Fluvanna County

Key demographics — Fluvanna County, Virginia (latest ACS 2019–2023 5‑year estimates; rounded)

• Population: ~27,800 (2020 Census: ~27,300)
• Age:
  • Median age: ~44
  • Under 18: ~22%
  • 18–64: ~57%
  • 65 and over: ~21%
• Sex:
  • Female: ~50.7%
  • Male: ~49.3%
• Race/ethnicity (mutually exclusive; share of total):
  • White, non-Hispanic: ~73%
  • Black or African American, non-Hispanic: ~14%
  • Hispanic/Latino (any race): ~5%
  • Two or more races, non-Hispanic: ~6%
  • Asian, non-Hispanic: ~1%
  • Other, non-Hispanic: ~1%
• Households:
  • Total households: ~10,600
  • Average household size: ~2.6
  • Family households: ~75% of households
  • Married-couple families: ~61% of households
  • Households with children under 18: ~28%
  • Owner-occupied housing rate: ~83%

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 2019–2023 5-year estimates (tables S0101, DP05, S1101, DP04) and 2020 Decennial Census (P.L. 94-171). Figures are estimates and rounded for readability.

Fluvanna County, VA snapshot (pop. ~28k; ~286 sq mi; ~95 residents/sq mi)

Estimated email users: 20–22k people (≈75–80% of all residents; ≈90%+ of adults).

Age distribution of email users (share of users):

• 13–17: ~5%
• 18–34: ~26%
• 35–64: ~53%
• 65+: ~16%

Gender split among users: ≈51% female, 49% male (usage rates are similar by gender).

Digital access and trends:

• Household internet subscription: roughly mid‑80% range; rising as fiber builds out.
• Fiber footprint has expanded rapidly since 2019 via Firefly (Central Virginia Electric Cooperative) and other ISPs; cable broadband is common around Lake Monticello/Palmyra; fixed wireless and satellite serve remaining rural pockets.
• Smartphone‑only internet households likely ~15–20%, mirroring rural Virginia.
• Mobile coverage (4G/5G) is strongest along major corridors (US‑15, near I‑64/US‑250) with weaker signal in some low‑density areas.

Local connectivity context: Population is clustered in and around Lake Monticello and the county seat of Palmyra, with sparser settlement elsewhere, which historically produced patchy broadband but a narrowing digital divide due to ongoing fiber and grant‑funded builds.

Note: Figures are estimates based on ACS population and typical U.S./Virginia email adoption patterns.

Summary of mobile phone usage in Fluvanna County, VA (with emphasis on what differs from Virginia overall)

High-level picture

• Fluvanna is an exurban–rural county east of Charlottesville with one large, dense community (Lake Monticello) and many sparsely populated areas. That mix drives strong smartphone adoption, but a higher-than-average reliance on cellular data for home internet in outlying tracts.

User estimates

• Adults using smartphones: roughly 20,000–24,000 residents. This reflects typical rural/exurban ownership rates (about 80–90% of adults) applied to Fluvanna’s adult population.
• Households with a cellular data plan: on the order of 70–80% of households (often used alongside or in place of wired broadband).
• Smartphone-only internet households: likely in the mid-to-high teens as a share of households, and plausibly 4–6 percentage points higher than the Virginia average. In practice this shows up as more families relying on phone hotspots or mobile plans for primary connectivity outside Lake Monticello.

How this differs from Virginia overall

• Greater cellular dependence: A noticeably larger share of households use cellular data as their only or primary internet compared with the statewide average, reflecting patchier wired options in rural parts of the county.
• Bigger intra-county divide: Residents in Lake Monticello/Palmyra have cable or fiber and look similar to urban/suburban Virginia, while many rural tracts show smartphone-only or cellular-first patterns. The within-county gap is wider than the typical gap seen in metro Virginia counties.
• 5G quality vs coverage: Low-band 5G coverage is common, but mid-band 5G (the speed workhorse) is spotty and concentrated near population centers and major routes. As a result, median mobile speeds are more variable than the statewide norm.
• Faster recent fiber gains from co-op builds: New fiber-to-the-home projects have been ramping up from the electric cooperative and partners, so wireline adoption is rising faster from a lower base than in the state overall, where adoption growth has flattened in many metro areas.

Demographic breakdown (directional differences vs statewide)

• Age:
  • Seniors (65+) in rural tracts are more likely to be offline or mobile-only than seniors statewide (who benefit from better metro wired coverage and training programs).
  • Working-age commuters (25–54) show high multi-line smartphone ownership and frequent hotspot use for remote work in areas awaiting fiber.
• Income:
  • Lower-income households show higher smartphone-only rates than similar-income households statewide, driven by limited wired choices and price sensitivity.
  • Middle-income households in Lake Monticello resemble suburban Virginia (smartphone + wired broadband), while similarly priced homes in rural areas lean more on cellular or satellite.
• Race/ethnicity:
  • Because the county is less diverse than Virginia overall, observed disparities in smartphone-only status are driven more by geography and income than by race/ethnicity, whereas Virginia’s statewide gaps are more tightly correlated with urban racial/ethnic patterns.
• Education/household type:
  • Families with school-age children tend to combine smartphones with wired or fixed wireless when available; single-adult and renter households are more likely to be mobile-only in rural parts of the county than their statewide counterparts.

