Home > Our Man Downtown > Archives > 2009 > May > 06 > Entry
Your SWAG or mine?
A real estate broker introduced me some years ago to the concept of the SWAG: A scientific wild@$$ guess. By which he meant, Here’s a plausible prediction, just don’t hold me to it.
When it comes to predicting population growth, we’re all swaggers. Is Waco the next Texas boomtown, or is it likely to plod along for the next few decades? Your swag is as good as mine.
A highly respected planning firm hired for Waco’s 1967 Comprehensive Plan predicted that McLennan County’s population would grow to 215,000 by 1985, with 75 percent living in the city of Waco. We didn’t pass that population threshold until the 21st century, and today nearly half the population of 230,000 lives outside the city. (You can read all about Waco’s plans of yesteryear here).
This week the city council hired a Portland consultant to work with the community to design a “Greater Downtown Waco” that would accommodate 80,000 more people.
According to Greater Waco Chamber of Commerce folks who have done the preliminary work on this, there’s enough vacant land in seven square miles of central city to accommodate that many people, plus 65,000 jobs, at about the density of New Orleans’ French Quarter.
The chamber has set a goal that Greater Downtown should capture half the 160,000 people it projects will be added to McLennan County’s population by 2050.
One online commenter on my story accused the chamber of swagging, saying that such optimistic projections make him inclined to dismiss the whole planning effort as a pipe dream.
To be fair, the chamber folks didn’t pull the number out of thin air. They chose the most aggressive scenario projected by the Texas State Data Center (http://txsdc.utsa.edu) for 2040 and extrapolated out to 2050. The scenario assumes that McLennan County’s growth continues at the pace it did in the 1990s, a pace the state demographer calls unlikely. The “preferred scenario” has Waco adding a mere 54,000 by 2040.
So what’s realistic? Beats the heck out of me. Population projections use complicated algorithms based on a simple fallacy: that historic trends will continue indefinitely.
Assuming that “trends continue,” the third-grader you know will be 10 feet tall in a few years, and every bank in the United States will soon be out of business.
What history does tell us is that long-term growth is unpredictable. Cities can limp along for decades, then explode almost overnight. That growth sometimes continues for decades before hitting a plateau or declining (think Detroit or Buffalo.)
By historical standards, it wouldn’t be surprising for a city of Waco’s size to grow by 70 percent over 40 years.
Fort Worth in 1940 had 177,662 people, comparable to Greater Waco’s population today. In 20 years, Fort Worth’s population doubled, and strong growth has continued. Likewise, Austin was 300,000 residents in 1960; its population doubled in 20 years.
A century ago, cities like Pittsburgh and St. Louis were booming, but in the last 40 years most of the growth has been in “Edge Cities,” i.e. incorporated areas in the orbit of an existing metropolis. For example, Arlington, Texas, is now bigger than St. Louis; Tempe, Ariz., is bigger than Pittsburgh.
But who’s to say that trend will continue? Technology (mainly the automobile and telecommunications) and cheap suburban real estate allowed Edge Cities to flourish. Who’s to say 21st century technologies (high-speed rail, telecommuting, etc) and new attitudes toward cities won’t change the game again?
By the same token Waco’s growth could stagnate in the next 40 years and Texas could become a new Rust Belt, confounding everyone’s official predictions.
But given the bones of our local economy — good transportation routes to Texas’ big cities, a varied manufacturing base, plentiful water supply and a full range of higher education institutions — my SWAG is that Waco’s best years are ahead of it.
I’d like to hear some SWAGs from others: How much growth will Waco see? And how much growth is desirable?
Permalink | Comments (15) | Post your comment |
Commenting is open from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. M-F
Post a comment
Before you comment, please take a few moments to make sure that what you're saying is civil and respectful. We don't tolerate personal attacks, insults, name-calling, impersonations or generally hateful comments — they don't make for a pleasant (or productive) conversation. We want to raise the level of debate and encourage a wide diversity of viewpoints — and that means disagreeing without being disagreeable. If you wouldn't say it to your grandmother, you probably shouldn't say it here.
Your comment will be removed from WacoTrib.com if it runs afoul of these guidelines or anything else in our site's visitor agreement.
*HTML not allowed in comments. Your e-mail address is required.
