RVA growth 1950 to today

[Brent114]

Yeah.  The slow population growth is painful.  But driving around town isn’t painful at all.  Richmond is booming, even if we pesky single people are all that live here  

I’ve always had the sense that the difference between Richmond and a place like Charlotte, for example, is the abundance of children in other cities.   Having an extra 100k babies around would make the numbers look good but would ruin the city, IMO.  Of course those children grow up to be adults in 20 years and it would be great to have 100k new adults in the pipeline just because they happens to be born here. 
 

The children do seem to be coming though (my building in Manchester has a dozen or so). Hopefully the numbers will start to look different soon. 

[I miss RVA]

29 minutes ago, Brent114 said:

Yeah.  The slow population growth is painful.  But driving around town isn’t painful at all.  Richmond is booming, even if we pesky single people are all that live here  

I’ve always had the sense that the difference between Richmond and a place like Charlotte, for example, is the abundance of children in other cities.   Having an extra 100k babies around would make the numbers look good but would ruin the city, IMO.  Of course those children grow up to be adults in 20 years and it would be great to have 100k new adults in the pipeline just because they happens to be born here. 
 

The children do seem to be coming though (my building in Manchester has a dozen or so). Hopefully the numbers will start to look different soon. 

I think you're on to something. Lots of families - lots of kids - DO seem to make up big portions of the REALLY booming cities (without looking at the data - it's merely speculation). We'll have to disagree on the kids ruining the city - Kids don't ruin the city at all. They are the FUTURE of the city (as you actually pointed out!) There's nothing better than having lots of families moving into RVA. It's part of what adds SO much vitality to city neighborhoods. I don't for the life of me understand why RVA seems to be a haven for singletons. What's sad is that it was also like that 20, 30 and even 40 years ago. I have to admit that, in retrospect, that's something I noticed 22 years ago when moved to Chicago - seemed like there were just WAYYYYYYYY more kids of all ages here. EVERY neighborhood - teeming with children. That's a real lack, if RVA isn't attracting families. I seem to recall when the Richmond 300 plan was still being finalized - city planners discussed RVA hitting 340,000 by 2037 with the following caveat - IF - the city began attracting FAMILIES with CHILDREN to move here. Singletons ain't gonna get it done by ANY stretch.

Looking back at the 35-plus year loss of population following annexation in 1970 - I DO recall plenty of news stories and analysis, etc., that bore out that the biggest loss to the city were FAMILIES - so part of the catastrophic free-fall in the city's population numbers wasn't that singletons were leaving down - it was families - so three, four, five, etc., - person households were resettling in Chesterfield and Henrico... IF there was any migration into the city - it was single people. 

Holy moly... methinks you've identified one of the puzzle pieces needed to solve this excruciatingly painful slow rate of growth. I started to be facetious in the previous post - and instead of posting a growth figure of 9,500 people over ten years (despite OTHERWORLDLY, UNPRECEDENTED physical development) - I almost said - "and yet, over ten years, the city population grows by like 1,500 people..."

And that's what it feels like to me. Because 9,500 may as well be 1,500 - particularly when other cities are growing by 20,000 or 30,000 or 130,000 in ten years.

It honestly frustrates (and ticks me off) to the point that it makes me wish NASA already had a moon base and I could just hop on an Artemis flight and have them drop me off on the moon - and I'd just never come back.

 

Edited January 11, 2023 by I miss RVA

[Child2021]

This article touches on this particular subject: Va. birth rates have declined, but regional differences tell a more complicated story - Virginia Mercury
Take a peek.

[I miss RVA]

21 minutes ago, Child2021 said:

This article touches on this particular subject: Va. birth rates have declined, but regional differences tell a more complicated story - Virginia Mercury
Take a peek.

REALLY great find, @Child2021. 

Of note:  For the five-year period ending in 2019 (the last year for which data is available) Richmond city's birth rate declined by only half a percent (0.5%) while our western-most, still largely-rural suburban counties - Goochland and Powhatan - saw birth rates INCREASE by 29.3 and 20.1% respectively. Chesterfield increased by 2.8% whilst Henrico slipped by a whopping 7.5%, and Hanover fell by 3.3%.  Overall, the RVA metro's birthrate slipped just 1.1% collectively.

What I'd like to see is how this is juxtaposed to in-migration to these specific municipalities.

