Census Bureau Releases July 1 '06 County Pop. Estimates

[SteveD]

The Census Bureau has just released the latest county-based population estimates, with a reference date of July 1, 2006. You can access the data here:
http://www.census.gov/popest/countie...ST2006-01.html

So, if you know the components of your area's MSA and/or CSA, you can now calculate the population estimate for July, 2006. I'll start with Atlanta.

Atlanta Sandy Springs Marietta MSA 2000: 4,281,616 / 2006: 5,138,223

The Atlanta CSA adds the Gainesville, GA MSA, and the micropolitan areas of Cedartown, GA, LaGrange, GA, Thomaston, GA, and Valley, AL:

Atlanta Sandy Springs Gainesville CSA 2000: 4,583,958 / 2006: 5,478,667

As is readily apparent from the above numbers, the Atlanta MSA and CSA are continuing with relentless and astonishing growth so far this decade, with the CSA adding nearly 900,000 people in the last 6 years. The Census Bureau noted that, in the 2000 through 2006 period, Georgia had 14 of the nation's 100 fastest-growing counties, leading the nation in that number, and three of the top 10.

[plinko]

Phoenix MSA: 4,039,182
Maricopa County: 3,768,123
Pinal County: 271,059

Raw growth in Maricopa County alone has been between 93K-140K every year since 2000. Scary.

Pinal County added 12.9% to its population in just the past year!

[Crawford]

Of all the Sunbelt boomers, Atlanta and environs is always the biggest mystery to me. Cities in Florida, Arizona, even Texas make sense (beach, warmth, golf, etc.). Atlanta is more of a head-scratcher. Inland location, far from ideal weather, high crime, crazy commutes, etc.

The two obvious draws would be 1. Easy to get a job and 2. Relatively cheap new homes in exurbs, except Atlanta does not appear to have lower unemployment rates or cheaper homes than from many of the regions from which it draws.

The strangest part of the Atlanta allure (and this extends to Charlotte) is the black mythology of these places as promised lands. Suddenly the North Carolina of Jesse Helms and the Georgia of Sonny Perdue are supposed meccas for progressive blacks (and Sonny's the governor RIGHT NOW and won basically for his support of the confederate flag).

I once heard a black secretary at my dad's office in suburban Detroit say she was moving from a nice middle-class Detroit suburb to the southern suburbs of Atlanta for the safety, schools and lack of congestion. There is absolutely no data to support the notion that suburban Atlanta would be a solid choice over suburban Detroit for safety, schools or congestion. If anything, there should be a flood in the opposite direction, from emerging ghettohoods in South DeKalb and South Fulton counties (Atlanta) to the Northeast and Midwest.

It's amazing how good PR can influence relocation decisions more than hard statistics.

[galaca]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Of all the Sunbelt boomers, Atlanta and environs is always the biggest mystery to me. Cities in Florida, Arizona, even Texas make sense (beach, warmth, golf, etc.). Atlanta is more of a head-scratcher. Inland location, far from ideal weather, high crime, crazy commutes, etc.

The two obvious draws would be 1. Easy to get a job and 2. Relatively cheap new homes in exurbs, except Atlanta does not appear to have lower unemployment rates or cheaper homes than from many of the regions from which it draws.

The strangest part of the Atlanta allure (and this extends to Charlotte) is the black mythology of these places as promised lands. Suddenly the North Carolina of Jesse Helms and the Georgia of Sonny Perdue are supposed meccas for progressive blacks (and Sonny's the governor RIGHT NOW and won basically for his support of the confederate flag).

I once heard a black secretary at my dad's office in suburban Detroit say she was moving from a nice middle-class Detroit suburb to the southern suburbs of Atlanta for the safety, schools and lack of congestion. There is absolutely no data to support the notion that suburban Atlanta would be a solid choice over suburban Detroit for safety, schools or congestion. If anything, there should be a flood in the opposite direction, from emerging ghettohoods in South DeKalb and South Fulton counties (Atlanta) to the Northeast and Midwest.

It's amazing how good PR can influence relocation decisions more than hard statistics.

It's quite obvious that you don't know what you're talking about.

[Crawford]

^
Thanks for the informed reply. Going forward, I'll be sure to ignore hard data and instead rely on media hype and PR razzle dazzle.

[SteveD]

Crawford, Atlanta is in the Piedmont region of the Appalachians, with an average elevation of about 1000 feet, and it has a far more desirable climate than most of the deep South as a result. Many folks prefer four distinct seasons, and Atlanta does not have the stifling heat of Texas or Florida (since "warmth" was one of your criteria citing those other locales). In fact, droves of folks from Florida (former northerners) are moving halfway back and settling in North Georgia and the Carolinas. This phenomenon is referred to as the "halfbacks". The Atlanta metro, and the City of Atlanta in particular, have seen rapidly declining crime for some time now, so your crime comment is ill-informed. Atlantan's are a short drive from either mountains or the beach. Golf?? plenty of that here too, Crawford, including several of the country's most celebrated courses. And, as is widely known, the Atlanta metro does indeed have one of the nation's most affluent, influential and thriving African American communities. Maybe your prior post seemed so filled with inaccuracies and generalities that the subsequent poster didn't even know where to start! But I digress...please let's get the thread back on track and discuss the new census pop. estimates.