Comments
By KDF
May 7, 2009 3:39 PM | Link to this | Report comment abuse
This is the National Day of Prayer in America. Please pray for our country, its leaders and all those who work to fulfill God’s promise!!!<><
By Dale
May 7, 2009 5:56 PM | Link to this | Report comment abuse
Waco’s growth in 40 years for a comfortable population should be 5 times larger than it is now. Of course, by that time Dallas will be knocking on our north door when their population hits 15 million. You know, in the late 1800’s Waco had it all. It was one of the largest cities in Texas (bigger than Dallas, Fort Worth, and even Austin). It was the home of Dr. Pepper, the home of TCU and Baylor, and had everything going for it. Then Dallas came along and started taking everything away followed by Fort Worth, and our “Leaders” let it all go. They gave away everything including future growth. I won’t live to see it, but I think it is high time Waco turned things around. If Waco is going to make it, it will have to do it on its own and stop waiting for others to do it for them.
I don’t mind the city, Chamber, and Baylor spending $300,000 for a consultant from Portland. But, the city is spending my tax money to do it. This time they better not shelve it like the last studies that have been done since 1953. If they like it but think its too expensive, then they better find the money to implement it, or they better get realistic and stop wasting money on studies that go nowhere.
By Mr. Goodbar
May 8, 2009 6:52 AM | Link to this | Report comment abuse
Wow JB, How “quirky” and “street level.” From the years of torture I spent in Waco, my scientific wild a* guess is that downtown will crater within the next eight years. That is, unless the fat-cat establishment gets off their royal backsides and erase their “glory day” fascination of that “wonderful time” when George W. Bush once lived in McLennan County. I think you would all be better off celebrating Vernon Howell Days! Talk about “quirky!” How about that Brazos Bill?
By chris
May 8, 2009 8:44 AM | Link to this | Report comment abuse
The truth is that to a certain extent we control the rate of our community’s growth in our own hands based on the decisions we make. Our assumption behind going with a more aggressive growth scenario is that we believe with proper planning, a commitment to implementing the plan and a rigorous performance monitoring strategy(which we believe we have in place with the greater downtown plan) we can and will achieve transformational growth in Waco. We need you to tell us what that transformation looks like, that’s where the planning process comes in.
The fact is that we as a community can and should be thinking bigger than we ever have when it comes to realizing our potential. Each of us have different ideas as to what that potential looks like and we want and need all citizens to have a stake in expressing those ideas in the development of this plan and ultimately holding our feet to the fire to ensure it is implemented because as the saying goes a plan without action is nothing more than a daydream. I hope you’ll join us, we can’t do it without you.
www.1000friendsofwaco.com
By Dale
May 9, 2009 5:56 PM | Link to this | Report comment abuse
Here is a SWAG for you. I was watching the “Made in America” series on the Travel Channel this afternoon. They had a segment on Dr Pepper. They were historically accurate regarding it being invented in Waco. They mentioned the Dr Pepper Museum here and interviewed a lady who worked there. They showed Dublin where the original pure cane sugar formula is still made. They interviewed a guy in Dublin who accurately stated that the Dublin Plant was the oldest continuously operating Dr Pepper bottler in the country.
Here is the kicker, and the monolgue: “Eventually Dr Pepper outgrew Waco and relocated to Dallas. If you are ever in Dublin, be sure and stop by the Dr Pepper bottling company and get a real Dr Pepper.”
Those two statements speak volumes about how Waco has destroyed itself. If Waco wants to grow, then there definitely needs to be an attitude change regarding our original creations here. When home grown companies start leaving, and Dr Pepper is not the only one, then the city needs to rise to the occasion to keep them here. Things like this hurt local industry, local businesses, local wages, and definitely any increase in population.
By Longtime
May 10, 2009 8:48 AM | Link to this | Report comment abuse
Frankly, I find this all very encouraging. We’ve got lots of great assets here, and Waco allowed itself to lose good employers and allowed downtown to languish for way too long. There is no reason we can’t use the substantial assets we have to make the next decade transformational for Waco. But it will require a lot of hard work, a major attitude adjustment, and closing on these ideas - not just talking about them. I find what has happened to this point to be encouraging, and the hiring of this consultant is a sensible next step.
By ExURW
May 10, 2009 4:04 PM | Link to this | Report comment abuse
I remember the day my machine was shut down at General Tire. It was detached and put on a forklift. I followed it outside and watched it being loaded in a shipping container with the Pakistani flag on the side of it. My supervisor was offered a job at a GT plant in Brazil, and we had noticed for a few months new tires being shipped into our warehouse with the prefix letters “XM” branded on their sides. Our plant (Waco) identifier prefix was “AB”. Who was “XM” We found out later that those tires were manufactered in Mexico City. When NAFTA came along, ex General Tire workers felt like salt was being poured into an old wound.
By Mike
May 11, 2009 2:39 PM | Link to this | Report comment abuse
Glad to hear you’re talking about that crazy population figure. Drives me nuts.