This coupled with the fact that nearly half of households in RVA city are made up of singletons is quite interesting to think about in terms of how population growth might change over the remainder of this decade. I do wonder how companies relocating to metro Richmond (and to the city in particular) and the kinds of jobs they bring would impact the "type" of population in-migration and growth - meaning - would we continue to see high numbers of singletons vs higher numbers of families and children as the city and metro grow throughout the 2020s?

[marinog711]

15 hours ago, I miss RVA said:

REALLY great find, @Child2021. 

Of note:  For the five-year period ending in 2019 (the last year for which data is available) Richmond city's birth rate declined by only half a percent (0.5%) while our western-most, still largely-rural suburban counties - Goochland and Powhatan - saw birth rates INCREASE by 29.3 and 20.1% respectively. Chesterfield increased by 2.8% whilst Henrico slipped by a whopping 7.5%, and Hanover fell by 3.3%.  Overall, the RVA metro's birthrate slipped just 1.1% collectively.

What I'd like to see is how this is juxtaposed to in-migration to these specific municipalities.

This coupled with the fact that nearly half of households in RVA city are made up of singletons is quite interesting to think about in terms of how population growth might change over the remainder of this decade. I do wonder how companies relocating to metro Richmond (and to the city in particular) and the kinds of jobs they bring would impact the "type" of population in-migration and growth - meaning - would we continue to see high numbers of singletons vs higher numbers of families and children as the city and metro grow throughout the 2020s?

Ok guys .. you know what to do .. Get out there, start spreading some love around and have some babies.  Do it for the future growth of RVA! 

[Shakman]

3 hours ago, marinog711 said:

Ok guys .. you know what to do .. Get out there, start spreading some love around and have some babies.  Do it for the future growth of RVA! 

This single dude is packing his bags.

Edited January 11, 2023 by Shakman

[Rooster]

3 hours ago, marinog711 said:

Ok guys .. you know what to do .. Get out there, start spreading some love around and have some babies.  Do it for the future growth of RVA! 

Im doing my part - 3 boys and live in the city

 

[I miss RVA]

34 minutes ago, Rooster said:

Im doing my part - 3 boys and live in the city

 

Now THAT'S what I'm talkin' about!! Well done, my friend! 

Edited January 11, 2023 by I miss RVA

[marinog711]

14 hours ago, Rooster said:

Im doing my part - 3 boys and live in the city

 

I have 2 young ones ( 3 yr old daughter - 2 yr old son) and live in the city as well . My next door neighbor just had two kids back to back.  Couple across the street are having twins soon! I’m going to talk to my partner about opening up our relationship to increase these numbers . Wish me luck guys !

what are your predictions for RVA metro for the 2030 census?  I’d like to see us at 1.5 million.  Not sure it will happen with the Baby boomer generation dying off between now and then but still think it is achievable 

 

[Downtowner]

3 hours ago, marinog711 said:

I have 2 young ones ( 3 yr old daughter - 2 yr old son) and live in the city as well . My next door neighbor just had two kids back to back.  Couple across the street are having twins soon! I’m going to talk to my partner about opening up our relationship to increase these numbers . Wish me luck guys !

what are your predictions for RVA metro for the 2030 census?  I’d like to see us at 1.5 million.  Not sure it will happen with the Baby boomer generation dying off between now and then but still think it is achievable 

 

Even though the majority of baby boomers are retired I think it will hurt the whole country because that’s the largest gen of citizens in the us.  I’m not sure but millennials and Gen z may make it to the point that our economic market collapses and we will have to have robots take over the jobs because of lack of citizens the United States, I think our 330 million people in America is going to take a very steep fall once the baby boomers and gen x are gone. This is a problem we have caused on our own. I have one daughter and plan on having one more kid at some point but I think we are going to have a lot of once promising businesses seize to exist because of not enough people or demand in the United States.

[Child2021]

I don't think boomers will die off quickly, but rather slowly. Medical advancements such as a cure for cancer will slow deaths quite a bit later this decade into the 30s.

