60M in CA by 2050; NorCal to be just 2M shy of SoCal? (San Diego: apartment, condominiums)

[sonarrat]

11-county..? Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, San Mateo, San Francisco, Marin, Sonoma, Napa, Solano, Alameda, Contra Costa. That's 10. They can't be counting Monterey, Merced or San Joaquin counties because they mention them. What's the last one? Google?

Regardless that does explain a few things..

[18Montclair]

Originally Posted by sonarrat

11-county..? Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, San Mateo, San Francisco, Marin, Sonoma, Napa, Solano, Alameda, Contra Costa. That's 10. They can't be counting Monterey, Merced or San Joaquin counties because they mention them. What's the last one? Google?

Regardless that does explain a few things..

LOL..
San Benito County is part of the San Jose MSA now.

[sonarrat]

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

LOL..
San Benito County is part of the San Jose MSA now.

How strange that they would include that but not Merced or San Joaquin.

[18Montclair]

tell me about it.

It has to do with more then 15% of commuters in SB working in Santa Clara.

San Joaquin currently sends 12% of its workers to The SF-Oak-Fremont Metro, when it hits 15% then theyll combine.

One interesting thing is that San Joaquin, Stanislaus and Calaveras are on a collision course with each other and with The Bay Area.

[sonarrat]

Hmm. I think I'm starting to see. San Jose jobs go to people living in Gilroy, Gilroy jobs go to people living in Hollister. Then I suppose Hollister jobs would go to Salinas, Gonzales and King City..

[Desertho]

All I can say is: IT'S ABOUT TIME THAT THE BAY AREA PICK UP THE SLACK!! Yikes, the insularity of the people that live up there think that their restrictive development policies is good for the envinronment etc., when in fact, Southern California and Central Valley are simply absorbing nearly all the growth. The wildfires this past week have already proven once again that it's Southern California that is especially vulnerable to any state calamity. Now that growth is coming to the flood-prone delta of Central Valley, the Bay Area is looking very myopic and self-centered in not allowing for more growth, even if just denser infill.

[kettlepot]

So, if as I expect California adds 14 million people over the next 40 years. Where do I think they will end up?

This is my hypothesis:

1. The coastal counties of the Bay Area - San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Cruz, Marin, Sonoma, and Napa.

Because of development restrictions they'll each add only about 100k each, mostly through the densification of existing downtowns of cities - apartments over commercial buildings. That sort of thing.

+600k

2. The inland Bay area counties - Santa Clara, Alameda, Contra Costa, and Solano Counties.

Still some room for tract homes and condominium complexes. 500k each.

+2000k

3. Sacramento, Stockton, Modesto metroplex

Sprawl filling in the valley between the cities, and sprawl into the foothills of El Dorado and the other Gold Rush counties.

+3000k

4. Central Coast - Monterrey, San Benito, San Luis Obispo, and Santa Barbara. Plenty of development restrictions there, inhospitable mountainous terrain, and no direct connections to the existing metro areas. Still people will move there in some numbers.

+500k

5. Los Angeles and Ventura Counties

They'll find a way to cram more people in there somehow. Tract homes up in northern LA, and condo towers in the city

+1500k

6. Orange County

Always in demand. Not much land left for development. Densification of the older downtown cores with apartments built over commercial buildings.

+1000k

7. The Inland Empire - San Bernardino & Riverside Counties

Sprawl from horizon to horizon - 1.5 million in each.

+3000k

8. San Diego County

Mostly filled up. Room for some more tract homes in the south bay, and some parts of north county. Most of the rest will have live in urban centers made more dense by condo towers.

+1000k

9. The San Joaquin Valley - Fresno & Bakersfield and everything south of Modesto.

500k around Fresno. 300k around B'field, and 200k around the other small towns in the valley.

+1000k

10. The North State

Plenty of room, lower cost land, but no job growth and far away from the areas that are adding jobs.

100k added to each of the three main metro areas of Eureka, Redding, and Chico. 200k everywhere else.

+500k

Grand Total 14.1 million more people between 2010 and 2050 for a state population of about 52 million. After that, the state will probably drive out as many people as it attracts and the population won't grow anymore.

[Coffee Mate]

Times change....but reality does not....
Want to see what California will look like in 2050?.....Take a look at Shanghai PRC China....
Oh...dude...no big deal....just deal with it.....[the planet doesn't mind...so it must be all fine....]

[sheri257]

I'll have to find the link again but, I remember one study predicting that the inland population would increase by 70 percent while the coastal population would increase by less than 20 percent over the next 20 years.

[YOU-CANT-EAT-SCENERY]

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

This report claims that CA will have 60 Million people and SoCal will have 31 Million people by 2050

Thank God I'll be dead by then