U.S. Census - Phoenix had 2nd largest increase in population (Mesa: transplants, loans)

[azriverfan.]

Until last July, Valley cities were among the fastest growing in the country even as the housing bubble was starting to burst, according to estimates released today by the U.S.

Between July 2007 and July 2008, Phoenix's population grew 2.2 percent to 1,567,924, its biggest jump since 2006. It added 33,184 residents last year - more than any other U.S. city except New York, the bureau estimated.

In terms of percentage growth during the same time period, the bureau estimates that Gilbert ranked fourth with a 5 percent gain, or about 10,283 people.

Gilbert grew faster in the past eight years than all U.S. cities except McKinney, Texas. Gilbert nearly doubled its population between 2000 and 2008, adding 99,161 people.

Mesa's population grew by fewer than 4,000. Glendale added only 1,125.
Scottsdale added 2,287, or just less than 1 percent.

Arizona saw its greatest growth this decade between July 2004 and July 2005, according to the data, when the population grew 3.7 percent.

An increase in population doesn't necessarily mean people are moving here, said Bill Schoolings, Arizona's demographer. A portion of the increase can be attributed to more births than deaths - a phenomenon called the net natural increase, he said.

"That's not a huge shift," Schoolings said. "Things are happening as we speak with the economy and with the housing situation and not all of that may be fully reflected in the estimates."The estimates drew skepticism from Jay Butler, director of the at the W.P. Carey School of Business at Arizona State University. Arizona's younger population means more people are having children, and that may be boosting the population more than migration in this recession, he said. "There's a sense that the population count isn't as great as we thought it was going to be," he said. Butler pointed out that some Valley schools aren't as full as predicted, and housing-permit numbers were misleading during the boom.It left the impression that people were moving here, when in reality many of those houses were built by out-of-state investors, Butler said.


U.S. Census Bureau: Valley cities among fastest growing

[homlish560]

Originally Posted by azriverfan.

Until last July, Valley cities were among the fastest growing in the country even as the housing bubble was starting to burst, according to estimates released today by the U.S.

Between July 2007 and July 2008, Phoenix's population grew 2.2 percent to 1,567,924, its biggest jump since 2006. It added 33,184 residents last year - more than any other U.S. city except New York, the bureau estimated.

In terms of percentage growth during the same time period, the bureau estimates that Gilbert ranked fourth with a 5 percent gain, or about 10,283 people.

Gilbert grew faster in the past eight years than all U.S. cities except McKinney, Texas. Gilbert nearly doubled its population between 2000 and 2008, adding 99,161 people.

Mesa's population grew by fewer than 4,000. Glendale added only 1,125.
Scottsdale added 2,287, or just less than 1 percent.

Arizona saw its greatest growth this decade between July 2004 and July 2005, according to the data, when the population grew 3.7 percent.

An increase in population doesn't necessarily mean people are moving here, said Bill Schoolings, Arizona's demographer. A portion of the increase can be attributed to more births than deaths - a phenomenon called the net natural increase, he said.

"That's not a huge shift," Schoolings said. "Things are happening as we speak with the economy and with the housing situation and not all of that may be fully reflected in the estimates."The estimates drew skepticism from Jay Butler, director of the at the W.P. Carey School of Business at Arizona State University. Arizona's younger population means more people are having children, and that may be boosting the population more than migration in this recession, he said. "There's a sense that the population count isn't as great as we thought it was going to be," he said. Butler pointed out that some Valley schools aren't as full as predicted, and housing-permit numbers were misleading during the boom.It left the impression that people were moving here, when in reality many of those houses were built by out-of-state investors, Butler said.


U.S. Census Bureau: Valley cities among fastest growing

Yeah but what's the population doing after July '08 since the housing collapse really took hold??????

Seems to me that Suburbs like Maricopa or San Tan would be declining in population now because so many newbies defaulted on loans and vacated when the Banks took over.

[fcorrales80]

Originally Posted by homlish560

Yeah but what's the population doing after July '08 since the housing collapse really took hold??????

Seems to me that Suburbs like Maricopa or San Tan would be declining in population now because so many newbies defaulted on loans and vacated when the Banks took over.

Actually Maricopa and other regions that were slammed by the bust are actually now realizing a "renaissance." Not the golden age of a couple of years back but a still fast, yet steady approach to growth.

Ok for some reason azcentral.com (Arizona Republic) website isn't working, but there was an article within the last week that showed the reversing trends in many hard hit areas. When the site is back up I'll include a link.

[fcorrales80]

Here is that article I was referring to earlier.

Maricopa seeing signs of new beginning

[azriverfan.]

Originally Posted by fcorrales80

Here is that article I was referring to earlier.

Maricopa seeing signs of new beginning

This was a really good article thanks

[Valley Native]

A similar thread can be found in the San Diego forum about how that city isn't growing as fast as it once did, and will likely be replaced by Dallas as the nation's eighth largest city. Some of the comments echoed my viewpoints exactly ... especially that it should be the QUALITY of people (not so much quantity) that matters.