[I miss RVA]

6 hours ago, marinog711 said:

I have 2 young ones ( 3 yr old daughter - 2 yr old son) and live in the city as well . My next door neighbor just had two kids back to back.  Couple across the street are having twins soon! I’m going to talk to my partner about opening up our relationship to increase these numbers . Wish me luck guys !

what are your predictions for RVA metro for the 2030 census?  I’d like to see us at 1.5 million.  Not sure it will happen with the Baby boomer generation dying off between now and then but still think it is achievable 

 

1.) Chocolates and flowers and, oh yeah - JEWELRY!!    Is she into jewelry? 

2.) I really do hope that the RVA metro will absolutely top 1.5 million by 2030. The generational shift is a mathematical issue - HOWEVER - the powers that be could go a long way to offsetting that by landing more heavy hitters like LEGO and CoStar. Job creation will be the linchpin to supercharged population growth. The Greater Richmond Partnership, the mayor's office, the economic development office, the governor's office and other government, civic and business community leaders can go a LONG way to seriously boosting RVA's (city AND metro) population over the next seven years. If we can poach some high-job companies from other markets, we could see some VERY impressive growth results. I still say that once LEGO builds its big factory here, we need to GO ALL OUT and put on an INTENSE FULL COURT PRESS to pry LEGO's U.S. headquarters away from Connecticut and link it up with the factory. Imagine if we could have the factory in the 'burbs... corporate HQ downtown... lots N lots N lots of jobs...  lots N lots N lots of people!  And that's just from one company. Imagine if the GRP and the other power brokers go full battle stations and poach poach poach poach companies from WAY more expensive markets like NYC or even NOVA/DC (really, ANY of the high COL northern markets)... the RVAs of the world still have a LOT of benefit on the table in the post-pandemic shakeout from the supersized metro regions. We just have to make the serious effort to go get it!

Edited January 12, 2023 by I miss RVA

[wrldcoupe4]

Here’s an article on downtown population which jumped 45% between 2010 and 2021. It only includes the area bound between Belvedere, the river, and 95/64, so it excludes Shockoe Bottom, Manchester, etc. 

https://richmond.com/business/local/people-are-moving-into-downtown-richmond-residential-population-grows-45/article_a2895326-92d3-11ed-b667-47a1a4d64822.html#tracking-source=mp-homepage

Edited January 14, 2023 by wrldcoupe4

[I miss RVA]

10 hours ago, wrldcoupe4 said:

Here’s an article on downtown population which jumped 45% between 2010 and 2021. It only includes the area bound between Belvedere, the river, and 95/64, so it excludes Shockoe Bottom, Manchester, etc. 

https://richmond.com/business/local/people-are-moving-into-downtown-richmond-residential-population-grows-45/article_a2895326-92d3-11ed-b667-47a1a4d64822.html#tracking-source=mp-homepage

Thanks, Coupe! Indeed - a very timely and neat article. So while the story pointed to the number of housing units downtown - it never actuallly quoted specific population figures. Using the graph they provided, I'm guesstimating that downtown's population as of 2021 is at just shy of 8,000 residents (guessing about 7,800-7,900, give or take) ... a really good jump from 2010 figures!

Now - keep in mind, that going back to the early '80s when I was in undergrad at VCU, my urban planning professors maintained that downtown needs a baseline population total of 30,000 residents needed to restore downtown retail and make downtown a truly viable 24/7 place with abundant human activity and vitality. That said, we still have (quoting Phil Collins) a long long way to go. All the more reason I kvetch about mid-rise residential construction downtown vs high-rise. Downtown is landlocked (and the boundaries cited in the article ARE INDEED 100% THE CORRECT boundaries!!) -- townhouses/rowhouses/lofts and mid-rises are NOT going to get us anywhere close to an additional 22,000 residents needed to transform downtown from a ghost town to a vital, vibrant urban core. And it does indeed seem that city planners understand this - particularly given how the Richmond 300 Plan - AND - the City Center SAP - have been developed.

So anyone who misconstrues my heartburn over mid-rises (or worse - row houses like Foushee Mews) being built in Monroe Ward and in other sections of downtown as merely a "preference" for tall buildings - please understand this: my distress over limited-sized residential development downtown is driven by raw numbers. Cluttering up Monroe Ward or the riverfront with six-story buildings WILL NOT GET US TO 30,000 PEOPLE LIVING DOWNTOWN!!! And the bottom line is this: for the health and vitality of downtown - we need 30,000 people living there. And that's not me talking - that message comes from real experts - scholars - urbanologists at VCU - who have been saying that for the past 40 years. And because downtown is landlocked - the ONLY way to make this happen is to go vertical - and reach for the stars. Fortunately, city planners had the foresight to completely jettison the lid of height restrictions from the new upzoned overlay for City Center. They would do well to extend that dispensation of height restrictions to ALL of downtown south of Broad Street (with the VERY limited exceptions of previously boundary-drawn O&HD's -- and even then, those exceptions should apply ONLY WITHIN - and NOT ADJACENT TO - those few specific districts).
 

