South Carolina's population growth

[westsider28]

New list of urban areas for 2020 has been released.  Definitions have changed, resulting in some urban areas (like Greenville) "losing" population.  Some changes:

--The use of housing unit density instead of solely population density. The minimum population threshold to qualify as urban increased from 2,500 to 5,000 or a minimum housing unit threshold of 2,000 housing units.

--The jump distance was reduced from 2.5 miles to 1.5 miles for 2020.  Jump distance is the distance along roads used to connect high-density urban territories surrounded by rural territory. 

SC Urban Areas  (city, population, housing units, area)

Charleston, SC    684,773    305,541    339.1

Columbia, SC    590,407    258,608    367.5

Greenville, SC    387,271    171,025    262.2

Myrtle Beach, SC    298,954    193,144    218.9

Rock Hill, SC    218,443    89,706    145.1

Spartanburg, SC    196,943    82,772    181.0

Mauldin—Simpsonville, SC    159,506    64,676    101.2

Anderson—Clemson, SC    118,369    50,811    95.9

Florence, SC    89,436    40,455    68.0

Bluffton East—Hilton Head Island, SC    71,824    43,742    63.2

Sumter, SC    68,825    30,795    57.7

Edited December 29, 2022 by westsider28

[motonenterprises]

7 minutes ago, westsider28 said:

New list of urban areas for 2020 has been released.  Definitions have changed, resulting in some urban areas (like Greenville) "losing" population.  Some changes:

--The use of housing unit density instead of solely population density. The minimum population threshold to qualify as urban increased from 2,500 to 5,000 or a minimum housing unit threshold of 2,000 housing units.

--The jump distance was reduced from 2.5 miles to 1.5 miles for 2020.  Jump distance is the distance along roads used to connect high-density urban territories surrounded by rural territory. 

SC Urban Areas  (city, population, housing units, area)

Charleston, SC    684,773    305,541    339.1

Columbia, SC    590,407    258,608    367.5

Greenville, SC    387,271    171,025    262.2

Myrtle Beach, SC    298,954    193,144    218.9

Rock Hill, SC    218,443    89,706    145.1

Spartanburg, SC    196,943    82,772    181.0

Mauldin—Simpsonville, SC    159,506    64,676    101.2

Anderson—Clemson, SC    118,369    50,811    95.9

Florence, SC    89,436    40,455    68.0

Bluffton East—Hilton Head Island, SC    71,824    43,742    63.2

Sumter, SC    68,825    30,795    57.7

I don't understand why Mauldin-Simpsonville are separate from Greenville when they are clearly connected. You can drive down Laurens Rd and not even know you've crossed the line if there weren't signs.

[westsider28]

12 minutes ago, motonenterprises said:

I don't understand why Mauldin-Simpsonville are separate from Greenville when they are clearly connected. You can drive down Laurens Rd and not even know you've crossed the line if there weren't signs.

Keep in mind, this is residential/housing based (not commercial).  There appears to be a pretty large gap in residential density just south of I-85 along Laurens that is probably enough to separate the two.  (There's also a residential gap on Woodruff Road, due to all the commercial).  The Census Bureau should be releasing maps sometime next year, which presumably will show the exact boundaries of each urban area.

I'm a bit surprised that Greer isn't its own urban area, but I assume it's attached to Greenville and/or Spartanburg urban area(s).

Edited December 29, 2022 by westsider28

[motonenterprises]

1 hour ago, westsider28 said:

Keep in mind, this is residential/housing based (not commercial).  There appears to be a pretty large gap in residential density just south of I-85 along Laurens that is probably enough to separate the two.  (There's also a residential gap on Woodruff Road, due to all the commercial).  The Census Bureau should be releasing maps sometime next year, which presumably will show the exact boundaries of each urban area.

I'm a bit surprised that Greer isn't its own urban area, but I assume it's attached to Greenville and/or Spartanburg urban area(s).

No. There is no gap between these places. It's pretty much all Greenville. I live in Simpsonville. Do you live in the area? Anyone that does knows there is no gap between these areas. It's contiguous. Greer is also a Greenville burb. It's contiguous from downtown Greenville, through Taylors; and Greer.

[westsider28]

21 hours ago, motonenterprises said:

No. There is no gap between these places. It's pretty much all Greenville. I live in Simpsonville. Do you live in the area? Anyone that does knows there is no gap between these areas. It's contiguous. Greer is also a Greenville burb. It's contiguous from downtown Greenville, through Taylors; and Greer.

Wow. Chill, my guy.  I'm just the messenger.  Direct your anger toward the Census Bureau.  However, you still seem to be conflating "development" with "residential density".

From the Census definitions of urban areas:  "500 people per square mile [or 200 housing units per square mile] to finish out the delineation as we moved outward through suburban territory to the edge of the urban area."

Here are the 2010 Urban Area maps:  Greenville map     Mauldin-Simpsonville map

The lack of residential density around I-85 causes the two areas to be separate.  Also, the updated residential density standards (and lower jump distance) probably caused Greenville to lose much of the western part of that map, leading to their urban area population decline.  We'll know for sure when the 2020 maps are released next year.  It is an odd scenario, but that happens with any dataset with (somewhat) arbitrary standards.

