

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

And the CSA (Combined Statistical Area) current number is around 2.63m.
Which is ALSO currently declining.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Pittsburgh
__________________
Check out the latest developments in Pittsburgh:
Pittsburgh Rundown III
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #78  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2022, 9:21 PM
Yuri's Avatar
Yuri Yuri is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,478
Quote:
Originally Posted by Austinlee View Post
Where are you getting these metro numbers? Your number is missing 200k residents. (2.17m vs our current 2.37m)

The current MSA (Metropolitan Statistical Area) population of Pittsburgh should be around 2.37m as of 2020 down from a peak of 2.76m in 1960. So the Pittsburgh metro has lost 300k since 1960.

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

And the CSA (Combined Statistical Area) current number is around 2.63m.
Which is ALSO currently declining.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Pittsburgh
Allegheny, Beaver, Butler, Washington and Westmoreland.

Pittsburgh metro area was defined by the US Census Bureau as the 4 counties (minus Butler) till 1983. Then Fayette was included.

That's how the 4-county Pittsburgh grew (2020-1950):
+0,81% -3,39% -2,93% -7,35% -5,72% -0,17% +8,68%

And that's Butler County:
+5,39% +5,62% +14,52% +2,77% +15,61% +11,60% +17,80%

Since the 1950's at least, Butler was clearly a booming suburb of Pittsburgh, hence I included it.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

And that's how 5-county Pittsburgh performed (2020-2000):
+1,20% -2,68%

And the two counties of the MSA I decided to drop here:

Armstrong: -4,91% -4,77%
Fayette: -5,71% -8,10%

Pittsburgh forumers always say that all counties minus Allegheny are actually a collection of small coal towns and not Pittsburgh suburbs per se. I don't know about that, but clearly they have a case for Armstrong and Fayette. They don't behave like suburbs, but like collapsing coal counties.

That's why I decided to use the 5 counties to define "Pittsburgh metro area" here.
__________________
London - São Paulo - Rio de Janeiro - Londrina - Frankfurt
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #79  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2022, 9:26 PM
wwmiv wwmiv is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Austin -> San Antonio -> Columbia -> San Antonio -> Chicago -> Austin -> Denver
Posts: 5,271
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
from the context of the thread, it was pretty clear to me that Wigs was talking about major metro areas when he said "cities".

so using a cut-off of 1M+ MSAs, the first major US metro areas that experienced population decline were detroit, cleveland, pittsburgh, and buffalo, all whom experienced their first decade of metro area loss in the '70s.
That’s a very modern definition of major, no?

Why would we not also consider and include cities that had the same growth trajectories as those that would become larger than 1 million, and were considered major cities by the definition of that time period, yet never reached that milestone because of their decline?
__________________
HTOWN: 2305k (+10%) + MSA suburbs: 4818k (+26%) + CSA exurbs: 190k (+6%)
BIGD: 1304k (+9%) + MSA div. suburbs: 3826k (+26%) + adj. CSA exurbs: 394k (+8%)
FTW: 919k (+24%) + MSA div. suburbs: 1589k (+14%) + adj. CSA exurbs: 90k (+12%)
SATX: 1435k (+8%) + MSA suburbs: 1124k (+38%) + CSA exurbs: 18k (+11%)
ATX: 962k (+22%) + MSA suburbs: 1322k (+43%)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #80  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2022, 9:37 PM
iheartthed iheartthed is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 9,787
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
from the context of the thread, it was pretty clear to me that Wigs was talking about major metro areas when he said "cities".

so using a cut-off of 1M+ MSAs, the first major US metro areas that experienced population decline were detroit, cleveland, pittsburgh, and buffalo, all whom experienced their first decade of metro area loss in the '70s.
Philadelphia and New York also declined that decade. Boston came very close to declining in the 1970s, but squeaked out a slight growth.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:28 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.