Los Angeles County suffers nation’s worst population outflow

[saybanana]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

Jeez....

When Chicagoland was starting to see population dips in around 2015 it was all about “Nanner nanner nanner Chicago is dying we knew it!” without any effort to look deeper into the numbers to figure out exactly what was happening.

Now that NYC and LA are seeing such dips, everybody is frantically drawing up charts and pulling out their calculators, trying to find an explanation

Are you trying to compared what happened to Chicago is the same as L.A.?

In post #4, I wrote the numbers of which counties are losing and gaining. LA County only lost. LA City gained.
LA County/Metro/CSA is highly desirable (if you can afford the rent/housing which keeps rising). A dying LA would have rents going lower and housing prices dropping and very affordable. That is not the case is it? LA City gained population because it is building a lot of dense housing throughout the city despite most of the other 88 cities in the county that are near even OR losing population. Now if everyone is on the same page in the county to build housing so the people dont need to leave due to Cost of Living plus allow more for people wanting to come, LA County would have 100,000 plus a year. The next 5-10 years will be critical for the LA area. State is looking a statewide rent control to stop out of control rent hikes. Also looking at allowing higher density around public transit corridors (even in NIMBY) single family neighborhoods with a rail station. LA City is rezoning the entire city allowing for higher density and height adjustments upward. Not sure of the other cities in the county what they are doing to relieve the housing crisis. I do get jealous of all these other major cities building so much housing for the people that want to come there, While the LA Metro area doesn't build enough despite the size of 4 entire new york cities

[Quixote]

^ I hope LA city population gains vis-à-vis stagnation/declines in the other 87 municipalities will be a continuing trend. LA city already dwarfs the others in terms of population, but unfortunately, it's not a neatly defined geopolitical entity like NYC (a city-state), DC, Philly, Chicago, and SF owing to extremely arbitrary borders and fewer contrasts in density and built environment. As a result, LA city is reduced to being a co-competitor among a field of 87 other participants (Garcetti himself as alluded to this challenge).

The good news is that LA city is pretty much the only place in the county where you can accommodate hundreds of thousands of new residents through increased density and designated affordable housing, as there are miles and miles of crosstown arteries that you could line with 7-story buildings. My hope is that all of this will lead to the creation of some sort of LA city-specific funding mechanism (i.e. parcel tax) for a half-dozen or so heavy rail projects... actual difference makers. A Pico-Venice line, for instance, would run entirely through LA city proper.

[Qubert]

Originally Posted by Quixote

^ I hope LA city population gains vis-à-vis stagnation/declines in the other 87 municipalities will be a continuing trend. LA city already dwarfs the others in terms of population, but unfortunately, it's not a neatly defined geopolitical entity like NYC (a city-state), DC, Philly, Chicago, and SF owing to extremely arbitrary borders and fewer contrasts in density and built environment. As a result, LA city is reduced to being a co-competitor among a field of 87 other participants (Garcetti himself as alluded to this challenge).

The good news is that LA city is pretty much the only place in the county where you can accommodate hundreds of thousands of new residents through increased density and designated affordable housing, as there are miles and miles of crosstown arteries that you could line with 7-story buildings. My hope is that all of this will lead to the creation of some sort of LA city-specific funding mechanism (i.e. parcel tax) for a half-dozen or so heavy rail projects... actual difference makers. A Pico-Venice line, for instance, would run entirely through LA city proper.

Just curious: What is the political appetite for annexation? I can see many of the gateway cities to the south and east (Bell, Mayflower, Carson, Compton, Inglewood, Lynwood, so on) seeing some benefit to joining in with Los Angeles in terms of consolidating services like police, fire, schools, etc. Heck, LAUSD, LA County Sheriffs Office, and Metro already serve as sort of county wide services.

[Quixote]

Also, the official July 2018 estimate for LA city wasn't released for a while, but now we see that it's 3,990,456 according to American FactFinder. Only, 9,544 short of the 4 million milestone. I wouldn't be surprised if it *doesn't* surpass that threshold when we get the estimates for the 2020 census in 2021.

[Quixote]

Originally Posted by Qubert

Just curious: What is the political appetite for annexation? I can see many of the gateway cities to the south and east (Bell, Mayflower, Carson, Compton, Inglewood, Lynwood, so on) seeing some benefit to joining in with Los Angeles in terms of consolidating services like police, fire, schools, etc. Heck, LAUSD, LA County Sheriffs Office, and Metro already serve as sort of county wide services.

I'm not in the best position to answer that question, but my thought is that there's no appetite whatsoever. Inglewood and Carson in particular are doing just fine on their own.

Inglewood's homicide rate has plummeted dramatically this decade (there's been "only" one homicide so far this calendar year), and with the Crenshaw Line, SoFi Stadium (future home of the Rams/Chargers), a revamped Forum (apparently one of the best places to attend a live concert in the city), a potentially new Clippers arena, and talks of a people mover serving all of those destinations, the city is undergoing a bit of a renaissance.

Carson's also not nearly as bad as people think it is. It's adjacent to Compton, but it has a median household income of $75,517 and is quite racially diverse (38% Latino, 27% Asian, 23% black, 7% white, and 5% mixed race).

[Quixote]

LA County
2018: 10,105,818
2010: 9,818,605
+2.9%


LA County's cities (population 50,000+), 2018 vs. 2010. Collectively, these places account for 78% of the county's population, so it's more than an adequate sample size. I'm not going to do all 88 cities, plus the CDPs and unincorporated areas. These numbers reveal:

• LA city is responsible for a large portion of the county's population growth, which is what I was interested (and hoping to find out) from the outset.

• Very marginal growth in suburban areas that are economically depressed and therefore more likely to have larger households and higher birth rates.

