[OC] Post-Pandemic Population Growth Trends, by US Metro Area (2022->2024)

[u/TA-MajestyPalm]

Graphic by me, created in Excel. All data from US Census here: https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/popest/2020s-total-metro-and-micro-statistical-areas.html

I've created similar graphics in the past, but usually from 2020-2024. This is not the best time frame as it combines the abnormal covid years with post pandemic movement.

This time frame (2022-2024) shows the most current and ongoing population trends of the last 2 years.

I also wanted to better categorize the cities into broad cultural regions vs the arbitrary geographic census regions.

[u/ballsonthewall]

It's interesting how the city of Pittsburgh is growing despite the metro taking a little population loss. I think the trend of the 20th century might be starting to reverse based on climate change, COL, and younger people's desires for more diverse, accessible, and urban communities. The suburban ponzi scheme is clearly up for many of our "middle" suburbs (no hate on Penn Hills but that's a great example), whereas the city is starting to see growth, development, and revitalization in places like Allentown, Uptown, and Garfield.

[u/Equivalent_Dig_5059 → u/ballsonthewall]

Pittsburgh is certainly not experiencing rapid growth like these other places though, and definitely not at a rate that’s average to most places. There’s a reason it’s last place on this graph man.

Pittsburgh is known to move slower these days, you can say what you will about the transit and what not, but people don’t take it, people don’t use it, and people don’t develop around it.

Pittsburgh has significant light rail coverage through an area of the city that lacks a freeway. Literally, a progressive urbanist wet dream, a perfect combo, yet, the light rail line has low ridership and, most of the line is surrounded by vast, empty parking lots. Grossly underutilized light rail infrastructure. Huge red flag for the region.

And another point would be that most of the growth is found in the exurb towns of Cranberry/Washington/Monroeville, all have had significant expansions of low rise office parks that are quite full, Southpointe (an exit off 79) has a higher occupancy rate than downtown Pittsburgh.

I don’t know what the solution is but the region is clearly at an impasse with what they want. It’s very telling where development lacks and where effort is put. Pittsburgh could be a very good city with insane location, a high speed rail line to NYC or Philly or DC would make Pittsburgh a viable living location to people in those regions too. But, it seems the state either doesn’t have the money to do it or doesn’t want to. Either way, it shows.

[u/FTTG487 → u/Equivalent_Dig_5059]

I get what you’re saying but cities like San Antonio at the top of the list here are also just massive parking spots with no/limited rail options, too. I don’t really think the low ridership is an issue; “The T” itself likely has limited ridership because it only covers the area of the South Hills into the city… the South Hills are one of the wealthier parts of the city/county, on average. If it covered the eastern side of the county, out to Wilkinsburg and beyond I’m sure the ridership would have higher numbers. That being said, Pittsburgh would be perfect for more rail transportation and the death of city trolleys is still one of the greatest misfortunes of the 20th century :(

[u/Equivalent_Dig_5059 → u/FTTG487]

“If it went to areas that are built up and high density urban already it would do better numbers”

Well yes of course. But that’s also kinda the point. You have potential for extreme volume transit, along a route that has a lot of open land and lots of asphalt usage. It’s being entirely underutilized because of the lack of desire to move there.

In a city that’s growing, every bit of land next to that line would be purchased, and heavily developed. Any neighborhood along the line would have had zoning changes and density changes significantly. The fact that the train is basically what appears to be in the middle of a slowdown and eventual abandonment of service, in an age where it’s “hot” and “trendy” to be a land developer near a transit hub, is a commentary on the city’s health.

[u/FTTG487 → u/Equivalent_Dig_5059]

Again I see what your point is but using public transportation to highlight growth is not a great metric imo. Take for example that pretty much every city at the top of this list not only lacks a real “rail system”, but they exist in areas openly politically hostile to railway funding. Railways have always been a political issue in the U.S., unfortunately. and despite that, Pittsburgh actually has fairly good public transportation numbers compared to many other cities, especially for its size. 37 million ridership last year in 2024 for the PRT; compare to 19 million for LYNX which is Orlando’s bus system, and Orlando has a similar population city/metro wise. A similar story for cities such as St Louis had also 19m last year. I’d recommend The Lost Subways of North America as a good read on why railways have failed historically in the U.S. and become deeply politicized(it also mentions pgh being high on the national bus list), but I’ve been to at least 3 of these cities recently in the top 10 and none of them had a robust bussing system, let alone rail. The land being developed is mostly commercial, not much for transportation outside of parking lots. We are staunchly in the age of Big Trucks and SUVs. But Pittsburgh actually has a higher level of public transportation utilization, which speaks more to the failure of public trans. in the U.S. than it does to anything else.

[u/Equivalent_Dig_5059 → u/FTTG487]

I feel like you are missing the point, I shall spell it out for you

If there was light rail in Orlando, because of the growth it’s experiencing, and because developing near ped friendly zones is “trendy” and so hot right now, ANY stop along that rail line, would have extreme levels of development, residential high rises would pop up and commerce would begin to flourish around the line.

There isn’t, but, because the region is experiencing growth, they are expanding roadways, updating expressways, adding HOV lanes, and upgrading the infrastructure they can to foster more growth.

Pittsburgh has none of that, all of their “freeways” are max 2 lanes on each side, basically a rural highway, and any roadwork is never expansion, just maintaining status quo, there’s no stat sheet saying “this road will experience 10x the volume it does today, it must be expanded or the region will suffer” and there’s no desire to make the roads larger.

And, they also don’t develop along the transit lines as mentioned.

Pittsburgh doesn’t develop around roadways, they don’t create new roadways, they don’t expand current roadways, they won’t develop around their transit and won’t expand the transits, they won’t create new transit.

Catch 22 of a dying city and region, sad for such a storied area of the country.