Census Bureau Releases July 1 '06 County Pop. Estimates - Page 5

john3eblover · #81 Posted **Mar 27, 2007, 1:43 PM**

I mean, you have Washington DC metro, which counts Arlington and Alexandria in their "MSA", which those cities are clearly very distinct cities on their own, even though I do think they should be counted into the metro, and then you add on Baltimore into their CSA. Atlanta adds on Gainesville and Sandy Springs into the CSA? Those places are already clearly absorbed into the megablob of Atlanta, they should be in the MSA easily. IF anything, Athens, Macon, Columbus, maybe even Greenville, Chattanooga, cities that far out would be my interpretation of the CSA. But i guess it all boils down to technicalities.

Heck, the DC/Baltimore CSA includes like 4 states, why shouldn't ours? We clearly influence the states around us, SC, AL and TN?

Trae · #82 Posted **Mar 27, 2007, 8:25 PM**

I think they are already in Atlanta's MSA (Sandy Springs at least). The CSA just defines the main cities in it (which would be Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Gainesville?).

SteveD · #83 Posted **Mar 27, 2007, 11:21 PM**

No. Whether it's MSA or CSA, the census will (in most cases) list the three largest cities in that region. So for the MSA, it's Atlanta Sandy Springs and Marietta. For the CSA, it's Atlanta, Sandy Springs and Gainesville. The Gainesville MSA is part of Atlanta's CSA but not its MSA. If you go back and read the very first post of this thread which I wrote you'll see that four micropolitan areas, and one metropolitan area (Gainesville) are added to Atlanta's MSA to form the CSA.

holladay · #84 Posted **Mar 31, 2007, 11:02 AM**

having lived in atlanta for four years i think its CSA numbers are rediculous. ive been to newton, barrow, jackson, walton, rockdale, dawson, etc. and those counties are nothing but sticks with a bunch of crap ass subdivisons popping up. they are experiencing tons of growth but there is really no THERE there. atlanta, to me, is still only fulton, dekalb, cobb, gwinnett, clayton, cherokee, henry, douglas, coweta, fayette, forsyth, paulding, bartow and maybe rockdale and hall. really and truly that's the bulk of the atlanta area and even though it includes all the principle areas it is still composed of a lot of HIGHLY undeveloped fringe counties. i mean, even in henry and cherokee there are large areas that are not even populated at all.

john3eblover · #85 Posted **Mar 31, 2007, 1:26 PM**

how is hall county "atlanta" and rockdale isn't?

SteveD · #86 Posted **Mar 31, 2007, 2:38 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by realm0854

having lived in atlanta for four years i think its CSA numbers are rediculous. ive been to newton, barrow, jackson, walton, rockdale, dawson, etc. and those counties are nothing but sticks with a bunch of crap ass subdivisons popping up. they are experiencing tons of growth but there is really no THERE there. atlanta, to me, is still only fulton, dekalb, cobb, gwinnett, clayton, cherokee, henry, douglas, coweta, fayette, forsyth, paulding, bartow and maybe rockdale and hall. really and truly that's the bulk of the atlanta area and even though it includes all the principle areas it is still composed of a lot of HIGHLY undeveloped fringe counties. i mean, even in henry and cherokee there are large areas that are not even populated at all.

Realm, I understand the point you're making, and it's common knowledge that the Atlanta MSA and CSA are the least dense of the nation's large metros; however, the CSA definition is not arbitrary. It is what it is. It's derived based on commuting patterns, and how the local population considers itself with respect to the adjacent primary city. Atlanta's CSA and MSA counties are therefore no more or less rediculous than the majority of other large sprawling sunbelt boomtowns, which also have far-flung largely undeveloped tracts within their MSAs and CSAs (such as Houston, Dallas, Phoenix...hell, even L.A.!). Also, with respect to the Atlanta MSAs and CSAs being the least dense, there are several other large MSAs and CSAs which come pretty darn close to matching our low density sprawl, to wit, some which I've just metioned.

GREGGYMIAMI305 · #87 Posted **Mar 31, 2007, 8:32 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SteveD

The "whole ATL thing" ???

what in the world are you talking about? What "whole ATL thing"?? This is a thread about the census bureau's most recent county population estimates. Thanks for sharing your completely negative opinions about Atlanta! If you want to write several paragraphs doing nothing but ragging about a particular US metro why don't you start you own thread rather than pollute mine. Let me suggest a title..."Why I hate Atlanta". Thanks for nothing, bud.

he's right

I went to atlanta for the first time last year expecting a "urban city"
it was a dissapointment. After you leave downtown atlanta, its like being in a forest Everything is so far apart from each other.Even Orlando Florida is more urban
Miami is a thousands times more urban than both

SteveD · #88 Posted **Mar 31, 2007, 10:32 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by GREGGYMIAMI305

he's right

I went to atlanta for the first time last year expecting a "urban city"
it was a dissapointment. After you leave downtown atlanta, its like being in a forest Everything is so far apart from each other.Even Orlando Florida is more urban
Miami is a thousands times more urban than both

