Texas Suburbs Lead Population Growth

cedarpark.jpg

The US Census Bureau has reported that eight of the fifteen 2011-2012 fastest-growing municipalities with at least 50,000 population were in Texas. Three of them were in the Austin metropolitan area. San Marcos, south of Austin, grew the fastest in the nation at 4.9 percent. Cedar Park, located in Austin's northern suburbs, ranked fourth in growth at 4.7 percent while Georgetown, also north of Austin grew 4.2 percent and ranked seventh. Houston suburb Conroe placed 10th adding 4.0 percent to its population. Dallas-Fort Worth suburbs McKinney and Frisco placed 11th and 12th. The other two Texas municipalities ranking high were outside the major metropolitan areas, Midland (third) and Odessa (13th).

Growth Outside Texas

South Jordan, located in the southern suburbs of the Salt Lake City metropolitan area was the second fastest-growing municipality, at 4.9 percent. Atlanta suburb Alpharetta grew 4.4 percent and ranked sixth. The largest municipality among the fastest-growing was Irvine, an Orange County suburb in the Los Angeles metropolitan area, which grew 4.2 percent to a population of 230,000. Buckeye, a suburb on the western periphery of the Phoenix metropolitan area placed ninth, growing 4.1 percent.

Among the above 11 fastest-growing suburbs in major metropolitan areas, all are either near the periphery of the urban area or beyond the principal urban area. This illustrates the historic tendency of the fastest-growing city sectors to be located on (or beyond) their fringes. This was also strongly evident in the 2000 to 2010 census data, which showed 94 percent of major metropolitan area growth to be 10 miles or more from the urban cores.

Other fast growers were not in major metropolitan areas, including Midland, Texas, Odessa, Texas, Auburn, Alabama and Manhattan, Kansas. Clarksville, Tennessee grew fifth-fastest. Clarksville is the core city of the second fastest-growing metropolitan area in the nation, just north of Nashville.

First Census Bureau Municipal Estimates Since 2010

These were the first reliable municipality (sub-county) population estimates produced by the Census Bureau since the 2010 census. The 2011 municipality estimates were virtually meaningless, since they were simply percentage allocation of county growth to municipalities based upon their share of the 2010 population.

Growth in the Major Metropolitan Core Cities

Nonetheless, over the past two years the greatest historical core municipality growth has been in those with the most suburban (Figure 1) land use characteristics. (See Suburbanized Core Cities for discussion of how “Historical Core Cities” are defined).

Pre-War & Non Suburban Core Cities: The least suburban core cities, those with little postwar suburban development, grew 0.7 percent between 2010 and 2012. The strongest growth in this category was in Washington, which added 2.2 percent annually. In reaching a population of 634,000, Washington passed nearby Baltimore for the first time in its history. New York added the largest number of people in the category at 162,000.

Pre-War and Suburban Core Cities: The Pre-War Core cities with large tracts of post-war suburban development grew at a 1.2 percent annual rate (Note 1). In this category, New Orleans grew the fastest, at an annual rate of 3.2 percent, as it continues to recover from Hurricane Katrina. Denver also grew strongly, at an annual rate of 2.5 percent.

Post-War & Suburban Core Cities: These core cities, none of which had strong urban cores before World War II and which are virtually all suburban, grew at an annual rate of 1.5 percent. Austin, which is at the core of the fastest-growing major metropolitan area in the United States, grew the fastest in this category, at 2.9 percent.

Metropolitan, Core City and Suburban Trends

The estimates also indicate that the suburban population boom that accompanied the housing bubble has run its course. During the 2000s, the share of major metropolitan area (over 1 million population) growth in historical core municipalities fell to approximately one-half the rate of the 1990s. That picked up in the late 2000s as housing construction came to a near standstill and the slower suburban growth rates that have continued through to 2012.

In a few metropolitan areas, historical core municipalities attracted the majority of the population growth. The leader in this regard was Providence, with 75 percent of its metropolitan growth, which was miniscule. New Orleans captured nearly 2/3 of the growth in its metropolitan area, while New York accounted for 61 percent of its metropolitan area growth. San Antonio, San Jose, and Columbus also attracted more than one half of their metropolitan area growth, though the high share of core-city growth in San Jose and San Antonio was reflective of their high population shares (Table 1).

