Maricopa County Added Over 222 People Per Day in 2016, More Than Any Other County

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by LouisianaRush

The riots happened. We are now experiencing a massive black flight from the city. The population growth of Caucasian, Latino, and Asians are not enough to off set this. Before the riots in 2014 the city was growing.

Yeah, I know about the riots, and Baltimore isn't exactly a boomtown, but the estimates are still a bit surprising. Baltimore, while gritty and high crime in parts, is still one of the best urban environments in the U.S., and is hilly, very green and extremely well-located. The Northeast Corridor has tons of high-paying jobs and Baltimore RE is cheap. You can be in DC, Philly or NYC in no time. You can be on the beach or in the mountains in no time.

It's just very clear that my preferences don't line up with national preferences. If I were to rank metropolitan counties in order of preference for living, Maricopa County might be dead last. I've had two skin cancer scares and despise extreme heat, the Phoenix air is awful, everything is brown, there's no shade, no nearby water, and there's nothing really urban or character-laden.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by chris08876

In Maricopa County, whats the predominate construction type thats housing all of these new residents? Apartments/townhouses/single family homes?

This is the other problem for us urban geeks. Growth in say, Dallas, or Phoenix, is kinda wasted growth, because we know the growth is typical sprawl. The older cities have an urban environment, generally speaking, and growth aids the expansion of urbanism.

To take an example, Dallas has such robust growth that it will likely shortly eclipse Chicago in terms of MSA/CSA population. But does anyone seriously think that Dallas will have a remotely comparable urban core, transit orientation or neighborhood character? Even if Dallas had 20 million people, no way it could compare to Chicago. And to the Northeast Corridor cities? LOL. Dallas will never even have a neighborhood comparable to Baltimore's best; I don't care if it grows to Tokyo size.

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by The North One

Metro Detroit has a higher job growth percentage rate than Chicagoland, Houston and even New York? That's very interesting.

Thanks for the source.

That may be true and it's great news, but metro Detroit is still nearly 200,000 jobs below it's peak, where the other three are at there highest levels in history generally.

[Leo the Dog]

Originally Posted by Parkway

It's not surprising when you consider that Maricopa Count is 500 square miles bigger than the state of New Jersey.

In contrast to NJ, most of Maricopa County is empty, non-developed mountain and range lands. Metro Phoenix sprawls into parts of Pinal County as well that would not be counted in the 4.2 million pop stat.

Business takes me to Phoenix/Scottsdale often. I drove from LA to Phoenix a few days ago via the 10 freeway and I've driven the 8 corridor numerous times (from SD to Phx) and almost everything is pristine desert/mountains/valleys until you hit the 303 freeway, outer loop.

Phoenix is often misunderstood and their sprawl is like every other western city, where you have density levels that are uniform until they hit a hard edge of nothingness. It could go from 5000ppsm to 0 once you cross a street, canal, mountain range, federal lands, indian reservation, or flood control dike.

[Ant131531]

Originally Posted by Crawford

This is the other problem for us urban geeks. Growth in say, Dallas, or Phoenix, is kinda wasted growth, because we know the growth is typical sprawl. The older cities have an urban environment, generally speaking, and growth aids the expansion of urbanism.

To take an example, Dallas has such robust growth that it will likely shortly eclipse Chicago in terms of MSA/CSA population. But does anyone seriously think that Dallas will have a remotely comparable urban core, transit orientation or neighborhood character? Even if Dallas had 20 million people, no way it could compare to Chicago. And to the Northeast Corridor cities? LOL. Dallas will never even have a neighborhood comparable to Baltimore's best; I don't care if it grows to Tokyo size.

Most of the people moving to Maricopa county would never be able to afford D.C., NYC, or any of the expensive coastal cities anyway...

[Leo the Dog]

Originally Posted by dc_denizen

Geezers

While there are the well known retirement communities (Sun City), that's not what's fueling the growth though for Maricopa County. Median age for the county is 35.6 years.

2010 census there were only 462,000 people 65+ representing just 12% of the population while there were well over 1 million people in the 0-17 age group.

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by chris08876

In Maricopa County, whats the predominate construction type thats housing all of these new residents? Apartments/townhouses/single family homes?

Kinda not a fan of the growth in this county because this county sprawls horribly and I'd imagine people are going the single family home route, which creates terrible, soulless developments.

I'd rather see higher figures in DC or Seattle because at least the housing being built is more efficient.

