Oregon Blue Book
 

This book of facts available online:

http://bluebook.state.or.us/

:banana: :banana: :banana:
I realize these facts are probably somewhat dated but I thought I would share:



Geography QuickFacts



Land area, 2000 (square miles)
Portland: 134
Oregon: 95,997

Persons per square mile, 2000
Portland: 3,939.2
Oregon: 35.6

Using the US Census 2006 data:

:::FaCtoRaMA::::

Oregon growth rate '00-'06: +8.2% to 3,700,758
States with similar growth rates:
Washington +8.5%
Virginia +8.0%
South Carolina +7.7%


Portland popluation: 533,427
cities of similar size:
Tucson 515,000
Oklahoma City 531,000
Las Vegas 545,000
Nashville 549,000

Portland growth since 2000: +0.8% (sort of surprised it is that low)
cities growing at a similar rate:
Little Rock +0.8%
Kansas City +0.8%
Denver +0.8%
New Haven +0.8%

I think this is interesting stuff but be careful, when another thread started comparing cities Markdaman said:

In my opinion, the Mod should have deleted this thread as one rule of the forum, as I understand it, is that versus threads aren't allowed. Now, you could say this was 'comparing' but whatever.

because the Houston thread was an obviously biased post intended to be a Portland vs. Houston thread, that isn't allowed.

Posting government statistics is allowed. Here is where you can use judgement about what is appropriate and what isn't. What is lacking, it appears, is common sense on the part of certain forumers.

Of course we won't mention any names....

That said, I'm not sure that comparing city populations without including metro area stats is really relevant. Some cities (like Tuscon, San Antonio)have very few suburbs, so the city population accounts for almost all of the metro area. Other cities have pops similar to Portland (Wash DC, Boston, SF, Seattle) but their metro areas are much larger than ours. So what is the point exactly of comparing city populations? It's like comparing a Porsche 911 to a Cadillac Escalade because they both have steering wheels.

BTW- Thank you for locking out that Houston thread MDM (or having somebody lock it for you).

"Portland growth since 2000: +0.8% (sort of surprised it is that low)"

remember that these numbers are according to the much-maligned US census bureau. the numbers provided by PSU's Population Research Center are used to determine funding levels around here (i think), and they say Portland has 562,690 people as of 2006, which puts our growth at over 6%. To me, that seems more in line with just the visual evidence out in the neighborhoods.

www.pdx.edu/prc has more .pdf tables

When they compare 2000-2006, they're comparing the same census tracts from Portland's 2000 borders. Of course, the borders have expanded since then.

^i'm slightly confused, who's using the same tracts, the Census Bureau or PSU?

Census Bureau

have we really added 19,000 through annexations then? i haven't seen any info on that, and everything i can find quickly says our area is stil 134 sq miles

^SHHHH, we are secretly overtaking Vancouver...don't let the secret get out!!!

...and Seattle