Between 2000 and 2012, historical core municipalities accounted for 27.2 percent of the growth in major metropolitan areas (Figure 2). This is slightly more than their 26.4 percent of the population in 2010. It would be a mistake to interpret this as presaging the long predicted "return to the city." It would take a continuation of these growth rates for nearly 500 years for historical core municipality populations to struggle to 30 percent of the major metropolitan area population. At the same time, there have been recent indications of even more dispersion, as major metropolitan areas lost nearly two million domestic migrants to smaller areas between 2000 and 2011, according to Census Bureau data.

Further, the trends in domestic migration indicate that people continue to move to the suburbs from elsewhere, while moving away from the core counties (migration data is not available below the county level). Overall, the core counties of major metropolitan areas lost 167,000 domestic migrants, while the suburban counties added 286,000 (Note 2).

The domestic migration losses in some core counties were substantial. In the five counties that constitute New York, there was a loss of 139,000 domestic migrants (there was also a loss of 114,000 domestic migrants in the suburbs). Los Angeles County lost 111,000 domestic migrants, while Chicago's Cook County lost 74,000. The largest gainers were in Austin (Travis County: 36,000), Atlanta (Fulton County: 32,000) and San Antonio (30,000). Core counties continued to attract most international migration, adding 757,000, compared to 589,000 in the suburban counties (Table 2).

The Future?

It seems apparent that the nation's growth continues to be in a transitional period. Should a more normal and vibrant economy replace the current malaise, it seems likely that suburban growth will be renewed. That would not, however, preclude a continuation of the recent smaller inner-core population growth in the increasingly safer and more attractive downtown areas.





Table 1
Metropolitan and Historical Core CityPopulation: 2010-2012
Metroplitan Area Metropolitan Area Change Historical Core City(s) Change Share of Growth
Atlanta, GA        5,457,831         171,099         443,775        23,496 13.7%
Austin, TX        1,834,303         118,017         842,592        51,955 44.0%
Baltimore, MD        2,753,149           42,660         621,342            381 0.9%
Birmingham, AL        1,136,650             8,600         212,038           (250) -2.9%
Boston, MA-NH        4,640,802           88,400         636,479        18,885 21.4%
Buffalo, NY        1,134,210            (1,301)         259,384         (1,926)
Charlotte, NC-SC        2,296,569           79,534         809,798        21,221 26.7%
Chicago, IL-IN-WI        9,522,434           61,329       2,714,856        19,258 31.4%
Cincinnati, OH-KY-IN        2,128,603           14,023         296,550           (400) -2.9%
Cleveland, OH        2,063,535          (13,705)         390,928         (5,886)
Columbus, OH        1,944,002           42,037         809,798        21,221 50.5%
Dallas-Fort Worth, TX        6,700,991         274,781       1,241,162        43,329 15.8%
Denver, CO        2,645,209         101,731         634,265        34,241 33.7%
Detroit,  MI        4,292,060            (4,187)         701,475       (12,302)
Grand Rapids, MI        1,005,648           16,710         190,411          2,371 14.2%
Hartford, CT        1,214,400             2,016         124,893            118 5.9%
Houston, TX        6,177,035         256,579       2,160,821        63,604 24.8%
Indianapolis. IN        1,928,982           41,105         834,852        14,410 35.1%
Jacksonville, FL        1,377,850           32,254         836,507        14,723 45.6%
Kansas City, MO-KS        2,038,724           29,386         464,310          4,523 15.4%
Las Vegas, NV        2,000,759           49,490         596,424        12,637 25.5%
Los Angeles, CA       13,052,921         224,079       3,857,799        65,172 29.1%
Louisville, KY-IN        1,251,351           15,643         605,110          7,774 49.7%
Memphis, TN-MS-AR        1,341,690           16,861         655,155          8,266 49.0%
Miami, FL        5,762,717         198,060         413,892        14,384 7.3%
Milwaukee,WI        1,566,981           11,073         598,916          4,176 37.7%
Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN-WI        3,422,264           73,405         683,650        16,004 21.8%
Nashville, TN        1,726,693           55,803         624,496        20,969 37.6%
New Orleans. LA        1,227,096           37,233         369,250        25,421 68.3%
New York, NY-NJ-PA       19,831,858         264,451       8,336,697      161,561 61.1%
Oklahoma City, OK        1,296,565           43,573         599,199        19,196 44.1%
Orlando, FL        2,223,674           89,263         249,562        11,258 12.6%
Philadelphia, PA-NJ-DE-MD        6,018,800           53,459       1,547,607        21,601 40.4%
Phoenix, AZ        4,329,534         136,647       1,488,750        41,198 30.1%
Pittsburgh, PA        2,360,733             4,448         306,211            509 11.4%
Portland, OR-WA        2,289,800           63,791         603,106        19,328 30.3%
Providence, RI-MA        1,601,374               522         178,432            396 75.9%
Raleigh, NC        1,188,564           58,074         423,179        19,232 33.1%
Richmond, VA        1,231,980           23,879         210,309          6,072 25.4%
Riverside-San Bernardino, CA        4,350,096         125,245         213,295          3,343 2.7%
Rochester, NY        1,082,284             2,613         210,532              20 0.8%
Sacramento, CA        2,196,482           47,355         475,516          9,028 19.1%
St. Louis,, MO-IL        2,795,794             8,099         318,172         (1,122) -13.9%
Salt Lake City, UT        1,123,712           35,839         189,314          2,871 8.0%
San Antonio, TX        2,234,003           91,495       1,382,951        55,346 60.5%
San Diego, CA        3,177,063           81,755       1,338,348        36,727 44.9%
San Francisco-Oakland, CA        4,455,560         120,169       1,226,603        30,649 25.5%
San Jose, CA        1,894,388           57,477         982,765        30,203 52.5%
Seattle, WA        3,552,157         112,348         634,535        25,875 23.0%
Tampa-St. Petersburg, FL        2,842,878           59,635         347,645        11,936 20.0%
Virginia Beach-Norfolk, VA-NC        1,699,925           23,105         245,782          2,979 12.9%
Washington, DC-VA-MD-WV        5,860,342         224,110         632,323        30,600 13.7%
Total     173,283,025       3,770,067     45,771,761    1,026,581 27.2%
Calculated from US Census Bureau data




