The largest cities in the U.S. (2009)

[Alps]

There are many factors that influence property values and I would say that racial prejudice, or more commonly the expectation of racial prejudice within the real estate marketplace, is of diminishing importance.

[...]

*  Quite a few homebuyers don't want to be in subdivisions which have apartment buildings or other types of rental housing which, for reasons of market position, tends to be characterized by short lets.  That kind of housing is typically associated with rootless people who live month to month, sometimes paycheck to paycheck, have no interest in building equity in land let alone social capital, and bring in all sorts of problems ranging from drugs to weapons.

Hate to burst your clean white bubble, but this reason is in fact racist.  White people don't want to move near rental housing because typically, more blacks are found in rental housing vs. owned homes.  (Says I, who lives in a rental unit - but in this part of NJ, ethnicity varies by town more than dwelling group, and in that case, white people won't move to a black town and vice versa.)

[realjd]

Hate to burst your clean white bubble, but this reason is in fact racist.  White people don't want to move near rental housing because typically, more blacks are found in rental housing vs. owned homes.  (Says I, who lives in a rental unit - but in this part of NJ, ethnicity varies by town more than dwelling group, and in that case, white people won't move to a black town and vice versa.)

Not necessarily. Just because rental housing has more minorities than non-rental housing (which is entirely location dependent BTW - it isn't true here in my part of Florida), that doesn't necessarily make the desire to avoid living near rental housing racist. Correlation != causation. There are enough reasons other than race to want to avoid apartment complexes or other rental units that I don't think its a valid conclusion.

At least here in Florida, renters are very transient. The Section 8 housing in particular has higher levels of (drug-related) crime, even the ones that are predominantly white. Even in single-family detached homes, rental homes are usually poorly cared for and the tenants make worse neighbors in my experience.

My particular neighborhood is very diverse. I have a nice house with a pool on a big lot. Crime is non-existent. It's a mix of blue-collar families. young professionals, and retirees (of all races and backgrounds). There are always kids out playing, and everyone is very friendly. I know a few coworkers who would never consider moving down near me because it's "dangerous". They prefer to pay more to live on tiny lots in small cookie-cutter houses behind a gate. I think that would be a more fitting example of modern racism with regard to housing.

[J N Winkler]

Hate to burst your clean white bubble, but this reason is in fact racist.  White people don't want to move near rental housing because typically, more blacks are found in rental housing vs. owned homes.  (Says I, who lives in a rental unit - but in this part of NJ, ethnicity varies by town more than dwelling group, and in that case, white people won't move to a black town and vice versa.)

Racist?  As realjd says, perhaps in some contexts, but as a generalization I would say no.  I had in mind a couple of specific examples within easy walking distance of my parents' house, including the apartment complex where my aunt lived for several years (in the late 1970's) before she bought her first house.  A few months ago someone in an apartment there thought he would show his gun in the middle of an out-of-control drinking party, and as a result two people were wounded (fatally, I think), and police and EMS had to be called.  Meanwhile, in my parents' subdivision, which is less than a mile to the west, three burglaries were enough to trigger establishment of an active Neighborhood Watch.  The person who looks after my parents' block is, in fact, a nurse at Wesley Medical Center who lives four doors down and is black.

The Wichita Eagle no longer notes the ethnicity of people involved in reported crimes unless that is a direct factor in the crime itself.  Since the Eagle is my sole source for the incident at my aunt's former apartment complex, I can only guess at the ethnicity of the people involved.  Wichita is however fairly similar to NJ in that ethnic composition varies by neighborhood (and, to an extent, income) rather than type of land tenure.  Since west Wichita is mostly white, I am pretty confident the people involved in the incident were white.

So, yes, I would say that race is not as important a factor as it used to be.  What was the case back in the 1950's when race was still a big deal, and is still the case today, is that people are very sensitive to any signs of lack of self-control on the part of potential new neighbors.  That is associated less with skin color today and more with education and income group.  To the extent that it is fuelled by prejudice, the suspicion itself is questionable as a matter both of morality and social policy, but people can't be expected unilaterally to pursue social justice with what is, for them, generally their biggest single investment.

[J N Winkler]

My particular neighborhood is very diverse. I have a nice house with a pool on a big lot. Crime is non-existent. It's a mix of blue-collar families. young professionals, and retirees (of all races and backgrounds). There are always kids out playing, and everyone is very friendly. I know a few coworkers who would never consider moving down near me because it's "dangerous". They prefer to pay more to live on tiny lots in small cookie-cutter houses behind a gate. I think that would be a more fitting example of modern racism with regard to housing.

Out of interest, was your subdivision built pre-1980?

