U.S. Department of Commerce

Economics and Statistics Administration

U.S. CENSUS BUREAU

census.gov

Population Trends in Incorporated Places: 

2000 to 2013

Population Estimates and Projections

Issued March 2015

P25-1142

By Darryl T. Cohen

(With Geoffrey W. Hatchard and Steven G. Wilson)

Current Population Reports

INTRODUCTION

Nearly two-thirds of Americans live in incorporated 

places, commonly referred to as cities. As the majority of the nation’s population lives in cities, patterns 

of population change among cities and the social and 

economic conditions affecting them often represent 

national trends. Using data from the 2000 and 2010 

censuses and 2013 population estimates, this report 

examines the population in cities and highlights how 

city populations changed between 2000 and 2010, 

and between 2010 and 2013. The report discusses the 

distribution of the population in cities by region, state, 

and city population size. It also highlights the fastestgrowing cities, city population densities, annexation, 

and new incorporations between 2010 and 2013.

Incorporated places are local governmental entities 

with powers to collect taxes and provide services 

within legally defined geographic boundaries. State 

laws govern how such places are established (incorporation), how they may modify their boundaries 

(annexation or deannexation), and how they may be 

dissolved (disincorporation). The population size, geographic extent, and population density of these places 

vary considerably. 

The U.S. Census Bureau produces estimates of the 

population of all governmentally active incorporated places in the United States each year. While 

cities, towns, boroughs, villages, and other types of 

municipalities are included in these estimates, for 

readability, the term “city” is used interchangeably 

with “incorporated place” throughout this report as 

a generic term to refer to incorporated places of all 

types. Though some unincorporated settlements 

(those without legally formed municipal governments) 

may colloquially be referred to as cities, such unincorporated settlements are generally not included in this 

report.

NATIONAL AND REGIONAL DISTRIBUTION 

OF THE INCORPORATED PLACE 

POPULATION 

Over 198.2 million people lived in incorporated places 

in 2013, constituting 62.7 percent of the U.S. population (Table 1, Figure 1). This was a slight increase 

from 62.3 percent of the U.S. population in 2010, 

and 61.9 percent in 2000 (Table 2). Between 2000 

and 2013, the population inside incorporated places 

increased by 24.1 million, or about 13.9 percent. The 

population inside incorporated places grew faster 

than the total U.S. population (up 12.3 percent) over 

the same period (Table 1). Similar to the total population, the incorporated place population increased in 

every region from 2000 to 2013, and did so at faster 

rates in the South and West than in the Northeast and 

Midwest. The Northeast was the only region in which 

the population inside cities increased at a slower rate 

than the total population between 2000 and 2013, 

even though the Northeast’s city population grew 

faster than the total population during the 3-year 

period from 2010 to 2013.

There were 19,508 incorporated places in 2013 (Table 

2). The Midwest had the largest number of incorporated 

places of any region (8,502), followed by the South 

(6,576), the West (2,310), and the Northeast (2,120).

Variation in the number of incorporated places, as well 

as in their population, area, and density results in a 
2 U.S. Census Bureau

different profile of the incorporated 

place population for each census 

region. For example, while the 

Northeast and the West had relatively 

similar numbers of incorporated 

places in 2013, the population of 

incorporated places in the West was 

roughly twice that of incorporated 

places in the Northeast. This can 

be explained in part by the West’s 

larger total population, as well as a 

higher proportion of its population 

living in incorporated places. Large 

expanses of arid and federally held 

land in Western states contribute to 

population concentration in cities. 

The Northeast, in contrast, contains 

many more smaller-sized incorporated places, as well as a large 

population living in densely settled 

unincorporated areas adjacent to 

large cities. 

The West had the highest percentage of its population living in 

incorporated places (76.4 percent, 

Figure 1). The South, however, had 

the largest number of people living 

in incorporated places in 2013 (64.7 

million, Table 1). The South also 

had the largest total population of 

any region (118.4 million), of which 

about 54.7 percent lived inside 

incorporated places. The Northeast 

had the lowest percentage (51.3) 

of population living in incorporated 

places. This is partly due to the fact 

that towns in New England are not 

treated as incorporated places in 

Census Bureau data products. 

(See text box “Incorporated Places 

vs. Unincorporated Places.”)

POPULATION IN 

INCORPORATED PLACES 

BY STATE

Reflecting the pattern exhibited at 

the regional level, the states with 

the highest percentages of their 

population in incorporated places 

tended to be located in the Midwest 

and West (Figure 2).1 Utah had the 

highest percentage (88.4), followed by Illinois (86.9), California 

(83.1), Kansas (82.7), and Minnesota 

(82.2).2 Vermont had the lowest 

percentage (24.6). 

This strong regional pattern reflects 

varying levels of urbanization, 

as well as differences in the total 

population and the number of 

incorporated places in each region. 

The West, for example, with 89.8 

percent of its population living in 

urban areas (not to be confused 

with cities) in 2010, was the most 

urbanized of the four regions. (See 

text box “City vs. Urban vs. Metropolitan.”) The relatively small number of incorporated places in the 

West reflects this greater degree of 

population concentration compared 

with the other regions. Montana 

stands out as an exception among 

Western states. A larger percentage 

of its population lived in rural areas 

(44.1 percent) compared with other 

states in the region, and with the 

region as a whole, whose population was only 10.2 percent rural. 

The lower percentages of population living in cities in Northeastern 

states such as Maine and New 

Hampshire, as well as Southern 

states such as West Virginia, are 

consistent with the larger proportions of their populations living in 

rural areas. Maine’s population was 

61.3 percent rural in 2010, New 

Hampshire’s 61.1 percent, and West 

Virginia’s 51.3 percent.

While the Midwest and South had 

similar rural population percentages 

1 Although there are no incorporated places 

in Hawaii, the Census Bureau typically includes 

the census designated place (CDP) of Urban 

Honolulu in its annual population estimates 

per special agreement with the state of

Hawaii. Urban Honolulu CDP accounted for 

24.8 percent of the state’s population in 2013. 

(See text box “Incorporated Places vs.

Unincorporated Places.”) 2 The District of Columbia is coextensive 

with the city of Washington, and is thus 

completely incorporated.

Figure 1.

Percentage of Population in Incorporated Places

by Region: 2013

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2013 Population Estimates.

62.7

51.3

71.2

54.7

76.4

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

West

South

Midwest

Northeast

United States
U.S. Census Bureau 3

(24.1 and 24.2, respectively), the 

Midwest had a greater number of 

incorporated places, and a higher 

percentage of its population living 

in incorporated places (Figure 1). 

This pattern can be seen in Figure 2, 

which shows Midwestern states such 

as Iowa and Nebraska with higher 

percentages of their populations living in incorporated places compared 

to Southern states such as South 

Carolina and West Virginia. 

