Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

cityboi

Greensboro's population to grow by 15,000 people after annexation

91 posts in this topic

after annexation this would bump Greensboro's population from about 233,000 to 248,000 or at the qaurter of a million mark. about 10 years ago Greensboro had just passed the 200,000 mark. city council members wont annex right away. It may be a year or two. which means by then it may be more than 15,000 that the city annexes. Apparently this is a move to retain Greensboro position as North Carolina's 3rd largest city. Durham is growing fast and Winston-Salem just annexed about 9,000 people.

"City staffers will weigh those factors in the coming months. The City Council has the final say in any annexations. One council member, Mike Barber, has warned that if Greensboro doesn't increase its population, it could fall from its long-held position as the state's third-largest city after the 2010 census."

http://www.news-record.com/apps/pbcs.dll/a...EC0101/70123027

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


This is pretty sad that the motivation to do this is based on a meaningless ranking, though annexing the Cardinal is appropriate for GSO. I suppose this will be in line with all NC's major cities whose population increases have been partially due to annexations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good move by G'boro. Glad they're finally doing this. WS has been doing this for years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is pretty sad that the motivation to do this is based on a meaningless ranking, though annexing the Cardinal is appropriate for GSO. I suppose this will be in line with all NC's major cities whose population increases have been partially due to annexations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Route, everyone has been doing this for years and this is the worst reason to annex...to keep a rank. <_<

the article said it would be done over several years, unlike the mass annexation W-S just completed. it would be around 2010 when all of these 15,000 people are added. this is the right way to do it IMO. its seems less controversial.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Route, everyone has been doing this for years and this is the worst reason to annex...to keep a rank. <_<

the article said it would be done over several years, unlike the mass annexation W-S just completed. it would be around 2010 when all of these 15,000 people are added. this is the right way to do it IMO. its seems less controversial.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just a correction on the population numbers: the city of Greensboro is actually estimating todays population as 240,955 so that means Greensboro's population would be 256,000 after all annexations. but that doesnt include immigration population into these areas over the next 3 years so it could be a little more. Thats what happened with Winston-Salem a few years or so after the annexation plan was first introduced. more people were actually annexed within those boundaries than orginally stated. within a 10 year period Greensboro will have increased its population by more than 30,000. in 2000 Greensboro's population was 223,000. Also consider Greensboro's population in 1990 was 283,000. Greensboro gained 40,000 that decade. By 2020, 13 years from now, Greensboro should be near the brink of 300,000 if these annexation patterns and growth rates continue. I'm guessing around 293,000.

I cant wait to see Greensboro hit the 300,000 mark. When a city gets above 300,000 the city starts getting more national attention and begins to be looked at as becoming a big city. Hopefully Greensboro will have some downtown towers that will reflect the city's population.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't disagree that there are legitimate and long standing areas that are urban and therefore appropriate for GSO to annex, but for the city to be quoted as saying there is a need to do this for ranking purposes? It is beyond ridiculous IMO, and those guys should be disciplined. At that point, why not just fake population increases or other data? It is a similar mentality. And frankly, is it really that different in terms of a recruitment tool for jobs to be 3rd or 4th? Neither are number 1 or 2, and past these two people are no longer making much of a distinction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


I don't disagree that there are legitimate and long standing areas that are urban and therefore appropriate for GSO to annex, but for the city to be quoted as saying there is a need to do this for ranking purposes? It is beyond ridiculous IMO, and those guys should be disciplined. At that point, why not just fake population increases or other data? It is a similar mentality. And frankly, is it really that different in terms of a recruitment tool for jobs to be 3rd or 4th? Neither are number 1 or 2, and past these two people are no longer making much of a distinction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seemed like the article was concerned with Durham surpassing GSO on the ranking list, not WS, which seems to gel with the fact that Durham, even putting it's own annexations aside, is growing faster than GSO. At any rate, having municipal officials make statements about annexing to stay ahead of their "competition" cannot look good to companies and individuals looking to locate here, IMO, instead, it reeks of desperation and makes prosperity look inflated and/or artificial.

Feel free to correct me on this if I'm wrong, but companies scouring regions for locations are looking at metro and regional statistics, not potentially arbitrary city statistics. I know in my job we have to look at metro stats when placing centers as we need to know specifics such as exact numbers of available employees with certain skillsets and educations levels in a labor market (in addition to variety of other stats), going by city limits in most cases is meaningless.

I would not see a reason to care if GSO falls to 5th or 6th place as long as it controls it's growth in good ways, but it probably will not if it is simply in a race to the finish line of bragging rights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Seemed like the article was concerned with Durham surpassing GSO on the ranking list, not WS, which seems to gel with the fact that Durham, even putting it's own annexations aside, is growing faster than GSO. At any rate, having municipal officials make statements about annexing to stay ahead of their "competition" cannot look good to companies and individuals looking to locate here, IMO, instead, it reeks of desperation and makes prosperity look inflated and/or artificial.

Feel free to correct me on this if I'm wrong, but companies scouring regions for locations are looking at metro and regional statistics, not potentially arbitrary city statistics. I know in my job we have to look at metro stats when placing centers as we need to know specifics such as exact numbers of available employees with certain skillsets and educations levels in a labor market (in addition to variety of other stats), going by city limits in most cases is meaningless.