We have the same syndrome in Wichita too, but usually it takes the form of retreat to a suburb (e.g. Goddard or Maize) rather than a gated community.  There is a very distinctive patter that goes with it too.  "Why are my children doing Black History Month things at school instead of reading, writing, and 'rithmetic?"  It sounds reasonable on the surface but in reality it is a dog whistle.

[realjd]

Out of interest, was your subdivision built pre-1980?

We have the same syndrome in Wichita too, but usually it takes the form of retreat to a suburb (e.g. Goddard or Maize) rather than a gated community.  There is a very distinctive patter that goes with it too.  "Why are my children doing Black History Month things at school instead of reading, writing, and 'rithmetic?"  It sounds reasonable on the surface but in reality it is a dog whistle.

My house was built in 1980, but it's one of the older ones in my particular neighborhood. I don't live in a subdivision though. My city, Palm Bay, was a General Development Corporation city. GDC bought up huge tracts of land, divided it up into 1/4 acre lots, then build roads. They then went and sold these lots to northerners. There aren't any subdivisions really because the whole city was intended to be essentially one subdivision. They would promise water and sewer connections to a block whenever 2/3 of the block had been built out, then proceeded to only sell just under 2/3 of the lots on any given block. As a result, you'll have some of the older parts of town with still vacant lots and a mix of housing ages.

My particular neighborhood is one of the older ones in the city. It's almost fully built out now, but it's a mix of older homes like mine (including a few really crappy GDC-built homes from the 60's), and newer homes built in the past few years.

I think the other thing that turns off some yuppie-types is the same thing that attracted me to Palm Bay in the first place - the fact that there are no HOA's and no deed restrictions.

GDC went out of business in (I think) the early 90's. The City of Palm Bay is still trying to fix some of the things they did poorly and cheaply. My house has city water, but large parts of the city are still on wells. They're rapidly working to expand the city water system to more areas. Most of the city is still on septic systems and not sewers (which is fine by me - septic is significantly cheaper). GDC didn't plan through streets or commercial areas, so it is extremely hard to get around parts of the city, and what ended up being the major roads are all lined with houses. GDC built the roads too thin, so Palm Bay can't just repave, they actually have to destroy the old road and rebuild it to a normal, maintainable thickness. The major roads are all in good condition, but it's a slow and expensive process to replace some of the residential streets.

There are a number of other GDC cities in Florida. Port Charlotte, Port St. Lucie, Port St. John, and Deltona were all GDC towns from what I remember.

In the far SW corner of Palm Bay, there's still about 200 miles of paved, named streets built by GDC that are completely vacant. It's like a maze out there. There's no street signs, but someone spray-painted arrows leading out onto the pavement at some of the intersections. It's patrolled by the police, but there's still a lot of shenanigans that go on out there. It's a creepy place.

http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=27.941185,-80.700932&spn=0.056414,0.109863&t=h&z=14

Sorry for the long winded, off-topic reply, but your simple question about my subdivision wasn't quite that easy to answer! 

[agentsteel53]

Neighborhood Watch.

what is the point of this sort of thing?  I'd imagine people would be looking out for would-be criminals out of their own self interest anyway, making the set of signs superfluous.  Is there also signs up for "this neighborhood puts on pants in the morning"?

[LeftyJR]

also, where is the York/Boston sign from?

I thought that would be easy - just do the math

Anyway, it's here if you can't work it out.

I just drove past the York/Boston sign last week!  Its just south of Portland, ME on I-95.

[J N Winkler]

what is the point of this sort of thing?  I'd imagine people would be looking out for would-be criminals out of their own self interest anyway, making the set of signs superfluous.  Is there also signs up for "this neighborhood puts on pants in the morning"?

I am not actually aware of any studies into the effectiveness of Neighborhood Watch organizations.  Based on my parents' experience, I think the main benefit is actually sharing of information:  Neighborhood Watch addresses gaps in people's knowledge both of technique and events.  Police officers go to Neighborhood Watch groups and give presentations on how better to secure houses against burglary; when a neighborhood is persistently targeted by thieves, information above and beyond "Always lock your doors and windows" becomes more valuable than is otherwise the case.  When another house gets raided by burglars, the information diffuses that much more quickly through the neighborhood (because a contact network has developed as part of the organization) and that is a reminder to others that they need to be on their guard.  Eventually, at least in theory, the thieves realize the neighborhood is a "hard target" and move on to easier pickings.

It may also have the effect of making vigilantism appear like a less attractive way of dealing with a burglary problem.  From the standpoint of society as a whole, this is advantageous because it is cheaper at the margin to let thieves take what they want and then claim on insurance than to risk serious injury (either to the homeowner or to the thief) trying to stop the theft.  (For the same reason, the standard advice is not to resist carjackings or muggings.)  At some point there has to be a response to theft through collective action, otherwise mobile private property becomes uninsurable, but society is generally still better off if that response is monopolized by individuals who are trained to confront thieves and have the legal capacity for responsible use of violence.

