Census Data for 1997 Move your mouse over the jurisdictions. (May not be available with some browsers.) 1997 Population: 1990 population: Percentage change, 1990-97: Note: Figures are estimates for population as of July 1, 1997 Source: U.S. Census

By D'Vera Cohn
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, March 18, 1998; Page A01

Washington's outer ring of suburbs – a once green circle including the farmland of Frederick County to the north, the bay country of Southern Maryland and the horse pastures of Virginia to the west – has become the engine of population growth in the region, according to new Census Bureau figures. The numbers, released yesterday, provide fresh evidence for development-wary local officials who have complained of being overwhelmed by unchecked expansion.

Thirty miles northwest of Washington, Loudoun County is gaining residents at a rate that puts it among the nation's fastest-growing counties, along with surging suburbs in Texas, Georgia, Nevada, Colorado and other southern and western states. Loudoun's population of 133,493 is up 55 percent since 1990, the census figures show.

To the north and northeast of the District, Frederick and Howard counties are among Maryland's 10 most rapidly expanding suburbs, according to the census figures. Each county's population is up 22 percent since 1990. To the south and southeast, by the Patuxent River and Chesapeake Bay, the counties of Calvert, Charles and St. Mary's also are among the 10 fastest-growing, by percent, ranging from 13 to 35 percent.

And to the west and southwest, in Virginia, Stafford and Prince William counties and the cities of Manassas and Manassas Park also have gained population at double-digit rates this decade, according to the census figures.

Local officials reacted to the figures yesterday with concern but not surprise.

"People cost you money," said Hagner R. Mister (D), president of the county commissioners in Calvert, which is Maryland's fastest-growing county. "We built a school a year for the last several years, and will build several more in the next few years. . . . We're flattered that they want to come, but I just hope that we can get enough commercial development to offset some of that cost."

"We're growing faster than we're able to afford," said Scott K. York (R-Sterling) a member of the Loudoun Board of Supervisors. "Growth is okay, but you've got to do it in a manner that you can afford. When you're having development at the rate it's going, it's hard to keep taxes down."

GROWTH BEYOND THE BELTWAY The area's population has grown 9 percent since 1990. Most growth was outside the Beltway. The District continued to lose people. Percent change in population, 1990-97 • Loudoun Co., 55% • Stafford Co., 44 • Calvert Co., 35 • Manassas Park, 26 • Manassas, 23 • Howard Co., 22 • Frederick Co., 22 • Prince William Co., 18 • Charles Co., 14 • St. Mary's Co., 13 • Fairfax Co., 12 • Anne Arundel Co., 10 • Fauquier Co., 9 • Montgomery Co., 9 • Prince George's Co., 7 • Alexandria, 5 • Falls Church, 4 • Fairfax, 2 • Arlington Co., 1 • D.C., -13

At the same time, according to the census figures, older suburbs close to the District, such as Alexandria and Arlington, have barely budged in size since 1990, and Washington itself continues to hemorrhage population. The Beltway behemoths -- Montgomery, Prince George's and Fairfax counties -- are increasing steadily. They draw new population mainly from births and foreign immigration -- though they are not growing at the spectacular pace of the outer suburbs.

Overall, the Washington region's population has grown 9 percent this decade, and now numbers 5.1 million people as of July 1997.

Yesterday's numbers were released amid swelling local debate over the costs of residential growth -- traffic jams, crowded classrooms and higher tax rates for government services such as fire protection, schools and roads. Officials in several outer suburbs have said they are considering new curbs on housing construction or higher impact fees for developers.

Prince William County Executive Bern Ewert has proposed creating a rural crescent in the western part of the county that will be off-limits to high-density housing. Charles County has asked Maryland's General Assembly to charge developers nearly $2,000 more per home to help pay for school construction. And last fall, Loudoun supervisors signaled their new attitude by ordering a 60 percent reduction in the number of homes that could be built in a neighborhood near Dulles Airport, which had been approved for the higher number two years earlier.

Among counties with more than 10,000 people, Loudoun's 7.7 percent growth rate for 1996-97 ranked eighth in the nation, according to the census figures. All the nation's hottest growth counties are in or next to metropolitan areas, illustrating a "hole in the doughnut" pattern of expansion at the edges of cities. Loudoun and Lincoln County, S.D., near Sioux Falls, are the only counties on the top 10 list that are not in the deep South or West.

County officials have said they intend to continue fighting what they consider to be excessive housing growth, but the building industry has said it will resist those efforts. Builders argue they are only meeting market demand, and they resent being the scapegoat for a not-in-my-backyard movement.

To some, the hold-the-line mentality echoes past battles in the region's older suburbs. Early in the decade, both Fairfax and Montgomery counties elected slow-growth chief officials because of revulsion over the price of progress. Both are now viewed as more development-friendly. Montgomery County, for example, recently lowered fees to developers.

Most growth in the beyond-the-Beltway suburbs comes from people moving in from other communities. More than half the Washington area's net population increase since 1990 has come in the outer suburbs, which constitute one-third of the region's total population.

The weapon in the debate over growth in those suburbs are financial studies indicating that new homes cost local governments thousands of dollars more in services than they generate in real-estate taxes. To offset those costs, counties need to attract businesses, which do not place as great a demand on county services. But developers want people -- the work force and customer base -- to be in place first.

Stephen Fuller, a regional economist at George Mason University, said officials in the outer suburbs are right to be concerned. In mature communities such as Arlington, there are more jobs than residents. But in Loudoun, where there are 5.5 jobs for every 10 residents, the ratio is worsening because housing is going up so quickly, he said.

Although there is general agreement about the costs of growth, explanations vary for why previous boards of supervisors in Loudoun did not seek to control it better, within the limits of Virginia's strong property-rights laws.

The strategy of previous boards, said York, the Loudoun supervisor, was to approve thousands of new homes and "to hope like heck that commercial development will keep pace, which it hasn't."

"When the growth started in the 1980s out here, when people moved they usually moved with preschool children," said planning commissioner Alfred P. Van Huyck (D), who ran unsuccessfully for board chairman on a slow-growth platform in 1991. "They didn't hit the schools. . . . They [supervisors] were just simply asleep as to what the impact of the growth they were approving was going to be."

Former board chairman George Barton (R) said when he took office in 1992, the weak economy was the supervisors' main concern.

Officials in Loudoun and Prince William are pressing state legislators in Richmond for more authority to control housing growth, and for more money to build schools and provide other services needed to accommodate the growth that does occur. A forum that York proposed to bring together fast-growing counties to share ideas has signed up 26 jurisdictions, and will be held in Fredericksburg in June.

Maryland has enacted stronger laws allowing communities to control growth, but local officials say they also are restricted by traditional property-rights protections.

Main Menu Page