View
1
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
August 17, 2012
Prepared by:
North Allegheny School District Facilities Study Phase 2
Demographic Trends Impacting the North Allegheny School District
Volume
Christopher Briem
Demographic Trends Impacting the North Allegheny School
District
Christopher Briem
August 16, 2012
Executive Summary Demographic Trends Impacting the North Allegheny School District
The communities of the North Allegheny School District have been consistently some of the most stable
areas within Allegheny County and across the Pittsburgh region in recent decades. Both Allegheny
County and the Pittsburgh metropolitan region have experienced nearly continuously declining
populations over the last 50 years whereas the municipalities of Bradford Woods, Franklin Park,
Marshall and McCandless and have all grown substantially over that period.
Nonetheless, the rapid population growth in previous decades has slowed across the district. Between
2000 and 2010 the districts overall population growth of 2.3% was the slowest population growth over
any decade since World War II. This decline in population growth has coincided with an aging of the
district’s population. Whereas earlier growth in these communities was driven by the migration of
younger families with children moving into the district, slower rates of building activity have correlated
with lower rates of migration.
This slower population growth is compounded by the changing demographic composition of the district.
The typical household in the district is likely to have aged in place. Many local families are likely to have
children that have already aged through both primary and secondary school. The result has been a
relatively older population and consequently a lower proportion of families with children. Coupled with
relatively modest rates of building activity these demographic shifts have depressed enrollment trends
within the region in the most recent decades.
With recent building and construction trends across the district showing no new acceleration, in the
near term population gains will be minimal. In the longer term, the district is anticipated to follow the
pattern of both Allegheny County and the greater Pittsburgh region which are both experiencing
significant demographic shifts. The elderly population in both the county and region peaked in the mid
1990s and declined over the subsequent decade. Certain communities that have previously aged in
place over multiple decades are attracting new residents. As a result Allegheny County has experienced
its first population gain in almost a century between 2010 and 2011. While the county‐wide population
gain is minimal, it represents a significant shift in trend compared to the past.
Population projections by the Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission (SPC), the region’s Metropolitan
Planning Organization, forecast a 17 percent growth in Allegheny County’s population between 2010
and 2040. The communities of the North Allegheny School District have consistently fared better than
the county at attracting and retaining residents and as a result the same population forecasts project a
population increase of 25% for the district over that period. However, for the North Allegheny School
District most of this growth is projected to take place only in the latter half of that 30 year period. In the
near term the projected population rise across the district is approximately 5% between 2010 and 2020.
Most of that growth is concentrated in specific communities within the district. Over 60% of net
population growth over the coming decade is projected to be in Franklin Park, with 40% in Marshall.
Minimal growth is projected for Bradford Woods and a decline of 4% over the decade is projected for
McCandless.
Demographic Trends Impacting the North Allegheny School District ‐ August 2012
3
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 2
Overview ....................................................................................................................................................... 5
Population Change in the Pittsburgh Region ................................................................................................ 7
Demographic Change in Allegheny County ................................................................................................. 10
Current District Demographics ................................................................................................................... 12
Migration and Population ....................................................................................................................... 17
Construction and Real Estate Development Impacts ............................................................................. 21
SPC Population Forecasts ........................................................................................................................ 24
Appendix. District Migration Patterns ........................................................................................................ 28
Demographic Trends Impacting the North Allegheny School District ‐ August 2012
4
List of Figures
Figure 1. Annual Net Migration into the Pittsburgh MSA, 1990‐2010 ......................................................... 9
Figure 2.Estimated Population Age 25‐64, Allegheny County, 2000‐2011 ................................................. 11
Figure 3. Projected Population Growth for Allegheny County, 2010 ‐ 2040 .............................................. 11
Figure 4. Percentage of Households with Children Under Age 18 ............................................................. 12
Figure 5.Population Density ‐ 2010 ............................................................................................................. 14
Figure 6.Distribution of Population by Age, 2010 ..................................................................................... 15
Figure 7.Youth Population Density ‐ 2010 .................................................................................................. 16
Figure 8. Increase in Population By Birth Cohort between 2000 and 2010 ................................................ 20
Figure 9.New Privately Owned Residential Housing Units Authorized by Building Permits ...................... 23
Figure 10.Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission Long Range Population Forecasts ............................. 26
Figure 11.Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission Long Range Population Forecasts ............................. 27
Figure 12. Census PUMA areas in the North Hills of Allegheny County ..................................................... 29
Figure 13.Age Distribution of New migrants into North Hills communities of Allegheny County .............. 30
Figure 14. Distribution by Age of Children Moving into North Hills communities of Allegheny County ... 31
List of Tables
Table 1. Population Change By Decade and Municipality, 1960‐2010 ......................................................... 5
Table 2. Household Composition By Type, North Allegheny SD Municipalities, 2010 ............................... 13
Table 3. Residence and Migration by Municipality ..................................................................................... 17
Table 4.Comparison of 2000 and 2010 Population By Single Year of Age .................................................. 19
Table 5. Comparative Age Cohort Analysis ‐ North Allegheny School District ........................................... 19
Table 6.Total Housing Units by Decade and Municipality .......................................................................... 21
Table 7.Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission Long Range Population Forecasts ................................ 25
Demographic Trends Impacting the North Allegheny School District ‐ August 2012
5
Overview
The North Allegheny School District comprises 4 municipalities in the Northwest quadrant of Allegheny
County, Pennsylvania: Bradford Woods, Franklin Park, Marshall and McCandless. Since the end of
World War II these communities have sustained a stable or growing population base despite what has
been an enduring population loss for Allegheny County. These communities have been able to maintain
their population because they attracted a significant level of migration and relocations from within
Allegheny County along with new residents moving into the Pittsburgh region from elsewhere in the
nation. The rapid growth of these communities was fastest over the decades immediately following
World War II. Population growth has continued for the district into the 21st century, but at declining
rates. Population growth for the district between 2000 and 2010 was 2.3% making it the lowest rate of
growth over any of the previous 5 decades.
