Today the US Census Bureau released their July 1, 2007 population estimates for both Incorporated Places and Counties. The results are quite interesting…
In looking at Incorporated Places (i.e. cities and towns), here are the 18 municipalities in the state with a population increase from July 1, 2006 to July 1, 2007 of 1,000 persons or more:
Denver led the state with a gain of over 12,000 people for the year, topping our little buddy Aurora by just over 4,000. I’m a bit surprised at the relatively small increase for Colorado Springs. At this rate, it appears Denver’s title as the state’s largest city will not be in jeopardy for quite a long time.
At the county level, here’s how things stacked up for the same 12-month period (15 counties in the state with a population increase from July 1, 2006 to July 1, 2007 of 1,000 persons or more):
Even at the county level, Denver was first in the state in numerical population growth, topping Douglas County, the growth machine to our south that consistently has been one of the nation’s fastest-growing counties. What’s also interesting is that, according to the Census Bureau’s estimates, Denver County regained the claim of most-populous county in the state from El Paso County, which had passed Denver up the year before. However, Denver’s lead likely won’t last, as El Paso County covers 2,129 square miles and Denver County covers only 156 square miles, of which a third is Denver International Airport.
Anyway, I find it amazing that Denver could lead the state in both city and county categories for annual population gain. What a turn-around from just twenty years ago!
Denver is a great place to live! You can't beat it!
With the word continually getting out that Denver is a fantastic city, and with Denver just getting better all of the time, the rapid population growth will continue. Colorado Springs is nice as well, but if they do not want to stagnate they need to invest in a light rail/trolley system and neo-urbanist and infill developments. I am so excited for the Democratic National Convention to begin and all of the worldwide attention it will bring to Denver. I bet we will see a surge in visitors and investment afterward.
FYI, the Colorado Department of Local Affairs estimates the July 1, 2007 population at 592,582. DRCOG estimates the January 1, 2007 population at 592,052. The local estimates are very close. The Census number seems to be an underestimate.
I don't see it as amazing or surprising that Denver is leading in both city and county population gain. In my opinion, that's what it should be doing. Yes, Ft. Collins and the Springs are great cities (but, honestly, what does Aurora offer to anyone? It's like the Anaheim of Denver, maybe they should have a baseball team.), but Denver is THE attraction for people moving here, in terms of urban centers. So Denver should be leading, it's the biggest city in this state in more ways than just population. I'm happy, but I'm not surprised.
The real question is where is this population growth occurring. If it's occurring in the suburban-style areas of Denver, such as Montebello then there is little reason to get all snooty about Aurora… it's more or less the same difference. Now if it's actually from Stapleton or other core areas than sure. That is, if you're willing to consider Stapleton urban.
WOW! almost 50,000 ppl in 1 year
in the metro area! WOW!
Not that surprising, really. I bet it might be a while before El Paso can overtake Denver county – if they even can. The pace of suburban sprawl is slowing noticably. Gas prices are making suburban life unattractive. Denver still has growth coming in the Gates redevelopment, more Stapleton infill, and the CU Medical redelopment. Plus, as per this site, I think Denver is just on the cusp of major downtown residential development. I think we have several big towers ahead of us. Look at Boston, San Diego, etc.
Not that I'm in love with Aurora, but it is a very affordable part of the metro. There's a decent chance that in a few decades it'll be the state's second city. Hopefully some of their own redevelopment projects will really take off.
I have heard much talk about everyone moving to Stapleton and Downtown. I've not heard of anyone moving to Montebello. In any event, there is always reason to be snooty where Aurora is concerned.
600,000 next year? I can see it happen.
I actually love the old part of Aurora along East Colfax. It is one of the most ethnically diverse areas of the city. I like all of the mom and pop restaurants,and the Fox Theatre is an underappreciated gem of the metro area. I think the massive redevelopment of Fitzsimmons is fantastic for the city. Also, check out the Aurora History Museum sometime. I enjoyed their small Art Deco and Googie exhibits they held recently. Personally, I will take Aurora over Highland's Ranch or Parker any day.
Corey
RE: Colorado Springs, I do think that a lot of their population is somewhat transitory: Air Force Academy and Colorado College students that are there for four years or so, Ft. Carson and Peterson Air Force Base personnel that are stationed temporarily, athletes and trainers at the Olympic Center, etc. So in many ways it's not too surprising that the population grows modestly.
People who are moving to Denver are much more likely to be permanent and with our increased density and unusually diverse and large infield developments, the growth is likely to continue. I read where the government is estimating 30,000+ in Stapleton and 10,000+ in Lowry when they are fully developed, and we still have a lot to develop in the Central Platte Valley (and increasingly in the area north of Downtown), Green Valley Ranch and lots of smaller redevelopment projects that will accompany hospital relocations (University and eventually St. Anthony's). 600,000+ is definitely a possibility.
Interesting… thanks! More evidence towards denver metros growth. although the numbers look deceiving, due to the county of Denver's small size, the suberbs and areas just ouside of the city are growing very quikly… as douglas county's growth supports.
One figure I'm interested in seeing is whether Denver has changed its ranking on the list of most populous U.S. cities. Another one is how long it will be until Denver is split into two U.S. congressional districts (one of them would surely include some suburban area).
