113 replies to this topic

[CorgiMatt]

Hey, Krazeeboi, here's an article from this morning's "The State" on the growth of South Carolina's MSA's from 2000 through 2006.  They focus mainly on rate of growth, but they also give the actual numbers (estimates).  The Columbia MSA gained the most people with the Charleston-N. Charleston MSA coming in second.  Myrtle Beach grew the fastest, but it only gained 40,451 to Columbia's 54,667.  Charleston-N. Charleston gained 52,663.  Personally I don't care how fast a place is growing as much as I do how many people are moving there.  

http://www.thestate....tory/27395.html

Also, Richland County beat Lexington County 26,834 to 23,263.  The tide has turned.

Edited by CorgiMatt, 05 April 2007 - 07:32 AM.

[Spartan]

I think that Richland and Lexington's numbers show that there is not a strong preference towards one county or the other. The growth is almost equal in terms of raw numbers. This just shows that Columbia as a whole is growing consistantly, and not in one direction.

[krazeeboi]

The census county estimates have been out for some time now; why are newspapers just getting around to reporting these figures?

It seems as though Columbia is still holding its own. However, I am most impressed by Myrtle Beach's growth, whose growth rates are comparable to those of the Big Three (it almost added as many people as the Greenville MSA from 2000-2006).

[CorgiMatt]

Still, gotta say I'm psyched by Columbia's gaining the most people in the state.

[krazeeboi]

Yeah, even though Charleston has made up some ground from the 90's, Columbia is still the front runner.

[Spartan]

krazeeboi, on Apr 5 2007, 01:09 PM, said:

The census county estimates have been out for some time now; why are newspapers just getting around to reporting these figures?

Because we didnt have a thread dedicated to it in the Columbia section, perhaps?

[krazeeboi]

[Temeteron]

What I don't understand is, why is Sumter losing population? Every time I go there to visit family there are like literally tons of new subdivisions being built.  Quite strange...

[krazeeboi]

That probably represents more of a shift of the existing population to the suburbs than it does true growth. Just a guess.

[Amapper]

krazeeboi, on Apr 5 2007, 08:10 PM, said:

Yeah, even though Charleston has made up some ground from the 90's, Columbia is still the front runner.

True, but only by 2000 people and when you look at the huge developments in the works in the Charleston area (135,000 homes in the pipeline), the numbers might be somewhat different by the end of the decade.

[krazeeboi]

It very well may be. All of our state's largest metros have several projects in the pipeline, but all of them won't materialize by the end of the decade. At any rate, it's good to see them all prospering.

[MikesLogic]

Don't discount Columbia from continued and increased growth.  They will continue to post large gains in population for the foreseeable future.  A lot of the rural migration throughout SC is ending up in the Columbia suburbs.

[SimCity]

MikesLogic, on Apr 6 2007, 09:36 PM, said:

Don't discount Columbia from continued and increased growth.  They will continue to post large gains in population for the foreseeable future.  A lot of the rural migration throughout SC is ending up in the Columbia suburbs.

That is very true, whenever I talk to former rural dwellers in SC they almost invariably ended up living in Columbia. Charleston seems to be the runner-up as far as rural to urban migration goes in this state.

[waccamatt]

Amapper, on Apr 6 2007, 04:33 PM, said:

True, but only by 2000 people and when you look at the huge developments in the works in the Charleston area (135,000 homes in the pipeline), the numbers might be somewhat different by the end of the decade.

One thing to remember, however, is that alot of homes purchased in Charleston are simply vacation homes and not full time residences.

[SimCity]

waccamatt, on Apr 7 2007, 02:04 AM, said:

One thing to remember, however, is that alot of homes purchased in Charleston are simply vacation homes and not full time residences.

True and that's the bane of downtown Charleston and the islands. This destroys the sense of community and neighborhood, robs the economy of the city and empties the streets of life.

[CorgiMatt]

SimCity, on Apr 7 2007, 10:04 AM, said:

True and that's the bane of downtown Charleston and the islands. This destroys the sense of community and neighborhood, robs the economy of the city and empties the streets of life.

Except for tourists, including Columbians.  Like I've always said, the best thing about Charleston is that it's only two hours from Columbia.

[SimCity]

CorgiMatt, on Apr 7 2007, 01:11 PM, said:

Except for tourists, including Columbians.  Like I've always said, the best thing about Charleston is that it's only two hours from Columbia.

I agree, any city that can attract money and investments from the outside has a lot to be thankful for.

[Temeteron]

CorgiMatt, on Apr 7 2007, 11:11 AM, said:

Except for tourists, including Columbians.  Like I've always said, the best thing about Charleston is that it's only two hours from Columbia.

2 hours? it takes me 1 1/2 and thats from NE columbia....from west columbia/irmo it should be only an hour....how slow are you driving lol

[sonofaque86]

Yeah...Charleston is about 1 and a half at MOST. lol 1 1/2 from beach, 1 1/2 from mountains. best of both worlds

Edited by sonofaque86, 07 April 2007 - 06:20 PM.

[Amapper]

waccamatt, on Apr 7 2007, 02:04 AM, said:

One thing to remember, however, is that alot of homes purchased in Charleston are simply vacation homes and not full time residences.

That's only true on some of the islands and to some extent in the "south of Broad" area, but not of the metro area as a whole. Most of the new homes are occupied full time. One indication that Charleston is a business city is that half of the air travelers are business people, this at the states busiest airport (a major reason AirTran decided to start service here). The big commercial and industrial outfits locating here would not do so if the area was made up of "vacationers". The area has been consistently creating over a thousand new jobs a month  for several years.

Just wanted to clear that up. Thanks.

Edited by Amapper, 07 April 2007 - 06:30 PM.