Table 2
Migration: Major Metropolitan Areas
Net Domestic Migration Net International Migration
Metroplitan Area Core County(s) Suburban Counties Core County(s) Suburban Counties
Atlanta, GA             32,368             4,672                8,122             31,891
Austin, TX             36,045           30,339                9,536              2,161
Baltimore, MD             (9,476)             9,895                4,282             14,336
Birmingham, AL             (6,365)             2,141                1,709              1,119
Boston, MA-NH             (2,596)             3,109              14,543             36,407
Buffalo, NY             (4,920)            (1,473)                4,930                 440
Charlotte, NC-SC             20,354           16,936                9,535              2,732
Chicago, IL-IN-WI            (74,050)          (48,018)              36,540             15,580
Cincinnati, OH-KY-IN            (10,814)            (3,155)                3,420              3,622
Cleveland, OH            (24,548)            (2,628)                6,409              1,382
Columbus, OH              3,116             2,366                9,220              1,088
Dallas-Fort Worth, TX              9,745           88,765              20,652             22,153
Denver, CO             17,317           29,839                3,447              6,393
Detroit,  MI            (49,741)              (706)                7,716             13,973
Grand Rapids, MI                 171                 59                1,794                 776
Hartford, CT            (10,189)            (3,202)                9,480              1,428
Houston, TX             20,101           50,554              42,096             12,295
Indianapolis. IN             (6,523)           11,509                5,561              2,670
Jacksonville, FL             (2,000)           12,461                5,991              1,546
Kansas City, MO-KS             (6,842)             2,624                1,957              4,711
Los Angeles, CA          (110,934)             8,439              88,868             23,635
Louisville, KY-IN                (906)             1,837                3,871                 647
Memphis, TN-MS-AR             (4,670)              (656)                3,727                 261
Miami, FL                   26           44,255              66,308             44,873
Milwaukee,WI            (11,271)               662                3,740                 911
Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN-WI              2,706            (4,786)              11,583             11,424
Nashville, TN              6,117           19,203                5,357              2,714
New Orleans. LA             19,061              (585)                1,439              4,262
New York, NY-NJ-PA          (139,190)        (114,335)            151,431           117,636
Oklahoma City, OK              7,494           12,791                3,335              1,432
Orlando, FL             16,507           15,163              21,115             10,779
Philadelphia, PA-NJ-DE-MD            (14,535)          (18,095)              16,276             22,104
Phoenix, AZ             42,243             4,716              18,971                 413
Pittsburgh, PA              3,114             4,050                5,006                 783
Portland, OR-WA              9,266           14,323                5,055              7,153
Providence, RI-MA             (9,263)            (5,050)                6,428              2,988
Raleigh, NC             25,546             3,409                7,207                 568
Richmond, VA              1,965             3,781                1,656              4,908
Riverside-San Bernardino, CA             (4,221)           33,207                6,649              6,184
Rochester, NY             (5,738)            (2,222)                4,392                 583
Sacramento, CA             (2,086)             6,472              11,150              3,172
St. Louis,, MO-IL             (7,666)          (14,640)                2,322              6,677
Salt Lake City, UT              1,486                 47                5,486                   28
San Antonio, TX             30,130           16,031                7,417                 604
San Francisco-Oakland, CA              1,736           17,103              12,294             36,783
San Jose, CA             (7,029)               476              30,315                 104
Seattle, WA             21,616             5,003              26,670              9,748
Tampa-St. Petersburg, FL             20,153           15,875              12,823              7,086
Virginia Beach-Norfolk, VA-NC             (4,405)            (7,859)                3,269             10,065
Washington, DC-VA-MD-WV             14,170           21,026                6,199             73,365
Total          (163,363)         285,728            798,480           588,593
Calculated from US Census Bureau data

