Lawrence continues to grow at a rate of a little less than 1 percent and is now growing slower than the rest of Douglas County, according to numbers released this morning by the U.S. Census Bureau.
Lawrence added 667 people from July 2007 to July 2008, according to annual estimates from the Census Bureau. The Census Bureau estimated Lawrence had a population of 90,520 people on July 1, 2008.
That represents a growth rate of 0.7 percent. The entire county grew at a rate of 1.2 percent, according to the estimates.
The growth rate for Lawrence is similar to rates in recent years. In 2007, the city added 742 people for an increase of 0.8 percent. But the numbers are significantly less than the city’s long-term population growth rates. In the 1980s, Lawrence’s population grew by 2 percent per year. In the 1990s, the rate increased to 2.2 percent per year.
Here’s a look at the population estimates for Douglas County’s other three cities:
• Baldwin City: 4,308 people, up 120 people or 2.8 percent.
• Eudora: 6,226 people, up 172 people or 2.8 percent.
• Lecompton: 666 people, up 23 people or 3.5 percent.
Here’s a look at population totals for several area cities:
• Basehor: 4,230 people, up 478 people or 12.7 percent.
• Bonner Springs: 7,161 people, up 108 people or 1.5 percent.
• De Soto: 5,420 people, up 52 people or 0.9 percent.
• Gardner: 17,462 people, up 1,040 people or 6.3 percent.
• Lenexa: 46,822 people, up 1,275 people or 2.7 percent.
• Manhattan: 52,284 people, up 533 people or 1.0 percent.
• Olathe: 119,993 people, up 2,298 people or 1.9 percent.
• Ottawa: 12,850 people, up 22 people or 0.1 percent.
• Overland Park: 171,231 people, up 2,312 people or 1.3 percent.
• Shawnee: 60,954 people, up 1,170 people or 1.9 percent.
• Tonganoxie: 4,305 people, up 154 people or 3.7 percent.
• Topeka: 123,446 people, up 881 people or 0.7 percent.
Comments
LJWorld.com doesn’t necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.
monkeyhawk (anonymous) says…
Kudos to all who helped make this awesome dream come true. It reminds me of the saying, "it's so crowded that nobody goes there anymore".
But, really, even more growth in De Soto than Lawrence? Now that is an accomplishment.
I'm sure the CC is poised to contest the results any day. Time to face facts: Lawrence is not special. It now ranks only slightly above Topeka.
This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.
merrill (anonymous) says…
Uncontrolled growth is about over building retail and residential which increases the cost of living to taxpayers.
Uncontrolled growth is an economic displacement problem which simply does not pay back the taxpayers and is a symptom of "boom town economics" which has wrecked the nations economy and created a high tax/user fee district aka Lawrence,Kansas.
This situation is unfriendly to new and existing business. It is also unfriendly to property values/homeowners. It is quite capable of producing economic displacement aka unfriendly development.
Tighter markets are stable,will maintain strong property values and are quite friendly to retail thus better paying jobs = consistent and strong economic growth.
kansasmutt (anonymous) says…
Smart growth in Lawrence. 0.7 % growth of people and 20% growth in apartments. Great math for good growth.Shows most are temporary and will leave soon.
BigAl (anonymous) says…
I love Lawrence, warts and all. My friends and family have no desire to live anywhere else. The fine people that I know that live in Eudora, Baldwin, etc.. still drive to Lawrence on a weekly basis.
Knock it all you want but Lawrence is one of, if not the best, places in Kansas to live: Great people, great school system, downtown, activities everywhere, KU and what it brings. This is a great place to live.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) says…
The simple fact is that growth is only necessary to businesses whose business models are built around it. For anyone else, and that's probably 95% of the population of Lawrence, maintaining a stable population is all that's necessary to be able to maintain, and even expand, the infrastructure and institutions required for a healthy community.
The quasi-religious infatuation with "growth" relies on a good deal of hype from its devotees, and comes at great expense to everyone else.
blue73harley (anonymous) says…
In a related story, single family houses in Lawrence are still unaffordable compared to surrounding cities.
And jobs?! We don't need no stinkin' jobs!
This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.
xbusguy (chris Ogle) says…
Ah heck, surely good ol Lawrence can spend its way out this one.
BigAl (anonymous) says…
Actually Nancy, a lot of people agree with me. All walks of life. I work in an industry dominated by conservatives and they also love Lawrence. But since you are an outsider, you wouldn't understand and that is just fine with me. We don't need any more whiners......
average (anonymous) says…
Exactly why should I be in favor of growth, again? I mean, if it happens, so be it and we should plan for it. But, is there some reason I should be paying a lot to encourage it?
youarewhatyoueat (anonymous) says…
When you consider what you get for rent or sale in terms of housing compared to anywhere else in the state, how in the hell can one be surprised people suddenly don't want to move here so much?? I've seen houses for rent that would be condemned in other cities, and they ask far more than a nicer, similar sized place anywhere else!
oneeye_wilbur (anonymous) says…
As long as the Planning Department in Lawrence, the city commisson and Planning commission members stall each and every issue, sending it back and forth only to be commented on by a handful of members in neighborhood groups and the Chamber of commerce in Lawrence endorsing these dolts on commissions to stall, Lawrence will continue to decline. It is a given.
Very simply, the city commission could have met on Tuesday and moved forward with issues, instead they save issues so they can further delay projects.
what you eat is correct, many houses in Lawrence should be torn down, the owners would tear them down, but the obstructionists at city hall and elsewhere won't allow demoliton. Lawrence will decline.