I would not see a reason to care if GSO falls to 5th or 6th place as long as it controls it's growth in good ways, but it probably will not if it is simply in a race to the finish line of bragging rights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obviously the people living in the annexed portions do in fact exist... ;)

By artificial/inflated I mean the prosperity, grandeur, etc. that many associate with population size (number junkies), to which annexation allows a simple way to inflate or increase such status which is artificial to real growth which is densification of existing areas in the city limits. Real growth is happening in GSO, but clearly not fast enough if the city is willing to annex just to keep up it's 3rd place ranking. Again, I agree there are legitimate reasons to annex, but to go on record saying they need to annex to keep up with the Joneses I think says it all in terms of the REAL motivations at play here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"This is a plan that some of it could be annexed next year, and some of it could be looked at in five years," said Bob Morgan, an assistant city manager

i think people are over lookin this quote. it will be after 2010 before these 15,000 are added to the city's pop. if the council decides to proceed.

i think GSO is concerned with Durham mainly, but also Winston-Salem, somewhat, since the new metro could have the city's name 2nd. its all trivial, but hey, if they want 3rd place that bad than more power to them. im all for adding urban areas but not doing it just to keep a ranking. hopefully the mayor and city council members dont share the same view as this person.

on a side note, next time any of you go to Borders or Barnes and Noble, pick up a copy of Moon Handbooks, North Carolina. an interesting surprise, which could be seen as evidence that the nation is looking at the Triad differently. just my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"This is a plan that some of it could be annexed next year, and some of it could be looked at in five years," said Bob Morgan, an assistant city manager

i think people are over lookin this quote. it will be after 2010 before these 15,000 are added to the city's pop. if the council decides to proceed.

i think GSO is concerned with Durham mainly, but also Winston-Salem, somewhat, since the new metro could have the city's name 2nd. its all trivial, but hey, if they want 3rd place that bad than more power to them. im all for adding urban areas but not doing it just to keep a ranking. hopefully the mayor and city council members dont share the same view as this person.

on a side note, next time any of you go to Borders or Barnes and Noble, pick up a copy of Moon Handbooks, North Carolina. an interesting surprise, which could be seen as evidence that the nation is looking at the Triad differently. just my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


2010 is around the corner. Thats like within 3 years the land will be annexed. 15,000 is still alot to add in that short period of time. But I dont really see anything wrong with annexing partly to maintain a city's status. Greensboro and other NC cities including Winston-Salem have done this. Recently Winston-Salem got its 4th place status back from Durham after the recent mass annexation that in reality could have been stretched out in 3 years like Greensboro is doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nothin much...just how they described the triad and its cities. the piedmont section is broken into three chapters. charlotte and southern piedmont, raleigh and the triangle, __________ and the triad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Greensboro annexes Pleasant Ridge Rd between NC 68 and Summerfield, I wonder if any improvements are planned for it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't this portion planned to be part of the new I-73 or something?

If Greensboro annexes Pleasant Ridge Rd between NC 68 and Summerfield, I wonder if any improvements are planned for it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt that Durham would catch Greensboro, annexation or not, considering completion of the new FedEx hub, completion of most of the urban loop, the A&T/UNCG biotech development, and an expanding city center that's on the verge of a boom.

Seemed like the article was concerned with Durham surpassing GSO on the ranking list, not WS, which seems to gel with the fact that Durham, even putting it's own annexations aside, is growing faster than GSO. At any rate, having municipal officials make statements about annexing to stay ahead of their "competition" cannot look good to companies and individuals looking to locate here, IMO, instead, it reeks of desperation and makes prosperity look inflated and/or artificial.

Feel free to correct me on this if I'm wrong, but companies scouring regions for locations are looking at metro and regional statistics, not potentially arbitrary city statistics. I know in my job we have to look at metro stats when placing centers as we need to know specifics such as exact numbers of available employees with certain skillsets and educations levels in a labor market (in addition to variety of other stats), going by city limits in most cases is meaningless.

I would not see a reason to care if GSO falls to 5th or 6th place as long as it controls it's growth in good ways, but it probably will not if it is simply in a race to the finish line of bragging rights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
By artificial/inflated I mean the prosperity, grandeur, etc. that many associate with population size (number junkies), to which annexation allows a simple way to inflate or increase such status which is artificial to real growth which is densification of existing areas in the city limits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The laws are liberal so that cities can annex to remain high on lists?

Atlanta, Miami, Boston, Minneapolis, Cleveland, St. Louis, half of New Jersey, etc. may have annexation laws as barriers, but are also now surrounded by other sovereign municipalities, so not really relevant to any NC city, all of which still have much available land around them, even land bloated CLT could gobble up another 100 or so square miles in Mecklenburg (god forbid). The list/ranking mentality is not productive, metro/urbanized area is more meaningful anyway. If a city is being robbed of a legitimate tax base or residents are lacking services then great, annex, but for the stated purpose to keep up with their rivals? Come on, that's krazee. ;/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...and - to follow up the two previous posts - I would note that there are several cities in NC that could greatly enlarge their populations (not necessarily to Greensboro's size) at this moment by annexing a lot of eligible suburbia, if inflating numbers was their only motivation. Obviously there are other factors that must be considered - cost of services vs income from tax revenue, geographical logic, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...and - to follow up the two previous posts - I would note that there are several cities in NC that could greatly enlarge their populations (not necessarily to Greensboro's size) at this moment by annexing a lot of eligible suburbia, if inflating numbers was their only motivation. Obviously there are other factors that must be considered - cost of services vs income from tax revenue, geographical logic, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The bigger the city population, the more the amenties the city will have and the more urban it becomes. A city with a popuation of 300,000 in a metro of 2 million is going to be viewed more important than a city of 10,000 in a metro of 2 million. So city population is very important.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.