POPULATION BY SIZE OF 

INCORPORATED PLACE

Incorporated places ranged in population from zero to more than 8 million in 2013.3 Though most of the 

incorporated place population (60.6 

percent) lived in places of 50,000 

3 While some states require a minimum 

population for the establishment of an incorporated place, others do not. It is therefore 

possible for a place to be legally incorporated 

even if there is no population living within its 

boundaries. Some such places may include 

only nonresidential territory, while others may 

have experienced population decline. A place 

will typically remain legally incorporated, even 

if its government is inactive, until the legal 

process of disincorporation is completed.

or more residents, the majority of 

incorporated places were relatively 

small. In 2013, 16,494 incorporated places—about 85 percent of 

all incorporated places—had fewer 

than 10,000 people (Table 2). These 

small places accounted for about 

14 percent of the total incorporated 

place population, or 9.1 percent of 

the total U.S. population. By contrast, in 2000, cities of less than 

10,000 accounted for 16.5 percent 

of the incorporated place population, and more than 10 percent of 

the total U.S. population—a higher 

Table 1.

Total Population and Population in Incorporated Places by Region: 2000 to 2013

Area

April 1, 2000,

Census

April 1, 2010,

Census

July 1, 2013,

estimate

Change,

2000 to 2013

Change,

2000 to 2010

Change,

2010 to 2013

Number

Percent Number

Percent Number

Percent

TOTAL POPULATION

 United States . . . . . . . . . . 281,421,906 308,745,538 316,128,839 34,706,933 12.3 27,323,632 9.7 7,383,301 2.4

Northeast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53,594,378 55,317,240 55,943,073 2,348,695 4.4 1,722,862 3.2 625,833 1.1

Midwest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64,392,776 66,927,001 67,547,890 3,155,114 4.9 2,534,225 3.9 620,889 0.9

South . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100,236,820 114,555,744 118,383,453 18,146,633 18.1 14,318,924 14.3 3,827,709 3.3

West . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63,197,932 71,945,553 74,254,423 11,056,491 17.5 8,747,621 13.8 2,308,870 3.2

POPULATION IN

INCORPORATED PLACES

 United States . . . . . . . . . . 174,073,290 192,326,392 198,207,340 24,134,050 13.9 18,253,102 10.5 5,880,948 3.1

Northeast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27,754,296 28,261,471 28,673,356 919,060 3.3 507,175 1.8 411,885 1.5

Midwest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45,461,284 47,471,807 48,074,818 2,613,534 5.7 2,010,523 4.4 603,011 1.3

South . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53,859,905 62,089,090 64,749,890 10,889,985 20.2 8,229,185 15.3 2,660,800 4.3

West . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46,997,805 54,504,024 56,709,276 9,711,471 20.7 7,506,219 16.0 2,205,252 4.0

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000, 2010 Census, and 2013 Population Estimates.

Table 2.

Number of Incorporated Places, Population, and Percent of United States Population by 

Size of Incorporated Place: 2000 to 2013

Population size category

Number of incorporated places1 Population Percent of United States

total population

2000 2010 2013

April 1, 2000,

Census

April 1, 2010,

Census

July 1, 2013,

estimate 2000 2010 2013

 All incorporated places . 19,454 19,541 19,508 174,073,290 192,326,392 198,207,340 61.9 62.3 62.7

1,000,000 or more . . . . . . . . . . 9 9 9 22,947,966 23,567,066 24,293,963 8.2 7.6 7.7

500,000 to 999,999 . . . . . . . . . 20 24 25 12,905,864 16,109,233 17,308,113 4.6 5.2 5.5

250,000 to 499,999 . . . . . . . . . 38 41 43 13,702,659 14,289,341 15,019,117 4.9 4.6 4.8

100,000 to 249,999 . . . . . . . . . 173 200 216 25,725,127 30,167,988 32,377,424 9.1 9.8 10.2

50,000 to 99,999 . . . . . . . . . . . 363 432 450 24,876,466 30,143,643 31,148,753 8.8 9.8 9.9

25,000 to 49,999 . . . . . . . . . . . 644 723 718 22,607,919 25,167,442 24,933,757 8.0 8.2 7.9

10,000 to 24,999 . . . . . . . . . . . 1,435 1,542 1,553 22,570,012 24,179,643 24,482,834 8.0 7.8 7.7

Less than 10,000 . . . . . . . . . . . 16,772 16,570 16,494 28,737,277 28,702,036 28,643,379 10.2 9.3 9.1

1

 The number of incorporated places is as of January 1 of the calendar year. The numbers of incorporated places for the census years 2000 and 2010 include 

places with inactive governments that are not included in the population estimates for 2013. There were 24 inactive incorporated places in 2010. These 24 places 

had a combined 2010 census population of 2,984.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000, 2010 Census, and 2013 Population Estimates.
4 U.S. Census Bureau DC FL NJ DE RI NH MD AL AR CO CT GA ID IN KY LA ME MA MI MS MO MT NV NM NY NC ND OH OR PA SC SD TN TX VT VA WA WV WI WY AZ CA IL IA KS MN NE OK UT AK 0 100 Miles HI 0 200 Miles 0 100 Miles 75.0 or more 65.0 to 74.9 55.0 to 64.9 45.0 to 54.9 Less than 45.0 Percent Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2013 Population Estimates. U.S. percen age: 62.7 Figure 2. Percentage of Population in Incorporated Places by State: 2013U.S. percent: 62.7
U.S. Census Bureau 5

INCORPORATED PLACES VS. 

UNINCORPORATED PLACES

Incorporation is the legal procedure by which a 

previously unincorporated settlement forms its 

own municipal government, thereby creating a new 

incorporated place or city. These cities typically 

provide not only housing, but also employment, 

education, recreation, transportation, and other 

amenities. Cities also often provide police, fire, 

medical emergency, water, sanitation, and other 

such services for their residents. While some people 

who do not live in a city may receive such services 

from their township, county, or other unit of local 

government, many rely on a nearby incorporated 

place for such services. Though numerous political 

arrangements exist between cities and other units 

of local government, a city is often governmentally dependent within (i.e., legally subordinate to 

and overlapping in territorial jurisdiction with) a 

larger parent county, and in some states, a parent 

township (or town) within the county. The level of 

local government services (and taxation) provided 

within a city is typically higher than that of the 

unincorporated portions of a township or county, 

though this varies to some degree from state 

to state, and in some instances, from county to 

county within a state.

While the data in this report are generally limited to 

incorporated places (with the exception of Urban 

Honolulu, HI), the Census Bureau has long recognized populated settlements that are not legally 

incorporated. The boundaries for these unincorporated settlements are delimited by state and local 

officials using Census Bureau criteria, and

are reviewed by Census Bureau staff for use in 

Census Bureau data products. These areas are 

referred to as census designated places, or CDPs. 

When interpreting the results and analysis of incorporated places presented in this report, it is important to note that these unincorporated settlements 

are not included.

INCLUSION OF URBAN HONOLULU CDP

The Census Bureau is legally required to produce 

postcensal population estimates for general purpose governmental units, such as states, counties, 

minor civil divisions (towns and townships), and 

incorporated places. Postcensal estimates, such as 

the 2013 estimates used in this report, are generally not produced for CDPs. The chief exception to 

this convention is Urban Honolulu CDP, HI, which

is included in the Census Bureau’s postcensal estimates products under a special agreement with

the state of Hawaii. 