Table 1. Population Change By Decade and Municipality, 1960‐2010
Total Population
Municipality 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Bradford Woods 866 970 1,264 1,329 1,149 1,124
Franklin Park 3,935 5,310 6,135 10,109 11,364 12,858
Marshall 2,528 2,907 2,594 4,010 5,996 6,643
McCandless 14,582 22,404 26,191 28,271 29,022 28,008
District Total: 21,911 31,591 36,184 43,719 47,531 48,633
Decade change:
44.2% 14.5% 20.8% 8.7% 2.3%
Future demographic change in the communities that comprise the North Allegheny School District will
be driven by fundamental demographic and economic changes happening not only within Allegheny
County but also across the Pittsburgh region. Population change is the result of two factors: natural
population change and migration. Natural migration results from the difference between the number
of deaths and the number of births a region experiences.
Some migration is between the greater Pittsburgh region and other regions within the nation. This inter‐
regional migration is primarily driven by employment decisions of individuals and their families.
Workers relocated for new jobs, or as the result of job loss or to optimize their job search. A significant
factor impacting any particular school district is intra‐regional migration reflecting the movement of
individuals and families within the Pittsburgh region. Intra‐regional migration is much more determined
by housing and quality of life decisions. . Households typically have significant flexibility as to within
which specific community they choose to reside ‐ and within the broader region ‐ can vary significantly
Demographic Trends Impacting the North Allegheny School District ‐ August 2012
6
from municipality to municipality. Overall, the difference between the flows of population moving into
the district and those moving out, or net migration, will add to natural population change and determine
future population levels for the district.
For the communities of the North Allegheny School district the key question is whether the population
trends over the last half century are expected to continue. Demographic forecasting techniques do not
perform particularly well for small areas and may be particularly unhelpful for subareas within the
Pittsburgh region. For the North Allegheny communities, the slowing rate of population growth over
previous decades, if projected out, would imply that future population is likely to experience minimal
growth. Extrapolation of past trends are not particularly helpful for communities in the Pittsburgh
region, which has seen structural shifts in its economic base in recent decades. How those trends have
evolved, and are expected to evolve in the future will be a driving factor in projecting future
demographic shifts and resulting enrollment trends. In addition, the overall population counts to not
fully reflect regional economic shifts taking place nor demographic changes taking place within each
community. Regional communities are experiencing demographic shifts that are unlike that which is
typical elsewhere in the nation. School enrollment patterns depend as much on the composition of
resident households as it they do on overall population counts.
Small area demographic forecasts are particularly difficult because they depend significantly on
migration flows within the county and metropolitan region. These intra‐regional migration flows can
vary significantly over time and are impacted by more than core demographic factors. Development
and real estate construction, zoning and land use and, in particular‐ popular perception of the quality of
individual communities as places to live ‐ all impact these migration flows over time. Indeed the quality
of local schools is itself a major factor impacting future population growth. Population trends for
individual municipalities will be determined by the continuing ability of North Allegheny communities to
continue to attract new residents and retain existing families. The composition of these migration flows,
and specifically the prevalence of young families with children to relocate to communities within the
district will be the factor that determines future enrollment for the district.
This report will provide an overview of the demographic and economic changes taking place in the
Pittsburgh region. The population trends impacting Allegheny County and its constituent municipalities
will be described leading up to the trends impacting the County’s northern suburbs. The specific
demographic trends for the municipalities of the North Allegheny School district will be described along
with the key factors impacting future growth of its constituent municipalities. These factors include the
demographics of the respective municipalities, but also recent and anticipated trends in residential
construction and development.