[realjd]

Neighborhood watch meetings are also a good way for neighbors to meet who otherwise wouldn't. Once you're aware of who is supposed to be in a neighborhood, it's easier to spot people that aren't. Also, some groups arrange for someone to drive around the neighborhood each night just looking for anything out of the ordinary. That way they'd notice something like an open gate, a strange car, or something like that and be able to call the police.

It's worth noting that neighborhood watch groups are not police, are not necessarily armed, and are trained to not confront criminals. Here in Florida though, since much of the population carries firearms anyway, I wouldn't be surprised to find out that many neighborhood watch patrols are at carrying so they can at least defend themselves even if they won't try to apprehend a criminal.

[florida]

There are a number of other GDC cities in Florida. Port Charlotte, Port St. Lucie, Port St. John, and Deltona were all GDC towns from what I remember.

Now I know why Deltona is extremely shoddy.....and why they will never have a four-lane road within the city.

[Scott5114]

My parents were part of both a neighborhood watch and a homeowner's association at different times. They seemed about the same (although the big topic at the HOA was normally road maintenance, since the HOA owned its roads and the NWA was in a city so it didn't).

[Scott5114]

In the far SW corner of Palm Bay, there's still about 200 miles of paved, named streets built by GDC that are completely vacant. It's like a maze out there. There's no street signs, but someone spray-painted arrows leading out onto the pavement at some of the intersections. It's patrolled by the police, but there's still a lot of shenanigans that go on out there. It's a creepy place.

http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=27.941185,-80.700932&spn=0.056414,0.109863&t=h&z=14

What sort of shenanigans? Urbane stuff like people having parties out in the sticks or something more sinister?

[golden eagle]

The conversation has strayed quite a bit from its original intent, so let me kinda get it back that way. One question I do have is is it harder for independent cities like St. Louis and many cities in Virginia to annex land to grow?

[TheStranger]

The conversation has strayed quite a bit from its original intent, so let me kinda get it back that way. One question I do have is is it harder for independent cities like St. Louis and many cities in Virginia to annex land to grow?

In the case of St. Louis, in the 1890s it separated from its county in order to have less area needing management - something that came back to haunt it (but could have not been foreseen at the time) when the suburbs became more affluent once developed in the 1940s and 1950s.

(Philadelphia actually had the opposite happened, when it consolidated very early on in its history to take full control of the entire namesake county - resulting in a situation like, say, Houston where much of the region's population still lives in the now-expanded core city.)

[huskeroadgeek]

The conversation has strayed quite a bit from its original intent, so let me kinda get it back that way. One question I do have is is it harder for independent cities like St. Louis and many cities in Virginia to annex land to grow?

The city of St. Louis can't grow in terms of land area because it is completely surrounded by St. Louis County. The independent cities in Virginia are in a slightly different situation-it sounds as though they can annex portions of their surrounding counties, but it apparently is very controversial. There was a moratorium on such annexations that is expiring this year and has not apparently yet been renewed.

[realjd]

What sort of shenanigans? Urbane stuff like people having parties out in the sticks or something more sinister?

Yes, there's a lot of teenagers who go out there and have parties, bonfires, and that sort of stuff, but there's more than just that. There are a number of burnt-out cars out there. Supposedly back in the 80's and 90's, drug cartels would land drug planes out there at night, and local stories say that the cartels would also dump bodies in the canals and swamps out there. Those may just be urban legends, but I wouldn't want to be out there at night to find out.

During the day, it's used by dirt bikers, model plane flyers, as a launching ground for huge home-made rockets, and often by local defense companies to do radio testing. It's harmless, but still a little creepy.

[Coelacanth]

GDC bought up huge tracts of land, divided it up into 1/4 acre lots, then build roads. They then went and sold these lots to northerners.

Don't like Palm Bay? What's wrong with it? It's beautiful, it's rich, it's got HUGE.....tracts of land!

My parents were two of those northerners. They ended up taking an absolute bath on the deal.

[jgb191]

My guess for the next census 2020, the top ten would look like:

1. New York City, NY (possibly almost reaching 9 million)
2. Los Angeles, CA (> 4 million)
3. Houston, TX
4. Chicago, IL
5. Dallas, TX (maybe nearing 2 million)
6. Phoenix, AZ
7. San Antonio, TX
8. San Diego, CA
9. San Jose, CA
10. Austin, TX (fourth Texas city to enter the one million club)


I think by 2020, it'll be a battle for the #3 spot, but I'd love to see Houston get it.  Austin hitting a million is wishful thinking on my part, but it's not out of reach for 2020.  Less than 80 miles separate San Antonio from Austin, and just maybe they might be combined CSA (perhaps approaching 6 million by 2020).

