Mt Pleasant Is now South Carolina's 5th largest city

[Spartan]

I acutally think that North Charleston may be a good place to invest. Its a higher risk right now, but I think the wheels of change are in motion. It sucks now, but its a prime area. Its the near downtown, its near the suburban shopping, it has great access. Thats where I'd put my money if I were in Charleston.

[Charleston native]

I acutally think that North Charleston may be a good place to invest. Its a higher risk right now, but I think the wheels of change are in motion. It sucks now, but its a prime area. Its the near downtown, its near the suburban shopping, it has great access. Thats where I'd put my money if I were in Charleston.

A bunch of my best friends from my old Single's Sunday School class who have recently married are all planning on buying houses in the old part of the north area. This is becoming a pretty hot trend. The north area is more affordable than Mt. P and West Ashley, and after developments take place, it will become a much nicer and more pleasant suburb. Of course, couldn't this be seen as...gentrification?

[Jerseyman4]

............Of course, couldn't this be seen as...gentrification?

ummmmmmm

yep haha

[vicupstate]

Latest estimates from Census Bureau show Low Country cities growing

No real surprises, and these type estimates are often way off, but nevertheless do show trends.

The Low Country should have a disproportionate number of the state's largest cities in the next census. Rock Hill also had a noticeable gain.

EDIT: Charleston should be in first place by 2010, not currently.

[monsoon]

No surprises to us at all. Looks as if someone at that paper read this UrbanPlanet topic. It would not be the first time this has happened.

[CorgiMatt]

Latest estimates from Census Bureau show Low Country cities growing

No real surprises, and these type estimates are often way off, but nevertheless do show trends.

The Low Country should have a disproportionate number of the state's largest cities in the next census. Rock Hill also had a noticeable gain.

EDIT: Charleston should be in first place by 2010, not currently.

That assumes Columbia sits still and doesn't annex much or that planned in-town housing isn't completed yet. USA Today's article on the new figures says costly coastal cities are among the new losers. SC's trends always lag the nation's.

[teshadoh]

That assumes Columbia sits still and doesn't annex much or that planned in-town housing isn't completed yet. USA Today's article on the new figures says costly coastal cities are among the new losers. SC's trends always lag the nation's.

But also keep in mind how significant gentrification is in Columbia, such as along Rosewood. In the central city, there are fewer lower income families - they are being replaced by middle income couples. I also don't consider a minimal population gain / loss as 'sitting still', population isn't an accurate barometer on the health of a city. There are a number of cities that are becoming poorer as their populations increase - especially the low income suburbs that are becoming more prominant in certain areas of the country. Columbia does have limitless possibilities to the north & northeast of course as well as what will likely be the 'next big thing', south of the city. Especially there utilities are likely less common requiring city hookup.

My only real intent is to not put too much stock on population gains / losses (especially for estimates) as a way to judge the health / vibrancy of a city.

[Charleston native]

Well, I can assure you that S'ville, Chas, and Mt. P are doing exceptionally well economically, since the majority of population growth is occurring in middle-income families and singles. All of them want to be a part of the quality of life that the Chas area has to offer, so they have been drawn in considerably in the past 6 years.

This quote from the article was cool:

...Mount Pleasant has surpassed Greenville as the state's fourth-largest city, and Summerville is poised to surpass Spartanburg and Sumter by the 2010 Census to become sixth largest. Charleston is growing so much faster than Columbia that it seems likely to regain its position as South Carolina's largest city within the next decade...

We'll see what happens in 2010. My interpretation of the plateaus and slight declines in populations of the coastal cities really boils down to how built out they are. Unfortunately, densities cannot be increased in these areas, because that would involve building tall condos on the beaches...something many of the residents wanted to get away from. It would detract from the environment the residents saw that was there in the first place.

[g-man430]

How many times do I have to tell people this. That is because the City of Greenville in square miles wise is smaller than Charleston's, duh.

[motonenterprises]

Those numbers aren't a good representation of a city's size in SC.

[krazeeboi]

In case anyone is wondering, Columbia is still the state's largest city.

And as much as we don't like it, municipal population figures do exist and they actually do count for something. The Census Bureau shouldn't just stop counting municipal populations just because one state has backwards annexation laws.

I wouldn't be surprised in the next few decades to see Columbia and Charleston continuously edge each other out for the title of the state's largest city.