Demographic Trends Impacting the North Allegheny School District ‐ August 2012
7
Population Change in the Pittsburgh Region
The Pittsburgh region is one that has experienced significant and continued population decline since
World War II. Population change for Allegheny County and its municipalities must first begin with an
analysis of the trends impacting the Pittsburgh region as a while. Past economic changes, including the
large scale decline in heavy industry in the region had profound demographic impacts on the region. A
loss of nearly half of the region's manufacturing employment in the early years of the 1980's, coupled
with slower but ongoing jobs losses in subsequent years begat a significant outmigration of population
from the region. That population loss was even more significant to local school districts and their future
enrollments because of the composition of those migration flows. Younger workers were far more likely
than older workers to leave the region. Net migration out of the region was predominantly made of
young working age workers who took with them their families and their future families as well. Across
the region the loss of those families has impacted the demographic trends in nearly all communities and
school districts in subsequent decades.1
Currently, the Pittsburgh Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), is defined as seven counties in
Southwestern Pennsylvania: Allegheny, Armstrong, Beaver, Butler, Fayette, Washington and
Westmoreland. MSA's are defined by the existence of significant commuting flows between counties.
Between each of the counties that comprise the Pittsburgh MSA are significant and ongoing commuting
flows. These commuting flows demonstrate that individuals and workers have a broad flexibility on the
location they can reside and where they choose to work within the region. Because of this flexibility in
residential location the population trends of individual municipalities within the region will first be
impacted by the regional economic and population trends.
The Pittsburgh MSA has experienced ongoing population losses over the last 25 years because of two
factors. Natural population change in the Pittsburgh region had been positive, resulting from a greater
number of births than deaths annually, through most of the 20th century until the mid‐1990s. From the
mid‐1990s forward, natural population change in the Pittsburgh region has been negative. The
Pittsburgh MSA is the only large metropolitan region in the United States to currently be experiencing
natural population decline. This rare example of natural population decline results mostly from the age
of the population that migrated out of the region in the early 1980's and earlier. Past migration was
very age‐selective with younger workers more likely to leave the region than older workers or those who
had already retired from the workforce. Those workers leaving would typically take with them their
families and their future families. This natural population decline peaked between 2000 and 2005 and
has generally been declining since. Natural population change remains negative for the region, but at
levels which have been declining over the last decade.
The shifting trends in natural population change for the Pittsburgh region will have a significant impact
on the region's future population trends. Natural population change is coincident to other changing
1 For more on the demographic trends impacting the Pittsburgh region see: A Demographic Overview of the Metropolitan Pittsburgh, by Peter A. Morrison. The RAND Corporation. Santa Monica, CA, 2004.
Demographic Trends Impacting the North Allegheny School District ‐ August 2012
8
demographic patterns within the population. For the Pittsburgh region, the population of age 65 and
over peaked in the mid‐1990s, just as population decline became negative. The proportion of the
region’s population of elderly peaked at that time. Many local communities have large proportions of
their resident households that have resided in their current location for multiple decades. This has
resulted in an “aging in place” demographic. For many Pittsburgh region communities and
neighborhoods there is a demographic shift taking place as these long tenured housing units come back
on the market and are replaced by residents significantly younger than what was typical in the past.
The Pittsburgh region has also been impacted by continued net migration of the population. Over the
last 25 years, other than for a brief period between 1991 and 1992, population outflows from the region
have exceeded the flow of population into the region. This ongoing outmigration has had an extended
impact on the region's population. Regional migration flows are mostly an economic phenomenon.
Most long distance migration flows (migration between metropolitan regions) in the US are the result of
employment related decisions. The net outmigration from the Pittsburgh region in recent decades has
reflected the overall level of job growth and relative job opportunity in the region compared to other
regions across the nation.
Population migration trends for the region are shifting. For the Pittsburgh region, recent shifts in the
region's economy are having impacts on migration flows into the region. Significantly, the Pittsburgh
MSA has begun to experience positive net migration for the first time in decades. Figure 1. shows the
trend in net migration flows impacting the population of the Pittsburgh region. While the rate of net
migration into the Pittsburgh region is relatively low, it represents a significant change in trend
compared to the past. This particular migration data is derived from change of address information
distributed by the Internal Revenue Service. When international immigration and college matriculant
migration is factored in, the overall rate of net migration into the region is even larger.
Past population trends for most communities in the Pittsburgh region have to be considered in light of
what has been the significant loss of population resulting from the long term and sustained out‐
migration of population. The rate of net migration into the region is only at a moderate level, but the
switch from net out‐migration to net in‐migration will have a broad impact on local municipalities going
forward.
The changing trend in migration flows is particularly important to projecting school enrollments. While
some migration is retirement related, most population migration in the United States is caused by
employment decisions. Trends for retirement migration flows are relatively stable over time, so
changing trends in regional migration flows are more likely to be caused by changes in economic
migration flows of the working age population. Employment induced, or economic, migration is
comprised of working age cohorts in the population which are also more likely to be part of households
with children. Whereas retirement migration is mostly of households without school age children,
employment migration can be expected to have greater impacts on the future population of school age
children.
Demographic Trends Impacting the North Allegheny School District ‐ August 2012
9
Figure 1. Annual Net Migration into the Pittsburgh MSA, 1990‐20102
2Migration Trends in the Pittsburgh Region: Update Through 2010. University Center for Social and Urban Research. December 2010.