TREATMENT OF TOWNS 

IN NEW ENGLAND

Due to their often rural character, towns in

New England are not regarded as incorporated 

places in Census Bureau data products (though 

some CDPs are coextensive with towns). Instead, 

they are recognized as minor civil divisions, much 

like townships in some Midwestern states. Cities, 

villages, and boroughs in New England are included 

as incorporated places in Census Bureau data 

products, including the 2013 estimates used in this 

report. When interpreting the results and analysis 

of incorporated places presented in this report, it 

is important to note that towns in New England are 

not included.

percentage than any other size 

category. The number of incorporated places with fewer than 10,000 

people decreased between 2000 

and 2013. The number of incorporated places of 1 million or more 

remained at nine, while the number 

of incorporated places of all other 

size categories increased.

Overall, the population in incorporated places grew between 2000 

and 2010, and again between 2010 

and 2013 (Table 3). Although the 

rate of population growth varied 

by size of place, most size categories experienced growth over both 

periods, with two exceptions. The 

population in cities of less than 

10,000 decreased over both periods, and the population in cities of 

25,000 to 49,999 decreased over 

the 3-year period between 2010 

and 2013. The population in cities 

of 500,000 to 999,999 grew faster 

than any other size category for 

both the 10-year and 3-year periods, as well as the 13-year period 

between 2000 and 2013.

MOST POPULOUS 

INCORPORATED PLACES 

New York city remained the nation’s 

most populous incorporated place 

in 2013 with 8.4 million people 

(Table 4), followed by Los Angeles 

(3.9 million), Chicago (2.7 million), 
6 U.S. Census Bureau

Table 3.

Population Change by Size of Incorporated Place: 2000 to 2013

Population size category

Population change

2000 to 2013 2000 to 2010 2010 to 2013

Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent

 All incorporated places . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24,134,050 13.9 18,253,102 10.5 5,880,948 3.1

1,000,000 or more . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,345,997 5.9 619,100 2.7 726,897 3.1

500,000 to 999,999 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,402,249 34.1 3,203,369 24.8 1,198,880 7.4

250,000 to 499,999 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,316,458 9.6 586,682 4.3 729,776 5.1

100,000 to 249,999 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,652,297 25.9 4,442,861 17.3 2,209,436 7.3

50,000 to 99,999 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,272,287 25.2 5,267,177 21.2 1,005,110 3.3

25,000 to 49,999 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,325,838 10.3 2,559,523 11.3 –233,685 –0.9

10,000 to 24,999 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,912,822 8.5 1,609,631 7.1 303,191 1.3

Less than 10,000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –93,898 –0.3 –35,241 –0.1 –58,657 –0.2

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000, 2010 Census, and 2013 Population Estimates.

Table 4.

Population and Population Change for the 25 Most Populous Incorporated Places in 2013: 

2010 to 2013

Population 

rank

Incorporated place

Population

Change,

2010 to 2013

2010 2013

April 1, 

2010,

Census

July 1,

2013,

estimate Number Percent

1 1 New York city, New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,175,133 8,405,837 230,704 2.8

2 2 Los Angeles city, California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,792,621 3,884,307 91,686 2.4

3 3 Chicago city, Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,695,598 2,718,782 23,184 0.9

4 4 Houston city, Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,099,451 2,195,914 96,463 4.6

5 5 Philadelphia city, Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,526,006 1,553,165 27,159 1.8

6 6 Phoenix city, Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,445,632 1,513,367 67,735 4.7

7 7 San Antonio city, Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,327,407 1,409,019 81,612 6.1

8 8 San Diego city, California........................................ 1,307,402 1,355,896 48,494 3.7

9 9 Dallas city, Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,197,816 1,257,676 59,860 5.0

10 10 San Jose city, California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 945,942 998,537 52,595 5.6

14 11 Austin city, Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 790,390 885,400 95,010 12.0

12 12 Indianapolis city (balance), Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 820,445 843,393 22,948 2.8

11 13 Jacksonville city, Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 821,784 842,583 20,799 2.5

13 14 San Francisco city, California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 805,235 837,442 32,207 4.0

15 15 Columbus city, Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 787,033 822,553 35,520 4.5

17 16 Charlotte city, North Carolina..................................... 731,424 792,862 61,438 8.4

16 17 Fort Worth city, Texas........................................... 741,206 792,727 51,521 7.0

18 18 Detroit city, Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 713,777 688,701 –25,076 –3.5

19 19 El Paso city, Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 649,121 674,433 25,312 3.9

20 20 Memphis city, Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 646,889 653,450 6,561 1.0

23 21 Seattle city, Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 608,660 652,405 43,745 7.2

26 22 Denver city, Colorado........................................... 600,158 649,495 49,337 8.2

24 23 Washington city, District of Columbia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 601,723 646,449 44,726 7.4

22 24 Boston city, Massachusetts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 617,594 645,966 28,372 4.6

25 25 Nashville-Davidson metropolitan government (balance), Tennessee . . . . . . 601,222 634,464 33,242 5.5

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census and 2013 Population Estimates.
U.S. Census Bureau 7

Houston (2.2 million), and Philadelphia (1.6 million). While the ten 

largest cities remained the same as 

in 2010, Austin, TX, rose from 14th 

largest to 11th largest, moving past 

San Francisco (14th), Jacksonville 

(13th), and Indianapolis (12th). 

Columbus remained ranked 15th, 

while Charlotte rose from 17th to 

16th, moving past Fort Worth (17th). 

The cities ranked 18th through 20th 

remained the same, while Seattle 

moved up to 21st most populous 

from 23rd. Denver, which was not 

among the 25 most populous in 

2010 (26th) ranked 22nd in 2013. 

Washington moved up one rank 

from 24th to 23rd, while Boston 

moved down two spots from 22nd 

to 24th. Nashville remained the 

25th most populous. Baltimore, 

which ranked 21st in 2010, fell out 

of the top 25 to the 26th spot in 

2013. Among the 25 largest cities 

in 2013, Austin, TX, was the fastestgrowing between 2010 and 2013, 

followed by Charlotte, Denver, 

Washington, and Seattle. Consistent 

with the broad population growth 

trend exhibited at the regional level, 

all five of these fastest-growing 

large cities were in the South or 

the West. All five were also in the 

500,000 to 1 million population size 

category, which was the fastestgrowing between 2010 and 2013 

(Table 3). Detroit was the only city 

among the 25 most populous that 

lost population between 2010 and 

2013 (Table 4).

GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION 

OF THE FASTEST-GROWING 

INCORPORATED PLACES

The fastest-growing large cities—

those with populations of 100,000 

or more—tended to be located in 

the South and West (Figure 3, Table 

5a, Table 5b). While all cities in 

this size category were located in 

metropolitan statistical areas (metro 

areas) due to their population size, 

many of the fastest-growing were 

near a larger principal city of a 

metro area, and some were principal 

cities themselves. Between 2000 

and 2010, the fastest-growing large 

city was Gilbert, AZ (near Phoenix), 

with an increase of 90.0 percent; 

followed by North Las Vegas, 

NV, which grew by 87.9 percent; 

CITY VS. URBAN VS. METROPOLITAN

The terms city, urban, and metropolitan are often 

used interchangeably in popular media and common discourse. These terms, however, have very 

different and specific meanings when used in 

Census Bureau data products. Users of these products should be mindful that the territory and population denoted by these terms often overlap but 

are not identical.