It's too bad , the J/W, the only publication in town, doesn't want to believe that Lawrence is declining. The Chamber of Commerce could be a moving force in Lawrence but instead is just as lackluster as the city commission and planning commission members who pass issues back and forth.
When is the last time an issue went before the Planning commission and the City commission voted at the next meeting and approved it? Meet in March move forward the next month.
It takes years to get projects approved. The staff at City Hall is comfortable in creating a climate whereby they protect their job.
Now let's hear from the skank "not_holroyd".
by the way, rumor is that certain staff members at LJW may be posters on this site, a site of imposter posters.
Lawrence is in decline.
Edit or delete posts, so be it. Lawrence is slowly deleteing itself from growth. Watch for a couple more closings downtown during the Fall.
Ceallach (anonymous) says…
blue, you forgot about our art! It's worth paying a lot more for a home and receiving a lot less income to be able to walk through the downtown area. One can opine for hours as to what they are actually viewing. So broaden your mind, let your imagination soar, and pay your outrageously high taxes! Oh, and don't forget, it's patriotic to pay taxes, so smile, smile, smile.
average (anonymous) says…
@oneeye
You might get that eye checked out. One piece of business I was watching passed the planning commission unanimously on April 20th of this year, was read the 1st time at city commission on May 5, read second and passed unanimously on May 12th (as were several other recommendations from the April 20th meeting).
unelectable (anonymous) says…
Why is growth the goal? Why not equilibrium? How much should we grow? 100,000? 125,000? 200,000? Join KC to Topeka?
It feels like Municipal Manifest Destiny.
Continual growth is not a reality. Anywhere.
oneeye_wilbur (anonymous) says…
thanks average, but that was probably just average :)
let's see how their "average" fares..
thanks
gosh, average must be working awfully close to the editing desk to respond so quickly, would your mother have been Mistress Quickly aka a Shakespeare character?
gl0ck0wn3r (anonymous) says…
Hmmm somehow I violated the usage agreement. My point was this: it is the anti-growth, faux progressives in this town - of which Richard is a prime example - who have helped bring this town to an economic screeching halt while at the same time burdening the poor with higher taxes. If I had to guess, I would guess that this story is actually pretty positive compared to the reality of the situation which can be measured by better metrics. Either way, it is amusing to see Richard cut-and-paste the same tired anti-growth arguments on a story about how the city is going down the tubes.
Keith (anonymous) says…
"OeraLinda (Anonymous) says…
one of those………….."
Even after you corrected your grammar, you still don't make sense.
BigPrune (anonymous) says…
Lawrence stagnation = tax increases
Get a clue people.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) says…
"Lawrence stagnation = tax increases"
So, by your terms, a person who doesn't have cancer would be "stagnant."
BigPrune (anonymous) says…
Being "stagnant" is unhealthy. If you ride a bicycle or exercise, surely you'd understand.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) says…
To the growthists, anything less than 2 percent growth is unacceptable. At a 2 per cent growth rate, in 25 years, Lawrence would have a population of nearly 150,000, and in fifty years, nearly 250,000. And if every neighboring town or city had similar growth, what we'd end up with is another Southern California. With all the overgrown metropolises in the world, if that's what you want, why do you want to stick around here?
blue73harley (anonymous) says…
ceal - oh, I embrace the art. But what is even more important is to soak up the diversity that IS Larryville. The homeless sex in the streets, the coalition for peace and justice protests, the honk for hemp guy, Richard the weedpicker, the swamp-lovers, the "progressives", the developturds, the Walmart haters...I could go on and on...
BigPrune (anonymous) says…
Perhaps bozo should move to Overbrook.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) says…
"Being “stagnant” is unhealthy. If you ride a bicycle or exercise, surely you'd understand."
Riding a bike or exercising has nothing to do with growth. It's merely taking care of what you've already got. And this town would be a lot better off if we spent more effort and dollars on taking care of those already here and the institutions and infrastructure we need rather than being so neurotic about Olathe planting more tract houses and strip malls than Lawrence does.
BigPrune (anonymous) says…
If you are not in shape, your argument doesn't apply. Your people screwed this town, up. That's why Lawrence has such terrible fiscal problems. Take a class in economics.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) says…
"Perhaps bozo should move to Overbrook."
You're the one who apparently doesn't like it here. Why are you suggesting that others move?
blue73harley (anonymous) says…
Bronze - Regarding banks - I think that, per capita, Lawrence has more banks than Seattle has coffee shops.
none2 (anonymous) says…
Mr_Nancy_Boy_To_You (Tom Shewmon) says…
“…rather than being so neurotic about Olathe planting more tract houses and strip malls than Lawrence does.”
-bozo
And as I've stated before, Hwy 10 is awfully danged busy eastbound in the A.M. and awfully busy westbound in the P.M. with “DG” county on at least every other license plate. I guess all that neurosis drives people to work in JoCo, right?
======================
It isn't neurosis. Rather it is the need to make more money to pay for all the things the needy progressives require. Somebody has to pay the bills.
BigPrune (anonymous) says…
No growth = high taxes. Higher taxes to subsidize progressive policies = stagnation.
Stagflation occurs when the economy isn't growing but prices are - like lawrence's housing market experienced, now being experienced in the commercial real estate market, brought to us by the restrictive "Progressive" policies still in place.