‐10,000
‐8,000
‐6,000
‐4,000
‐2,000
0
2,000
Demographic Trends Impacting the North Allegheny School District ‐ August 2012
10
Demographic Change in Allegheny County
Allegheny County is the largest county in Southwestern Pennsylvania, with approximately half of the
population in the seven‐county Pittsburgh MSA. Allegheny County has suffered population loss resulting
from both overall migration from the region, but also from the movement of population within the
Pittsburgh region. Suburbanization of residential population is a national phenomenon that has
impacted the Pittsburgh region similarly to other metropolitan regions. As a result, Allegheny County
has experienced net migration of population across every decade going back to the 1920s.
Like the Pittsburgh region, Allegheny County experienced disproportionate outmigration of population
in the 1980's. The younger age composition of those migration flows also resulted in a comparatively
older population and natural population decline from the mid‐1990s onward. One corollary of the
natural population decline impacting both Allegheny County and the Pittsburgh region has been a
decline in the level of the elderly population (age 65 and over). There have also been changes to the
college age population in the county that are reflective of changes in enrollment at local institutions of
higher education. As shown in Figure 2, the Census Bureau estimates that the population trend for the
population of age 25‐64 in Allegheny County has actually been positive since 2008. This reversal of
trend is one part of what is anticipated to be continued population increases in Allegheny County, and in
particular, increase in the population most likely to comprise families with school age children.
Long range forecasts for both the Pittsburgh region and Allegheny County show that Allegheny County
will continue to experience moderate population growth over the coming decades. While the overall
rate of population growth is moderate it reflects a significant turnaround from the net migration
experienced prior. Figure 3 shows the current long range population forecast for Allegheny County
produced by the Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission (SPC), the Federally designated Metropolitan
Planning Organization (MPO) for the Pittsburgh region. Between 2010 and 2040 the county's population
is projected to increase by an annual average of 1.6%. While this reflects a moderate growth, it
represents a significant turnaround from population declines in previous decades. SPC forecasts of the
population specific to the North Allegheny School District and its constituent municipalities are provided
in a subsequent section of this report.
Demographic Trends Impacting the North Allegheny School District ‐ August 2012
11
Figure 2.Estimated Population Age 25‐64, Allegheny County, 2000‐2011
Source: U.S. Census Bureau ‐ Population Estimates Program
Figure 3. Projected Population Growth for Allegheny County, 2010 ‐ 2040
Source: Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission
640,000
650,000
660,000
670,000
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010^ 2010* 2011
‐
200,000
400,000
600,000
800,000
1,000,000
1,200,000
1,400,000
1,600,000
2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
Demographic Trends Impacting the North Allegheny School District ‐ August 2012
12
Current District Demographics
Population trends for the communities of the North Allegheny School District are a hybrid of two
competing factors. The four communities of Bradford Woods, McCandless, Marshall and Franklin Park
are located within Allegheny County, the urban core of the Pittsburgh region which has experienced the
most decline since World War II. They are also suburban areas that have been able to attract new
residents relocating from elsewhere within the county and new residents moving into the region. The
ability to attract new residents has over time resulted in a comparatively younger population when
compared to other municipalities within Allegheny County, though generally not as young as
municipalities in other counties within the region. Figure 4 compares the percentage of households with
children under 18 in each of these communities to the average for Allegheny County. Each of these
communities has a greater proportion of households with children than the county as a whole. Franklin
Park and Marshall have significantly more households with children than is typical across the county.
Table 2 gives some further detail on the household composition of each municipality.
Figure 4. Percentage of Households with Children Under Age 18
25.227.6
43.9
28.0
44.2
0
10
20
30
40
50
Allegheny County Bradford Woods Frankin Park McCandless Marshall
Demographic Trends Impacting the North Allegheny School District ‐ August 2012
13
Table 2. Household Composition By Type, North Allegheny SD Municipalities, 2010
Allegheny Bradford Franklin
County Woods Park McCandless Marshall
Total households 533,960 100 474 100 4,723 100 11,659 100 2,415 100
Family households 308,009 57.7 359 75.7 3,883 82.2 7,709 66.1 1,994 82.6
With own children 123,389 23.1 123 25.9 2,020 42.8 3,113 26.7 1,046 43.3