[dimondpark]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Of all the Sunbelt boomers, Atlanta and environs is always the biggest mystery to me. Cities in Florida, Arizona, even Texas make sense (beach, warmth, golf, etc.). Atlanta is more of a head-scratcher. Inland location, far from ideal weather, high crime, crazy commutes, etc.

The two obvious draws would be 1. Easy to get a job and 2. Relatively cheap new homes in exurbs, except Atlanta does not appear to have lower unemployment rates or cheaper homes than from many of the regions from which it draws.

The strangest part of the Atlanta allure (and this extends to Charlotte) is the black mythology of these places as promised lands. Suddenly the North Carolina of Jesse Helms and the Georgia of Sonny Perdue are supposed meccas for progressive blacks (and Sonny's the governor RIGHT NOW and won basically for his support of the confederate flag).

I once heard a black secretary at my dad's office in suburban Detroit say she was moving from a nice middle-class Detroit suburb to the southern suburbs of Atlanta for the safety, schools and lack of congestion. There is absolutely no data to support the notion that suburban Atlanta would be a solid choice over suburban Detroit for safety, schools or congestion. If anything, there should be a flood in the opposite direction, from emerging ghettohoods in South DeKalb and South Fulton counties (Atlanta) to the Northeast and Midwest.

It's amazing how good PR can influence relocation decisions more than hard statistics.

that's an interesting observation...I've wondered that too. The Bay Area(And California for that matter) is hemorraging blacks left and right and I suspect a huge chunk are headed to the south. I suspect (far)lower housing costs is the primary reason.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by dimondpark

that's an interesting observation...I've wondered that too. The Bay Area(And California for that matter) is hemorraging blacks left and right and I suspect a huge chunk are headed to the south. I suspect (far)lower housing costs is the primary reason.

I'd agree that Atlanta has big cost advantages over places like California, but what about Atlanta's draw in cheaper places like Baltimore, Detroit, etc.? Yes, these cities have huge urban problems, but the suburbs of Detroit are no different from suburbs anywhere else and they are CHEAP with good schools and low congestion.

If you look at the data, Atlanta has very high crime and congestion numbers and below-average schools. At the same time, people are moving to Atlanta based on these criteria.

[CityFan]

Originally Posted by Crawford

I'd agree that Atlanta has big cost advantages over places like California, but what about Atlanta's draw in cheaper places like Baltimore, Detroit, etc.? Yes, these cities have huge urban problems, but the suburbs of Detroit are no different from suburbs anywhere else and they are CHEAP with good schools and low congestion.

If you look at the data, Atlanta has very high crime and congestion numbers and below-average schools. At the same time, people are moving to Atlanta based on these criteria.

How is winter climate in Detroit? People move to Atlanta for various reasons. Climate is one of them.

[scguy]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Of all the Sunbelt boomers, Atlanta and environs is always the biggest mystery to me. Cities in Florida, Arizona, even Texas make sense (beach, warmth, golf, etc.). Atlanta is more of a head-scratcher. Inland location, far from ideal weather, high crime, crazy commutes, etc.

The two obvious draws would be 1. Easy to get a job and 2. Relatively cheap new homes in exurbs, except Atlanta does not appear to have lower unemployment rates or cheaper homes than from many of the regions from which it draws.

The strangest part of the Atlanta allure (and this extends to Charlotte) is the black mythology of these places as promised lands. Suddenly the North Carolina of Jesse Helms and the Georgia of Sonny Perdue are supposed meccas for progressive blacks (and Sonny's the governor RIGHT NOW and won basically for his support of the confederate flag).

I once heard a black secretary at my dad's office in suburban Detroit say she was moving from a nice middle-class Detroit suburb to the southern suburbs of Atlanta for the safety, schools and lack of congestion. There is absolutely no data to support the notion that suburban Atlanta would be a solid choice over suburban Detroit for safety, schools or congestion. If anything, there should be a flood in the opposite direction, from emerging ghettohoods in South DeKalb and South Fulton counties (Atlanta) to the Northeast and Midwest.

It's amazing how good PR can influence relocation decisions more than hard statistics.

As far as weather, what you hear mostly from the thousands of retiring baby boomers who are relocating to Georgia and the Carolinas is that Florida is too hot all the time and that the NE is too cold in the winter with snow and all. Atlanta has a little bit of each but it is relatively mild, (much milder than the NE).

