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.
The US Census numbers from July 2008 were estimated to be 392,000. I highly doubt Raleigh only grew by 5k in 2 years, especially considering the fact this is one of the fastest growing metros in the U.S. My guess judging from the annual growth percentage would be around 403,000-410,000k.
The biggest question would be whether Raleigh and Durham will be recombined? Part of Raleigh is located in Durham county. It would only make sense. If so, then the Raleigh-Durham metro would be around 1.7-1.8 million.
The US Census numbers from July 2008 were estimated to be 392,000. I highly doubt Raleigh only grew by 5k in 2 years, especially considering the fact this is one of the fastest growing metros in the U.S. My guess judging from the annual growth percentage would be around 403,000-410,000k.
The biggest question would be whether Raleigh and Durham will be recombined? Part of Raleigh is located in Durham county. It would only make sense. If so, then the Raleigh-Durham metro would be around 1.7-1.8 million.
The 392K number was from last Summer, not 2008. Another projection estimated it at 388K. See links below. There has been a temporary slowing of migration nationally because of the recession and the stalled national real estate market. This has caused more people to stay put where they are. It's because of this that I am thinking that the city's population will be sub 400K.
The 392K number was from last Summer, not 2008. Another projection estimated it at 388K. See links below. There has been a temporary slowing of migration nationally because of the recession and the stalled national real estate market. This has caused more people to stay put where they are. It's because of this that I am thinking that the city's population will be sub 400K.
The city's methodology is not as accurate as the US Census Bureau. The numbers I quoted were from July 2008. They've been posted on the Census Bureau's website for quite some time (definitely before last spring). Raleigh's ETJ number is already pushing 440,000, so I doubt the city's corporate limits are far behind.
On a side note, I find it amazing this city has a part-time city gov't. It's starting show.
The city's methodology is not as accurate as the US Census Bureau. The numbers I quoted were from July 2008. They've been posted on the Census Bureau's website for quite some time (definitely before last spring). Raleigh's ETJ number is already pushing 440,000, so I doubt the city's corporate limits are far behind.
On a side note, I find it amazing this city has a part-time city gov't. It's starting show.
I hope you are correct because I think it would be terrific to cross the 400,000 theshold during a census year. My caution comes from recent history though. If you look at the summary link of Raleigh's population, you'll see that the estimated 1999 population was more than the following year's census count. If Raleigh had annexed some of its ETJ land, as it will undoubtedly do in the future, this wouldn't even be an issue at this point. But then again, I am not a big fan of annexing/consolidating one's way to visibility as some other cities have done in the last few decades.
407,153. Nice round number there. My wife and I lived in Raleigh from June 2000 until July 2008. Kickin' it in Cary now with our daughter (who lived in Raleigh 05-08).
Raleigh just doesn't feel like a city that has more people than Saint Louis, Pittsburgh, or Newark. But it does.
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.