Husband‐wife family 222,332 41.6 323 68.1 3,530 74.7 6,647 57 1,817 75.2
With own children 81,706 15.3 111 23.4 1,842 39 2,651 22.7 963 39.9
Male householder, no
wife present 20,406 3.8 15 3.2 126 2.7
297 2.5 61 2.5
With own children 8,559 1.6 5 1.1 59 1.2 136 1.2 25 1
Female householder, no
husband present 65,271 12.2 21 4.4 227 4.8
765 6.6 116 4.8
With own children 33,124 6.2 7 1.5 119 2.5 326 2.8 58 2.4
Nonfamily households 225,951 42.3 115 24.3 840 17.8 3,950 33.9 421 17.4
Householder living alone 186,958 35 100 21.1 710 15 3,337 28.6 358 14.8
Male 79,382 14.9 32 6.8 285 6 1,295 11.1 144 6
65 years and over 18,970 3.6 11 2.3 93 2 352 3 42 1.7
Female 107,576 20.1 68 14.3 425 9 2,042 17.5 214 8.9
65 years and over 50,691 9.5 32 6.8 210 4.4 971 8.3 121 5
Households with
individuals under 18 134,539 25.2 131 27.6 2,072 43.9
3,263 28 1,068 44.2
Households with
individuals 65+
150,500 28.2 161 34 1,033 21.9
3,251 27.9 480 19.9
Demographic Trends Impacting the North Allegheny School District ‐ August 2012
14
Figure 5.Population Density ‐ 2010 Population per square mile by Census Block
Demographic Trends Impacting the North Allegheny School District ‐ August 2012
15
Figure 6.Distribution of Population by Age, 2010 North Allegheny School District and Allegheny County
Source: Compiled from U.S. Census Bureau ‐ Decennial Census 2010 (Summary File 1)
0.0%
0.5%
1.0%
1.5%
2.0%Under 1 4 8
12
16
20
24
28
32
36
40
44
48
52
56
60
64
68
72
76
80
84
88
92
96
100
North Allegheny Allegheny County
Demographic Trends Impacting the North Allegheny School District ‐ August 2012
16
Figure 7.Youth Population Density ‐ 2010 Population Under Age 18 per square mile by Census Block
Demographic Trends Impacting the North Allegheny School District ‐ August 2012
17
Migration and Population
The cross section of population in 2010 gives only a starting point for projections of future population
for municipalities in Allegheny County. Dynamic communities such as those of the North Allegheny
School District are continually impacted by migration. Table 3 shows the most recent data available on
migration flows at the municipal level which impact the North Allegheny School District. This data from
the American Community Survey is derived from a specific question as to where each respondent lived
one year prior. The results are that on average 8.2% of the district's population lived in a different
municipality just one year earlier. While comparable data is not available for the proportion of the
population that moved out over the same year, the scale of new residents is a sign of continued
attraction and competiveness of each of these communities.
Table 3. Residence and Migration by Municipality North Allegheny SD Municipalities, American Community Survey, 2006‐2010
Bradford Woods
Franklin Park
McCandless MarshallNA
School District
Total Population 1,124 12,858 28,008 6,643 48,633 Same house 1 year ago 1,016 11,825 25,353 6,181 44,375 Different house in US 1 year ago: 108 987 2,532 407 4,034 Same city or town: 0 25 11 0 36 Same county 0 25 11 0 36 Different county (same state) 0 0 0 0 0 Elsewhere: 108 962 2,521 407 3,998 Same county 90 562 1,672 369 2,693 Different county: 18 400 849 38 1,305 Same state 8 127 366 18 519 Different state: 10 273 483 20 786 Northeast 0 41 73 0 114 Midwest 0 96 159 5 260 South 10 136 251 0 397 West 0 0 0 15 15 Abroad 1 year ago: 0 46 123 55 224 Puerto Rico 0 0 0 0 0 U.S. Island Areas 0 0 0 0 0 Foreign country 0 46 123 55 224
Percentage who moved into the municipality over previous year
9.6% 7.5% 9.0% 6.1% 8.2%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau ‐ American Community Survey 2006‐2010
Demographic Trends Impacting the North Allegheny School District ‐ August 2012
18
Migration, especially migration of households with young school age children, is the primary reason for
the increase in population for specific age cohorts. Table 4 compares the population by single year of
age between 2000 and 2010 for the North Allegheny School District. While for many of the specific ages
the overall number of children in the district has decreased over the decade, a comparison of what has
happened to each birth cohort over that time gives a stronger indication of what can be anticipated in
the future.
Table 5 is the same population by single year of age data except it is matched to consistent birth year
cohorts. For each cohort there is a significant increase in the population over the decade, which results
from migration of households with children. The trend in this relative gain in birth cohorts is compiled in
Figure 8 and shows a steadily increasing gain in population. Only the earliest birth cohort in the range
shown (children born in 1992‐1993) is likely to be impacted by migration related to college matriculation
or post high school relocation. These recent migration trends will be incorporated into the enrollment
projections described in a subsequent section.
Note, all the year groups are shown as ranges, but nonetheless reflect single year periods. The
decennial census reports data as of April 1 of each year. As a result, birth cohorts reflect births
between successive Aprils.