 

[motonenterprises]

9 hours ago, westsider28 said:

Wow. Chill, my guy.  I'm just the messenger.  Direct your anger toward the Census Bureau.  However, you still seem to be conflating "development" with "residential density".

From the Census definitions of urban areas:  "500 people per square mile [or 200 housing units per square mile] to finish out the delineation as we moved outward through suburban territory to the edge of the urban area."

Here are the 2010 Urban Area maps:  Greenville map     Mauldin-Simpsonville map

The lack of residential density around I-85 causes the two areas to be separate.  Also, the updated residential density standards (and lower jump distance) probably caused Greenville to lose much of the western part of that map, leading to their urban area population decline.  We'll know for sure when the 2020 maps are released next year.  It is an odd scenario, but that happens with any dataset with (somewhat) arbitrary standards.

 

How do you get emotion from a post? It is what it is. They don't live here either. Lol. The ones of us that do know that it's really one area. We live in Mauldin-Simpsonville for proximity to Greenville. Residential actually does run contiguous across the lines. 2010 is a long time ago. Actually, apparently once they deem an area it's own urban area they don't change it. So even if Greenville City completely engulfs it, that separate urban area will still exist.

[distortedlogic]

This is a very interesting change. It's obvious the change in parameters had a vast effect on the numbers; Greenville has grown tremendously since 2010 yet the UA shrank. Charleston has also grown tremendously since 2010 and it's UA went way up. Charleston's includes portions of other counties as it's UA has more people than it's whole county, and Greenville doesn't even include contiguous areas. It just goes to show that numbers don't really tell the real world story about areas (and one could manipulate the parameters to say just about anything they want). By city pop Charleston is twice as big as Greenville; the UA says almost the same. County populations says Greenville is significantly larger despite being a bit smaller geographically. MSA says Greenville is larger. In reality, they are laid out differently, but very similar in size. My advice, don't get too caught up in the numbers, just decide which area you like the feel of better.

Edited December 31, 2022 by distortedlogic

[motonenterprises]

27 minutes ago, distortedlogic said:

This is a very interesting change. It's obvious the change in parameters had a vast effect on the numbers; Greenville has grown tremendously since 2010 yet the UA shrank. Charleston has also grown tremendously since 2010 and it's UA went way up. Charleston's includes portions of other counties as it's UA has more people than it's whole county, and Greenville doesn't even include contiguous areas. It just goes to show that numbers don't really tell the real world story about areas (and one could manipulate the parameters to say just about anything they want). By city pop Charleston is twice as big as Greenville; the UA says almost the same. County populations says Greenville is significantly larger despite being a bit smaller geographically. MSA says Greenville is larger. In reality, they are laid out differently, but very similar in size. My advice, don't get too caught up in the numbers, just decide which area you like the feel of better.

I agree. Even though they are the kings of census data, they are still human; which means they are flawed too. They are just laid out differently as you said. Most people don't care about these numbers. They do care about the amenities of the place they live in. Greenville doesn't really lack on that and in many cases gets things first.

[Spartan]

So I was taught that the combination or urban areas isn't strictly a data-driven process, it's also partially political. I think the local jurisdictions get a say in it. Greer is included in Greenville's UA (generally the Tyger River is a better boundary between Greenville and Spartanburg than the County Line), and is historically more connected as a 'suburb' - even though Greer was its own place long before it was absorbed into Greenville's sphere. This isn't an uncommon phenomenon. The same situation exists in Charlotte where Concord is IRL seamlessly connected, yet it remains a separate UA. 

My thoughts are that UA population doesn't really mean much aside from understanding population distribution patterns. I wouldn't get too hung up on it. County population, MSA population (which is derived in part from commute data), GDP, employment, etc. are all better metrics. 

[motonenterprises]

4 hours ago, Spartan said:

So I was taught that the combination or urban areas isn't strictly a data-driven process, it's also partially political. I think the local jurisdictions get a say in it. Greer is included in Greenville's UA (generally the Tyger River is a better boundary between Greenville and Spartanburg than the County Line), and is historically more connected as a 'suburb' - even though Greer was its own place long before it was absorbed into Greenville's sphere. This isn't an uncommon phenomenon. The same situation exists in Charlotte where Concord is IRL seamlessly connected, yet it remains a separate UA. 

My thoughts are that UA population doesn't really mean much aside from understanding population distribution patterns. I wouldn't get too hung up on it. County population, MSA population (which is derived in part from commute data), GDP, employment, etc. are all better metrics. 

This is the debate I got into with Charleston Data on another forum. He wanted to ignore MSA and County and only use UA for his 'bragging rights'. I told him you can't just ignore MSA and County.

[Spartan]

Exactly. I mean, UA isn't completely irrelevant -but the fact that you have what, 5-7 of them just in the Upstate just emphasizes how spread out we are.

And if you want to get really nitpicky, you coudl argue the 2k/sq mi density is hogwash too. Its an arbitrary number that basically gets large areas of subdivisions. I would argue if it isn't dense enough to require sewer service then it doesn't count as "urban"