Jump to content

Triangle overtaking Metro Charlotte in population?


Recommended Posts

I had originally posted an article here but it got deleted because news clippings are against the rules. Fair enough. The point of the article that I wanted to convey is that the Dunn micropolitan statistical area is 99k people. That, along with the existing Raleigh and Durham MSAs, creates a CSA of 1.43 million people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 134
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I had originally posted an article here but it got deleted because news clippings are against the rules. Fair enough. The point of the article that I wanted to convey is that the Dunn micropolitan statistical area is 99k people. That, along with the existing Raleigh and Durham MSAs, creates a CSA of 1.43 million people.

Our 2006 CSA estimates stand a little over 1.5 million now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our 2006 CSA estimates stand a little over 1.5 million now.

The article was dated October 2005. Either way, they're both just estimates. But do you see the logic of my point? It makes more sense to compare CSAs since that's where these metros are headed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The article was dated October 2005. Either way, they're both just estimates. But do you see the logic of my point? It makes more sense to compare CSAs since that's where these metros are headed.

No, because as I said earlier the difference between Charlotte's CSA vs its MSA is 600,000 people spread over 3000 sq/miles. This includes places like Heath Spring, SC and Harmony NC and these places have not changed in the 30+ years that I have lived here and in fact some of them are losing population because of the textile mills closing. And if you were to drive between these two places its more than 110 miles.

I don't see the logic at looking at regions that have 200 people/sq mile. But if you feel that it is important, then yes the Charlotte is drawing in commuters from more rural areas than Raleigh Durham. This most likely because the median income in Eastern NC is higher than what is found here in Western NC and certainly in rural SC.

Since you looked at Dunn, lets look at a few of the counties in Charlotte's CSA.

Population Change 2004-2005

  • Chester -840

  • Anson-243

  • Cleveland +19 (yes, just 19 people)

This is 160K's worth of the 600K listed above, and they are located in counties losing people. Certainly this isn't the future of CLT. This is why CSA comparisons are fairly pointless IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It really doesn't make sense to include municipalites in your figures that are not truely a part of the Charlotte region, even if it is geographically lumped into the CSA. I'm sure many of these communities are so far out in the county that they should not even be factored in.

I can't speak for Charlotte, but being from Raleigh I can. I think the same thing applies to the Triangle in terms of outlying communities. Not every city within a county should be included in the figures. Take Chatham county, the only communities that are truely a part of the Triangle are Pittsboro and probably Fearrington Village. I would not calculate the total population of Chatham county into the Triangle's population.

If we start to include communities an hour outside of the city with miles of undeveloped, rural land between then it can get quite ridiculous. Cities within an hour drive of the Triangle with great highway access include Henderson, Rocky Mount and Sanford. Close...yes. Part of the Triangle...no. Again, I know very little with regards to Charlotte but I think the same rationale should be applied. The only way to compare the two is to look at commuting patterns of communities with little interruption in terms of developed growth. An easier way is to look at population rings 5-10-20-25...-50 miles from the city's core.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since you looked at Dunn, lets look at a few of the counties in Charlotte's CSA.

Population Change 2004-2005

  • Chester -840

  • Anson-243

  • Cleveland +19 (yes, just 19 people)

This is 160K's worth of the 600K listed above, and they are located in counties losing people. Certainly this isn't the future of CLT. This is why CSA comparisons are fairly pointless IMO.

All of the above should be included, whether these areas are showing growth or not. These outlying areas are already a part of Charlotte's CSA and as the metro continues to sprawl these areas will only continue to get more and more connected to Charlotte.

Again, I think the downfall of this discussion is that it's virtually impossible to agree on what should and should not be included, so we're not having an apples-to-apples discussion.

It really doesn't make sense to include municipalites in your figures that are not truely a part of the Charlotte region, even if it is geographically lumped into the CSA...An easier way is to look at population rings 5-10-20-25...-50 miles from the city's core.

So what is the deciding factor for what counts and what does not count? Perhaps we should use city limits? Perhaps we should use some radius from the core? I'd like to see how Raleigh and Charlotte compare to eachother from a 5-mile radius from their cores, but I don't think we have any way of determining this. The rest of the growth is suburban sprawl that doesn't do much for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But if you feel that it is important, then yes the Charlotte is drawing in commuters from more rural areas than Raleigh Durham. This most likely because the median income in Eastern NC is higher than what is found here in Western NC and certainly in rural SC.

I think another reason that there is less commuting in Eastern NC to Raleigh is simply because many of these areas are agricultural. Agricultural farmers and those in the hog farming industry have no reason to commute to Raleigh for jobs. Most of these smaller communities are self-sufficient and don't attract the commuter from Raleigh. Bottom line, those working in the RDU region have little reason to live any further out than Wake, Durham, Orange and Johnston counties. There is plenty of "outlaying" areas in these counties still where housing is more affordable. This area is still a while off before these areas get saturated and the Triangle metro spills into neighboring counties/communities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, I think the downfall of this discussion is that it's virtually impossible to agree on what should and should not be included, so we're not having an apples-to-apples discussion.