Demographic Trends Impacting the North Allegheny School District ‐ August 2012
19
Table 4.Comparison of 2000 and 2010 Population By Single Year of Age North Allegheny School District3
Age Birth Range
Population 2000
Birth Range
Population 2010
Under 1 1999-2000 539 2009-2010 458
1 1998-1999 600 2008-2009 512
2 1997-1998 575 2007-2008 583
3 1996-1997 633 2006-2007 601
4 1995-1996 673 2005-2006 649
5 1994-1995 657 2004-2005 657
6 1993-1994 678 2003-2004 683
7 1992-1993 669 2002-2003 687
8 1991-1992 703 2001-2002 708
9 1990-1991 808 2000-2001 736
10 1989-1990 761 1999-2000 725
11 1988-1989 722 1998-1999 727
12 1987-1988 807 1997-1998 734
13 1986-1987 794 1996-1997 752
14 1985-1986 763 1995-1996 742
15 1984-1985 741 1994-1995 744
16 1983-1984 741 1993-1994 751
17 1982-1983 710 1992-1993 722
Source: U.S. Census Bureau ‐ Decennial Census 2000 and 2010 (Summary File 1)
Table 5. Comparative Age Cohort Analysis ‐ North Allegheny School District
Population Increase
Birth Range 2000 2010 Number Percent
1998‐1999 600 727 127 21.2%
1997‐1998 575 734 159 27.7%
1996‐1997 633 752 119 18.8%
1995‐1996 673 742 69 10.3%
1994‐1995 657 744 87 13.2%
1993‐1994 678 751 73 10.8%
1992‐1993 669 722 53 7.9%
3 Birth range will generally reflect an age between April 1 of each year. This is because the decennial census collects data for a reference data of April 1 each decade. As a result the self‐reported age of children will be as of that date.
Demographic Trends Impacting the North Allegheny School District ‐ August 2012
20
Source: U.S. Census Bureau ‐ Decennial Census 2000 and 2010 (Summary File 1)
Figure 8. Increase in Population By Birth Cohort between 2000 and 2010 North Allegheny School District
+7.9%
+10.8%
+13.2%
+10.3%
+18.8%
+27.7%
+21.2%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
1992‐1993 1993‐1994 1994‐1995 1995‐1996 1996‐1997 1997‐1998 1998‐1999
Demographic Trends Impacting the North Allegheny School District ‐ August 2012
21
Construction and Real Estate Development Impacts
A major factor impacting the projected population growth of many communities is projected real estate
investment and the development of new residential housing. For the communities in the North Hills of
Allegheny County, the large scale development of new residential housing was a major factor in the
population growth the communities experienced in the decades following World War II. New
residential construction in these communities has continued, but at significantly slower rates than in
earlier decades. Table 6 shows the trend in the number of housing units for municipalities within the
North Allegheny School District. While the growth between 2000 and 2010 of 11% was significantly
slower than the rate between 1980 and 1990 (+30.9%) it is only slightly slower than the change between
1990 and 2000 ( +12.1%).
In contrast, Allegheny County experienced only a 1% increase in the total number of new housing units
over the period 2000‐2010. The continuing building activity of North Allegheny School District
communities reflects on their ability to continue to attract new residents within the county. Remarkably
the 4 municipalities of the school district recorded 1,103 new housing units between 2000 and 2010,
which accounts for just under 20% of all net new housing units in Allegheny County over the decade.
This is despite the fact that the district accounts for just under 4% of the county's total population in
2010.
Table 6.Total Housing Units by Decade and Municipality North Allegheny School District and Municipalities
1980 1990 2000 2010
Bradford Woods 419 476 478 497
Franklin Park 1,972 3,420 3,973 4,882
Marshall 900 1,382 2,018 2531
McCandless 9,093 10,933 11,697 12,307
District total: 12,384 16,211 18,166 20,217
Growth over decade: 30.9% 12.1% 11.3%
Near term population projections will be impacted by any recent deviation in building activity within the
district. Figure 9 shows the recent trends in approved building permits by year for private residential
housing units in each of the municipalities of the North Allegheny School District. Building permits
generally reflect a leading indicator to future construction and population trends. The timeline to actual
construction and new sales resulting can vary from as short as 6 months to several years, with larger
projects taking longer to complete and take in new residents.
Recent trends in new housing unit construction can be expected to impact future migration and
population trends for each of the district's municipalities. Most of the migration generated by recent
building permit activity over the recent decade is captured via the cohort migration analysis in the
Demographic Trends Impacting the North Allegheny School District ‐ August 2012
22
previous section. Looking forward, the only anticipated deviation from those trends will likely come
from any recent deviation in the patterns of new housing unit construction within the district.
For 2011 total building permits across the 4 municipalities of the district were recorded at 151 which is
in line with both a 5 year and 10 year average for the number of private residential building permits
across the district. The only anomaly in recent years derives from a significant spike in building permits
recorded in McCandless for 2009. Compared to an average of under 35 new residential housing units in
the municipality annually over the preceding decade (1999‐2008), 180 were recorded in McCandless for
2009. That year 57 units were recorded for single family housing units, a number in line with what was
normal for McCandless over the decade, while 123 units were in multiple unit structures of 5 or more
units which was highly atypical of new housing construction for the municipality.
With other building permits activity in the district are generally reflecting a steady state trend for the
region, the additional 123 new housing units can be expected to induce new population moving into the
district beyond that which is expected from recent migration patterns. For McCandless in 2010, the
average population per housing unit was 2.43 ‐ which would mean that the 123 units would induce
additional new population of approximately 299 moving into the district. This ratio may not reflect the
population moving in this type of multi‐unit development. Average household size ranges from 1.71
people per household for rental units in McCandless in 2010 to 2.55 people per household for owner
occupied housing units in the municipality. Depending on the mix of rental and owner occupied status
for these new units, the anticipated additional population moving into the district is between 210 and
314. A large multi‐unit development is anticipated to attract residents more similar to rental housing
than single family housing units.