Digital infrastructure highlights

• Wired broadband:
  • Fiber: Ongoing fiber-to-the-home expansion by the local electric co-op’s broadband arm (e.g., Firefly Fiber Broadband/CVEC) and partners; growing availability outside Lake Monticello.
  • Cable: Cable service (e.g., Xfinity) in and around Lake Monticello/Palmyra; limited reach elsewhere.
  • Legacy DSL: Present in rural areas but often speed-limited; being supplanted by fiber and fixed wireless.
  • Satellite: Widely available (HughesNet, Viasat, Starlink) and used as a fallback where wired and strong cellular are absent.
  • Fixed wireless home internet: Select availability from national carriers; uptake higher than the state average in fiber‑not‑yet areas.
• Mobile networks:
  • Carriers: Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile serve the county.
  • Coverage: Solid LTE along main corridors and population centers; low-band 5G is common, while mid-band 5G capacity is clustered and leaves rural pockets with lower throughput and occasional dead zones.
• Community access:
  • County library in Palmyra offers public Wi‑Fi and often hotspot lending; schools have supported hotspot programs for students; these resources see heavier use than in better-wired Virginia localities.

Implications

• Service design: Optimize for mobile-first experiences that handle variable bandwidth and intermittent connectivity; SMS and app-lite channels will reach more residents outside wired footprints.
• Equity: Target outreach and subsidies for rural seniors and lower-income households where smartphone-only use is highest.
• Network planning: Mid-band 5G densification and continued fiber buildout in rural tracts will have outsized impact compared with similarly sized investments in already well-served metro areas.

Notes on estimates

• Figures are derived from recent ACS “Computer and Internet Use” patterns for rural/exurban Virginia counties, statewide benchmarks, and known local infrastructure buildouts. For a precise, citation-ready profile (e.g., percent of households with a cellular data plan or smartphone-only by age/income), pull the latest ACS 5-year table S2801 for Fluvanna County and Virginia, plus current FCC mobile coverage data.

Fluvanna County, VA social media snapshot (estimates for 2025)

How many people use social media

• Population baseline: ~28,000 residents. Residents age 13+ ≈ 24,000.
• Estimated social media users (any platform): 17,000–20,000 residents (roughly 70–85% of those 13+). Adults are the majority, with near-universal use among teens and 20-somethings.

Most-used platforms (share of residents 13+)

• YouTube: ~75–85%
• Facebook: ~60–70% (strongest single community platform; Groups and Marketplace are central)
• Instagram: ~35–45%
• TikTok: ~25–35% overall; 60%+ among teens and 18–24
• Snapchat: ~20–30% overall; 50%+ among teens
• Pinterest: ~25–35% overall; higher among women (40–50% of women)
• LinkedIn: ~20–30% (concentrated among commuters/professionals)
• X (Twitter): ~15–25% (more male/younger skew)
• Nextdoor: ~10–20% of households (notably around Lake Monticello and HOA neighborhoods)
• Reddit: ~15–20% (younger/male skew)

Age mix among local social media users

• Teens (13–17): ~5–7% of users (very high daily use; TikTok/Snapchat/YouTube)
• 18–29: ~13–16% (YouTube, Instagram, TikTok; Facebook for Events/Marketplace)
• 30–49: ~35–40% (Facebook, YouTube, Instagram; Pinterest among parents)
• 50–64: ~22–26% (Facebook, YouTube; Pinterest; some LinkedIn)
• 65+: ~15–20% (Facebook, YouTube; growing but still lower TikTok/Instagram use)

Gender breakdown

• Overall users: roughly 52% women, 48% men (near the county’s population split).
• Platform skews: Pinterest and Facebook usage higher among women; YouTube, Reddit, and X higher among men; Instagram and TikTok relatively balanced but younger-skewed.

Behavioral trends to know

• Community-first engagement: Facebook Groups (HOAs like Lake Monticello, schools, youth sports, church groups, buy/sell/trade, yard sales) drive most local conversation and referrals.
• Marketplace matters: Facebook Marketplace is a top channel for secondhand goods, tools, farm/yard equipment, and local services.
• Events and alerts: Residents rely on Facebook for county/school updates, weather/emergency notices, and local events (fairs, festivals, wineries/breweries).
• Video is rising: Short-form video (Reels/TikTok) performs best for restaurants, local shops, real estate, and sports highlights. Many churches and civic groups post longer videos on YouTube.
• Timing: Highest engagement typically evenings (7–9 pm) and weekend mornings; parent-focused posts do well around school drop-off/lunch hours.
• Trust dynamics: Content shared by neighbors or local admins in Groups outperforms brand pages. Reviews and UGC carry outsized influence.
• Nextdoor for hyperlocal: Effective for HOA notices, lost/found pets, safety, and contractor recommendations in neighborhoods; reach is smaller but targeted.
• Messaging: Facebook Messenger is the default for inquiries/bookings; WhatsApp usage is modest but growing among certain communities.

Notes on method

• Figures are best-available estimates built by applying recent Pew Research Center U.S. platform adoption rates to Fluvanna’s age/gender mix and suburban–rural profile, plus observed usage patterns in similar Virginia counties. Nextdoor and platform skews are inferred from neighborhood/HOA prevalence and national platform demographics.