Although Phoenix has seen dramatic growth during the latter half of the 20th Century, a good share of that growth has been from transplants & retirees seeking a sunny climate & cheaper housing. Cheaper housing tends to attract a cheaper calliber of residents. They're not exactly moving here for the high salaried corporate jobs, or the opportunity to better themselves. The nation's fifth largest city should be more willing to lure in more of the educated types and the corporate executives, instead of those who are just looking for a sunny climate and a cheap place to live.

[azriverfan.]

Originally Posted by Valley Native

A similar thread can be found in the San Diego forum about how that city isn't growing as fast as it once did, and will likely be replaced by Dallas as the nation's eighth largest city. Some of the comments echoed my viewpoints exactly ... especially that it should be the QUALITY of people (not so much quantity) that matters.

Although Phoenix has seen dramatic growth during the latter half of the 20th Century, a good share of that growth has been from transplants & retirees seeking a sunny climate & cheaper housing. Cheaper housing tends to attract a cheaper calliber of residents. They're not exactly moving here for the high salaried corporate jobs, or the opportunity to better themselves. The nation's fifth largest city should be more willing to lure in more of the educated types and the corporate executives, instead of those who are just looking for a sunny climate and a cheap place to live.

I agree and disagree. I agree that we should try to lure more educated types. However, retirees moving to Arizona and Florida are not necessarily seeking cheaper housing and they are not exactly poor people. Phoenix and South Florida don't have cheap housing. There are a lot of other cities that offer cheaper housing and warm weather namely the Southern United States. They come here because the quality of living is nice. They want to play golf, eat at nice restaurants and just enjoy proximity to Las Vegas and Southern California. Most of my patients are retirees and they have a lot of money; trust me, these are not some dumb bumpkins. Many of them are ex-executives who worked at Fortune 500 companies. While I agree many tend to be NIMBYs regardless of their wealth, they do also spend a lot of money and contribute to our economy as well.

Nonetheless, I agree with your overall point. We do need to attract more educated people but unfortunately, that won't happen until we improve our schools both secondary and higher education and attract businesses. And thus far, we don't seem willing to do that. We don't invest in our public schools and we don't employ practices that will attract companies to move here like Texas does aka eliminating the state income tax, tort reform etc. I get annoyed with our people because they want great things are unwilling to take the measures to accomplish them. Just 2 months ago, we had an argument about trade schools. It just shows the mentality of this city. They are happy with schools like the University of Phoenix and Collins College and have no aspiration to create a prestigious academic university with the type of research that will lead to creation of companies and development. Instead, they justify how great ASU is. It's nothing against ASU. I like ASU too but I think we should have more options than just ASU and obviously they disagree.

[sheena]

Originally Posted by azriverfan.

Until last July, Valley cities were among the fastest growing in the country even as the housing bubble was starting to burst, according to estimates released today by the U.S.

Between July 2007 and July 2008, Phoenix's population grew 2.2 percent to 1,567,924, its biggest jump since 2006. It added 33,184 residents last year - more than any other U.S. city except New York, the bureau estimated.

In terms of percentage growth during the same time period, the bureau estimates that Gilbert ranked fourth with a 5 percent gain, or about 10,283 people.

Gilbert grew faster in the past eight years than all U.S. cities except McKinney, Texas. Gilbert nearly doubled its population between 2000 and 2008, adding 99,161 people.

Mesa's population grew by fewer than 4,000. Glendale added only 1,125.
Scottsdale added 2,287, or just less than 1 percent.

Arizona saw its greatest growth this decade between July 2004 and July 2005, according to the data, when the population grew 3.7 percent.

An increase in population doesn't necessarily mean people are moving here, said Bill Schoolings, Arizona's demographer. A portion of the increase can be attributed to more births than deaths - a phenomenon called the net natural increase, he said.

"That's not a huge shift," Schoolings said. "Things are happening as we speak with the economy and with the housing situation and not all of that may be fully reflected in the estimates."The estimates drew skepticism from Jay Butler, director of the at the W.P. Carey School of Business at Arizona State University. Arizona's younger population means more people are having children, and that may be boosting the population more than migration in this recession, he said. "There's a sense that the population count isn't as great as we thought it was going to be," he said. Butler pointed out that some Valley schools aren't as full as predicted, and housing-permit numbers were misleading during the boom.It left the impression that people were moving here, when in reality many of those houses were built by out-of-state investors, Butler said.


U.S. Census Bureau: Valley cities among fastest growing

Ok so does anyone want to buy my house in Gilbert so I can move back to NC.

[azriverfan.]

Originally Posted by sheena

Ok so does anyone want to buy my house in Gilbert so I can move back to NC.

Talk to the Captain and I don't mean Morgan