US Census Bureau data for Austin and other cities

[drummer]

Yeah, those are good thoughts - I think you're right. The interesting thing is that Marble Falls is connected directly to the Cedar Park area (one of the fasting growing areas of the metro) via 1431, but it'll never be able to connect directly because of the reserve (for which I'm grateful - love that area for hiking, etc.). I don't want to see 1431 get developed in the same way, personally. It's bound to happen on 29 and 71 in the future (as it's already somewhat begun).

What do you think of 290 going west of the Y? It seems that there's a lot of development going that way already (especially Dripping Springs), but beyond that, what do you guys think will happen? It seems that there is some local desire for more land preservation. I'm actually a fan of that as the Hill Country shouldn't be plowed over completely. I also know that if people want to move there, buy the land, and build, they probably will. I just wonder at what rate it'll happen. It seems that 71 is more destined for growth in the long run given that it runs along the lakes and has more flat areas (with the exception of a few areas). Burnet County along 71 is generally flat, for instance.

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by drummer

It seems that 71 is more destined for growth in the long run given that it runs along the lakes and has more flat areas (with the exception of a few areas). Burnet County along 71 is generally flat, for instance.

This. This is why I think that area will end up being tied pretty heavily into our MSA once we reach 3 million or so. A lot of that land is flat and easily developable for standard subdivisions and is, of course, going to be connected by a major highway corridor.

[The ATX]

We just barely made that 2,000,000 mark this time around. Based on the metro's growth since 2010, those 860 extra people are just five and half days worth of growth.

[Novacek]

http://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2016/cb16-81.html

[drummer]

Texas is still booming all over. Crazy. Thanks for sharing.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by Novacek

http://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2016/cb16-81.html

We already had metro numbers, so probably the interesting points from this are

1) seems like a slight slowing of CoA itself (closer to 2% than 3%).
2) Georgetown growing faster than San Marcos (growth shifting north a bit?)
3) Austin continues to gain (slowly) on San Jose for 10th largest city.

[GoldenBoot]

Originally Posted by Novacek

We already had metro numbers, so probably the interesting points from this are

1) seems like a slight slowing of CoA itself (closer to 2% than 3%).
2) Georgetown growing faster than San Marcos (growth shifting north a bit?)
3) Austin continues to gain (slowly) on San Jose for 10th largest city.

An interesting note: The CoA's percent growth between the 2010 Census and the July 1, 2015 estimate has outpaced the Metro's. This has not been seen in a few decades.

In raw numbers, a little more than 1 out of every 4 "new" people in the Metro area move into the City of Austin proper.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by GoldenBoot

In raw numbers, a little more than 1 out of every 4 "new" people in the Metro area move into the City of Austin proper.

Wait, that number doesn't make sense to me. If CoA is about half of the total metro, and is growing at a slightly greater rate, wouldn't it be ~1 out of 2?

[GoldenBoot]

Originally Posted by Novacek

Wait, that number doesn't make sense to me. If CoA is about half of the total metro, and is growing at a slightly greater rate, wouldn't it be ~1 out of 2?

Sorry...I was traveling and tried to calculate the numbers too quickly (and my recollection of metro growth was off).

Actually, 1 out of every 3 "new" people in the Austin Metro Area set root in Austin proper.

Of the estimated 57,395 "new" citizens in the Austin Metro Area (July 1, 2014 to July 1, 2015), 19,117 took up residency in the City of Austin proper (33.3%).

[the Genral]

When can we expect to see Austin proper reach 1,000,000?

[KevinFromTexas]

Originally Posted by the Genral

When can we expect to see Austin proper reach 1,000,000?

According to this, probably sometime in 2020. The estimated population now is 931,830, with 19,117 estimated to have moved in from July 2014 to July 2015. Assuming that number stays the same, we'll exceed 1 million sometime in 2020.

http://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2016/cb16-81.html

[H2O]

Originally Posted by the Genral

When can we expect to see Austin proper reach 1,000,000?

Austin Proper will be about 400 (feet).

[drummer]

Yeah, 1,000,000 feet does seem unrealistic given that we have a 400 foot ceiling for most buildings.

[ILUVSAT]

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

According to this, probably sometime in 2020. The estimated population now is 931,830, with 19,117 estimated to have moved in from July 2014 to July 2015. Assuming that number stays the same, we'll exceed 1 million sometime in 2020.

http://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2016/cb16-81.html

Actually...I believe that should be 2018 or 2019. Remember, the estimate was for July 1, 2015. There may be another ~20,000 new people in the city as of July 1, 2016 (~950,000).

~0.951 in 2016
~0.970 in 2017
~0.989 in 2018
~1.008 in 2019

***This assumes the City of Austin gains 19,000 per year (which means, over time, the actual Y-O-Y growth percentage will be decreasing). I actually believe it will at least remain the same or see a slight increase when new for sale and multi family units com online.

The City of Austin seems to average 3.58% annual growth since 2010. If this remains constant, COA could cross the 1,000,000 mark as early as 2017. The Bureau seems to estimate last year's growth at ~2.1%. If you hold that rate constant, COA would surpass the 1,000,000 threshold in late 2018 or early 2019.

[drummer]

That's insane. I'm not as old as some folks on here (*cough* theGeneral *cough*), but I do remember it being significantly smaller...and the idea of this conversation happening would have brought forth a lot of laughter and skepticism.

[the Genral]

Originally Posted by drummer

That's insane. I'm not as old as some folks on here (*cough* theGeneral *cough*), but I do remember it being significantly smaller...and the idea of this conversation happening would have brought forth a lot of laughter and skepticism.

Please do see a doctor for that "cough"
And yes, even this "old" man (though extremely cool) did not see this coming. I think the first indication that Austin's population growth was gaining momentum and sustainably was during the first wave of condos headed by the insanely gobbled up 360.

[the Genral]

Originally Posted by H2O

Austin Proper will be about 400 (feet).

I believe the question was about the Austin [p]roper, not [P]roper, then I saw what you did there, and I want to commend you on your attempt at humor Don't let this set back discourage you. I see potential in you

[H2O]

Originally Posted by the Genral

I believe the question was about the Austin [p]roper, not [P]roper, then I saw what you did there, and I want to commend you on your attempt at humor Don't let this set back discourage you. I see potential in you

Ouch!

[Tech House]

Originally Posted by Novacek

Wait, that number doesn't make sense to me. If CoA is about half of the total metro, and is growing at a slightly greater rate, wouldn't it be ~1 out of 2?

When I read his comment, I saw the same error and my first thought was to say something about, but within one second I relaxed and thought, "Novacek will get it." And there you were in the very next comment.

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by Novacek

2) Georgetown growing faster than San Marcos (growth shifting north a bit?)

And Pflugerville.

Haven't I been saying this would happen because of geography?