It's also kind of surreal to see that my South Texas cities (Laredo and Corpus Christi) aren't that far behind some of the once mighty cities of St. Louis, Buffalo, Pittsburgh, etc.....maybe even surpass them by the next census.  The Brownsville/McAllen MSA's combine for almost 1.2 million.

[Chris]

Los Angeles is already at 4.1 million according to the California Department of Finance. Illegal immigrants are probably underestimated in official census figures.

[golden eagle]

I think Houston will eventually pass Chicago, but not that quickly. Maybe 2030 at the earliest. I see Phoenix being larger than Dallas and will be that way for some time to come.

Am I correct in assuming that Philadelphia will not have a million people, or just not enough to be in the top ten? And what about Jacksonville and Fort Worth?

[TheStranger]

Am I correct in assuming that Philadelphia will not have a million people, or just not enough to be in the top ten?

Looking at Wikipedia, Philly has stayed over a million since 1890 (though from 1920-1970 the population hovered, and sometimes surpassed 2 million) and has flatlined in the 1.5-1.6 million range since.

[Chris]

Chicago has been declining for decades now, dropping from 3.6 million in 1950 to 2.85 million 2008, with only a (temporary?) increase in the 2000 Census. Redevelopment in Chicago may halt the decline. The difference between Houston and Chicago is currently 600,000 people. In the last 20 years, Houston has grown by approximately 30,000 people per year. If we assume Chicago's population would stagnate, but not decline significantly, Houston will pass Chicago in 20 years, or in 2030 at the current rate.

However, it should be noted there has been a massive migration from the north to the south. Maybe Houston's growth will accelerate once the recession is over. It should also be noted Houston is surrounded by unincorporated communities. If Houston will manage to annex some of them, the growth will be much larger. Especially to the north of Houston, between the city proper and the Harris County line, there are probably a few 100,000 people living.

Harris County has a population of just over 4 million people. If we subtract Houston and incorporated suburbs, that means approximately 1.5 million people are living in unincorporated areas within Harris County. I'm not familiar with Houston's history of annexations. At least the potential is there.

[TheStranger]

However, it should be noted there has been a massive migration from the north to the south. Maybe Houston's growth will accelerate once the recession is over. It should also be noted Houston is surrounded by unincorporated communities. If Houston will manage to annex some of them, the growth will be much larger. Especially to the north of Houston, between the city proper and the Harris County line, there are probably a few 100,000 people living.

Harris County has a population of just over 4 million people. If we subtract Houston and incorporated suburbs, that means approximately 1.5 million people are living in unincorporated areas within Harris County. I'm not familiar with Houston's history of annexations. At least the potential is there.

Houston has quite a bit of territorial rights even now in Harris County (and has been an annexation machine for years), particularly around Greater Katy and the Woodlands.

http://houstonstrategies.blogspot.com/2005/08/annexation-and-city-county.html
http://www.huffmanarea.com/news/2005_2007_annual_plan.pdf
www.houstontx.gov/planning/Annexation/annexation.html

One notable example where the annexation process did NOT go well:
http://www.bizjournals.com/houston/stories/1996/11/25/editorial6.html

In response to that, The Woodlands is planning to incorporate as a seperate community from Houston:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Woodlands,_Texas#Incorporation

Now in comparison (to provide a California example), the last time Sacramento successfully annexed territory (beyond its rights to the Natomas area where Arco Arena, several major shopping areas, and the airport are - though the airport is not presently in city limits) was 1964 when they subsumed the former incorporated city of North Sacramento; the oddly-shaped Fruitridge Pocket has been difficult to add to the city limits due to jurisdictional lack of clarity, while Arden-Arcade has tried to strike out on its own and has proposed becoming an independent community.  The small town of Freeport was slated to be annexed earlier in this decade but got voted down by residents in that area.


Apparently, in Texas law, any city above 100K can have an extraterritorial jurisdiction:
http://www.texasbest.com/houston/geograph.html

[Michael in Philly]

I think Houston will eventually pass Chicago, but not that quickly. Maybe 2030 at the earliest. I see Phoenix being larger than Dallas and will be that way for some time to come.

Am I correct in assuming that Philadelphia will not have a million people, or just not enough to be in the top ten? And what about Jacksonville and Fort Worth?

Philadelphia's doing all right, thank you very much.  We're not going to drop below a million any time soon.

[Chris]

Philadelphia's decline has leveled off in recent decades, even reaching a small growth in the last decade. However, it should be noted Philadelphia is now at 1910 level.