Empowered by Tyler Technologies
Refine Results

The population density of St. Martin, MS was 1,457 in 2009.

Population Density

Population Density is computed by dividing the total population by Land Area Per Square Mile.

Above charts are based on data from the U.S. Census American Community Survey | ODN Dataset | API - Notes:

1. ODN datasets and APIs are subject to change and may differ in format from the original source data in order to provide a user-friendly experience on this site.

2. To build your own apps using this data, see the ODN Dataset and API links.

3. If you use this derived data in an app, we ask that you provide a link somewhere in your applications to the Open Data Network with a citation that states: "Data for this application was provided by the Open Data Network" where "Open Data Network" links to http://opendatanetwork.com. Where an application has a region specific module, we ask that you add an additional line that states: "Data about REGIONX was provided by the Open Data Network." where REGIONX is an HREF with a name for a geographical region like "Seattle, WA" and the link points to this page URL, e.g. http://opendatanetwork.com/region/1600000US5363000/Seattle_WA

Geographic and Population Datasets Involving St. Martin, MS

  • API

    Maryland Resident Population Per Square Mile: 2010-2020

    opendata.maryland.gov | Last Updated 2024-03-11T18:51:03.000Z

    Resident population density for Maryland and Jurisdictions per square mile from 2010 to 2020. Source: U.S. Bureau of Census

  • API

    Waste Tire Abatement Sites

    data.ny.gov | Last Updated 2024-09-27T18:10:25.000Z

    Information on designated waste tire abatement sites in New York State, including approximate size, location, and abatement status.

  • API

    Vital Signs: Population – by region shares

    data.bayareametro.gov | Last Updated 2018-07-06T18:06:55.000Z

    VITAL SIGNS INDICATOR Population (LU1) FULL MEASURE NAME Population estimates LAST UPDATED September 2016 DESCRIPTION Population is a measurement of the number of residents that live in a given geographical area, be it a neighborhood, city, county or region. DATA SOURCES U.S. Census Bureau 1960-1990 Decennial Census http://factfinder2.census.gov California Department of Finance 1961-2016 Population and Housing Estimates http://www.dof.ca.gov/research/demographic/ CONTACT INFORMATION vitalsigns.info@mtc.ca.gov METHODOLOGY NOTES (across all datasets for this indicator) All legal boundaries and names for Census geography (metropolitan statistical area, county, city, tract) are as of January 1, 2010, released beginning November 30, 2010 by the U.S. Census Bureau. A priority development area (PDA) is a locally-designated infill area with frequent transit service, where a jurisdiction has decided to concentrate most of its housing and jobs growth for development in the foreseeable future. PDA boundaries are as current as July 2016. Population estimates for PDAs were derived from Census population counts at the block group level for 2000-2014 and at the tract level for 1970-1990. Population estimates for Bay Area counties and cities are from the California Department of Finance, which are as of January 1st of each year. Population estimates for non-Bay Area regions are from the U.S. Census Bureau. Decennial Census years reflect population as of April 1st of each year whereas population estimates for intercensal estimates are as of July 1st of each year. Population estimates for Bay Area tracts are from the decennial Census (1970 -2010) and the American Community Survey (2008-2012 5-year rolling average; 2010-2014 5-year rolling average). Population estimates for Bay Area PDAs are from the decennial Census (1970 - 2010) and the American Community Survey (2006-2010 5 year rolling average; 2010-2014 5-year rolling average. Estimates of density for tracts and PDAs use gross acres as the denominator. Annual population estimates for metropolitan areas outside the Bay Area are from the Census and are benchmarked to each decennial Census. The annual estimates in the 1990s were not updated to match the 2000 benchmark. The following is a list of cities and towns by geographical area: Big Three: San Jose, San Francisco, Oakland Bayside: Alameda, Albany, Atherton, Belmont, Belvedere, Berkeley, Brisbane, Burlingame, Campbell, Colma, Corte Madera, Cupertino, Daly City, East Palo Alto, El Cerrito, Emeryville, Fairfax, Foster City, Fremont, Hayward, Hercules, Hillsborough, Larkspur, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Los Gatos, Menlo Park, Mill Valley, Millbrae, Milpitas, Monte Sereno, Mountain View, Newark, Pacifica, Palo Alto, Piedmont, Pinole, Portola Valley, Redwood City, Richmond, Ross, San Anselmo, San Bruno, San Carlos, San Leandro, San Mateo, San Pablo, San Rafael, Santa Clara, Saratoga, Sausalito, South San Francisco, Sunnyvale, Tiburon, Union City, Vallejo, Woodside InlandCoastalDelta: American Canyon, Benicia, Clayton, Concord, Cotati, Danville, Dublin, Lafayette, Martinez, Moraga, Napa, Novato, Orinda, Petaluma, Pleasant Hill, Pleasanton, Rohnert Park, San Ramon, Santa Rosa, Sebastopol, Walnut Creek, Antioch, Brentwood, Calistoga, Cloverdale, Dixon, Fairfield, Gilroy, Half Moon Bay, Healdsburg, Livermore, Morgan Hill, Oakley, Pittsburg, Rio Vista, Sonoma, St. Helena, Suisun City, Vacaville, Windsor, Yountville Unincorporated: all unincorporated towns