Edited January 15, 2023 by I miss RVA

[RVA-Is-The-Best]

On 1/14/2023 at 2:39 PM, I miss RVA said:

downtown needs a baseline population total of 30,000 residents needed to restore downtown retail and make downtown a truly viable 24/7 place with abundant human activity and vitality. 
 

Filling in Monroe Ward's empty lots with the highest density allotted by zoning would solve this quickly I feel. Not with the 4-6 story buildings we're getting now, but something more substantive. What's done is done though, and better we get Foushee Mews and One Canal now than the surface parking they've been for so long before. Also truth be told, we could fit a lot of people into the City Center/'Court End' area where the Coliseum/MCV/biotech area is, lots of empty lots/surface parking and underutilized space there, and would liven that corner of downtown up too, beyond the medical center keeping it alive 24/7 it's really kind of a no man's land.

Edited January 16, 2023 by RVA-Is-The-Best

[I miss RVA]

10 hours ago, RVA-Is-The-Best said:

Filling in Monroe Ward's empty lots with the highest density allotted by zoning would solve this quickly I feel. Not with the 4-6 story buildings we're getting now, but something more substantive. What's done is done though, and better we get Foushee Mews and One Canal now than the surface parking they've been for so long before. Also truth be told, we could fit a lot of people into the City Center/'Court End' area where the Coliseum/MCV/biotech area is, lots of empty lots/surface parking and underutilized space there, and would liven that corner of downtown up too, beyond the medical center keeping it alive 24/7 it's really kind of a no man's land.

 !!! Spot on, @RVA-Is-The-Best!! I couldn't agree more. VERY well said.

If I may add a few thoughts:

If you expanded your map and added circles to account for areas along the riverfront and the canal - there are plenty of additional opportunities ripe for high-density development. And while I'm not suggesting we completely obliterate Gamble's Hill/Gamble's Hill Park - there ARE available tracts that could - AND FRANKLY SHOULD - be developed to the highest possible intensity and density possible. I don't mean wall-to-wall. But what about 2nd and Byrd -- SW corner - and the area behind the VHDA complex? Is all that property - upon which once sat the state penitentiary - all owned by the Commonwealth? Perhaps they could be talked into parting with a few tracts close to 2nd and Byrd by some deep-pocket developers who could drop a couple of really nice apartment or condo towers there. 

Re: City Center/Court End: That was one of the premises behind the Navy Hill proposal - to convert that part of downtown into a high-density residential/mixed-use neighborhood. I'm hopeful that the successor - the City Center neighborhood - will not only fulfill that mission - but exceed it exponentially. Among the components of the NH plan that I liked - and it appears are being included in the City Center SAP - is for high-density development south of Broad, within "expanded" boundaries of what will constitute the City Center district. Indeed - we could pack quite a few people into this part of downtown -- and actualizing three particularly high(er) intensity projects would go a long way toward that end. IF we could get those 20-23-story residential/mixed use buildings constructed on Broad Street (one on Broad between 4th and 5th, the other on Broad between 6th and 7th in the footprint of the "front" half of the old Thalhimer's flagship store) - and IF we could get a development along the lines of what was to be the privately developed "City Center" project on E. Grace between 6th and 7th - depending on final specs either a one or two-tower mixed-use (with heavy emphasis on residential) complex in the 18 to 20 story range -- that would do wonders for that small handful of blocks in what was the heart of the Broad/Grace retail corridor.

