Over at New Geography, there's a post asking the question on whether there's a return to the city or a new divide in the region? The data use to parse the migration pattern suggests that though there's a pattern that people moved back to the city, and yet at the same time data pointed that the burbs still going strong. However, data also points to the direction that not all burbs are created equal.
According to Census Bureau population estimates, between 1987 and 2007 the population of the Washington DC metropolitan area grew from 3.92 million to 5.31 million people, an increase of about 35.5 percent. The population growth rates over this period varied considerably within the metropolitan area. The Center City experienced a 7.6 percent population decline between 1987 and 2007 while all of the other subregions in the metropolitan area grew. The fastest growing subregion was the Outer Suburbs, where the population grew by 109.6 percent over the 20-year period, followed by the Far Flung Suburbs (80.0%), Inner Suburbs (27.4%) and Inner Core (23.7%).
[via New Geography]
Yes, not all burbs are created equal. I think people migrate for a couple of reasons, for example lower housing prices. The far flung burbs or exurbs may have gained more people because the housing prices were much, much lower then than say, outer burbs like Prince William county. The data, the writer use was as current as 2007, before foreclosure buying frenzy. So, I'd be interested to see how the tide have changed since then.
Full story here..