When the P&C says that "Charleston is growing so much faster than Columbia," apparently it means within the past few years, as between 2004-2005, both cities pretty much added the same amount of people (~1,000).

I'm glad to see Rock Hill hot on Concord's trail to regain its place within the Charlotte MSA designation. As slow as Gastonia is growing, it's only a matter of time until one of those two replaces it as the 2nd largest city in the metro.

[CorgiMatt]

In the Columbia City Council meeting before last on Cable channel 2, council addressed the annexation issue at length and talked about filling in donut holes and moving out into parts of NE Richland County and along Garner's Ferry Road, with an overhall of the city's approach to annexation to the extent that state laws will allow. They are thinking in terms of economics and seem to be ready to get some real results from the new annexation chief position they created last year. Daniel Rickenmann and Kirkman Finlay, Jr seem especially interested in this issue.

[Greenville]

Let's not turn this thread into an intra-state peeing contest, guys. The FACTS, according to the most recent census (2000), state that Columbia is still the state's largest city, Greenville is the state's largest county, and the Greenville-Spartanburg MSA is the state's largest MSA. Estimates at this point are shaky at best, sort of like predicting the outcome of a game at halftime. Relax, guys. All of our big three are growing in a positive way, and it will be interesting to see what changes take place until the next census is taken (2010). I am confident that Columbia, Charleston, and Greenville will all be making strides toward becoming the cities we envision them being.

[monsoon]

I said this in the other exact thread on this subject. It's not the circles that SC's cities draw in order to tax sprawl. It's the urbanization that matters.

[monsoon]

Note: I moved this previous topic with the one that already existed since they were exactly the same subject. I note that UrbanPlanet reported this fact 2 months before the paper got around to it.

[krazeeboi]

The FACTS, according to the most recent census (2000), state that...the Greenville-Spartanburg MSA is the state's largest MSA.

Actually, the Columbia MSA is the state's largest MSA; Greenville-Spartanburg-Anderson is a CSA, and the state's largest.

[motonenterprises]

Greenville has more restaurant choices than the others though.

[krazeeboi]

OK, I don't see how that's relevant.

[Greenville]

Actually, the Columbia MSA is the state's largest MSA; Greenville-Spartanburg-Anderson is a CSA, and the state's largest.

Actually, I was referring to the last official census (2000). You are referring to the halfway point estimates (2005), correct?

EDIT: The definitions for MSA were changed since the last census, thus the reason for the change. It will be interesting to see which definitions are used for the next census in 2010.

[krazeeboi]

Well, it's not so much about population figures as it is about definitions and designations. The new MSA/CSA definitions have already taken effect. Those don't have to be reconfigured decennially in order to be official.

[sonofaque86]

i see people like to delete my posts for no reason sometimes

[sonofaque86]

The US Census 2005 figures show Charleston at 106,712 up from 104,000 in 2004...Not even close to Columbia's 117,088 or 121,395, depends on what u like to use....But just like Charleston hasn't been going by the US Census, the other cities really been using other sources too...

[Charleston native]

Oh boy, the pissing contest is on. Actually, the figures for the cities from each year tell a different story. Check out this link from the article: http://newsfiles.charleston.net/webextras/

Click on the top link on that page which is labeled "Summary of census estimates". This is an Excel file which shows every SC city and town population from their 2000 census and each year following. Note the trend: Cola's municipal population has fluctuated and remained fairly consistent. Chas actually has shown a steady increase from the original population of over 96,000 to over 106,000 in five years. The numbers show a trend...that is not to say Cola is not growing, because the metro area is at an impressive rate. However, the metro area of Chas is the fastest growing in the state, and the population increases in the core city and the cities surrounding it help emphasize this trend. Will Chas edge out Cola for the largest city in SC by 2010? Who knows, but the race is sure fun to watch!

[goodbye]

It really is difficult to distinguish the growth of our major metros in this state because they are each literally outpacing their previous census growth rates. Can we not just be glad about that instead of scrapping about minor details that only prove to hurt others in the end? Who cares which city/county/MSA/CSA is largest since they're relatively equal size and are ALL experiencing rapid change and development?

[g-man430]

I hope everybody is happy now: http://www.greenvilleonline.com/assets/gif/BS32018621.GIF and http://www.greenvilleonline.com/apps/pbcs....314/1004/NEWS01

I have one question and that is how can cities like Columbia annex land easily, but Greenville can't? Does this state have their head so far up their you know where that they can't see what's going on around them or is just me.