Probably stucco over wood frame single family houses in the adobe style. Maricopa is like LA--innumerable satellite towns surrounding a central city (Phoenix):


http://maps.mcassessor.maricopa.gov

[M II A II R II K]

Will they have enough water though.

[The North One]

Originally Posted by Vlajos

That may be true and it's great news, but metro Detroit is still nearly 200,000 jobs below it's peak, where the other three are at there highest levels in history generally.

200,000? Please source your info.

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by M II A II R II K

Will they have enough water though.

The Gila and Salt Rivers along with Arizona's portion of the Colorado seem to supply Phoenix adequately:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gila_R...larivermap.png

Theodore Roosevelt Dam on the Salt River:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodo...m,_Arizona.jpg

[The North One]

Originally Posted by Ant131531

Wow...just looking at the employment numbers for Detroit and you're right...it has barely recovered the jobs it's lost during the recession and in fact, as of Jan 2017 isn't even above it's September 2007 peak for employment(though it was above it in the last few months of 2016 before losing a lot of jobs, probably seasonal).

Source: https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/SMU2...de_graphs=true

Didn't even realize there were still metro areas out there that haven't fully recovered from the recession to this day and the recession officially ended 7-8 years ago.

Well no shit, the data you fetched wasn't seasonally adjusted...

That site is absolutely horrendous, it won't let me search because a supposed Java plugin I don't have when I clearly have it enabled.

Seasonally adjusted would likely show it well above pre-recession levels, however still below 2000 levels. Homes values, GDP and CPI all show strong growth and are fully recovered.

[brian_b]

Originally Posted by M II A II R II K

Will they have enough water though.

Arizona banks all of their extra water by recharging underground aquifers. They probably have the best water management of any western state.

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Yeah, I know about the riots, and Baltimore isn't exactly a boomtown, but the estimates are still a bit surprising. Baltimore, while gritty and high crime in parts, is still one of the best urban environments in the U.S., and is hilly, very green and extremely well-located. The Northeast Corridor has tons of high-paying jobs and Baltimore RE is cheap. You can be in DC, Philly or NYC in no time. You can be on the beach or in the mountains in no time.

It's just very clear that my preferences don't line up with national preferences. If I were to rank metropolitan counties in order of preference for living, Maricopa County might be dead last. I've had two skin cancer scares and despise extreme heat, the Phoenix air is awful, everything is brown, there's no shade, no nearby water, and there's nothing really urban or character-laden.

im with you man and i think most of us on this forum would choose Baltimore over Maricopa County. I dont see the appeal at all but to each their own i guess

[tablemtn]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Yeah, I know about the riots, and Baltimore isn't exactly a boomtown, but the estimates are still a bit surprising.

I think you might be understating the scale of Baltimore's problems:


Source: Adapted from the Baltimore Sun's homicide tracker

That's not just "bad," that's cataclysmic. That's a murder-rate over 10 times the national average. Additionally, how many Baltimore public schools are safe for the kids of the young urban class, if we could call them that? Not "high-performing," but merely physically-safe from assault and other crimes?

Until Baltimore's civic leadership chooses to pull things together a bit, most people will give the city a wide berth.

[chris08876]

I think people tend to forget the major psychological impact that having a high crime rate can have. People will ditch those cities or hesitate in moving there if it has a reputation for crime. Just the reputation alone is enough to stifle growth. When you factor in the daily news about muggins or murders, yeah, it can do wonders to turn people off or even business.

Jobs are important, yes, but crime is a big reason why some cities do not grow as fast. And with crime, comes crappy schools as a side effect of the residents impacted. Have a higher crime rate, get less qualified people who want to teach there. All of the good residents flock, and with it, the neighborhoods go to crap.

When you think Detroit, urban lovers will think pre-wars, but most people think crime, and because of that, you'll rarely find a person who in conversation would admit that its a good place or worth going too or moving too.

Unfortunately, Chicago has a very bad reputation for crime, and I bet because of the crime issue, its lost 1000's of potential residents.

Now imagine if a place like Baltimore or Detroit or Chicago had a lower crime rate. You'd see a change in the census numbers. Either a higher percentage or not such a fast migration from the core city.

[isaidso]

Originally Posted by brian_b

Arizona banks all of their extra water by recharging underground aquifers. They probably have the best water management of any western state.