CITY/INCORPORATED PLACE

A city is a type of incorporated place and, as noted 

earlier in the text, the term “city” is used generically 

throughout this report to refer to incorporated places 

of all types. A city can be partly urban and partly 

rural, and may be inside or outside of a metropolitan 

statistical area. The area and population included in 

a city reflect its legal corporate limits, which often 

do not include all of the densely settled territory of 

which the city forms the center. About 62.3 percent 

of the U.S. population lived in cities in 2010.

URBAN

An urban area as defined by the Census Bureau 

is a cluster of densely settled census blocks that 

together have a population of at least 2,500 people. 

These census blocks (usually the same as city 

blocks) generally have an aggregate population 

density of at least 1,000 people per square mile. 

Since urban areas do not conform to political 

boundaries, they can contain multiple incorporated 

places, either in part or in their entirety. They generally include a city (or in some cases, a CDP) and its 

adjacent, densely settled suburbs, including both 

incorporated and unincorporated territory. About 

80.7 percent of the U.S. population lived in urban 

areas in 2010.

METROPOLITAN

Metropolitan statistical areas, or metro areas, are 

delineated by the U.S. Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB). Each metro area consists of one or 

more counties that contain a core urban area of 

50,000 or more population, plus additional counties that have a high degree of social and economic 

integration with the urban core. They are typically 

partly urban and partly rural, and can contain 

many cities, in whole or in part. Each metro area 

generally includes a large city and its nearby

suburbs, as well as some sparsely settled territory

that is in some degree reliant on the urban core

for employment. About 83.7 percent of the

U.S. population lived in metro areas in 2010

(based on OMB’s metro area definitions as of 

2009).
8 U.S. Census Bureau TX MT ID NV NM OR UT KS WY NE SD MN ND WI MO WA GA LA MI PA NY MS VA KY ME WV AK 0 100 Miles Note: Size category based on 2000 census population. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 and 2010 Census. 0 200 Miles 0 100 Miles NY MA RI VT NH0 50 Miles CACA Percent 40.0 or more 20.0 to 39.9 10.0 to 19.9 0.0 to 9.9 –2.5 to –0.1 Less than –2.5 0 50 Miles 0 50 Miles HI CT OH IN IL OK AR TN SC NC AL FL CA NJ DE VT DC MD NJ IA CO AZGilbert North Las Vegas Fayetteville Fontana Cape Coral Lakewood Urban Honolulu Figure 3. Percentage Change in Population for Incorporated Places of 100,000 or More: 2000 to 2010
U.S. Census Bureau 9

Fayetteville, NC, which grew by 65.7 

percent; Fontana, CA (near Riverside), which grew by 52.1 percent; 

and Cape Coral, FL, which grew by 

50.9 percent.4

Large cities that lost population 

over the same period were found in 

every region, with a noticeable concentration in the states bordering 

the Great Lakes (Figure 3). Of the 

52 large cities that lost population 

4 Louisville city, Kentucky consolidated its 

government with Jefferson County in 2003. 

The 2010 population of the balance of the 

consolidated city (not including the smaller 

incorporated places that continue to exist 

within the county) was 597,337, which 

represents an increase of 341,106 or 133.1 

percent from the 2000 population (256,231) 

of the former Louisville city.

between 2000 and 2010, 7 were 

in the Northeast, 21 were in the 

Midwest, 13 were in the South, and 

11 were in the West. Nine were in 

California, more than any other 

state. The other two in the West 

region were Lakewood, CO, and 

Urban Honolulu, HI, which declined 

due to a substantial reduction in 

territorial extent, as the territory 

of the former Honolulu CDP was 

split into the newly created Urban 

Honolulu and East Honolulu CDPs 

in 2010 (the 2000 data used in this 

report are for the former, larger 

Honolulu CDP).

Four of the five fastest-growing large 

cities between 2010 and 2013 were 

in Texas. Frisco, TX, topped the

list of fastest-growing large cities 

(16.9 percent); followed by McKinney, 

TX (13.3 percent); Austin, TX (12.0 

percent); Cary, NC (11.7 percent); and 

Midland, TX (11.5 percent). Of the ten 

fastest-growing large cities over this 

period, seven were in the South and 

three were in the West. Cary, NC, was 

the only city of 100,000 or more east 

of the Mississippi that was among the 

ten fastest-growing between 2010 

and 2013. 

A number of large cities that lost 

population between 2000 and 2010 

saw their populations rise between 

2010 and 2013, most notably

New Orleans, which grew by

Table 5a.

Fastest Growing Incorporated Places of 100,000 or More Population: 2000 to 2010

Incorporated place

Population Change, 2000 to 2010

April 1, 2000,

Census

April 1, 2010,

Census Number Percent

Gilbert town, Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109,697 208,453 98,756 90.0

North Las Vegas city, Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115,488 216,961 101,473 87.9

Fayetteville city, North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121,015 200,564 79,549 65.7

Fontana city, California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128,929 196,069 67,140 52.1

Cape Coral city, Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102,286 154,305 52,019 50.9

Irvine city, California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143,072 212,375 69,303 48.4

Henderson city, Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175,381 257,729 82,348 47.0

Raleigh city, North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 276,093 403,892 127,799 46.3

Peoria city, Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108,364 154,065 45,701 42.2

Bakersfield city, California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247,057 347,483 100,426 40.6

Note: Size category based on 2000 census population.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 and 2010 Census.

Table 5b.

Fastest Growing Incorporated Places of 100,000 or More Population: 2010 to 2013

Incorporated place

Population Change, 2010 to 2013

April 1, 2010,

Census

July 1, 2013,

estimate Number Percent

Frisco city, Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116,989 136,791 19,802 16.9

McKinney city, Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131,117 148,559 17,442 13.3

Austin city, Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 790,390 885,400 95,010 12.0

Cary town, North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135,234 151,088 15,854 11.7

Midland city, Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111,147 123,933 12,786 11.5

Irvine city, California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212,375 236,716 24,341 11.5

Gilbert town, Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208,453 229,972 21,519 10.3

New Orleans city, Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 343,829 378,715 34,886 10.1

Bellevue city, Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122,363 133,992 11,629 9.5

Denton city, Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113,383 123,099 9,716 8.6

Note: Size category based on 2010 census population.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census and 2013 Population Estimates.
10 U.S. Census Bureau TX MT ID NV NM OR UT KS WY NE SD MN ND WI MO WA GA LA MI PA NY MS VA ME WV AK 0 100 Miles Note: Size category based on 2010 census population. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census and 2013 Population Estimates. 0 200 Miles 0 100 Miles NY MA RI VT NH0 50 Miles CACA Percent 8.5 or more 5.0 to 8.4 3.0 to 4.9 0.0 to 2.9 Loss 0 50 Miles 0 50 Miles HI CT OH IN IL OK AR TN SC NC AL FL CA NJ DE VT DC MD NJ IA CO AZ KY Frisco McKinney Austin Midland Cary Beaumont St. Louis New Orleans Figure 4. Percentage Change in Population for Incorporated Places of 100,000 or More: 2010 to 2013
U.S. Census Bureau 11

10.1 percent (Table 5b, Figure 4).5

In fact, nearly all large cities west of 

the Mississippi grew between 2010 

and 2013. Only two—Beaumont, TX, 

and St. Louis, MO—lost population 

during that period (Figure 4).