With housing unit vacancy rates across the district minimal, the 123 additional units can be expected to
generate net gain in population within the district. A supplemental analysis of migration patterns into
the district is included here as an appendix of this report. That analysis estimates that the population
recently moving into the northern suburbs of Allegheny County is 25% comprised of children under age
18. Based on an expectation that new population resulting from this development will be 210, the total
number of new children that can be expected to move into the region would be approximately 52 when
the development is fully occupied. Any new children will be distributed across age ranges detailed in
the appendix for an average of 3 children per single year of age. If the anomalous construction is more
marketed toward older households, it is less likely to have school age children and the anticipated
enrollment impacts will be lower.
Demographic Trends Impacting the North Allegheny School District ‐ August 2012
23
Figure 9.New Privately Owned Residential Housing Units Authorized by Building Permits North Allegheny School District Municipalities, 1996 ‐2010
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
3501996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
McCandless
Marshall
Franklin Park
Bradford Woods
Demographic Trends Impacting the North Allegheny School District ‐ August 2012
24
SPC Population Forecasts
Population forecasts of population for local municipalities and school districts within the Pittsburgh
region have also been produced by the Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission (SPC). SPC is the
Federally designated Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) responsible for transportation planning
for 10 counties of Southwestern Pennsylvania. As part of SPC's long range transportation improvement
plan, population forecasts for the region and all local municipalities are developed. SPC population
forecasts incorporate regional population and economic trends, but also local development factors and
transportation access factors that are likely to impact the distribution of future population growth or
decline within the region.
While these forecasts are not directly used in the enrollment projections developed in the next section,
they are provided here to provide additional context for what patterns of population change are
anticipated within Allegheny County. SPC utilizes both a regional population projection for their
projections and an intra‐regional model for the allocation of growth or decline to specific municipalities
and school districts. The regional population projections are developed from the REMI model, an
economic model developed by Regional Economic Models Inc. of Amherst, MA. This regional model
incorporates a detailed demographic mode of the Pittsburgh region and an economic model that allows
for the projection of future population trends. The REMI model provides detailed projections for the 1‐
county region within Southwestern Pennsylvania and for specific counties or groups of counties within
the region. Allegheny County is one of the model regions for which the REMI provides detailed
population projections.4
SPC has developed a model of population and economic growth within the Pittsburgh region that it uses
to develop specific population projections for individual school districts and municipalities. SPC’s
MERLAM model (Mature Economic Region Land Allocation Model) is used to allocate the REMI regional
population and employment projection to municipalities and traffic zones. The allocation is based on
local data for relative tax rates, accessibility to transportation facilities, proximity to jobs, existing
development density, and other factors that measure each area’s relative capacity to attract and retain
people and jobs. The MERLAM model also develops the projection of households based on the
population forecast and the region’s reported 40‐year Census trend in household size. The MERLAM
model is intended to capture the fundamental trends that impact the relative competitiveness of
specific communities as the region’s population changes in the future.
4 The REMI model is purchased jointing between the Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission and the University of Pittsburgh where the author works. This report did not develop any separate REMI forecasts beyond what is distributed by the Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission. For more on the REMI model and Allegheny County population projections see: Housing and Social‐Demographic Trends. A report for Allegheny Places: the Allegheny County Comprehensive Plan, Prepared by the University Center for Social and Urban Research ,Sabina Deitrick, Christopher Briem, & Angela Williams Foster in cooperation with McCormick Taylor, Inc. Engineers and Planners. December 2005.
Demographic Trends Impacting the North Allegheny School District ‐ August 2012
25
The SPC population forecasts for the North Allegheny School District and its constituent municipalities
are included in table 7 and figure 10. These forecasts show moderate population growth in each
municipality. Overall the district is projected to increase from a population of 46,262 in 2010 to 58,139
in 2040.
Table 7.Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission Long Range Population Forecasts North Allegheny School District and Municipalities
Municipality 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
Bradford Woods 1,222 1,242 1,273 1,307 1,354 1,414 1,475
Franklin Park 12,446 13,123 13,887 14,755 15,735 16,795 17,943
McCandless 25,831 25,659 25,732 26,036 26,722 27,466 28,279
Marshall 6,763 7,232 7,755 8,344 8,993 9,693 10,442
District 46,262 47,256 48,647 50,442 52,804 55,368 58,139
5‐year Growth
2010‐15 2015‐20 2020‐25 2025‐30 2030‐35 2035‐40
Bradford Woods 1.6% 2.5% 2.7% 3.6% 4.4% 4.3%
Franklin Park 5.4% 5.8% 6.3% 6.6% 6.7% 6.8%
Marshall 6.9% 7.2% 7.6% 7.8% 7.8% 7.7%
McCandless ‐0.7% 0.3% 1.2% 2.6% 2.8% 3.0%
Source: Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission (SPC)
Also presented here in Figure 11 is a comparison of school district population projections also prepared
by the Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission. The North Allegheny School District is projected to have
the 10th highest rate of population increase between 2010 and 2040 among the 43 school districts
within Allegheny County. Regardless of whether the specific amount of population gain is achieved, the
distribution of future growth within Allegheny County is more likely to match these patterns.
