Jump to content

Population Growth


GRDadof3

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, MJLO said:

Well neither do people in Holland and Grand Haven for that matter.  After working out there for several years i'm convinced people from western Ottawa County need weeks to prepare for the 6 day journey to Grand Rapids.  Which they must make the journey at least once in their lifetime.

 

That is true, but Muskegon people are even MORE different. And really I don't think the commuting patterns are there. It'd be like saying Brighton is part of the Ann Arbor metro area. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


3 hours ago, GRDadof3 said:

You and your CSA. :) Nobody in Muskegon thinks they're part of Grand Rapids, no way no how. 

I have plenty of friends who live in GR and work in Holland, Grand Haven, and Zeeland. And a few out in Holland that make the reverse commute. Muskegon is an island for all I'm concerned, but if Newaygo and Ionia are a part of our metro, Holland and GH sure as hell are. 

3 hours ago, GRDadof3 said:

That is true, but Muskegon people are even MORE different. And really I don't think the commuting patterns are there. It'd be like saying Brighton is part of the Ann Arbor metro area. 

Statistically the commuting patterns have to be there to be a part of an MSA or CSA, that is how they are calculated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone seriously following population trends knows that MSAs - while not perfect - are the best option for city to city comparisons.  City proper population is a useless measurement because Southern and especially Western cities tend to cover large physical areas.  Like wise, CSAs are not a good measurement because not all cities are part of a CSA, and CSAs in general just indicate that there is another Metro nearby. 

I think the best way to measure population growth trends is to compare the growth rate since the last decennial census.  I usually use a MSA population of of at least 1,000,000 as the most meaningful measurement since small Metros don't need much of an increase to post high growth rates.  But since this list is just for a particular region, I used 500,000 as the population benchmark.  These are the 10 fastest growing Midwest Metros since the 2010 census:    

 Fastest%20Growing%20Midwest%20Metros%202

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, The ATX said:

Anyone seriously following population trends knows that MSAs - while not perfect - are the best option for city to city comparisons.  City proper population is a useless measurement because Southern and especially Western cities tend to cover large physical areas.  Like wise, CSAs are not a good measurement because not all cities are part of a CSA, and CSAs in general just indicate that there is another Metro nearby. 

I think the best way to measure population growth trends is to compare the growth rate since the last decennial census.  I usually use a MSA population of of at least 1,000,000 as the most meaningful measurement since small Metros don't need much of an increase to post high growth rates.  But since this list is just for a particular region, I used 500,000 as the population benchmark.  These are the 10 fastest growing Midwest Metros since the 2010 census:    

 Fastest%20Growing%20Midwest%20Metros%202

For comparison sake, fine MSAs are a better tool, but I find it very difficult to discuss the population of the GR region and neglect to include the Lakeshore. Yes you can look at an extreme case like the DC/Baltimore CSA and it makes no sense to try to compare it to other metro areas, but GR acts far more as the city hub for the smaller adjacent metro areas than is the case for most CSAs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, The ATX said:

Anyone seriously following population trends knows that MSAs - while not perfect - are the best option for city to city comparisons.  City proper population is a useless measurement because Southern and especially Western cities tend to cover large physical areas.  Like wise, CSAs are not a good measurement because not all cities are part of a CSA, and CSAs in general just indicate that there is another Metro nearby. 

I think the best way to measure population growth trends is to compare the growth rate since the last decennial census.  I usually use a MSA population of of at least 1,000,000 as the most meaningful measurement since small Metros don't need much of an increase to post high growth rates.  But since this list is just for a particular region, I used 500,000 as the population benchmark.  These are the 10 fastest growing Midwest Metros since the 2010 census:    

 Fastest%20Growing%20Midwest%20Metros%202

Agreed.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Pattmost20 said:

For comparison sake, fine MSAs are a better tool, but I find it very difficult to discuss the population of the GR region and neglect to include the Lakeshore. Yes you can look at an extreme case like the DC/Baltimore CSA and it makes no sense to try to compare it to other metro areas, but GR acts far more as the city hub for the smaller adjacent metro areas than is the case for most CSAs. 

