Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
OK so I've got some numbers compiled let's hope I haven't mistyped anything but here goes.*
As always I start with the inner ring and work my way out.* This years census showed that estimates for Michigan were under by about 90k residents.* I had speculated that this underestimate came from a political climate that either incentivized immigrant populations to be under the radar, or perhaps discounted those who were not legal citizens.* I suspected this would affect areas with higher proportions of Latino immigrants.* *In my head I thought the Grand Rapids area would be undercounted because of this.* *It was undercounted, but nowhere nearly as dramatic as the results for the Detroit area which ended up with a net gain of about 80k residents off of original estimates.* *The GR area was under counted only by about 6,000.* Grand Rapids city was OVER estimated per census by about 1,500.* This resulted in an underestimation of suburban areas by about 8,000 people.* What I have found by looking at the numbers throughout under estimated states, is that suburban areas in general were under estimated while core cities were over estimated(A few exceptions to this rule largely in the Northeast).*
The inner ring:
The city of Grand Rapids is stuck in a purgatory of "almost" since 1970.* It inches so close to 200k residents, but every time the census comes out it's not quite there.* That said the city grew almost 6% and had the largest numerical gain for the decade and ended with it's highest official recorded population ever.* The six inner ring burbs all grew by a greater % than GR with the largest percent gains in Kentwood and GR Township.* As I stated previously Wyoming is officially the 2nd largest city in the western half of the state.* It is now larger than Kalamazoo by more than 3k residents.* The total inner ring which if combined would be city of 401,213 people in*140sq mi.* To put this in perspective Birmingham Alabama has 200k people in 148 sq mi.* From another perspective Boston MA has 675k people in 48sq mi so it's all relative.* The inner ring gained 26k people total for a growth rate of almost 7%.*
Next we add in the outer ring, and Rockford.
The outer ring suburbs in Kent County posted solid double digit growth rates.* The areas especially along M6 continued the surge in population they have been experience the last several decades.* I like to cluster the areas around Rockford together because I've always felt that the areas that* they"identify" as Rockford , and are larger than just Rockford city.* You'll note I included Cannon Twp as part of Rockford, and also alone in the inner ring.* It is not added into the numbers twice.**
Next are the Ottawa County townships along the eastern border with Kent.**
These are the Western GR burbs that have the strongest commuting ties into Kent. They posted the strongest growth numbers of any area.* Particularly impressive are Allendale, Georgetown, Jamestown and Blendon Townships.* At 54,000 residents Georgtown TWP is the largest municipality in Ottawa County.* I was under the impression that it was largely built out which is clearly not the case since it gained the 2nd most residents in raw numbers after GR.* *The eastern half of Ottawa grew at a significantly faster rate than the western half.* This combined with a softening automotive employment base along the lakeshore should strengthen the commuting ties between the counties.* *I am fairly confident that Ottawa won't be separated from Kent County again.* *The final total at the end of the chart roughly represents the Grand Rapids urbanized area.* There are a few townshipsthat aren't dense enough to be included, my guess is that the urbanized number will be around 650,000 when published.*
More data for the surrounding areas and counties:
The township on the eastern edge of Kent County grew at almost twice the rate of the Northern townships.* Though by actual raw numbers there is not a big difference.*
Here are bordering townships from outlying rural counties.* Montcalm and Ionia Counties* both grew by over 3,000 people.* Both were to have only estimated to have grown a couple hundred each.* That's a significant under estimation for rural counties.* I would have thought the bulk of that growth would be coming from the areas near the border with Kent County.* That growth must be more evenly distributed through the counties as the border areas did not show that strong of growth in Ionia County, it was a bit stronger in Montcalm.* Still it makes me wonder how far out from the folks in the country must be commuting into the metro.*
Barry County is a mystery to me.* It suddenly disappeared from the GR metro alignment during the 2018 shift, and Ionia County was added back in.* The townships that border Kent County account for 1/4th of Barry County's population, but a full 2/3rds of it's overall growth.* I have a hard time imagining that it dropped below the 15% threshold to be counted in the CSA, and these numbers would indicate a strengthening in commuting patterns.* I need to spend more time researching OMB guidelines for statistical areas to understand why.* I have theories but I don't want to put anyone to sleep.