The enrollment forecasts developed in the following section are not directly derived from these SPC
population forecasts for the municipalities of the North Allegheny School District. The forecasts of
elementary school enrollments developed here focus on younger age cohorts and anticipated
enrollment change in the term. Nonetheless the SPC forecasts provide a broader insight into the longer
term trends that are likely to impact population trends across the Pittsburgh region and the patterns of
anticipated growth or decline between subareas of Southwestern Pennsylvania.
Demographic Trends Impacting the North Allegheny School District ‐ August 2012
26
Figure 10.Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission Long Range Population Forecasts North Allegheny School District and Municipalities
Source: Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission (SPC)
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
Bradford Wood
Franklin Park
McCandless
Marshall
District
Demographic Trends Impacting the North Allegheny School District ‐ August 2012
27
Figure 11.Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission Long Range Population Forecasts North Allegheny School District and Municipalities
Source: Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission (SPC)
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
Carlynton Sto‐Rox
Keystone Oaks Allegheny Valley
Penn Hills McKeesport Area
Wilkinsburg Borough Steel Valley
Elizabeth Forward Woodland Hills
Riverview Pittsburgh
Baldwin‐Whitehall Northgate
East Allegheny North Hills
Duquesne City Highlands
Brentwood Borough Cornell
Bethel Park Upper Saint Clair South Allegheny
Shaler Area West Mifflin Area
Gateway Mt Lebanon Clairton City South Park
Plum Borough Fort Cherry
West Jefferson Hills Quaker Valley
Hampton Township North Allegheny Chartiers Valley
Moon Area Fox Chapel Area
Deer Lakes Avonworth
West Allegheny Montour
South Fayette Township Pine‐Richland
Demographic Trends Impacting the North Allegheny School District ‐ August 2012
28
Appendix. District Migration Patterns
An important factor in determining future enrollment patterns for the district comes from the migration
of families with school age children.
Only limited data is directly available via the Census Bureau or other sources on the demographic
composition of recent migration flows at a municipal or school district level. Census data available via
the Public Use Microsample Data (PUMS) distributed for the American Community Survey (ACS) can be
used to compile the demographic profile of recent migrants into smaller geographic areas, though not
for areas as small as specific municipalities. PUMS data is identified to geographic areas ('PUMA' areas)
with populations of approximately 100 thousand. Within Allegheny county, PUMS area '01801' covers
an area of the North Hills of Allegheny county including all of the municipalities of the North Allegheny
school district. The geographic description of PUMA areas in the North Hills areas of Allegheny County is
shown in figure 12. With North Allegheny’s 2010 population of 48,633, it constitutes roughly half of the
PUMA area. The analysis here infers that general population migration impacting the larger North Hills
area covered by PUMA area '01801' is generally consistent with migration trends impacting the
communities of the North Allegheny School District.
Using PUMS data, a breakdown of recent migrants moving into the North Hills of Allegheny County can
be compiled and compared to the migration flow into other parts of the county. Here in figure 13, is a
breakdown by age group of new migrants moving into district. This figure describes the population that
moved from another PUMA area over the last year and may include some intra‐regional and inter‐
regional migration. In almost all cases, this means that a new migrant is someone who moved at least
between municipalities over the most recent year, but could also include population that moved into
the region from elsewhere in the country.
What this shows is that recent migrants into the North Hills are far more likely to include children
under age 18 compared to new migrants in the county as a whole. 25% of new arrivals in the North Hills
are children under 18, compared to just over 16% for Allegheny County as a whole. Elsewhere in
Allegheny County, there is a greater proportion of new arrivals between the ages of 18 and 24 reflecting
the concentration of college matriculants mostly in the City of Pittsburgh.
Of the new arrivals who are under age 18, figure 14 further breaks down this migration flow by single
year of age. This figure is the breakdown of recent arrivals solely among the population that is under age
18. While new children moving into the North Hills are spread across all age groups, there is a particular
concentration of new arrivals age 1 or less. This concentration of migration for younger children is
consistent with the growth of younger age cohorts shown earlier.
Demographic Trends Impacting the North Allegheny School District ‐ August 2012
29
Figure 12. Census PUMA areas in the North Hills of Allegheny County
Demographic Trends Impacting the North Allegheny School District ‐ August 2012
30
Figure 13.Age Distribution of New migrants into North Hills communities of Allegheny County
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
Under 18 Age 18‐24 Age 25‐34 Age 35‐54 Age 65+
North Hills Communities Remainder of Allegheny County
Demographic Trends Impacting the North Allegheny School District ‐ August 2012
31
Figure 14. Distribution by Age of Children Moving into North Hills communities of Allegheny County
9.4%
8.9%
6.3% 6.5%
5.4%
6.6%
4.6%5.0% 4.8%
4.4%
5.9%
4.7% 4.9%5.3%
5.0%
5.8%6.3%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Recommended