The ten fastest-growing cities of 

50,000 to 99,999 were all in the 

South or West for both the 10-year 

period from 2000 to 2010, and the 

3-year period from 2010 to 2013. 

Three of the ten fastest-growing 

over the 10-year period were in

California, more than any other 

state (Table 6a). For the 3-year 

5 New Orleans had lost a considerable 

percentage of its population between 

2000 and 2010 due to the impact of 

Hurricane Katrina.

period, Washington, Texas, and 

Arizona each had two cities among 

the ten fastest-growing in this size 

category (Table 6b).

Plainfield, IL, a suburb of Chicago, 

stood out as the only Midwestern 

city among the ten fastest-growing 

of 10,000 to 49,999 between 2000 

and 2010 (Table 7a). The other nine 

fastest-growing cities in this size 

category for the 10-year period 

were all in the South or West. Two 

Midwestern cities—Zionsville, IN 

(near Indianapolis), and Williston, 

ND—were among the ten fastest 

growing in this size category for the 

3-year period between 2010 and 

2013 (Table 7b). Zionsville, which 

grew by 77.4 percent, was the 

fastest growing overall in this size 

category over the 3-year period.6

Williston was one of the few cities 

among the fastest-growing that was 

not in a metro area.

LAND AREA AND 

POPULATION DENSITY 

While incorporated places included 

a majority of the U.S. population, 

only a small fraction of the U.S. 

land area (about 3.5 percent) was in 

incorporated places in 2013. Due to 

their nature as areas of population 

6 Princeton borough, New Jersey, consolidated its government with Princeton township 

in 2013. The 2013 population of the consolidated borough and township was 29,008, 

which represents an increase of 16,701 or 

135.7 percent from the 2010 population 

(12,307) of the former Princeton borough.

Table 6a.

Fastest Growing Incorporated Places of 50,000 to 99,999 Population: 2000 to 2010

Incorporated place

Population Change, 2000 to 2010

April 1, 2000,

Census

April 1, 2010,

Census Number Percent

Elk Grove city, California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59,984 153,015 93,031 155.1

McKinney city, Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54,369 131,117 76,748 141.2

Port St. Lucie city, Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88,769 164,603 75,834 85.4

Renton city, Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50,052 90,927 40,875 81.7

Victorville city, California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64,029 115,903 51,874 81.0

Temecula city, California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57,716 100,097 42,381 73.4

Rio Rancho city, New Mexico . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51,765 87,521 35,756 69.1

Miramar city, Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72,739 122,041 49,302 67.8

Round Rock city, Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61,136 99,887 38,751 63.4

Murfreesboro city, Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68,816 108,755 39,939 58.0

Note: Size category based on 2000 census population.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 and 2010 Census.

Table 6b.

Fastest Growing Incorporated Places of 50,000 to 99,999 Population: 2010 to 2013

Incorporated place

Population Change, 2010 to 2013

April 1, 2010,

Census

July 1, 2013,

estimate Number Percent

Kent city, Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92,411 124,435 32,024 34.7

South Jordan city, Utah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50,418 59,366 8,948 17.7

Pasco city, Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59,781 67,599 7,818 13.1

Conroe city, Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56,207 63,032 6,825 12.1

Goodyear city, Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65,275 72,864 7,589 11.6

Buckeye town, Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50,876 56,683 5,807 11.4

Meridian city, Idaho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75,092 83,596 8,504 11.3

Lake Elsinore city, California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51,821 57,525 5,704 11.0

Odessa city, Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99,940 110,720 10,780 10.8

Mount Pleasant town, South Carolina . . . . . . . . . . 67,843 74,885 7,042 10.4

Note: Size category based on 2010 census population.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census and 2013 Population Estimates.
12 U.S. Census Bureau

Table 7a.

Fastest Growing Incorporated Places of 10,000 to 49,999 Population: 2000 to 2010

Incorporated place

Population Change, 2000 to 2010

April 1, 2000,

Census

April 1, 2010,

Census Number Percent

Lincoln city, California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,205 42,819 31,614 282.1

Surprise city, Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30,848 117,517 86,669 281.0

Frisco city, Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33,714 116,989 83,275 247.0

Goodyear city, Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,911 65,275 46,364 245.2

Beaumont city, California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,384 36,877 25,493 223.9

Plainfield village, Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,038 39,581 26,543 203.6

Pflugerville city, Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,335 46,936 30,601 187.3

Indian Trail town, North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,905 33,518 21,613 181.5

Wylie city, Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,132 41,427 26,295 173.8

Issaquah city, Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,212 30,434 19,222 171.4

Note: Size category based on 2000 census population.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 and 2010 Census.

Table 7b.

Fastest Growing Incorporated Places of 10,000 to 49,999 Population: 2010 to 2013

Incorporated place

Population Change, 2010 to 2013

April 1, 2010,

Census

July 1, 2013,

estimate Number Percent

Zionsville town, Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,160 25,115 10,955 77.4

Kirkland city, Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48,787 84,430 35,643 73.1

Cibolo city, Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,349 23,890 8,541 55.6

Sweetwater city, Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,499 20,575 7,076 52.4

Burien city, Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33,313 49,858 16,545 49.7

Williston city, North Dakota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,716 20,850 6,134 41.7

Hutto city, Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,698 19,728 5,030 34.2

Lone Tree city, Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,218 13,267 3,049 29.8

Saratoga Springs city, Utah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,781 22,749 4,968 27.9

Little Elm city, Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,898 32,701 6,803 26.3

Note: Size category based on 2010 census population.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census and 2013 Population Estimates.

Table 8.

Land Area and Population Density by Size of Incorporated Place: 2013

Population size category January 1, 2013,

land area in

square miles

July 1, 2013,

population

estimate

Population

density per

square mile of

land area

 United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,531,924.9 316,128,839 89.5

In incorporated place . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124,388.6 198,207,340 1,593.5

1,000,000 or more . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,377.8 24,293,963 7,192.3

500,000 to 999,999 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,945.0 17,308,113 2,911.4

250,000 to 499,999 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,205.0 15,019,117 2,420.5

100,000 to 249,999 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,779.0 32,377,424 2,533.6

50,000 to 99,999 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,282.2 31,148,753 2,345.1

25,000 to 49,999 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,578.8 24,933,757 1,504.0

10,000 to 24,999 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,813.9 24,482,834 1,374.4

Less than 10,000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48,406.9 28,643,379 591.7

Not in incorporated place . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,407,536.3 117,921,499 34.6

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2013 Population Estimates.
U.S. Census Bureau 13

concentration, incorporated places 

are much more densely populated 

(1,593.5 people per square mile, in 

aggregate) than the territory outside 

incorporated places (34.6 people 

per square mile). As Table 8 shows, 

population density was generally 

higher among the largest cities, and 

lower among the smallest ones. In 

particular, cities of 1 million or more 

population were considerably more 

dense (by a difference of more than 

4,000 people per square mile, in 

aggregate) than cities of less than 1 

million. Similarly, cities of fewer than 

10,000 were considerably less dense 

(by a difference of more than 1,600 

people per square mile, in aggregate) 

than cities of 10,000 or more. 

