2013 Metropolitan Area Census Estimates Released

[Metro Jacksonville]

2013 Metropolitan Area Census Estimates Released



The latest U.S. Census metropolitan area population estimates for the U.S. and Puerto Rico as of July 2013 have been released. Find out where Jacksonville ranks.

Read More: http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2014-apr-2013-metropolitan-area-census-estimates-released

[Scrub Palmetto]

Pretty much as expected for Jax. Not growing very slowly, not very quickly -- faster than 12 of its 20 closest in rank and slower than 8.

I think the biggest surprise for me is it's the first time I've really wrapped my head around South Florida being on the heels of 6 million.

I'm also surprised at the breadth of growth rates for the smaller metro areas -- much higher for Fort Myers and Sarasota than Daytona and Melbourne. And I hate how these 4 MSAs all begin with the names of generic suburbs (Cape Coral, North Port, Deltona, Palm Bay.) I refuse to call them by these names!

[simms3]

I'll quote myself to consolidate findings:

Duval - 885,855 (up from 879,736 in 2012, 0.7% growth)
St. Johns - 209,647 (up from 202,328, 3.6% growth)
Clay - 196,399 (up from 194,215, 1.1% growth)
Nassau - 75,710 (up from 74,701, 1.4% growth)
Baker - 27,013 (down from 27,060, -0.1% growth)

Total - 1,394,624 (up from 1,378,040 in 2012, 1.2% growth)

2010 Census the metro was at 1,345,596 people, so in a little over 3 years has grown by 49,028 people, or around 1.2% per year (~12% per annum) since then.  Growth in the metro and particularly in formerly fast-growing counties has dramatically slowed.  Similar story in Atlanta, as well.

I suppose due to commuting patterns, they have added to Charlotte's MSA.  Here are the cities that we used to compare ourselves to in early to mid 2000s:

Charlotte: 2,335,358 (5.34% growth)
Austin: 1,883,051 (9.72% growth)
Nashville: 1,757,912 (5.21% growth)

Jacksonville: 1,394,624 (3.64% growth)

We are definitely more comparable to Memphis, Oklahoma City, Birmingham, Hartford, Richmond, and Louisville at this stage.  Of those cities, Oklahoma City is not far behind and is growing 5.34% since 2010 Census.

Slow growth is fine if you are Atlanta and need to reinvent yourself completely.  Jax is small and is consolidated with the county.  I think it benefits from faster growth, though I think simultaneously needs to reinvent itself.  Sadly, growth has slowed dramatically from most of the prior 20th century decades and the city has yet to reinvent itself (both in terms of how it grows and in terms of its economy/city being). 

Austin's entire metro is growing as fast as Saint Johns County.  That's crazy!

[I-10east]

One thing that's really eye-popping are the size of some of these cities' suburbs. One of Jax's larger cities in the metro is St Augustine, and it's a little town (population-wise) compared to some of these super-suburban cities with around 100K people or more like Round Rock(Austin), Columbia MD(Baltimore), and Vancouver WA(Portland). Not to mention bonifided cities that aren't even suburbs like Ft Lauderdale, Tacoma, St Paul, and Ft Worth. You could fit like 7 or 8 St Augustines' into Round Rock. The growth is MULTIPLIED that much more when you're nearby other metro(s) or large suburban city(ies).   

When you include cities like Jacksonville that doesn't have these super suburban areas, and clustered metros, things get pretty down to Earth, and Jax looks like about what it should. Look at the cities that are higher populated than Jax, that has ONE city listed & (Metropolitan Statistical Area) and not like three additional cities added.

St Louis- Head barely above the water, even with Illinois added
Pittsburgh- Head barely above the water
Cincinnati- Down to Earth, even with Kentucky and Indiana added
Kansas City- Down to Earth, even with Kansas City, Kansas added
Columbus, OH- Growing a tad slower than Jax

IMO the two cities that's nipping on Jax's heels (without major help from super-suburbs) and growing significantly faster right now are Oklahoma City and Raleigh.

[Scrub Palmetto]

A couple of stats for comparison to Jacksonville's +3.64%:

The national rate of change during this period was +2.39%.

The average rate of change of the most populous 50 metro areas was +3.23%. (Note: this is the average of the 50 rates of change, not the rate of change of their combined populations.)

[JaxJersey-licious]

What has always peeved me about the yearly Census metro area population report was how they define some of these MSAs. For some reason the Durham metro area is not included with Raleigh which it should on this list while for whatever reason the Census pairs up all of Palm Beach County w/Miami-Ft. Lauderdale like some twisted Bejeweled game. Quick rule of thumb: If where you are is large enough and far away enough to merit having your own set of TV stations then for the sake of this survey you're on your own, Big Boy!

And while I'm at it, can someone tell me what happened to Flagler County's stupendous growth? I no longer around there but when I was out was like the hottest county in the world and the masses were pushing and shoving to get in. Whatevers ailing it, I'm glad St. John's county isn't catching it.

[Tacachale]

What has always peeved me about the yearly Census metro area population report was how they define some of these MSAs. For some reason the Durham metro area is not included with Raleigh which it should on this list while for whatever reason the Census pairs up all of Palm Beach County w/Miami-Ft. Lauderdale like some twisted Bejeweled game. Quick rule of thumb: If where you are is large enough and far away enough to merit having your own set of TV stations then for the sake of this survey you're on your own, Big Boy!