Allegan County is considered the "Holland Michigan Micropolitan area", because a portion of Holland extends into Allegan.* Even though the majority of Holland is in the GR MSA.* *The county grew to more than 120k residents making it the 4th most populous county in the area after Muskegon.* The townships that border Kent County posted some of the most impressive growth numbers in the region at 17% for the decade. Particularly impressive was Leighton Township with surged almost 42% since 2010.* I am not confident that the growth in this quadrant of the county would be enough to shift commuting patterns to adding Allegan fully back into the GR metro.* It only accounts for about 1/4 the total population.* The rest of the county is divided into commuting pockets: Plainwell/Otsego commute into Kalamazoo.* The northwestern portions of the county largely commute into the Holland area, and you have self containing pockets of the county such as the city of Allegan, and Saugatuck/Douglas.
FInally here's a breakdown of the western side of Ottawa County, Grand Haven and Holland.* I've always thought Grand Haven was artificially small on paper.* When you add up the urbanized cluster around it you get a city of almost 50,000 people.* Also interesting is that there are more jobs than employment base in the Grand Haven area.* *A significant enough portion of Muskegon's urbanized area commutes into Ottawa County which is enough to include Muskegon in the GR CSA.* *The areas around Grand Haven grew faster than those around Holland, Though Holland still grew more in raw numbers.* *
The areas around Holland comprise and urbanized population of around 110k people.* When I include the Allegan County portions that immediately feed into Holland you get and area with about 117k residents.* Holland has been going through a shift in its employment base with Johnson Controls divesting in it's Holland business units, and the majority of the R&D and corporate positions being shifted over to the Detroit area.* Still it's managing to grow at a healthy enough pace.**
Alright I'm ending it here.* If you all have any questions or requests let me know.
Nice analysis, though I wish you had included Muskegon. There's a good chunk of commuters from there into both grand rapids and Holland, my household representing both of those scenarios, though we are now working from home more than not these days.
Nice analysis, though I wish you had included Muskegon. There's a good chunk of commuters from there into both grand rapids and Holland, my household representing both of those scenarios, though we are now working from home more than not these days.
I can do a breakdown of Muskegon, I have a template for it. I’ll get to it sometime this weekend
Here's the breakdown for Muskegon. Overall the county grew pretty uniform at about 2%. There were low spots with Muskegon City, Twp, and Heights losing population(the Heights by a noticeable margin). There were also higher growth spots with Egelston TWP leading the county at 12% growth.
Tiny Roosevelt Park also posted an impressive 8% growth rate, though in raw numbers it's only 341 people. To be fair an inner ring burb that's only one square mile growing at all is good. Roosevelt Park has always been one biggest of the poster children for the redundant nature of Michigan suburbs. In the late 50's/ early 60's there was this proliferation of unincorporated townships bordering core cities that chartered as cities themselves to prevent annexation. They didn't want the city's to annex them and then have to pay city taxes, and deal with city problems. At the time it made sense because the cities were powerful and they were all starting to lose their tax bases to the extra spaces just outside of their borders. The dirty consequence were core cities that were politically walled in by other entities that syphoned off their tax bases, wealth, and political clout leaving them nowhere to go but decline.
All due respect to Roosevelt Park residents logically I don't see any value in one sq mi of land being politically autonomous from an overall core. The result is redundant government services that cost extra tax dollars and hinder core cities from regaining health. There are literally hundreds of examples like this (though none as tiny as RP) throughout the state and they are a huge contributing factor to why Michigan as a whole has such weak core cities and is struggling to catch up in the modern era that places a higher value on stronger urban cores with character. Michiganders love their tiny fractured governments and plethora of redundant school districts. If there ever were to be a shift and cities/services started consolidating/merging, the tax payers would save literally billions, and the state would be much better positioned to make moves in regards to overall urban health.
1. Why was Barry County removed from the GR MSA a couple years ago? If the growth in the county is towards Kent County, wouldn't the commuting patterns be strengthening in theory?
2. In terms of Allegan County, does the commuting patterns have to be into Kent County to be included in the GR MSA? Or does commuting into Ottawa County also qualify? Not sure if Ottawa County is considered a core county.
Overall though, it seems that a lack of housing and higher home prices have pushed people into more rural areas. The rural area between the urban GR and Holland area is closing fast. Also, the addition of Barry County is literally the difference between passing both Birmingham, AL and Rochester, NY in size.
Here's the breakdown for Muskegon. Overall the county grew pretty uniform at about 2%. There were low spots with Muskegon City, Twp, and Heights losing population(the Heights by a noticeable margin). There were also higher growth spots with Egelston TWP leading the county at 12% growth.
Tiny Roosevelt Park also posted an impressive 8% growth rate, though in raw numbers it's only 341 people. To be fair an inner ring burb that's only one square mile growing at all is good. Roosevelt Park has always been one biggest of the poster children for the redundant nature of Michigan suburbs. In the late 50's/ early 60's there was this proliferation of unincorporated townships bordering core cities that chartered as cities themselves to prevent annexation. They didn't want the city's to annex them and then have to pay city taxes, and deal with city problems. At the time it made sense because the cities were powerful and they were all starting to lose their tax bases to the extra spaces just outside of their borders. The dirty consequence were core cities that were politically walled in by other entities that syphoned off their tax bases, wealth, and political clout leaving them nowhere to go but decline.