While most incorporated places were 

less than 50 square miles in land 

area, a few were more than ten times 

that size. Cities that were largest 

in land area in 2013 tended to be 

located in Western states (particularly 

Alaska), and to a lesser extent, the 

South. Four of the five largest were 

located in Alaska, each with an area 

of over 1,700 square miles (Table 9).7

Several cities that have consolidated 

governments with their parent 

counties also rank among the largest in land area. Of the 11 cities 

of 500 square miles or more, 8 of 

them (also the eight largest in land 

area, each being over 700 square 

miles) were city/county consolidations, or—in the case of Anchorage—county equivalents. Oklahoma 

City, at 606.7 square miles, was the 

largest city in land area that was 

not a city/county consolidation or 

7 Much of Alaska’s very large area is 

sparsely populated, and the relatively few 

units of local government that exist are 

responsible for administering services to 

relatively large territories. Note the large area 

compared to the relatively small population 

size and low population density levels in cities 

such as Juneau, Sitka, and Wrangell (Table 9).

county equivalent. Phoenix and 

Houston were the only other cities 

of 500 or more square miles that 

were not city/county consolidations 

or county equivalents. Houston had 

the largest population of any city of 

more than 500 square miles. Of the 

25 largest cities in land area, only 4 

had a 2013 population estimate of 

fewer than 10,000 people. Fifteen 

of the 25 had population density 

values of more than 1,000 people per 

square mile. Only one, Los Angeles, 

had a population density of more 

than 5,000 people per square mile 

(Table 9).

New York, with a population density 

of 27,781.2 people per square mile, 

was the nation’s densest large city 

by a considerable margin, followed 

by San Francisco (17,858.9); Jersey City, NJ (17,396.0); Paterson, 

NJ (17,316.5); and Cambridge, MA 

(16,790.7) (Table 10). These dense 

Table 9.

Top 25 Incorporated Places in Land Area: 2013

Incorporated place January 1, 2013,

land area in

square miles

July 1, 2013,

population

estimate

Population

density per

square mile of 

land area

Sitka city and borough, Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,870.4 9,020 3.1

Juneau city and borough, Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,702.0 32,660 12.1

Wrangell city and borough, Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,541.5 2,400 0.9

Anchorage municipality, Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,704.8 300,950 176.5

Greeley County unified government (balance), Kansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 777.4 450 0.6

Jacksonville city, Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 747.3 842,583 1,127.5

Anaconda-Deer Lodge County, Montana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 736.5 9,329 12.7

Butte-Silver Bow (balance), Montana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 716.2 33,854 47.3

Oklahoma City city, Oklahoma.................................... 606.7 610,613 1,006.5

Houston city, Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 599.7 2,195,914 3,661.5

Phoenix city, Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 517.5 1,513,367 2,924.4

Nashville-Davidson metropolitan government (balance), Tennessee . . . . . 476.2 634,464 1,332.5

Los Angeles city, California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 468.7 3,884,307 8,288.0

San Antonio city, Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 461.0 1,409,019 3,056.5

Suffolk city, Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 400.2 85,728 214.2

Buckeye town, Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 392.1 56,683 144.6

Indianapolis city (balance), Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 361.5 843,393 2,333.3

Dallas city, Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 341.4 1,257,676 3,684.2

Chesapeake city, Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 340.8 230,571 676.6

Fort Worth city, Texas........................................... 340.7 792,727 2,326.7

San Diego city, California........................................ 325.2 1,355,896 4,169.5

Louisville/Jefferson County metro government (balance), Kentucky . . . . . . 325.2 609,893 1,875.6

Memphis city, Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 315.1 653,450 2,074.1

Kansas City city, Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 314.9 467,007 1,482.9

Austin city, Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 310.2 885,400 2,854.5

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2013 Population Estimates.
14 U.S. Census Bureau

large cities include older port cities 

and their nearby suburbs. Cities in 

California also feature prominently 

among the most dense, accounting 

for 9 of the 25 densest large cities, 

more than any other state. Of the 25 

densest large cities, 11 were in the 

Northeast, 1 (Chicago) was in the 

Midwest, 4 were in the South, and 9 

were in the West (Table 10).

Table 11 shows large cities that had 

the largest increases or decreases 

in population density between 2010 

and 2013. Increases in density 

result from population gains unaccompanied by a commensurate gain 

in land area. Infill development, conversion of nonresidential land for 

residential use, and redevelopment 

from low-rise to high-rise residential 

structures are common processes 

that can increase population density. 

Older coastal cities (e.g., New York, 

San Francisco, Boston) were among 

the large cities whose population 

density values increased the most 

between 2010 and 2013. Most of 

these cities had stable land area 

over the period. 

Decreases in density result from 

either population loss or from gains 

in land area that outpace gains in 

population. Several Midwestern cities (Des Moines, IA; Detroit; Evansville, IN; Lansing, MI; and Rockford, 

IL) were among those with the 

largest decreases in population 

density (Table 11). While some cities’ density levels declined due to 

population loss (e.g., Detroit and 

Rockford, IL), others (e.g., Modesto, 

CA, and Spokane, WA) lost density 

due to increases in land area. Of the 

ten cities of 100,000 or more with 

the largest declines in population 

density, only Detroit did not have an 

increase in land area. 

ANNEXATION

Though expansion of municipal boundaries via annexation is 

uncommon in the Northeast, it is a 

fairly common practice in the South 

and the West, and in some parts 

of the Midwest. Not surprisingly, 

Southern, Western, and Midwestern 

cities topped the lists of incorporated places that had the largest 

annexations between 2010 and 

Table 10.

Densest Incorporated Places of 100,000 or More Population: 2013

Incorporated place January 1, 2013,

land area in

square miles

July 1, 2013,

population

estimate

Population

density per

square mile

of land area

New York city, New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 302.6 8,405,837 27,781.2

San Francisco city, California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46.9 837,442 17,858.9

Jersey City city, New Jersey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14.8 257,342 17,396.0

Paterson city, New Jersey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.4 145,948 17,316.5

Cambridge city, Massachusetts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.4 107,289 16,790.7

Daly City city, California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.6 104,739 13,708.6

Boston city, Massachusetts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48.4 645,966 13,355.9

Santa Ana city, California.................................. 27.1 334,227 12,314.0

Inglewood city, California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.1 111,542 12,300.7

El Monte city, California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.6 115,708 12,100.4

Chicago city, Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227.7 2,718,782 11,942.2

Miami city, Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35.9 417,650 11,636.7

Philadelphia city, Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134.1 1,553,165 11,581.4

Newark city, New Jersey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24.2 278,427 11,508.7

Berkeley city, California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.5 116,768 11,157.2

Yonkers city, New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18.0 199,766 11,090.7

Norwalk city, California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.7 106,589 10,978.3

Hialeah city, Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21.4 233,394 10,889.4

Washington city, District of Columbia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61.1 646,449 10,573.5

Elizabeth city, New Jersey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.3 127,558 10,353.3

Alexandria city, Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15.0 148,892 9,903.4

Garden Grove city, California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18.0 175,140 9,753.5

Providence city, Rhode Island . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18.4 177,994 9,673.6

Long Beach city, California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50.3 469,428 9,332.4

Bridgeport city, Connecticut . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16.1 147,216 9,167.0

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2013 Population Estimates.
U.S. Census Bureau 15

Table 11.