However, I’m also interested in the way the Chamber seems to be looking at it. It’s more of a goal than a serious projection. I’m still not sure I like the size of that number. I remember where the projection came from, but I’m still not sure I understand where half the county population projected growth should be in this downtown area comes in, which gives us that 80k number. I seem to recall some body quoted as saying “Well, we’d like half that growth to be downtown.”
I mean, if we’re talking about that as an aspiration… well then SWAGs or trends or throwing darts at the wall don’t really matter.
Even if we buy the 80 thousand population number as a healthy goal or projection. I still don’t see why we would want that level of population growth downtown. Even though I questioned the population number, and I am willing to see it as a goal… the next hurdle is that level of density. I saw one of last week’s articles, that the goal is more comparable to the French Quarter, I guess in terms of density. Is THAT even what we want? But I guess that’s the point of these studies, which is good to see.
I’m fully supportive of growing that area and making the downtown vicinity a greater living neighborhood, but if it means we are going to concentrate on making that area a prime target, what’s that mean for the rest of the city? If we are going to attract half the new population of the county to those few square miles, what kind of serious change are we going to have to go through to get that, and do we really want it?
By Bob
May 11, 2009 2:57 PM | Link to this | Report comment abuse
The DFW area’s growth has been due to the large airport, sports (football, baseball, hockey, basketball), etc. Waco has none of those big name draws.
Waco does have low wages which attracts manufacturing companies and other business venues. However, this will be offset by rising property taxes which creates inflation and pressure on raising wages to meet the costs to employees. The Waco development corp. & city council will attract companies with a tax break & other incentives for a 5 to 10 year period, but will they stay when the incentives end? Not if the companies are priced out of the area due to high taxes & labor costs. Another SWAG!
Growth is possible if managed well. Will it be downtown?…..Doubtful….Waco is currently growing to the Southwest of downtown toward Robinson & Hewitt.
By mark
May 13, 2009 8:34 PM | Link to this | Report comment abuse
My swag says seven. I’m projecting that as the population growth by this Friday. I could be wrong, but’s that my swag and I’m sticking to it. How come the Trib doesn’t list births along with obits so I can verify my prognostifornication? At least then I could project the tally by Friday into the next 40 years and join all the other experts. Crap.
By John
May 14, 2009 12:25 AM | Link to this | Report comment abuse
Trust me - Waco along with Texas in general is set to skyrocket in growth. No jobs that pay more than 30,000 accept Doctors and Immigration Attorneys but you are definitely about to double the census in 5 years. Prepare ? YES – learn Spanish.
By j.b. smith
May 14, 2009 10:48 AM | Link to this | Report comment abuse
I don’t know if that last comment means to imply that we’re being flooded with immigrants who will never work anything but menial jobs. If so, that’s a bit simplistic, I think.
Immigration from Mexico has actually slowed in the last five years. Hispanic growth rates remain high, partly because immigrants tend to be in their child-bearing years and tend to have larger families.
But is growth in that population undesirable? Who’s to say those Hispanic kindergartners today won’t be the doctors, scientists, inventors and entrepreneurs of tomorrow?
As for the wage scale, it’s still below average, but consider that the number of households in McLennan County making more than $45,000 grew 29 percent between 2000 and 2007.
By John
May 14, 2009 5:45 PM | Link to this | Report comment abuse
J.B. - You expand on, clarify and support my point better than I ever could have with a wasted rebuttal.
Thanks and keep up the great work.
By Dale
May 15, 2009 3:29 AM | Link to this | Report comment abuse
My SWAG just dropped from 5 to 1. With Chrysler pulling their new car market out of McLennan County, they are setting a bad precedent for the rest of the new car dealers to follow suit. Here we go again. Comments I have read on other blogs range from everything that Waco car dealers will rip you off to they can get a better deal elsewhere. I disagree with that myself. But, if someone thinks the grass is that much greener on the otherside, they do not need a passport to move from McLennan County to their green grass elsewhere.
The comment was also made that Temple-Killeen-Fort Hood has a larger MSA than Waco and that it is a centralized market where Waco is not. Well, the last part of that (Fort Hood) is the key to this whole thing. the T-K-FH MSA includes Bell, Coryell, and Lampasas Counties because the Fort Hood reservation is located in part in all 3 counties. The Waco MSA is McLennan County only.
At this point, I’ll just hand it over to the crystal ball and see how things play out. It is anybody’s guess if Waco will ever get things turned around again. There is always a way, but at this point I just don’t think enough people have the will any more. At least not the younger generation.
By j.b. smith
May 15, 2009 4:24 PM | Link to this | Report comment abuse
Thanks for reading and commenting. I agree about learning Spanish. I’ve been trying for the last 10 years and have achieved mediocrity.