And while I'm at it, can someone tell me what happened to Flagler County's stupendous growth? I no longer around there but when I was out was like the hottest county in the world and the masses were pushing and shoving to get in. Whatevers ailing it, I'm glad St. John's county isn't catching it.

Yeah, a lot of the MSAs seem pretty arbitrary, and some of them are clearly influenced by what some regional interests want to be included rather than reality. As for Palm Coast, much or most of its growth was tied to bedroom communities serving people who worked in Jacksonville or Daytona. Since the recession it's been less feasible for people to live so far away from work; that's probably contributing to the decline in growth. St. Johns is also continuing to grow due to bedroom developments for people who work in Jacksonville. It will catch up to them eventually.

[tufsu1]

MSAs are primarily defined by population density and commuting patterns.

[simms3]

It would appear that Palm Coast is now part of Daytona's MSA, and therefore Orlando's CSA.

Regarding I-10 East's comment about Raleigh nipping at Jacksonville's heels, Raleigh should really be Raleigh + Durham, and has had a larger population than Jax for a couple decades now.  In some respects, Jax does feel larger, though, because as low density as Jax is, Raleigh is even lower.  Pine forests up until the edge of downtown.

San Jose should really be a part of San Francisco-Oakland (a slight majority of Silicon Valley cities are in Santa Clara County, SJ MSA, as opposed to San Mateo County, SF MSA, leading to commuting patterns that split the two cities into 2 metros).  Greensboro/High Point should really be a part of Winston Salem.  Salt Lake City should really be combined with Provo and maybe even Orem.

All of these used to be part of 1 MSA until definitions were revised.  We've gone slightly more European with the MSA model, which actually I like.  However, even in Europe one doesn't think of just Dusseldorf as a standalone city of a few hundred thousand people, or the "Dusseldorf MSA", which is impossible there.  It's part of a greater conglomerate of cities over 3,000 square miles (smaller than the size of Jax metro area) that includes Cologne, Essen, Dortmund, and others (around 11,000,000 people).

[Scrub Palmetto]

I'm confused by all these "shoulds." CSAs exist. Why should MSAs be the same? Why "should" we not have both classifications?

[simms3]

Because some particular cases are always up for serious debate by statisticians, planners, and companies that rely on research and data (lots of companies) to make decisions.

When the definition of MSAs and CSAs changed a few years back, it was after very robust debate at both the national Census level and at the local level.  And it's still up for debate.

What's nice is that not everyone always has to accept what some people hand down to them as bible and we can debate these things. 

[Scrub Palmetto]

Your "because" didn't exactly answer the questions or clear up the confusion. You listed a few MSAs that you say should be combined, but they already are, as CSAs. Why pick on MSAs for not being CSAs when CSAs already exist and seem to be what you're calling for?

[simms3]

Part of the reason is because nobody looks at CSAs.  When a retailer comes into DC, they aren't looking at DC + Baltimore for statistical information or shopping habits.  They are looking at DC MSA.

Anyway, why are you so concerned I've questioned why some CSAs, which were previously MSAs, are now split up MSAs and considered CSAs when combined?  Lots of people share my thoughts and feelings, which is why definitions for these things change and are up for constant debate.

I question why you just take everything handed to you without questioning the data itself or the reasoning behind the data or definition.

CSAs are the loosest form of definition for metropolitan areas.  Many would say lots of CSAs make sense as CSAs, and others would question other CSAs and why they include what they include.  Boston's includes half of New Hampshire down to Providence over to Western Mass.  Yet, like San Francisco's, its MSA is quite small by geographical standards.  Many would argue that both Boston's and SF's CSAs are a little too large while their MSAs are simply too small, based on fairly concrete concepts and statistics.  Often times an MSA is overly large.  Atlanta's includes nearly 30 counties...all because the farthest outlying county has a certain percentage of residents commuting one county closer to Atlanta, even though the next county in is still 1-2-3 counties outside of the core Atlanta area.  The CSA is half of the state of GA.

Palm Coast goes to Orlando's CSA because of commuting patterns to Daytona Beach/Volusia County.  Would you say Palm Coast is far and away moreso a part of Orlando and Central FL than NE FL?  Philadelphia has this fight with NYC all the time about central NJ counties.

Long story short, I don't need to answer your question "clearly" because there is nothing clear and concrete about MSA and CSA statistics.

[thelakelander]

Looking at the list and thinking about my thoughts in 2000, I figured Atlanta would have caught and passed Miami's MSA by now.  I'm surprised to see that despite being pretty much built out, Miami's MSA has a higher growth percentage than Atlanta's.

It's also interesting to see how quick Charlotte, Nashville and Austin have packed on people.  It seems like it wasn't that long ago, that they were well below Virginia Beach/Norfolk and closer to Jax's range.  Two smaller southern metros to keep an eye out on are Charleston and Fort Myers. Both continue to grow at pretty healthy rates.

[simms3]

I think Charlotte's MSA added a couple counties.  It really is the baby Atlanta, haha.  Goes back to why people question MSAs and CSAs, the numbers are always up for debate, as are the definitions and how those definitions get applied differently for different areas.