Jump to content

2005 Best Places to Live Report, from Sperling's


hood

Recommended Posts

Because there are very few areas, if any, that are that dense for that long of an area. 1,000 ppsm is more than many may think. These areas are still considerably smaller than metro area populations which, as said, are based on commuting patterns and not density. Urban Area is about the best you can get to measure the built environment. Maybe, someday they will boost the density number.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 33
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • 1 month later...

Not to get back off topic but there was nothing wrong with the GR/Holland/Muskegon metro. As a matter of fact it kind of makes more sense than the current convoluted one that added two rural counties while removing Ottawa.

Mind you - more than 50% of Ottawa Counties population now live on the border of Kent County - clearly there is a bond. The only reason the old metro was broken up was that Ottawa fell short by 1% in the intra-urban transportation requirement. Muskegon made it but they still removed it - why - who knows. I guess they figured that if they screwed us already with Ottawa there was no way they could justify Muskegon.

If you ask me, it was a farce and I am sure it will be corrected the next time around. Sadly, it cost this area and State a lot in terms of Federal money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree SuperNOVA. The population of Ottawa County along the border of Kent is probably 20 - 30,000, at most. It's basically Georgetown Township and Jamestown Township, which Jamestown is still VERY rural. That's under 10% of its overall population. Although there are some people who traverse back and forth between Holland and GR, its still two very separate and VERY different cities. It's not anything like Lansing/East Lansing, where you can barely tell where one starts and the other ends (although they differ culturally). I think to say that Grand Rapids is 1.3 or 1.4 million is silly, and makes us look silly to the rest of the country. We are a very healthy and growing 600,000 - 700,000 metro, and that's it (Fed. funds notwithstanding).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But, facts are facts and opinions are opinions. It depends on what you place importance on, Metropolitan Area population or urban area population. Lansing/East Lansing are joined like Grand Rapids, East Grand Rapids (they are in the immediate vicinity), so that doesn't have much bearing here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But, facts are facts and opinions are opinions. It depends on what you place importance on, Metropolitan Area population or urban area population. Lansing/East Lansing are joined like Grand Rapids, East Grand Rapids (they are in the immediate vicinity), so that doesn't have much bearing here.

The current metropolitan area that is being used for Grand Rapids is erroneous, and that's a fact. It's all in an effort to get money from the feds. Just because a bunch of senators say it is so does not in fact make it true. Neither Holland nor Muskegon is joined to Grand Rapids, and that's a fact. I do agree that the two rural counties that were added to the current MSA/CSA/BSA whatever the name is now was just a silly "land-grab" to make GR appear bigger. It would be like including Marshall or Clair in Lansings. That's all I'm saying.

And back to the topic at hand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Metro areas are based on commutting patterns, as has been said over and over again, not on the built environment. That is what the government uses thus making it official whether we like the definition or not.

Now, if you are talking built-up area, than Grand Rapids is indeed the 600,000 to 700,000, and Lansing is just a bit over 300,000.

But, like I said, you and I can think whatever we want about the definition. Grand Rapids, officially by government standards is a metropolitan area of over 1,000,000 residents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • 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.