[c4smok]

Between July 1, 2005, and July 1, 2006, the 10-county Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown Metropolitan Statistical Area gained 187,380 residents, bringing the total to 5,539,949 - HBJ

Harris County, TX 3,886,207 3,762,844 +123,363


Houston MSA is now the 6th Largest in the US =)

[hoosier]

Indianapolis-Carmel MSA 2006

Marion County (Indianapolis)-865,504
Hamilton County (Carmel)- 250,979
Hendricks County-131,204
Johnson County- 133,316

Total-1,381,003

I left out some of the smaller counties, so the Indy MSA is well over 1.4 million.

[netdragon]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Of all the Sunbelt boomers, Atlanta and environs is always the biggest mystery to me. Cities in Florida, Arizona, even Texas make sense (beach, warmth, golf, etc.). Atlanta is more of a head-scratcher. Inland location, far from ideal weather, high crime, crazy commutes, etc.

J-O-B-S and lower cost of living that's why we moved down here.

[SteveD]

Originally Posted by plinko

Phoenix MSA: 4,039,182
Maricopa County: 3,768,123
Pinal County: 271,059

Raw growth in Maricopa County alone has been between 93K-140K every year since 2000. Scary.

Pinal County added 12.9% to its population in just the past year!

Yeah, the Phoenix metro growth is equally as amazing as Atlanta's.

[vertex]

Originally Posted by plinko

Phoenix MSA: 4,039,182
Maricopa County: 3,768,123
Pinal County: 271,059

Raw growth in Maricopa County alone has been between 93K-140K every year since 2000. Scary.

Pinal County added 12.9% to its population in just the past year!

Plinko, realistically they ought to start adding Yavapai County (Prescott/Prescott Valley) to the Phoenix MSA as well. That would bump the total to 4,247,196.

[Mr Roboto]

Supposedly cook county is losing tons of people to surrounding chicagoland counties. I find this trend disturbing, if its true that is. Because the neighborhoods surrounding downtown are certainly growing, which means that much more people are leaving the other areas in chicago. Not good.

[Marcu]

Originally Posted by Mr Roboto

Supposedly cook county is losing tons of people to surrounding chicagoland counties. I find this trend disturbing, if its true that is. Because the neighborhoods surrounding downtown are certainly growing, which means that much more people are leaving the other areas in chicago. Not good.

Not necessarily. The estimated loss in population in cook co is about 1.5% which is actually around 0 growth if accouting for the marign of error. The collar counties are growing at the rate of the sunbelt cities so the region is growing fairly rapidly and doing well economically. Lake county, for example, grew about 10% and Will county grew 29%. Both are at around 700k now making each more populous than atlanta, tampa, and raleigh city limits. Those areas will have no choice but to get denser and aleviate congestion with mass transit. I know both Kane and Lake have allocated most of their existing land to wild life preserves and there's a lot of denser transit oriented growth going on in both counties as a result.

The shrinking areas in cook county are in the impoverished southern portion of the county (places like markham, robbins, harvey, etc.) that are far from desirable. Robbins, for example, is losing about 4% a year. I personally see this as a good thing. The last thing I want to see is impoverished portions of the county experiencing growth while staying impoverished. The best thing that can happen for a lot of those places is a clean slate.

[VivaLFuego]

Originally Posted by Mr Roboto

Supposedly cook county is losing tons of people to surrounding chicagoland counties. I find this trend disturbing, if its true that is. Because the neighborhoods surrounding downtown are certainly growing, which means that much more people are leaving the other areas in chicago. Not good.

Even for the areas around downtown, they are developing with reasonably high household density but lower population density, i.e. it is alot of singles, couples, etc, not large families pack in like in the old days.

[Attrill]

Originally Posted by VivaLFuego

Even for the areas around downtown, they are developing with reasonably high household density but lower population density, i.e. it is alot of singles, couples, etc, not large families pack in like in the old days.

Yep. It's important to remember just how crowded parts of Chicago were at the peak of it's population. I lived in Ukrainian village in the 90's and saw three flats with extended families of 5-8 people on each floor turned into condos with 1 or 2 people per floor. That's a loss of density, but it doesn't mean Chicago is stagnating in any way. I also don't know what % of growth in surrounding counties is due to people leaving Cook county, I'm sure some is due to that, but some of the growth has to be from people moving from other parts of the state or country.

[Mr Roboto]

Originally Posted by Attrill

I also don't know what % of growth in surrounding counties is due to people leaving Cook county, I'm sure some is due to that, but some of the growth has to be from people moving from other parts of the state or country.

Right, I also dont know at what % former cook county residents are contributing to counties like lake, dupage and will. I just saw on the news this morning, they were talking about the new census estimates, and seemed to infer that those leaving cook county were going to these outer burbs. Of course, llke people have said, all of these are just estimates anyway and no one knows for sure, but I just dont like to hear trends like that regardless.

Good points about the density decreases too though. Most of these new flats and condos do seem to be mostly getting filled with young couples and singles. Population decreases but not necessarily bad for the city.