All due respect to Roosevelt Park residents logically I don't see any value in one sq mi of land being politically autonomous from an overall core. The result is redundant government services that cost extra tax dollars and hinder core cities from regaining health. There are literally hundreds of examples like this (though none as tiny as RP) throughout the state and they are a huge contributing factor to why Michigan as a whole has such weak core cities and is struggling to catch up in the modern era that places a higher value on stronger urban cores with character. Michiganders love their tiny fractured governments and plethora of redundant school districts. If there ever were to be a shift and cities/services started consolidating/merging, the tax payers would save literally billions, and the state would be much better positioned to make moves in regards to overall urban health.
Thank you. There really isn't much room to grow in RP, but I think you're seeing the difference between the end of the great recession and now a housing boom. I've seen houses get foreclosed upon, and now many more families moving in. I believe there also was a lot of vacancies at the largest apartment complex around 2010. In a tiny city, that matters.
Before I moved to RP, I would agree with you about the redundant services, but really the only one is the police department. With crime high nearby in Muskegon heights and Muskegon, I changed my mind on the necessity of funding a tiny little department. I believe it has kept property values up to have a very focused police presence. (See all the different police forces in Grand Haven.). Other services are contracted out, so not redundant. By the age of the earliest houses, I think you have the wrong idea about RP. I like to think of it as a very early master planned community, with all the sidewalks and playgrounds scattered throughout. I believe if it were folded into a nearby city, the level of services would tank and the many littleparks neglected. Winter snow removal, for instance, was fantastic until a few years ago. It's still good, whereas even Norton shores suburb is slow, which is still outrageously better than Fruitport). If you want to blame the hollowing out of the city center, it's more on Norton shores than the tiny suburb established really early on. Now most of the new building is being done in Fruitport and out in wolf lake areas.
Anyway, your argument seems to imply that you think RP would have been part of city of Muskegon if it weren't on its own, but it would have actually been part of Norton shores, by geography and shared school district.
Anyway, your argument seems to imply that you think RP would have been part of city of Muskegon if it weren't on its own, but it would have actually been part of Norton shores, by geography and shared school district.
I apologize for the ensuing rant. Feel free not to read lol. I'm using Roosevelt Park as an example of what I consider to be an overall failed suburbs vs. core city system in Michigan as a whole. I wasn't meaning to suggest that only RP shouldn't exist.
Norton Shores itself is just a larger version of RP in this regard. I would make the same arguement that Norton Shores shouldn't exist as a city but rather be part of a larger city government as well. Norton Shores didn't incorporate until the late 60's. RP was incorporated a full 20 years before Norton Shores, so theoretically you could say Norton Shores should have just been a part of RP The Mona Shores School district was established prior to Norton Shores even incorporating. There are many examples of this. The city of Wyoming has 5 school districts within its borders, and they are older than Wyoming itself. Per the quote, in my opinion all of the urbanized Muskegon communities should be one civic entity. Muskegon should be a city of 100k people that covers 90ish sq mi. I would argue the same for any city because one unified civic government allows for a more cohesive metro area, instead of multiple small governments competing for the same tax dollars and investments.
When you look at the cities who's borders cover the majority of their urbanized portions, you don't find a Muskegon Heights, or Highland Park, or even an East St. Louis. Sure you find bad neighborhoods in every city but they exist in pockets, not entire cities. Look at Muskegon Heights, if it were one unified Muskegon, the city would be forced to find a way to manage the struggling neighborhoods because it would be in the best interest of the region as a whole. Instead because of the current Michigan system, all of the incorporated entities around it just wall it off with their police forces, brand it as toxic, and then become appealing to what little sustainable resident base that's left within its borders. Those invisible political lines create a vacuum by which the struggling entity continues to collapse on itself, while its tax base just crosses the street in to the "safer" cities. It's an unrecoverable collapse for the cities that fall into it. No other state has as many examples of these failing incorporated entities as Michigan.
History doesn't reveal it's alternatives but I would argue with confidence that if Muskegon had one unified city instead of 6 independent entities all competing with each other, there would be no stigmatized boarded up Muskegon Heights. There would still be desirable, less desirable, and some down right bad neighborhoods. But you wouldn't have one three square mile section of the area in total collapse while all of the areas around it politically walled it off. It would be in the areas best interest to try and encourage investment in the struggling portions instead of just watching them die.