Incorporated Places of 100,000 or More Population With Largest Increase and Decrease in 

Population Density: 2010 to 2013

Incorporated place

Land area in square miles1 Population

Population density per

square mile of land area

2010 2013

Change, 

2010 to 

2013

April 1, 

2010,

Census

July 1, 

2013,

estimate

Change,

2010 to 

2013 2010 2013

Change,

2010 to 

2013

Largest increase

New York city, New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . 302.6 302.6 –0.1 8,175,133 8,405,837 230,704 27,012.4 27,781.2 768.7

Washington city, District of Columbia . . 61.0 61.1 0.1 601,723 646,449 44,726 9,856.5 10,573.5 717.0

San Francisco city, California . . . . . . . . . 46.9 46.9 Z 805,235 837,442 32,207 17,179.2 17,858.9 679.7

Jersey City city, New Jersey . . . . . . . . . 14.8 14.8 Z 247,597 257,342 9,745 16,736.6 17,396.0 659.3

Alexandria city, Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15.0 15.0 Z 139,966 148,892 8,926 9,314.3 9,903.4 589.1

Boston city, Massachusetts . . . . . . . . . . 48.3 48.4 0.1 617,594 645,966 28,372 12,792.7 13,355.9 563.2

Seattle city, Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83.9 83.8 –0.1 608,660 652,405 43,745 7,250.9 7,781.8 530.9

Daly City city, California . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.7 7.6 Z 101,123 104,739 3,616 13,195.0 13,708.6 513.6

Miami city, Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35.9 35.9 Z 399,457 417,650 18,193 11,135.9 11,636.7 500.7

Hialeah city, Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21.5 21.4 Z 224,669 233,394 8,725 10,474.2 10,889.4 415.3

Largest decrease

Modesto city, California . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36.9 44.4 7.5 201,165 204,933 3,768 5,456.5 4,618.9 –837.6

Spokane city, Washington . . . . . . . . . . . 59.2 68.7 9.5 208,916 210,721 1,805 3,526.2 3,065.7 –460.5

Temecula city, California . . . . . . . . . . . . 30.2 37.2 7.1 100,097 106,780 6,683 3,319.8 2,869.6 –450.3

Roseville city, California . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36.2 42.2 6.0 118,788 127,035 8,247 3,279.5 3,009.1 –270.3

Lansing city, Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36.0 39.0 2.9 114,297 113,972 –325 3,170.6 2,924.2 –246.4

Des Moines city, Iowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80.9 89.0 8.1 203,433 207,510 4,077 2,515.6 2,332.2 –183.4

Detroit city, Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138.8 138.8 Z 713,777 688,701 –25,076 5,144.3 4,963.6 –180.7

Rockford city, Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61.1 63.3 2.3 152,871 150,251 –2,620 2,502.7 2,371.8 –130.9

Evansville city, Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44.2 47.3 3.2 117,429 120,310 2,881 2,659.6 2,541.0 –118.6

Arvada city, Colorado................ 35.1 38.3 3.2 106,433 111,707 5,274 3,028.6 2,914.2 –114.4

Z Rounds to zero. 

1

 Land area data are as of January 1 of the calendar year.

Note: Size category based on 2010 census population. Figures for land area and population density are rounded to the nearest tenth.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census and 2013 Population Estimates.

Table 12.

Incorporated Places With Largest Increase in Land Area: 2010 to 2013

Incorporated place

Land area in square miles1

July 1, 2013,

population

2010 2013 estimate

Change,

2010 to 2013

Caliente city, Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.9 57.6 55.7 1,169

Akutan city, Alaska....................... 13.8 66.0 52.1 1,028

Zionsville town, Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.3 49.7 39.5 25,115

Show Low city, Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40.9 65.1 24.2 10,730

Bristol village, Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.9 33.0 24.1 4,903

Yorktown town, Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.8 31.9 23.2 11,270

Page city, Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16.6 38.2 21.6 7,326

Rogers city, Minnesota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.1 25.5 17.4 11,983

Buckeye town, Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 375.3 392.1 16.8 56,683

Uniontown town, Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.3 15.2 13.8 2,529

1

 Land area data are as of January 1 of the calendar year.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census and 2013 Population Estimates.
16 U.S. Census Bureau

2013. Caliente, NV, (a small city in 

Lincoln County), had the largest 

increase in land area (Table 12), 

while Kirkland, WA, annexed the 

area with the largest 2010 population (Table 13). Zionsville, IN (a 

suburb of Indianapolis), stood out 

as having annexed territory that was 

among the largest in both land area 

and population. As Table 13 shows, 

in some cities (e.g., Kokomo, IN), 

annexation appeared to be a major 

contributor to population growth, 

as suggested by a 2013 population 

that was not much higher than the 

2010 population in the 2013 boundary. In other cities (e.g., Austin, TX), 

demographic components of population change (i.e., natural increase or 

migration) contributed to population 

growth in addition to annexation—as 

evidenced by a 2013 population that 

was notably higher than the 2010 

population in the 2013 boundary.

Among cities of 100,000 or more 

population, those with the largest 

percentage increases in land area 

between 2000 and 2013 tended to 

be located in the South and West, 

and in some parts of the Midwest 

(Figure 5). With the exception of 

Louisville, KY, which consolidated its 

government with Jefferson County 

in 2003, the cities of 100,000 or 

more with the largest percentage 

gains in land area between 2000 

and 2013 were: Fayetteville, NC 

(149.1 percent); Brownsville, TX 

(64.7 percent); Joliet, IL (64.7 percent); Gilbert, AZ (57.9 percent); and 

Reno, NV (55.1 percent).

Most cities in the Northeast and 

in the Midwestern states of Ohio 

and Michigan had relatively stable 

boundaries between 2000 and 

2013. This regional pattern partly 

reflects variation in annexation 

laws by state. While some states 

allow cities to annex unilaterally 

(without consent of the population 

living in the area to be annexed), 

others require multilateral consent, 

often in the form of a referendum 

voted on by the residents of the 

area being annexed. 

NEW INCORPORATIONS

While the number of incorporated 

places was relatively stable from 

2010 to 2013, there were 16 new 

incorporations during the period 

(Table 14), and 1 place (Jane, MO) 

that newly reported its existence to 

the Census Bureau, despite having 

incorporated several years earlier.8

Collectively, these incorporated 

places had a total 2013 population 

of 307,191. Their individual 2013 

populations ranged from 208 (Sandy 

Point, TX) to 98,030 (Jurupa Valley, 

CA). Four were in the West, eight 

in the South (three in Texas alone), 

four (including Jane, MO) in the Midwest, and one (Mastic Beach, NY) in 

the Northeast. One new entity (Greeley County unified government, KS) 

formed from the consolidation of 

a previously existing incorporated 

place with its parent county.

8 There were 3 incorporated places that 

became inactive between 2010 and 2013, and 

24 that disincorporated, including 1 (Foster 

city, Kentucky) that was inactive in 2010.