Re: One Canal and Foushee Mews - I have mixed feelings that it's better to have them than to let the surface lots sit fallow. On the one hand, I agree. Maybe they help serve as catalysts for more, greater, higher intensity/density development. However, that VAST Sea of Parking Lots that is Monroe Ward (plus much of what has proliferated Court End and what was originally the Navy Hill neighborhood) have been there since AT LEAST the 1970s - and some much farther back, unfortunately. (Yes - there are surface lots downtown that go back 60 and 70 - perhaps even as much as 80 years - which is BEYOND ridiculous!) So I'm torn between whether it would be better to let them sit a few more years and get something MUCH bigger with MUCH more density -- or if their development is actually necessary and part of the process to GETTING us that higher intensity/density construction. As you said - a bunch of 4-6 story apartment buildings just won't work.

And that plays into one of my BIGGEST concerns/fears - that what's right now a Pacific Ocean-sized sea of surface lots, ripe for development, will ultimately end up cluttered with a BUNCH of Foushee Mews or 4-6-story buildings. And if, GOD-FORBID, that were to happen -- THEN WHAT?  WHERE, pray tell, do we put the 20, 30, 40-story apartment buildings? WHERE do we build for MUCH higher density? There is no way in hell a bunch of smaller buildings will get torn down and replaced with significantly bigger buildings only 10 or 20 years after they (the small fries) were constructed. Of course - being that this is Richmond after all, the "aesthetics police" who are all over the moon about "character" and "architectural integrity" and blah blah blah blahhhhh...   will come in and want to clamp down on the size of buildings constructed anywhere within a 20-mile radius of places like Foushee Mews simply because... "Charleston!!!" or "Savannah!!!"

At that point - we'd be able to kiss the prospect of anywhere close to 30,000 people LIVING downtown hasta la bye-bye.

THIS CANNOT - and MUST NOT HAPPEN, folks! 

(YES - I'm being hyperbolic in presenting a worst-case scenario - but I'm doing it for a reason to demonstrate the path we must NOT follow.)

Idk - some of our CRE experts have explained that we need to stairstep the development of downtown residential buildings to prove that they are viable projects - and that developers CAN make money off of going bigger and taller, both of which incur significantly more cost as the buildings are sized up. I believe "pencil" or "pencil out" is the term I've heard used most frequently. 

Either way - downtown has SO much potential to really beef up over the next couple of decades. As I've said many time, I hope I live long enough to see it - because if it all comes together, it could be something spectacular!

 

Edited January 16, 2023 by I miss RVA

[Brent114]

Meh.  I personally couldn’t care less about downtown being 24/7.  Only NYC can pull that off and even there it’s only in tiny pockets  centered around the distribution of goods and it’s not downtown (which is dead as hell on evenings and weekends). 
 

I’ll gladly take any 20-40 story building developers want to throw at Richmond but I’m not going to use them as a gauge for the city’s success.  
 

The 30K figure is probably really outdated now too.  Shopping isn’t what it used to be back in the 80’s.  The storefronts downtown won’t be filled with shops with just 30k residents living downtown.  Just a few dozen spaces will be filled with services and restaurants.  There are between 11k and 12k people living in downtown Denver and most of those downtown storefronts are empty now.  That number seems low and there is a sea of those 4-6 buildings circling the downtown (and their presence adds to the city feel very nicely I might add, really beefs  up the skyline).  With the people living and working downtown and the tourists, there still isn’t enough foot traffic to make it seem lively.   The sidewalks do fill up in the spring and summer but the storefronts remain empty. 

Keep  Richmond beautiful and build whatever the market allows on every parking lot.  If it’s 4 story townhomes or 40 story condo towers it doesn’t matter to me.   Just fill them up. 

[I miss RVA]

18 minutes ago, Brent114 said:

Meh.  I personally couldn’t care less about downtown being 24/7.  Only NYC can pull that off and even there it’s only in tiny pockets  centered around the distribution of goods and it’s not downtown (which is dead as hell on evenings and weekends). 
 

I’ll gladly take any 20-40 story building developers want to throw at Richmond but I’m not going to use them as a gauge for the city’s success.  
 

The 30K figure is probably really outdated now too.  Shopping isn’t what it used to be back in the 80’s.  The storefronts downtown won’t be filled with shops with just 30k residents living downtown.  Just a few dozen spaces will be filled with services and restaurants.  There are between 11k and 12k people living in downtown Denver and most of those downtown storefronts are empty now.  That number seems low and there is a sea of those 4-6 buildings circling the downtown (and their presence adds to the city feel very nicely I might add, really beefs  up the skyline).  With the people living and working downtown and the tourists, there still isn’t enough foot traffic to make it seem lively.   The sidewalks do fill up in the spring and summer but the storefronts remain empty. 