So what is the deciding factor for what counts and what does not count? Perhaps we should use city limits? Perhaps we should use some radius from the core? I'd like to see how Raleigh and Charlotte compare to eachother from a 5-mile radius from their cores, but I don't think we have any way of determining this. The rest of the growth is suburban sprawl that doesn't do much for me.

I agree with you that it is a very subjective debate on what should and should not be included in the respective metro's population figures. Unfortunately, trying to get unbiased opinions will be difficult. I do think that looking at population from a radius standpoint is good, but again, how far out do you go? I would be willing to take a stab at a list of Triangle communities that are truely a part of the metro's population.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Statistics that include remote farmland, small textile towns that are losing people and vast areas of no population that isn't do nothing to compare these two metros. All too often people confuse the CSA with a large urban area when the reality is very different. I encourage all of you to travel to some of these places.

It really doesn't matter to me where you decide to draw the lines because the bottom line is there really isn't that much difference between the Charlotte and Triangle metro's where it matters. They are both about the same size and both are growing about the same rate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It really doesn't matter to me where you decide to draw the lines because the bottom line is there really isn't that much difference between the Charlotte and Triangle metro's where it matters. They are both about the same size and both are growing about the same rate.

I agree. It only varies when you look at the various definitions of the two areas out there. There are census definitions, economic planning regions, regional partnership councils, etc. I think the two regions are very similar in size. I think the more important topic for this forum is how well each of these two regions are dealing with and accomodating the growth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It really doesn't matter to me where you decide to draw the lines because the bottom line is there really isn't that much difference between the Charlotte and Triangle metro's where it matters. They are both about the same size and both are growing about the same rate.
What do you mean by 'where it matters'? Again, I'd argue that we cannot make an apples-to-apples comparison because none of us will agree on 'where it matters'. I personally feel the 5-mile radius is the most important, because that's the part of the metro that's the 'real city'. Of course, the growth rates are obviously lower at the core because these areas are more established. but it's more meaningful, IMO, than getting excited over the sprawl on the outskirts.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do you mean by 'where it matters'? Again, I'd argue that we cannot make an apples-to-apples comparison because none of us will agree on 'where it matters'. I personally feel the 5-mile radius is the most important, because that's the part of the metro that's the 'real city'. Of course, the growth rates are obviously lower at the core because these areas are more established. but it's more meaningful, IMO, than getting excited over the sprawl on the outskirts.

But the 5 mile radius sample still wouldn't paint a complete picture here because the Triangle is a multi-nodal metro area much like Minneapolis-St. Paul or Dallas-Ft. Worth. And lets not forget Cary. It's population is expected to jump from 103,000 to over 140,000 with a single new MASSIVE development in the works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do you mean by 'where it matters'? Again, I'd argue that we cannot make an apples-to-apples comparison because none of us will agree on 'where it matters'. I personally feel the 5-mile radius is the most important, because that's the part of the metro that's the 'real city'. Of course, the growth rates are obviously lower at the core because these areas are more established. but it's more meaningful, IMO, than getting excited over the sprawl on the outskirts.

One man's sprawl is another man's retirement fund (developers point of view). Why is all growth on the outer core considered sprawl? Growth is growth in my opinion and most cities/people get very excited over it...some good, some bad...surely, not all bad.

The triangle is complex in terms of overall commuting patterns due to the proximity of the Burlington and Triad areas (to an extent Rock Mount/Wilson). I know a lot of people who commute from Mebane/Graham/Burlington to RTP/Durham (25 to 35 minute drive). Those areas are not included in the Triangles MSA, but they're growing rapidly as well (not at the neck break pace of Charlotte and Raleigh). I know of 3 families who live in Mebane (1 spouse commutes to the Triad and other to the Triangle). It's a short trip up I-85 to RTP and moderately more affordable.

I live in Durham and it's 50 minutes from my house to downtown Greensboro (I've made the commute both ways to/from for college). I commute daily to North Raleigh/Knightdale (35-40 minutes). There are a lot of people who work in the RTP but live outside of the MSA.

Raleigh and Durham are both densifying. IMO, Raleigh's urban infill will rival Charlotte's in a decade (terms of % growth, I know Charlotte has a head start). Unfortunately, Durham's unwarranted "crime" stigma will cause it to lag due to developer uncertainty. IMO, Durham is the most diverse city in the state with loads of potential downtown.

Charlotte got the jump start, but Raleigh, Durham, G'boro and Winston will follow the trend excluding an A2 chicken little scenario.

Basically, the two areas are too different to compare (just hope they keep growing!) and we figure out a way to fund TTA rail transit.

