Oregon Population Thread Including PSU and Census Data

[MarkDaMan]

Thursday, March 19, 2009, 11:54am PDT | Modified: Thursday, March 19,
Oregon cities among fastest growing in nation
Portland Business Journal

The Bend area, the Portland-Beaverton-Vancouver area and the Salem area are among the fastest growing metropolitan areas, according to data released Thursday by the [CompanyWatch allows you to receive email alerts with stories related to your companies of interest. <p>You can watch up to ten companies at a time.</p>] U.S. Census.

Of the U.S. largest 100 metropolitan areas, Bend grew at a 3 percent rate from 2007 to 2008, increasing to 158,456 residents from 153,799, ranking No. 13.

Ranking No. 55, the Portland area grew at a 1.9 percent rate from 2007 to 2008, increasing to 2,207,462 residents from 2,166,491.

Ranking No. 66, the Salem area grew at a 1.7 percent rate from 2007 to 2008, increasing to 391,680 residents from 385,108.

Raleigh-Cary, N.C., was the nation’s fastest-growing city, growing at a 4.3 percent clip from 2007 to 2008, followed by Austin-Round Rock, Texas at 3.8 percent. Kennewick-Pasco-Richland at No. 3 was followed by Palm Coast, Fla., and Gainesville, Ga.

http://portland.bizjournals.com/port...6/daily42.html

[MarkDaMan]

Thursday, March 19, 2009, 10:13am PDT | Modified: Thursday, March 19, 2009, 2:35pm
Metro: Population may double by 2060
Portland Business Journal

In 50 years, the population in the Portland area will likely be between 3.61 and 4.38 million people. As of the 2000 Census, the region’s population was about 1.93 million.

The Metro Council on Thursday released updated forecasts that estimate a range of possible population and employment growth for the seven-county metropolitan region by the years 2030 and 2060. Metro’s projections indicate slower rates of growth in the short term due to current economic conditions with sustained population and employment growth over the long term.

The 20-year forecasts indicate that there is a 90 percent chance that the region’s population in 2030 will fall between 2.9 and 3.2 million people.

In May 2008, Metro projected a 90-percent likelihood that the population of the region would be between 3.46 and 4.25 million in 2060. That forecast also projected the total employment of the region to be between 1.7 and 3.3 million in 2060. No projections for 2030 were included in last May’s forecast.

Metro will use the information to determine future urban growth boundary expansion.

The forecasts encompass the seven-county Portland-Beaverton-Vancouver Primary Metropolitan Statistical Area as defined by the federal Office of Management and Budget. That area includes all of Multnomah, Clackamas, Washington, Yamhill and Columbia counties in Oregon and Clark and Skamania counties in Washington.

http://portland.bizjournals.com/port...l?ana=e_du_pub

[MR. Cosmopolitan]

Originally Posted by MarkDaMan

Metro will use the information to determine future urban growth boundary expansion.

I hope they won't do that, Portland is already a very large city, I don't see any good in expanding the growth boundary except falling land prices, anyway I believe that by that time even the most conservative dinosaurs would refuse it, with the gas prices going up and the climate going crazy they'l probably think it twice before getting on their cars.

[JordanL]

Originally Posted by MR. Cosmopolitan

I hope they won't do that, Portland is already a very large city, I don't see any good in expanding the growth boundary except falling land prices, anyway I believe that by that time even the most conservative dinosaurs would refuse it, with the gas prices going up and the climate going crazy they'l probably think it twice before getting on their cars.

As someone who can't afford rent... falling land prices wouldn't be the worst thing in the world.

[MR. Cosmopolitan]

Originally Posted by JordanL

As someone who can't afford rent... falling land prices wouldn't be the worst thing in the world.

I dont understand how falling prices in the rich outer suburbs would affect the poor people living in the downtown and inner suburbs that fail to pay their rent.

[JordanL]

Originally Posted by MR. Cosmopolitan

I dont understand how falling prices in the rich outer suburbs would affect the poor people living in the downtown and inner suburbs that fail to pay their rent.

Hey now, I said I couldn't afford to, I didn't say I'm failing to pay my rent. Lets not make this personal.

In Portland, poor people don't live in inner suburbs and downtown, because the housing there is WAY more expensive than the suburbs. It's WAY cheaper to live near Lombard or Parkrose, and even cheaper to live in Clackamas or Hillsboro.

[ue]

That's pretty good to hear! Hopefully it's more a sustainable boom (guess it is with stuff like the Pearl, SoWa, etc. happening) than a hyper suburban crazy boom.

[colganc]

http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/t...xhtml?src=bkmk

1.4% growth, nearly 34,000 people. Still ranked 24th in size and grew, in absolute numbers, 23rd fastest. Amazing to think with all of the development that it is still only is enough for 23rd fastest.

[2oh1]

Originally Posted by colganc

Amazing to think with all of the development that it is still only is enough for 23rd fastest.

Yup! Bend is growing much faster than we are. Here's an article on VOX with a map for a snapshot of a national perspective. It's interesting to see where the growth is - and isn't.