Keep  Richmond beautiful and build whatever the market allows on every parking lot.  If it’s 4 story townhomes or 40 story condo towers it doesn’t matter to me.   Just fill them up. 

NYC is the king of 24/7. Things do quiet down even there, though (hard to imagine in a city of 9 million residents!)  I've spent a lot of time over the years in Brooklyn -- and the one thing that's 24/7 is the sound of sirens. Just never seems to stop. Chicago is the same way. Constant wailing of ambulances, fire trucks, occasional police cars. Par for the course.

20/40 story building: you and me both! 

Hard to say about 30K being outdated - but WHY NOT AIM FOR IT! If we aim low, we get lower. If we aim higher, we might achieve something really spectacular!

Just fill them (parking lots) up: it's been posted on here previously - a great quote from I think it was Bette Midler, who was in town either because she was performing here or there was a gala - this was at least 40 years ago - she said (paraphrasing) - "Beautiful city you've got here, but what's with all the parking lots? You need to fill all of those up." (Consider she's used to the jam-packed environment of Manhattan - and she could see the potential for how awesome RVA could be without that Sea of Parking Lots. That's one of my favorite quotes of all time about Richmond.)

My only disagreement with you is that I'm not willing to back off on the size. I DON'T want rowhouses or 5 over 1 stick-frame apartments. I want BIG massing, HIGH density, HEIGHT - as Queen once sang - "I WANT IT ALL!!!!!!!" 

Mind you - I know you want the bigger stuff, too - so we're in basic agreement on that part.  

 

[wrldcoupe4]

Interesting article about increasing migration from NOVA to Richmond. It doesn’t speak to migration Richmond to NOVA which would be a helpful datapoint.

 https://www.axios.com/local/richmond/2023/01/16/northern-virginia-nova-richmond#newsletter

[I miss RVA]

7 hours ago, wrldcoupe4 said:

Interesting article about increasing migration from NOVA to Richmond. It doesn’t speak to migration Richmond to NOVA which would be a helpful datapoint.

 https://www.axios.com/local/richmond/2023/01/16/northern-virginia-nova-richmond#newsletter

The uptick in the NOVA to RVA migration is remarkable. Agreed, Coupe, that it would be good to know the level of RVA-to-NOVA migration. That the article didn't touch on this could be viewed as an indicator that the figure is quite small.

A couple of interesting points from the Axios article: the NOVA-to-RVA migration is being driven in large part by families with children.

By the numbers: Between 2012 and 2019, an average of around 7,700 NoVa residents relocated here each year. In 2021, 12,541 people came from NoVa.

Yes, but: Despite online gripes, pandemic-era NoVa transplants are more likely to be young couples with kids moving to the suburbs as opposed to 20-somethings moving into the city, Lombard said.

Zoom in: In 2020 and 2021, NoVa residents ages 25-45 accounted for the largest share of Richmond-area moves. The number of kids under 18 moving here also spiked during the pandemic.

The article doesn't break it out by percentage - I'd like to see how that shakes out. Also - I'd be interesting to see how this trend looked in 2022.

Cardinal News did an even more granular analysis of the out-migration from NOVA and overall state population changes (based on 2021 data) last April. It shows some interesting trends that dovetail with our discussion over in the airport thread about population changes in both the RVA and Hampton Roads metro markets.

First up - raw population change. The top 10 localities with negative population change in 2021:

1. Fairfax County -8,752
2. Arlington County -5,801
3. Alexandria -4,391
4. Norfolk -2,502
5. Virginia Beach -1,701
6. Newport News -1,329
7. Montgomery County -1,035
8. Roanoke -1,010
9. Charlottesville -751
10. Henrico County -744

Then, Cardinal News looked at population changed based on NET in/out migration. Here are the top 10 localities with the highest net population loss due to migration in 2021:

1. Fairfax County -17,789
2. Arlington County -7,685
3. Alexandria -6,188
4. Norfolk -3,540
5. Virginia Beach -3,022
6. Prince William County -2,824
7. Newport News -2,293
8. Henrico County -1,552
9. Roanoke -1,169
10. Charlottesville -1,116