I think the cost of fuel may have had a big role to play in the speed of growth in Denver, since the city of Denver is a place you can live without driving much. In that case, I'd expect to see the growth continue – and it's one reason why a bad economy might not necessarily put a halt to new downtown projects.
I'm really glad Denver is growing, and not glad that Douglas County is still growing. My interest in infill and urban planning are all about slowing exurban and suburban growth and adding to urban growth, which gives a population a much smaller carbon footprint per capita and does not encroach on farm land, water use and wildlife habitat. It's also cheaper to build infrastructure on a smaller, denser land area. And it looks better, IMHO.
What is the chance of Denver annexing more land in the future? I know it's a terribly unlikely thing, but under what circumstances might it happen? Another military base closing?
I have two questions that are totally off topic, but I was hoping that maybe someone knew the answers. I have noticed that on the 38th Avenue/22nd Street bridge that the large pedestals are designed to have sculptures on top of them. Are the sculptures just not yet completed after so many years, a la DIA's giant blue stallion, or did they run out of money for them? Secondly, is the data storage building at 15th and Champa being renovated for the new location of the downtown Office Depot so that the W Hotel can be built?
Matt, Denver can't annex due to the Poundstone Amendment to the state constitution (DIA was the one exception and that required a vote of Adams County) so the chances are pretty much nil that Denver will gain any more territory in the near future.
Also, note that the Lowry and Stapleton projects are not the result of annexation. Those land parcels were already in Denver long before the new developments. As Ken said, the CO Constitution makes it very difficult for Denver to annex again. Besides, other than DIA, most of Denver is surrounded by incorporated places. These facts make Denver's recent growth more impressive.
I have to add some historical context to the discussion about the Poundstone Amendment, which was added to the Colorado Constitution when I was a kid, about 1972 or so. In 1969 the Denver Public Schools came under a court order: to desegregate the public schools, non-white children had to be taken out of their neighborhood schools and bussed to schools in parts of town that were mostly white. I lived in one of those parts of town (Cory-Merrill), and every day, three buses would bring kids from Whittier, Globeville, and some other neighborhood in the northern part of town to my school, John J. Cory Elementary (Steele and Florida). The experiment never worked very well, even if in pure percentage terms the schools appeared to be "racially balanced" (whatever that term means). The white neighborhood kids would go home in groups together after school (very few parents picked up their kids every day the way they do now), and the kids from far-flung neighborhoods would go home together on the buses. At recess, white kids played with white kids–there really wasn't much mixing, although in the sixth grade I made friends with a kid named Mario who lived around 26th & High somewhere, and a couple of times my mother would take us to Elitch's together. And then he went to Cole and I went to Merrill and we never heard from each other again.
As far as I know, white kids living in the southeast quadrant of the city didn't have to board buses to attend schools in the other parts of the city where there were more racial and ethnic minorities–we got to stay close to home.
One major result of the forced bussing was that Denver, which had been on an annexation binge for several years, was stopped dead in its tracks by State Representative Freda Poundstone (R-Greenwood Village) and her amendment. People living in unincorporated suburban areas were terrified that their schools–not part of the DPS–would soon come under the bussing plan, especially if their neighborhoods became part of big, bad Denver.
As for the Aurora discussion, all I can say is that in 10 or 20 years it will be chic to live in old Aurora. It may happen sooner than that. That part of Colfax still has good bones–lots of urban buildings right up next to the sidewalk, not too many torn down for more typical suburban-style buildings with parking in front. The houses are affordable compared to older Denver neighborhoods, and creative young couples, gay and straight, will buy them, fix them up, and suddenly you'll have some interesting things happening. That close to Stapleton and that close to Fitzsimmons, and with easy access to DIA, all those millions and millions of dollars in public and private investment have to spill over to the neighborhoods nearby. It's gentrification, but I'm of the opinion that gentrification is part of the whole urban ecosystem, neither intrinsically good nor intrinsically bad. It's not good for the poor to lose affordable homes, but it's probably inevitable. If you try to prevent it, you might as well tell people to keep buying houses in greenfield developments.
Sorry this is so long.
So the Poundstone Amendment was the result of white parents' fear and/or loathing of non-white children. Such is the effect of race on the growth of American cities.
I think denver should annex ken karl ranch and expand to the mountains. Who's with me?
Great Post!!
You might be interested in attending a luncheon forum being hosted by the Brookings Institution on July 22 in Denver.
The event formally presents a new report we are releasing this Sunday that looks at the challenges facing the West and pressing need for federal policy reform to address issues of land use, immigration and population growth, and transition to a knowledge-based economy.
Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper and Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter will open the discussion, with Brookings experts Bruce Katz and Robert Lang providing an overview of the report and its policy recommendations. Following that, a panel of Mountain region leaders will provide their responses to the report.
The event is free, but registration is required. You can find out more about the event and register online at the following URL: http://www.brookings.edu/events/2008/0722_metropolitan.aspx
Denver is nothing other than an Omaha with mountains. Nothing stays late at night, little culture. All these wonderful posts are from people moving here from places like Hays, Kansas and Kearney, Nebraska.