Soap box time: Come check out the Bull City...you'll be pleaseantly surprised.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^we're on a website called URBANplanet. Wouldn't you say that generally speaking the members of this forum are pro urban and not so much in favor of suburban outskirt development? I would say that describes me pretty well, which is why I'm not all that excited by a giant sprawling metropolitan area. I'm much more excited to see urban development at the core.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^we're on a website called URBANplanet. Wouldn't you say that generally speaking the members of this forum are pro urban and not so much in favor of suburban outskirt development? I would say that describes me pretty well, which is why I'm not all that excited by a giant sprawling metropolitan area. I'm much more excited to see urban development at the core.

I am more excited to see urban development in the core too. Eventhough I dislike sprawl, I think it is unrealistic to expect it to cease or for people to abandon newly devloped areas for their downtowns. That is why I am pleased when I see urban development even when it is outside of the city's core. RTP is a major employment center so if I see an urban type development in Morrisville or Cary, I am pleased.

If in urbanism we are talking about walkability, more efficient infrastructures and maximizing land-use, then yes, urbanism does exist outside of the downtown core.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^we're on a website called URBANplanet. Wouldn't you say that generally speaking the members of this forum are pro urban and not so much in favor of suburban outskirt development? I would say that describes me pretty well, which is why I'm not all that excited by a giant sprawling metropolitan area. I'm much more excited to see urban development at the core.

I will remind you that you first suggested comparing CSA's and even said that it was important. That includes all of the suburban outskirt development and then some. Now you have done a 180 and suggest comparing a 5 mile radius from the city core. I am confused by your sudden turn around in this topic. In any case, the purpose of this thread is to discuss the population differences between the Triangle and Charlotte. It might be better for you to start a different topic on the differences in urban development in the two places.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will remind you that you first suggested comparing CSA's and even said that it was important. That includes all of the suburban outskirt development and then some. Now you have done a 180 and suggest comparing a 5 mile radius from the city core. I am confused by your sudden turn around in this topic. In any case, the purpose of this thread is to discuss the population differences between the Triangle and Charlotte. It might be better for you to start a different topic on the differences in urban development in the two places.

There has been no turnaround. Let me simplify for those who haven't followed...

-The core is what really counts, so comparing metro versus metro isn't my favorite topic to begin with

-The true growth in these metros is on the absolute outskirts

-CSA estimates cover the extreme limits of the outskirts, so if we're going to compare outskirts, this is what we should be comparing

Some of you feel MSA is more ideal to compare, but I don't understand why. These MSAs are not static. In very little time these MSAs will expand to include the additional land of the CSAs, as well as the population already there. Yet you don't see the reasoning behind including the land that will soon be part of an expanded MSA. You are looking at the present while discussing what you believe will be the future. The future of charlotte and Raleigh is in cornfields beyond the current MSAs. For that reason, yes, I think it's relevant to look at what's on this land right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would much rather see Charlotte and the Triangle hold their current boundaries and redevelop older sites within the existing urbanized areas--with higher gas prices, that is our future anyway, we might as well embrace it. While I'm dreaming, let's go with an Urban Growth boundary (UGB) or heavily restrict new annexations in the county based on water and facility capacity and keep densities very low for new construction, like Orange Co (1 unit per 3 acres max with a well). Everyone says that UGBs artificially inflate prices, and maybe they do for single family homes, but for multi-units, I don't think so. (See Portland for examples.)

Does everyone that moves here really need a brand new house on a 1/2 acre of land? Call me a socialist, liberal, or whatever, but we are destroying our planet each day we tear down more forests, clog up creeks, and build more McMansions and strip-malls. I fear there won't be very many livable cities in the next 20-30 years in this country. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm very pro-urban core development, but realistically, most people relocating to Raleigh and Charlotte (from New York, DC or internal NC, etc) are from surburbia and rural areas. They are accustomed to space/land and not dense neighborhoods.

It'd be tough for someone from Queens to adapt. I met this young lady (politically correct...ok, chick and quite the stunner) from Queens at a bar in Durham the other night. When I say Queens, I mean Queens (poster child for Queens...heavy accent, fashion, etc). She was married, just out to have a quick cocktail (I gathered not to attract hound dogs like myself, but oh well). She moved here a few years ago and mentioned how difficult it was to adjust but the cost of living and raising a family was the key reason. She enjoyed the idea of having some space/land. Her mother visits but can't tolerate the slow pace and lack of on-going noise factor.

In other words, I think we'll see new types of densification in the South. It will only happen if new forms of transit become available, so the Triangle is a decade or so away, where Charlotte is progressing in this area now. Accordingly, Charlotte's urban core development will reflect this transition earlier in terms of MSA/CSA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Krazeeboi is correct. There are two counties that share a border with Mecklenburg that are in not in the Charlotte MSA. Iredell and Lancaster, SC. Both have geographies that put most of the land mass of the county a considerable distance from Charlotte. It remains to be seen if the growth of these two places on the border with Mecklenburg will push them into the Charlotte MSA. This might happen with Lancaster as it is basically unpopulated and the only growth is right on the Charlotte border. But Iredell maintains its own economy and two major interstates pass right through it's county seat Statesville.

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.