That's good but the key is whether they extract more than is replenished. Does someone know? What does the Colorado River look like by the time it reaches Mexico? If it's a trickle they're at their limit already.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by tablemtn

I think you might be understating the scale of Baltimore's problems:

But Baltimore has had a horrible murder rate and bad schools for the last 40-50 years. The question is why is the city showing bad population loss right now, when most of the older U.S. cities with decent housing stock have recovered.

Philly, just up the road, is every bit as gritty, with high crime and bad schools, but Philly is growing (barely) and genuinely recovering (somewhat). Philly's core is booming (yeah, this is true of most U.S. cities) and there are probably more cranes on the skyline than all but three or four U.S. cities. I think Philly can make a somewhat plausible argument for second best core in the U.S. (at absolute worst top five or so). So you don't need safety or good schools to have a growing, improving city.

And no offense to other declined U.S. cities, but Baltimore, in terms of urban form, is vastly better than a Detroit or Cleveland. Baltimore has some great bones; better urbanistically than almost anywhere outside of the Northeast Corridor. It has a subway, light rail, commuter rail, vast 19th century rowhouse neighborhoods. It's proximate to tons of high paying federal jobs. It also has a very large corridor of wealth running up the central spine of the city.

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by brian_b

Arizona banks all of their extra water by recharging underground aquifers. They probably have the best water management of any western state.

These are Tucson groundwater recharge basins in the fairly remote Avra Valley. The water mostly comes from the Central Arizona Project which is an aquaduct bringing Colorado River water to the central and southern parts of the state:


https://www.tucsonaz.gov/water/technical-library

Central Arizona Project:


http://arizonaexperience.org/innovat...rizona-project


http://kjzz.org/content/318385/gravi...h-arizonas-cap

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by isaidso

That's good but the key is whether they extract more than is replenished. Does someone know? What does the Colorado River look like by the time it reaches Mexico? If it's a trickle they're at their limit already.

In dry times, the Colorado hardly reaches Mexico (Sea of Cortez):


http://www.livingwilderness.com/lake...ver-delta.html

But that isn't Arizona's fault and certainly not Maricopa's. Until recently, Arizona didn't take all of its legal allocation of Colorado River water. Now it takes most of it, I believe, for the groundwater recharge program.

It's California, and especially southern CA. sucking the Colorado dry.

The Colorado River is managed and operated under numerous compacts, federal laws, court decisions and decrees, contracts, and regulatory guidelines collectively known as "The Law of the River."

The compact divides the river basin into two areas, the Upper Division (comprising Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming) and the Lower Division (Nevada, Arizona and California). The compact requires the Upper Basin states not to deplete the flow of the river below 7,500,000 acre feet (9.3 km3) during any period of ten consecutive years. Based on rainfall patterns observed in the years before the treaty's signing in 1922, the amount specified in the compact was assumed to allow a roughly equal division of water between the two regions. The states within each basin were required to divide their 7,500,000-acre (30,000 km2) foot per year (289 m³/s) share allotment among themselves. The compact enabled the widespread irrigation of the Southwest, as well as the subsequent development of state and federal water works projects under the United States Bureau of Reclamation. Such projects included the Hoover Dam and Lake Powell.

The current specific annual allotments in the Lower Basin were established in 1928 as part of the Boulder Canyon Project, while the current specific annual allotments in the Upper Basin were established by the Upper Colorado River Basin Compact of 1948. They are:



In addition to this, 1,500,000-acre-foot (1.9×109 m3)/year of Colorado River water is allocated to Mexico, pursuant to the treaty relating to the use of waters of the Colorado and Tijuana rivers and of the Rio Grande, signed February 3, 1944, and its supplementary protocol signed November 14, 1944. Also, the lower basin can get an additional 1,100,000-acre-foot (1.4×109 m3)/year in surplus conditions.[3]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colorado_River_Compact

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by tablemtn

I think you might be understating the scale of Baltimore's problems:


Source: Adapted from the Baltimore Sun's homicide tracker

That's not just "bad," that's cataclysmic. That's a murder-rate over 10 times the national average. Additionally, how many Baltimore public schools are safe for the kids of the young urban class, if we could call them that? Not "high-performing," but merely physically-safe from assault and other crimes?

Until Baltimore's civic leadership chooses to pull things together a bit, most people will give the city a wide berth.

See that sort of central peninsula of murder-freeness? That's where I lived and went to school and where I was talking about above. The remaining middle class safe zone.