I agree. The whole I-196 corridor all the way to Holland is very much tied to Grand Rapids. Grand Haven is tied to GR but to a lesser extent. Muskegon is a whole other world. I have often thought of the GR area encompassing Kent County and all of Ottawa County south of I-96. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, MJLO said:

Well neither do people in Holland and Grand Haven for that matter.  After working out there for several years i'm convinced people from western Ottawa County need weeks to prepare for the 6 day expidition to Grand Rapids.  Which they must make the journey at least once in their lifetime.

 

Difference is, there are mass daily commutes between Grand Rapids and Holland. Rush hour in both directions at both times of day on I-196 is almost as busy as the highways in the city at those times. The same can't be said for GR-Muskegon/Grand Haven.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, GRLaker said:

I agree. The whole I-196 corridor all the way to Holland is very much tied to Grand Rapids. Grand Haven is tied to GR but to a lesser extent. Muskegon is a whole other world. I have often thought of the GR area encompassing Kent County and all of Ottawa County south of I-96. 

I commute to Grand Haven Grand Rapids everyday.  So do 2/3rds of the administrative/brain trust in my company.  It's more common that people realize.  The same is less true in reverse from what I've seen.

 

1 hour ago, Pattmost20 said:

For comparison sake, fine MSAs are a better tool, but I find it very difficult to discuss the population of the GR region and neglect to include the Lakeshore. Yes you can look at an extreme case like the DC/Baltimore CSA and it makes no sense to try to compare it to other metro areas, but GR acts far more as the city hub for the smaller adjacent metro areas than is the case for most CSAs. 

Well from a statistical standpoint a good chunk of the Lakeshore is already included in GR's MSA.  I do agree that the case of Grand Rapids is a bit more fuzzy than other CSA's.  100,000people in GR's urban area bleeds into Ottawa County.  There's about a 6 mile gap from where GR's urbanized portion stop and Holland's starts.  Grand Haven really anchors an urbanized area of about 50,000 people.  That bleeds into Muskegons UA.   It gets even more fuzzy since about 12,000 people within the city of Holland aren't even counted in those MSA numbers since they live in Allegan county.  From a metro standpoint I do feel that the original 1990's alignment represents the area best.  (Allegan, Ottawa, Muskegon, Kent County as one MSA).

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


22 minutes ago, MJLO said:

I commute to Grand Haven Grand Rapids everyday.  So do 2/3rds of the administrative/brain trust in my company.  It's more common that people realize.  The same is less true in reverse from what I've seen.

 

Well from a statistical standpoint a good chunk of the Lakeshore is already included in GR's MSA.  I do agree that the case of Grand Rapids is a bit more fuzzy than other CSA's.  100,000people in GR's urban area bleeds into Ottawa County.  There's about a 6 mile gap from where GR's urbanized portion stop and Holland's starts.  Grand Haven really anchors an urbanized area of about 50,000 people.  That bleeds into Muskegons UA.   It gets even more fuzzy since about 12,000 people within the city of Holland aren't even counted in those MSA numbers since they live in Allegan county.  From a metro standpoint I do feel that the original 1990's alignment represents the area best.  (Allegan, Ottawa, Muskegon, Kent County as one MSA).

 

That is interesting. I guess the GR-GH commute is one that I have heard of some doing, which is why I said that it does have somewhat of a connection to GR. I guess I just didn't realize the true extent of it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep...lots of GR employees here in Spring Lake. I also feel like when we go to GR on a weekend evening that we run into more lakeshore people that we know than GR people - and we've only lived over here for 4 years vs. almost 40 in GR.  (granted, I have worked on the Lakeshore for 15 years...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, MJLO said:

Well neither do people in Holland and Grand Haven for that matter.  After working out there for several years i'm convinced people from western Ottawa County need weeks to prepare for the 6 day expidition to Grand Rapids.  Which they must make the journey at least once in their lifetime.