Then - looking at raw population change, The top 10 localities with positive population change in 2021:

1. Chesterfield County 5,122
2. Loudoun County 4,995
3. Stafford County 3,273
4. Spotsylvania County 3,201
5. Frederick County 1,951
6. Prince William County 1,734
7. Chesapeake 1,590
8. Suffolk 1,509
9. Hanover County 1,501
10. James City County 1,470

Chesterfield also led the way in positive population changed based on net migration in 2021:

1. Chesterfield County 4,402
2. Spotsylvania County 2,861
3. Stafford County 2,583
4. Frederick County 1,987
5. Loudoun County 1,651
6. James City County 1,561
7. Suffolk 1,381
8. Louisa County 1,208
9. Bedford County 1,042
10. Chesapeake 1,014

And FINALLY - and this is a huge data point from a market standpoint, the ranking of Virginia metro areas based on net migration in 2021:

1. Richmond 6,788
2. Winchester 2,009
3. Lynchburg 1,287
4. Charlottesville 851
5. Staunton 617
6. Roanoke 420
7. Bristol 271
8. Harrisonburg -6
9. Blacksburg -494
10. Hampton Roads -2,072
11. Northern Virginia -26,149

So at least for 2021 - metro RVA was the clear leader in terms of migration-based population growth. I'll e VERY interested to see how this looks for the year 2022.

You can check out entire Cardinal News article at the link below.

https://cardinalnews.org/2022/04/20/yes-virginia-northern-virginia-is-losing-population/

 

 

 

[eandslee]

It’s seems “off” seeing Henrico bleeding people…is that right?  I thought they were adding people.  If they bled some folks, I can see them possibly migrating down to Richmond City…maybe?  Nah, probably not. Just seemed weird seeing a negative flow of people out of one of the best-run counties in all of Virginia!

[I miss RVA]

19 minutes ago, eandslee said:

It’s seems “off” seeing Henrico bleeding people…is that right?  I thought they were adding people.  If they bled some folks, I can see them possibly migrating down to Richmond City…maybe?  Nah, probably not. Just seemed weird seeing a negative flow of people out of one of the best-run counties in all of Virginia!

Supposedly RVA city lost about 100 people, give or take in 2021 (I can't remember offhand where i saw that figure) - which to me is startling given how much residential construction has been going on and reports from realtors saying that they can't build these projects fast enough given how quickly they fill up.

So - I'm not sure.

But keep in mind - non "migration" statistics are also impacted by births/deaths - and there's no question that 2021 full-year figures were impacted by the back-half of the pandemic. I'll be VERY interested in seeing how the 2022 data shakes out. This does, however, play into my bigger overall "fear" that come 2030 - with a full decade of epic construction (and that's presuming a stable, healthy economy over the next seven years with stabilized costs and developer-friendly economic metrics) and somehow RVA city grows by something ridiculous like 9,000 residents (whereas other competitor cities over the same 10-year period grow by 30,000 or more...) That's my worry - we get our hopes up based on a decade of incredible development - only to be horribly let down by -- at best -- only incremental population growth.

Idk - quoting Elton John - "all of the science... I don't understand... "

Edited January 18, 2023 by I miss RVA

[wrldcoupe4]

Henrico and the City hardly feel stagnant so not sure what to think of those estimates to be honest.

[skycity]

1 hour ago, wrldcoupe4 said:

Henrico and the City hardly feel stagnant so not sure what to think of those estimates to be honest.

You can no longer approach any population estimates in the way we have, traditionally. The entire country (and much of the world) are in the middle of a sudden and severe demographic implosion. The spike in excess mortality is unlike anything we have seen in our lifetimes.  Life insurance companies consider a 10% rise in excess mortality to be catastrophic and we are now seeing 40% excess mortality. Additionally, fertility rates are plunging around the world.  "Stagnant" is an understatement in terms of what we are going to see, moving forward. And there are real implications for property values and other commodities as demand collapses. What is occurring now is far greater excess mortality than anything that was seen during "covid." Interestingly, it all began with the rollout of a certain experimental medical intervention. You can try to ignore this reality, but everything I am saying is backed up by the statistics and the pattern is the same all over the world. We are in a new world now. 

Edited January 18, 2023 by skycity

[marinog711]

What if the government increased the number of immigrants per year to counter the decreasing population?