  • API

    Surface Drinking Water Importance - Forests on the Edge_data

    opendata.utah.gov | Last Updated 2024-04-10T19:40:35.000Z

    America’s private forests provide a vast array of public goods and services, including abundant, clean surface water. Forest loss and development can affect water quality and quantity when forests are removed and impervious surfaces, such as paved roads, spread across the landscape. We rank watersheds across the conterminous United States according to the contributions of private forest land to surface drinking water and by threats to surface water from increased housing density. Private forest land contributions to drinking water are greatest in the East but are also important in Western watersheds. Development pressures on these contributions are concentrated in the Eastern United States but are also found in the North-Central region, parts of the West and Southwest, and the Pacific Northwest; nationwide, more than 55 million acres of rural private forest land are projected to experience a substantial increase in housing density from 2000 to 2030. Planners, communities, and private landowners can use a range of strategies to maintain freshwater ecosystems, including designing housing and roads to minimize impacts on water quality, managing home sites to protect water resources, and using payment schemes and management partnerships to invest in forest stewardship on public and private lands.This data is based on the digital hydrologic unit boundary layer to the Subwatershed (12-digit) 6th level for the continental United States. To focus this analysis on watersheds with private forests, only watersheds with at least 10% forested land and more than 50 acres of private forest were analyzed. All other watersheds were labeled “Insufficient private forest for this analysis"and coded -99999 in the data table. This dataset updates forest and development statistics reported in the the 2011 Forests to Faucet analysis using 2006 National Land Cover Database for the Conterminous United States, Grid Values=41,42,43,95. and Theobald, Dr. David M. 10 March 2008. bhc2000 and bhc2030 (Housing density for the coterminous US in 2000 and 2030, respectively.) Field Descriptions:HUC_12: Twelve Digit Hydrologic Unit Code: This field provides a unique 12-digit code for each subwatershed.HU_12_DS: Sixth Level Downstream Hydrologic Unit Code: This field was populated with the 12-digit code of the 6th level hydrologic unit that is receiving the majority of the flow from the subwatershed.IMP1: Index of surface drinking water importance (Appendix Map). This field is from the 2011 Forests to Faucet analysis and has not been updated for this analysis.HDCHG_AC: Acres of housing density change on private forest in the subwatershed. HDCHG_PER: Percent of the watershed to experience housing density change on private forest. IMP_HD_PFOR: Index Private Forest importance to Surface Drinking Water with Development Pressure - identifies private forested areas important for surface drinking water that are likely to be affected by future increases in housing density, Ptle_IMP_HD: Private Forest importance to Surface Drinking Water with Development Pressure (Figure 7), percentile. Ptle_HDCHG: Percentage of each subwatershed to Experience an increase in House Density in Private Forest (Figure 6), percentile. FOR_AC: Acres forest (2006) in the subwatershed. PFOR_AC: Acres private forest (2006) in the subwatershed. PFOR_PER: Percent of the subwatershed that is private forest. HU12_AC: Acreage of the subwatershedFOR_PER: Percent of the subwatershed that is forest. PFOR_IMP: Index of Private Forest Importance to Surface Drinking Water. .Ptle_PFIMP: Private forest importance to surface drinking water(Figure 4), percentile. TOP100: Top 100 subwatersheds. 50 from the East, 50 from the west (using the Mississippi River as the divide.) (Figure 8)TOP50EW: 1 = EAST; 2=WESTPoint of Contact: Rebecca Lilja GIS SpecialistForest ServiceNortheastern Area State and Private Forestryp: 603-868-7627 c: 603-953-4307 rlilja@fs.fed.us271 Mast Rd Durham, NH 03824