"Where Americans moved in 2014, in one map"

[colganc]

Originally Posted by 2oh1

Yup! Bend is growing much faster than we are. Here's an article on VOX with a map for a snapshot of a national perspective. It's interesting to see where the growth is - and isn't.

"Where Americans moved in 2014, in one map"

Very cool. Texas and Florida metro areas look like they're exploding.

San Antonio and Orlando are close on our heels. Repeating the growth rates from last year will have Portland, San Antonio, and Orlando passing by Pittsburgh. Keep it up two years in a row and San Antonio and Orlando could pass us by.

I also went and looked at the County stats: Clackamas at 1.7% growth, Clark at 1.7%, Multnomah at 1.4%, and Washington at 1.3%.

[colganc]

http://www.census.gov/newsroom/press...5/cb15-84.html

Next Thursday the Census will release city data. I Can't wait.

[PDXDENSITY]

Originally Posted by colganc

http://www.census.gov/newsroom/press...5/cb15-84.html

Next Thursday the Census will release city data. I Can't wait.

http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/t...xhtml?src=bkmk

According to this table, our metro area added 33,500 people 2013-14.

I wouldn't be surprised if Portland added close to 10,000 in the year. 2013 estimate says 609,000 on wikipedia. We're probably up around 615,000-620,000 in the city now. I am looking forward to the data to see how off I am.

[PDXDENSITY]

Originally Posted by PDXDENSITY

http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/t...xhtml?src=bkmk

According to this table, our metro area added 33,500 people 2013-14.

I wouldn't be surprised if Portland added close to 10,000 in the year. 2013 estimate says 609,000 on wikipedia. We're probably up around 615,000-620,000 in the city now. I am looking forward to the data to see how off I am.

619,360 in July 2014.

Damn, I was spot on!!!

Since demand hasn't seemed to wane and we have a ton of housing on the way, I wouldn't doubt seeing a 630,000-635,000 estimate for july 2015. I guesz we'll see!

[Abide]

Originally Posted by PDXDENSITY

619,360 in July 2014.

Damn, I was spot on!!!

Since demand hasn't seemed to wane and we have a ton of housing on the way, I wouldn't doubt seeing a 630,000-635,000 estimate for july 2015. I guesz we'll see!

Kudos! Welp, looks like we've finally surpassed my previous city of Milwaukee.

[MarkDaMan]

Forumers, let's try to stay on topic in our threads...

[58rhodes]

Originally Posted by MarkDaMan

Forumers, let's try to stay on topic in our threads...

sorry

[colganc]

Summary for larger cities in the metro area...

Portland
2013: 609,520
2014: 619,360
Percentage: 1.6%
Absolute: 9,840
Density: 4,642

Vancouver
2013: 167,108
2014: 169,294
Percentage: 1.3%
Absolute: 2,186
Density: 3,644

Gresham
2013: 109,266
2014: 109,892
Percentage: .6%
Absolute: 626
Density: 4,337

Hillsboro
2013: 97,476
2014: 99,393
Percentage: 1.9%
Absolute: 1,917
Density: 4,159

Beaverton
2013: 93,611
2014: 95,109
Percentage: 1.6%
Absolute: 1,498
Density: 5,078

[PDXDENSITY]

Originally Posted by colganc

Summary for larger cities in the metro area...

Portland
2013: 609,520
2014: 619,360
Percentage: 1.6%
Absolute: 9,840
Density: 4,642

Vancouver
2013: 167,108
2014: 169,294
Percentage: 1.3%
Absolute: 2,186
Density: 3,644

Gresham
2013: 109,266
2014: 109,892
Percentage: .6%
Absolute: 626
Density: 4,337

Hillsboro
2013: 97,476
2014: 99,393
Percentage: 1.9%
Absolute: 1,917
Density: 4,159

Beaverton
2013: 93,611
2014: 95,109
Percentage: 1.6%
Absolute: 1,498
Density: 5,078

Thanks for this table of the data.

[58rhodes]

Originally Posted by PDXDENSITY

Thanks for this table of the data.

Beaverton has very little park acreage,very little office/commercial, no major airport and is full of badly maintained garden style apartments and pretty much no 20 minute neighborhoods and thats the best we can do?

the more you quote stuff the more you make MY point

[colganc]

Originally Posted by 58rhodes

Beaverton has very little park acreage,very little office/commercial, no major airport and is full of badly maintained garden style apartments and pretty much no 20 minute neighborhoods and thats the best we can do?

Beaverton is not exactly in a fair situation. It has massive amounts of office square footage that truly should be part of such a discussion. It just happens that the office space is in "unincorporated" Washington County.

It has a decent amount of parks, they're just not where you would expect. A lot of the remaining empty lots are getting filled with three and four story apartments with relatively minimal parking spaces. Just need to look half a mile or less up and down the MAX line.

It may not have many "20 minute neighborhoods" or any that meet whatever the definition is, but it's fast moving in that direction as evidenced by the recent developments near Nike and MAX.