Detroit is a Muskegon Heights on a macro scale. As its suburbs incorporated, they walled the city off, sucked away its tax base and wealth, and then branded themselves independent from the city for 3 decades as it utterly collapsed. If Detroit had been able to expand its borders and keep its tax base there would be a very different story in SE Michigan. Only in the last 20 years have Detroit's suburbs realized they need the core city to be sustainable in the modern era which favors "hip" cities. Only they are late to the party and the Detroit area has one of the weakest identities for any Metro it's size. The Detroit model of townships chartering or incorporating to fight against the main city played out over and over again in Michigan. It hinders Michigan cities from truly thinking big even now.
To be clear I do understand why RP exists, I understand the value in it's police force, and the safer neighborhoods they bring. I also agree that if it were merged into a larger entity that the residents would see a disruption in quality of services as the system currently sits. Though I'm not sure those services would really suffer if all six Muskegon entities merged.
If it had just been one Muskegon working together from the beginning would there have a need for a tiny, independent Roosevelt Park to begin with?
1. Why was Barry County removed from the GR MSA a couple years ago? If the growth in the county is towards Kent County, wouldn't the commuting patterns be strengthening in theory?
Barry County was removed in the 2018 alignment. It must have dropped below the necessary 25% commuting threshold based on the ACS. Barry County had been in GR's MSA for 20 years and it's growth has been solidly along M-37 during that time as well. The fact that it disappeared from both the MSA and CSA was surprising. What was equally as surprising was that more rural, less connected Ionia County was added back in.
Here's what I think. Going to try to do this as simple as I can because it's clear as mud lol.
To be included in an MSA a county must have a minimum of 25% of its workforce commuting into the main metro.
To be included in a CSA a county must be included in an adjoining statistical area, or at minimum be classified as it's own Micropolitan area. Between 15-25% of the adjoining statistical area must commute into the main metro area. CSA's only combine statistical area's to each other, Metro to metro, Micro to metro, etc. Counties classified as rural cannot be joined into a statistical area.
1.To be classified as a Micropolitan area a county must have an urbanized cluster of at least 10k people within its borders.
2.To be classified as a metro area a county must have a minimum urbanized cluster of at least 50k people.
3.If a county does not have a strong enough commuting base to be part of a statistical area, and it doesn't have a large enough urbanized cluster to be classified as an independent statistical area, it is classified as rural.
The largest urban cluster in Barry County is Hastings which has less than 8,000 people in it so it does not qualify to be an independent statistical area. This means that the OMB classifies it as rural, and it does not qualify to be added into the CSA. It must then have a minimum 25% of it's commuters going into Kent County to be included in the GR MSA.
The statistical models they use are heavily weighted in theory, and I'm sure there is a large margin of error within them. If their models say that Barry County dropped below the commuting threshold, but Ionia County's went above. It signals that these counties are all probably hovering right around that 25% mark, and that a margin of error is all it takes for them to be removed, or added back in.
The next metro alignment is 2023. I would not be surprised to see Barry County added back in. I wouldn't be surprised if another rural county was removed resulting in a zero net gain in metro pop either. This will probably be the case with these outlier counties until you truly start seeing suburban development spill into them instead of the exurban pockets that have been slowly spreading over the last couple of decades.
Quote:
2. In terms of Allegan County, does the commuting patterns have to be into Kent County to be included in the GR MSA? Or does commuting into Ottawa County also qualify? Not sure if Ottawa County is considered a core county.
If I understand correctly the commuting patterns have to be into the core MSA, not necessarily the main county. I believe Muskegon is actually considered part of the CSA due to commuting patterns into Ottawa County, not Kent.
The problem for adding Allegan County is more about getting enough commuters into the GR metro. It's more than twice the population of the other rural counties surrounding GR, and it's commuter base it being pulled from both ends (GR and Kzoo). Also the city of Allegan is home to a rather large employment base with Perrigo and all of it's operations, so a decent amount of the workforce may not need to commute out of the county at all. The south eastern end of the county is more centric to the Benton Harbor area and even Chicago. Clearly at least 15% of it's workforce is commuting to Kent and Ottawa Counties. The growth patterns just aren't enough to suggest it will be over that 25% threshold by 2023. Perrigo is shifting some of its operations into Kent County which may swing a bit. At 120K people you would still need a few thousand more commuters to start pouring over that border for work.
This is all speculative on my end. There is a way to find the actual commuting patterns between the counties, but navigating the ACS website has been very difficult for me to figure out over the last few years.
Last edited by mjlo; 08-14-2021 at 03:52 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