MEASURING THE IMPACT 

OF ANNEXATION

Annexation is the legal procedure by which an 

incorporated place modifies its boundaries through 

the addition of new territory. The process varies 

considerably by state, and is generally more common in the South and West. It is less frequent in the 

Northeast, and particularly rare in New England.

2013 ESTIMATES BASE POPULATION

In this report, the impact of annexation is measured 

by comparing the results from the 2010 Census 

with a retabulation of those results in 2013

boundaries. This retabulation, referred to as the 

estimates base (Table 13), shows what the 2010 

population of an area would have been had the 

area’s 2013 boundary been in place at the time of 

the census. The difference between the original census population and the estimates base population 

for an incorporated place provides a measure of the 

impact of annexation on the place’s population by 

approximating the 2010 population of the territory 

annexed between 2010 and 2013. The estimates 

base population reflects official boundary changes 

collected via the Census Bureau’s annual Boundary 

and Annexation Survey, as well as other enhancements to the Census Bureau’s geographic and 

address database. Official corrections to the census 

processed via the Count Question Resolution program are also included in the estimates base.
U.S. Census Bureau 17

Table 13.

Incorporated Places With Largest Increase in 2010 Population Due to Boundary Change: 

2010 to 2013

Incorporated place

April 1, 2010, Population

July 1, 2013,

population

estimate

In 2010

boundary

(census)

In 2013

boundary

(estimates base)1

Increase due to 

boundary change 

Kirkland city, Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48,787 80,583 31,796 84,430

Kent city, Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92,411 118,590 26,179 124,435

Austin city, Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 790,390 810,759 20,369 885,400

Burien city, Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33,313 48,072 14,759 49,858

Kokomo city, Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45,468 56,842 11,374 56,895

Zionsville town, Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,160 23,319 9,159 25,115

Omaha city, Nebraska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 408,958 416,969 8,011 434,353

San Jose city, California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 945,942 952,576 6,634 998,537

Sweetwater city, Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,499 19,958 6,459 20,575

Norcross city, Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,116 15,174 6,058 16,131

1

 The estimates base population reflects legal boundary changes such as annexations, as well other enhancements to the Census Bureau’s geographic and 

address database. Official corrections to the 2010 Census processed via the Count Question Resolution program are also included. (See text box “Measuring the 

Impact of Annexation.”)

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census and 2013 Population Estimates.

Table 14.

New Incorporations: 2010 to 2013

Incorporated place July 1, 2013,

population

estimate

January 1, 2013,

land area in

square miles

Population

density per

square mile

of land area

Jurupa Valley city, California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98,030 42.9 2,283.5

Eastvale city, California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55,191 12.7 4,358.4

Brookhaven city, Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50,603 11.2 4,499.7

Peachtree Corners city, Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40,059 16.2 2,475.8

Mastic Beach village, New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,860 4.0 3,693.2

James Island town, South Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,542 4.7 2,433.4

Anthony city, New Mexico . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,378 2.7 3,495.6

Diamondhead city, Mississippi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,279 10.1 819.0

Providence Village town, Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,941 1.1 4,361.8

Summit village, Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,711 21.2 222.2

Bloomfield village, Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,644 12.5 372.2

Semmes city, Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,123 3.6 861.4

Tusayan town, Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 573 16.8 34.1

Greeley County unified government (balance), Kansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 450 777.4 0.6

Coyote Flats city, Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 312 3.3 93.7

Jane town, Missouri1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 287 3.0 96.5

Sandy Point city, Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208 1.5 143.0

1

 Jane town, Missouri was legally incorporated in 2005, but was not reported to the Census Bureau until 2013.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2013 Population Estimates.
18 U.S. Census Bureau TX MT ID NV NM OR UT KS WY NE SD MN ND WI MO WA GA LA MI PA NY MS VA ME WV AK Note: Size category based on 2000 census population. Source: U.S. Census Burea Census 2000 u, and 2013 Population Estimates. 0 200 Miles 0 100 Miles NY MA RI VT NH0 50 Miles CACA Percent 50.0 or more 25.0 to 49.9 10.0 to 24.9 5.0 to 9.9 Less than 5.0 0 50 Miles 0 50 Miles HI CT OH IN IL OK AR TN SC NC AL FL CA NJ DE VT DC MD IA CO AZ KY NJ 0 100 Miles Gilbert Brownsville Joliet Reno Fayetteville Louisville/ Jefferson County Figure 5. Percentage Change in Land Area for Incorporated Places of 100,000 or More: 2000 to 2013
U.S. Census Bureau 19

SUMMARY

The U.S. population remains increasingly concentrated in incorporated 

places, more so in the West than 

in any other region. Incorporated 

places are as diverse in their characteristics as the United States, 

varying considerably in population 

size, geographic extent, and patterns of growth and decline. These 

patterns can be affected by physical 

geographic conditions, demographic 

trends, and legal or political factors, 

such as the ability to annex additional territory. 

Incorporated places grew faster 

than the United States as a whole 

from 2000 to 2010, and from 2010 

to 2013. Cities in the South and 

West grew faster than those in the 

Midwest and Northeast. Larger 

cities (of 100,000 or more population) grew faster than smaller ones 

between 2000 and 2013, with cities 

of 500,000 to 999,999 growing the 

fastest. Cities among the ten fastestgrowing across all size categories 

tended to be located in metro areas.

Cities with larger populations 

tended to be more dense than 

smaller cities. Several large cities 

with stable boundaries (e.g., New 

York, Washington, San Francisco) 

experienced population growth 

between 2010 and 2013, resulting 

in increased density levels. While 

density levels in some cities fell due 

to population decline (e.g., Detroit), 

some cities that experienced 

population growth saw their density 

levels decline due to increased land 

area via expansion of their municipal boundaries (e.g., Modesto, CA).

Expansion of city boundaries via 

annexation was more common in 

the South, West, and Midwest, but 

almost nonexistent in the Northeast, 

as was the establishment of new 

incorporated places. More cities 

incorporated in the South between 

2010 and 2013 than in any other 

region. Three new cities incorporated in Texas, more than any other 

state. While more than one-third of 

the U.S. population lives outside 

incorporated places, America continues to be mainly a nation of cities. 

METHODOLOGY AND 

SOURCES OF DATA

The data used in this report include 

100 percent counts of the total 

population from the 2000 and 2010 

censuses, as well as postcensal 

estimates of the total population for 

July 1, 2013. For information about 

the Census Bureau’s methodology 

for producing the 2013 population 

estimates for incorporated places, 

see <www.census.gov/popest

/methodology/2013-su-meth.pdf>. 

Potential sources of nonsampling 

error in the population estimates 

process include: (1) potential 

errors (such as differential undercoverage or overcoverage by 

demographic characteristics) in the 

enumeration (e.g., the previous 

decennial census) that serves as 

the base of the postcensal estimates; and (2) potential errors in 

the components of change (such as 

births, deaths, domestic migration, 

and net international migration) 

used to carry forward the population estimates.

For information on confidentiality 

protection, nonsampling error, and 

definitions for decennial census 

data, see <www.census.gov/prod

/cen2010/doc/sf1.pdf>.