 

Wendell Cox is a Visiting Professor, Conservatoire National des Arts et Metiers, Paris and the author of “War on the Dream: How Anti-Sprawl Policy Threatens the Quality of Life.

-----

Note 1: See 2010 historical core municipality list. This list does not include Grand Rapids, which now exceeds 1,0000,000 population as a result of the new metropolitan definitions, and is classified as Pre-War Core and Suburban.

Note 2: Excludes the Las Vegas and San Diego metropolitan areas, which have only one county.

Photo: Google Earth image of Cedar Park, Texas



















Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Texas Suburbs Lead Population Growth

Well of course.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/20/nyregion/suburbs-are-home-to-growing-s...

Texas leads the nation in minimum-wage jobs.

Your point is that exclusionary policies are bad, or good?

And your point is....?

If the people getting the minimum wage jobs were somewhere else, they would get higher paid jobs and/or end up with more discretionary income?

It is noticeable that many of the same people are critics of exclusionary suburbs, yet seem to love exclusionary cities. "Look, smart growth cities with higher density and more public transport use have higher incomes".

DUH. Cause; effect; correlation; causation.

The same people's reaction to the following statement would say everything we need to know:

"......exclusionary large-lot suburbs with a high level of automobile use have higher income levels".

We just need a bit of consistency in our moral judgements, then we can start making sensible policy.

Lefty-liberals positively despise any examples of disadvantaged people getting ahead in life through freedom and maximisation of "choice", in contrast to Statist nannying and the entrenchment of dependence.

There is a really great series of articles currently being written and published on Frontpage Magazine:

http://frontpagemag.com/2013/arnold-ahlert/toxic-government-by-democrats...

And the cities covered so far there, are not examples of what Thomas Sowell called "Green Disparate Impact", which is more to the point that I am making.

http://townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/2008/01/15/green_disparate_i...

I also recommend Randall Pozdena: "The New Segregation"

http://www.nationalcenter.org/NewSegregation.pdf

Key findings (and this was written in 2002!):

".....If restricted growth policies like those imposed by Portland had been in effect across the nation over the last ten years, 260,000 minority families who currently own their own homes would not own them today. Restricted growth policies, therefore, can fairly be dubbed "the new segregation," as they deter African-American and other minorities from the housing market at disproportionate rates.

 If these restricted growth policies had been in effect nationally over the past ten years, one million urban families who currently own their own homes would not own them today.

 Poor and minority families pay a disproportionate amount of the social and economic costs of growth restrictions. The weight of increased home prices falls most heavily on minorities, the disadvantaged and the young, fewer of whom already own homes. The
"haves" who already own homes ride the price bubble created by restricted growth policies while the dream of ownership moves further away from the "have-nots.".......

Segregation: good or bad? You choose.

Oh, and it didn't surprise me at all to read the other day that Houston and Dallas are the two LEAST SEGREGATED cities in the USA:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142412788732374460457847287318365591...