Well, you're certainly entitled to your opinion. To suggest that Orlando is more urban than Atlanta is, well, questionable and ill-informed at best, and laughable at worst. Atlanta's "forest" is one of the primary reasons that hundreds of thousands of new residents flock here YEARLY. And I'll say to you what I said to him...I created this thread to discuss the census bureau's latest county population estimates. If you ALSO want to rag about Atlanta, first, join the club, next, you can be the second poster on his "Why I Hate Atlanta" thread. I wonder if he's created it yet.

john3eblover · #89 Posted **Mar 31, 2007, 11:56 PM**

you tell em Steve.

netdragon · #90 Posted **Apr 17, 2007, 4:53 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crawford

Of all the Sunbelt boomers, Atlanta and environs is always the biggest mystery to me. Cities in Florida, Arizona, even Texas make sense (beach, warmth, golf, etc.). Atlanta is more of a head-scratcher. Inland location, far from ideal weather, high crime, crazy commutes, etc.

J-O-B-S and lower cost of living that's why we moved down here.

KB0679 · #91 Posted **Apr 17, 2007, 7:52 AM**

CSA numbers are based on commuting patterns, not how developed counties included in the CSA are. If anything, the lack of development in those counties explain why a cetain percentage of their population must travel to one of the core metro counties for employment which is why they are included in the CSA.

gripja · #92 Posted **May 4, 2007, 2:02 AM**

I guess I'll be a different voice, basically I hear everyone cheering that their city is growing in leaps and bounds but I'm not at all upset that it looks like NYC lost a few residents, cuz even tho having a lot of people around is cool its also f'ing crowded in this city, traffic jams... 10 people per square foot in the subways... can't walk down 1 block in the city without hitting 15 shoulders.... astronomical housing prices cuz the city is so damn popular.... I wouldn't mind if another million left NYC for Phoenix or Atlanta -- enjoy the future crowds all you forumers in those booming cities, I'll enjoy NYC more if there is a few less people around

Then again -- more people more skyscrapers

LMich · #93 Posted **May 4, 2007, 2:40 AM**

NYC lost population? Over what years are you referring to?

john3eblover · #94 Posted **May 4, 2007, 12:16 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by gripja

I guess I'll be a different voice, basically I hear everyone cheering that their city is growing in leaps and bounds but I'm not at all upset that it looks like NYC lost a few residents, cuz even tho having a lot of people around is cool its also f'ing crowded in this city, traffic jams... 10 people per square foot in the subways... can't walk down 1 block in the city without hitting 15 shoulders.... astronomical housing prices cuz the city is so damn popular.... I wouldn't mind if another million left NYC for Phoenix or Atlanta -- enjoy the future crowds all you forumers in those booming cities, I'll enjoy NYC more if there is a few less people around

this is blasphemy! Don't you know that NYC is the holy grail of all cities! You should be wishing for MORE people! Absolute mind numbing urbanity! 100 people per sq ft in the subways! Housing so expensive you will absolutely go into bankruptcy! Its worth it! There is nothing better than having the streets so jam packed with people that you can't breathe!!

ATLian12 · #95 Posted **May 12, 2007, 6:50 AM**

Buckhead is just as nice if not nicer than alot or most of the places in Miami, more affordable plus you dont have to worry about your place blowing down because of a hurricane.

Sure the beaches are great but you can take a 6 hour trip to anywhere on the panhandle from Atlanta which I prefer over the Atlantic any day.

Over the next 10 years Atlanta's population in city will double to 800 plus up to a million even and its suburban population will continue to grow also at almost the same pace.

brickell · #96 Posted **May 12, 2007, 8:50 PM**

Are you really rationalizing Atlanta by saying the beach is 6 hours away? I'm not taking anything away from Atlanta, but we're talking about walking out your door, into the boat and 15 minutes to direct ocean access, not a day at the beach.

sprtsluvr8 · #97 Posted **May 12, 2007, 11:46 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by brickell

Are you really rationalizing Atlanta by saying the beach is 6 hours away? I'm not taking anything away from Atlanta, but we're talking about walking out your door, into the boat and 15 minutes to direct ocean access, not a day at the beach.

I think panhandle beaches are actually more like 5 hours away, and the Georgia coast/Jacksonville is closer...but I didn't think anyone was "rationalizing" Atlanta, just making a statement about its proximity to beaches. Whether a couple of hours in the car is near or far is relative...if you live in Nebraska you might think that drive is nothing and Atlanta is next to the ocean. It's great that youcan be on the ocean in 15 minutes, but apparently that isn't important to everyone in the world because many, many, many humans live inland. I can be in the Appalachian Mountains in 30 minutes, how long does it take you to get there?

brickell · #98 Posted **May 13, 2007, 3:28 AM**

I'm not going to get into the city vs city thing. I just think it's silly to use a 5 hour car ride as a comparison, but more power to Atlanta and Buckhead and all that sprawl.

LMich · #99 Posted **May 13, 2007, 3:58 AM**

That really did seem odd, since the thread had been dead for a few days, and someone comes in pitting city against city for apparently no reason. Let's stop it, here and now.

john3eblover · #**100** Posted **May 13, 2007, 4:23 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by brickell

I'm not going to get into the city vs city thing. I just think it's silly to use a 5 hour car ride as a comparison, but more power to Atlanta and Buckhead and all that sprawl.

because Miami doesn't sprawl