• Exurban hellholes such as Lancaster and Palmdale, thankfully, have grown very modestly.

Los Angeles
2018: 3,990,456
2010: 3,792,621
+5.2%

Long Beach
2018: 467,354
2010: 462,257
+1.1%

Santa Clarita
2018: 210,089
2010: 176,320
+19.2%

Glendale
2018: 201,361
2010: 191,719
+5%

Lancaster
2018: 159,053
2010: 156,633
+1.5%

Palmdale
2018: 156,667
2010: 152,750
+2.6%

Pomona
2018: 152,361
2010: 149,058
+2.2%

Torrance
2018: 145,182
2010: 145,438
-0.1%

Pasadena
2018: 141,371
2010: 137,122
+3.1%

El Monte
2018: 113,475
2010: 115,586
-1.8%

Downey
2018: 112,269
2010: 111,772
-0.4%

Inglewood
2018: 109,419
2010: 109,673
-0.2%

West Covina
2018: 106,311
2010: 106,098
+0.2%

Norwalk
2018: 105,120
2010: 105,549
-0.4%

Burbank
2018: 103,695
2010: 103,340
+0.3%

Compton
2018: 96,617
2010: 96,455
+0.2%

South Gate
2018: 94,443
2010: 94,396
+0.05%

Carson
2018: 91,909
2010: 91,714
+0.2%

Santa Monica
2018: 91,411
2010: 89,736
+1.9%

Whittier
2018: 86,064
2010: 85,331
+0.9%

Hawthorne
2018: 86,965
2010: 84,293
+3.2%

Alhambra
2018: 84,649
2010: 83,089
+1.9%

Lakewood
2018: 80,140
2010: 80,048
+0.1%

Bellflower
2018: 77,131
2010: 76,616
+0.7%

Baldwin Park
2018: 75,813
2010: 75,390
+0.6%

Lynwood
2018: 70,504
2010: 69,772
+1

Redondo Beach
2018: 67,412
2010: 66,748
+1

Pico Rivera
2018: 62,888
2010: 62,942
-0.1%

Montebello
2018: 62,632
2010: 62,500
+0.2

Monterey Park
2018: 60,401
2010: 60,269
+0.2%

Gardena
2018: 59,721
2010: 58,829
+1.5%

Huntington Park
2018: 58,173
2010: 58,114
+0.1%

Arcadia
2018: 58,610
2010: 56,364
+4

Diamond Bar
2018: 56,275
2010: 55,544
+1.3%

Paramount
2018: 54,387
2010: 54,098
+0.5%

Rosemead
2018: 54,412
2010: 53,764
+1.2%

Glendora
2018: 52,002
2010: 50,073
+3.9%

[sopas ej]

It looks like Downey has grown? Unless you reversed the figures...

[edale]

^ Is Santa Clarita not an 'exurban hellhole'? It's super far out and is definitely sprawly and cheap. I work with a woman who moved out there and when I asked why, I got the typical suburbanite answer- "we can get a bigger house, it's safer, and the schools are better than the (San Fernando) Valley."

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

Originally Posted by edale

^ Is Santa Clarita not an 'exurban hellhole'? It's super far out and is definitely sprawly and cheap. I work with a woman who moved out there and when I asked why, I got the typical suburbanite answer- "we can get a bigger house, it's safer, and the schools are better than the (San Fernando) Valley."

yup, anyone that i know that has moved to the SC valley has said the exact same thing.. Its about 45 min from DTLA and 25 - 30 min from the valley... you couldnt pay me to live there lol

[Quixote]

Originally Posted by edale

^ Is Santa Clarita not an 'exurban hellhole'? It's super far out and is definitely sprawly and cheap. I work with a woman who moved out there and when I asked why, I got the typical suburbanite answer- "we can get a bigger house, it's safer, and the schools are better than the (San Fernando) Valley."

Yeah, major growth in Santa Clarita is definitely an unfortunate demographic trend. I don't think SC is quite "exurban" though, and it does have a few saving graces. One, it's relatively wealthy... $90,544 household income for a city of 200,000+. Two, it's home to arguably the best art school (CalArts) outside of the East Coast, particularly when it comes to graphic design, photography, and animation. Three, it has (3) Metrolink stations that give its residents easy access to DT.

Ultimately, my point stands. LA city adding twice as many people as the rest of the county (87 municipalities, dozens of CDPs and unincorporated areas) combined is impressive (when was the last time that happened?) and worth monitoring as a trend moving forward. I don't ever expect LA city's share to be 50%, but if it's just 45% (within 469 square miles, more like 400 when you factor out the uninhabited mountainous areas) and most of the growth is in the form of urban infill, then I think that could have a significant effect in altering the local political structure. But this is long-term, meaning 20-40 years.

[sopas ej]

Hehe Santa Clarita. I knew a girl from there who hated it; her thing was "You can't even get KROQ there!" This was back in the 90s.

Years ago, I had a coworker who was maybe 10 years older than me, who said "I grew up in Santa Clarita---Well, Saugus. I still refuse to say that Santa Clarita is my home town." I realized that the city of Santa Clarita only came to existence in 1987 when the unincorporated communities of Saugus, Valencia, Canyon Country and Newhall all united to form the one city.

I still associate that area with Six Flags Magic Mountain, and I refer to that place as being in Valencia. I consider Santa Clarita to be in the exurbs; I wouldn't want to live there, but I must say, it's not far from great hiking at Vasquez Rocks. That place is amazing. I went there for the very first time 2 years ago.

[Quixote]

I just associate exurban LA with desert, "no-man's-land" geography. Santa Clarita, like Simi Valley and Thousand Oaks, is basically an extension of the SFV.

For me, Lancaster/Palmdale might as well be Bakersfield and Victorville/Hesperia Barstow.