 

I couldn't agree more. After working in Holland for ten years, it's my assertion that folks out there believe GR is far away, den of iniquity to be avoided at all costs ... unless its ArtPrize time but only during the day.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thjnk the Muskegon perception could have been more included if if it did things like stay in the 616 area code, not have its own commercial airport, and it's starting to move high school sport over to Ottawa-Kent league. There's also radio stations you get in Muskegon but not GR

Link to comment
Share on other sites


There's just so much farmland and undeveloped area between Muskegon and GR that it makes it seem further away than what it is. If Ft. Lauderdale is considered part of Miami's metro/csa (and same thing with other large cities) than the distance between GR and Muskegon is not much different and can definitely be considered part of the same category. What the main difference between GR and larger cities is, though, is that larger cities normally don't have as much underdeveloped area or farmland between nearby cities as GR does.

 

To add onto that.. in the future when the area between Muskegon and GR and even GR to Holland has been connected by development the perception of being so far apart from each other might go away.

Edited by TheSutterKing
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed Holland to GR is closer and will fill in faster than MKG to GR but that will probably eventually happen. I thjnk more development along 96 in walker will help but the dump in coopersville probably doesn't! There's also a lot more woods on that stretch so you can see development from the highway like around fruitport

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, mgreven said:

Yep...lots of GR employees here in Spring Lake. I also feel like when we go to GR on a weekend evening that we run into more lakeshore people that we know than GR people - and we've only lived over here for 4 years vs. almost 40 in GR.  (granted, I have worked on the Lakeshore for 15 years...)

Nobody in GR goes downtown anymore. :rofl: j/k

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Quercus said:

Love this thread and the first-hand accounts of why Census work is so tricky. Also reminds me of why the state's congressional districts are kind of a joke (Ludington and Wyoming part of the 2nd District, Battle Creek and Cedar Springs part of the 3rd).

the districts are a joke because the GOP used an unprecedented amount of data on every individual voter in Michigan to gerrymander the state following the 2010 census. 

The 2nd district is a perfect example of "packing" conservative voters so as to create a completely uncompetitive district.  And it helps explain why Huizenga acts as though the only people he's responsibly to are the DeVos's and GOP primary voters.  

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, scottythe1nonly said:

the districts are a joke because the GOP used an unprecedented amount of data on every individual voter in Michigan to gerrymander the state following the 2010 census. 

The 2nd district is a perfect example of "packing" conservative voters so as to create a completely uncompetitive district.  And it helps explain why Huizenga acts as though the only people he's responsibly to are the DeVos's and GOP primary voters.  

 

Of course democrats are completely innocent of the same accusation:

https://mirsnews.com/pdfs/districts/docs/Senate District 4.pdf

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michigan's_5th_congressional_district#/media/File:Michigan_US_Congressional_District_5_(since_2013).tif

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, organsnyder said:

With all of this growth, any thoughts on how our congressional districts might be reconfigured in 2020?

it won't change much if the GOP has control in 2020.  Grand Rapids is part of the 3rd district Gerrymander that ensures Amash can't be beat in the General.  It's likely, though, that Michigan could lose another seat in the House.  If that happens I'd expect that redistricting will take away one of the few remaining safe Democratic seats.

However, If the citizen redistricting amendment is successful in 2018 I would expect that GRap would end up in a competitive district after 2020.

On 3/28/2017 at 0:02 PM, arcturus said:

Both parties gerrymander.  Which is why legislatures shouldn't be allowed to do it.  Here in Michigan right now it's the GOP.  And they're doing it in a way that is unprecedented in our State's history.

also, in the past 10 years the amount of data used to gerrymander has taken it to another level of crazy.  it's not just about looking at voting roles anymore.  The out of state interest groups who draw the districts for the GOP here use huge amounts of personal data that didn't even exist a few years ago.

Edited by scottythe1nonly
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.