U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Will Houston surpass Chicago as the 3rd largest city by 2020?
Yes 492 41.55%
No 692 58.45%
Voters: 1184. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-04-2008, 12:46 PM
 
42 posts, read 31,586 times
Reputation: 13

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve-o View Post
I wouldnt be proud of that. And if Chicago exercised power over the suburbs, we'd all be taxed to death and sucked into Chicago's notorious corruption vacuum. No thanks.

Yeah, well I would be proud for Houston. I'm tired of people moving to the suburbs here too. So for Houston the control is a good thing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-04-2008, 01:26 PM
 
Location: USA
13,266 posts, read 10,405,281 times
Reputation: 4228
Quote:
Originally Posted by operadivo View Post
Yeah, well I would be proud for Houston. I'm tired of people moving to the suburbs here too. So for Houston the control is a good thing.

Can you provide me with some reasoning on why you think Houston's city proper will surpass Chicago's in the near future? I won't argue with you, lets just have a reasonable debate. I'll even start it off...I'll provide you with mine.

According to the U.S. census bureau. Houston proper grew from 1.95 Million in 2000, to 2.009 million in 2003. Thats a 2.9% increase. At that rate Houston would not be surpassing Chicago any time soon.

Chicago is currently undergoing a massive building boom in its downtown and core.

The Chicago Boom

Chicago has the capacity to greatly increase its core population without the addition of huge amounts of infastructure. Houston would have to undergo redevelopment.

Most individuals who move to Houston don't move there for an urban experience. It would seem logical that they would resist density increases much more than Chicagoans who most already live in a dense urban environment.

Information was just released that showed that Sunbelt cities were experiencing a slow down in population growth.

So tell me hun, what is the reasoning behind your claim? (Uh oh...you may actually have to do some research on this one)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2008, 04:32 PM
 
42 posts, read 31,586 times
Reputation: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gtownoe View Post
Can you provide me with some reasoning on why you think Houston's city proper will surpass Chicago's in the near future? I won't argue with you, lets just have a reasonable debate. I'll even start it off...I'll provide you with mine.

According to the U.S. census bureau. Houston proper grew from 1.95 Million in 2000, to 2.009 million in 2003. Thats a 2.9% increase. At that rate Houston would not be surpassing Chicago any time soon.

Chicago is currently undergoing a massive building boom in its downtown and core.

The Chicago Boom

Chicago has the capacity to greatly increase its core population without the addition of huge amounts of infastructure. Houston would have to undergo redevelopment.

Most individuals who move to Houston don't move there for an urban experience. It would seem logical that they would resist density increases much more than Chicagoans who most already live in a dense urban environment.

Information was just released that showed that Sunbelt cities were experiencing a slow down in population growth.

So tell me hun, what is the reasoning behind your claim? (Uh oh...you may actually have to do some research on this one)
OK hun, the whole US is experiencing a slowing of population growth, but we all know that the sunbelt is growing relatively faster because it's much more affordable. For example, I think many people have realized that it's silly to pay $1.00 some of the more expensive cities for the same can soda you can get in the sunbelt for 55 cents. It may seem trivial but it's the small things that (add up to make big things) count. Also, just because something built doesn't mean people will come that goes for every city. The point is Houston will pass Chicago, either way. I'm not sure when though. (I don't think it will by 2025.) I didn't have to do any research for that. It's common sense and logic.
Feel free to send me a message.

Last edited by operadivo; 05-04-2008 at 04:43 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2008, 05:50 PM
 
Location: USA
13,266 posts, read 10,405,281 times
Reputation: 4228
Quote:
Originally Posted by operadivo View Post
OK hun, the whole US is experiencing a slowing of population growth, but we all know that the sunbelt is growing relatively faster because it's much more affordable. For example, I think many people have realized that it's silly to pay $1.00 some of the more expensive cities for the same can soda you can get in the sunbelt for 55 cents. It may seem trivial but it's the small things that (add up to make big things) count. Also, just because something built doesn't mean people will come that goes for every city. The point is Houston will pass Chicago, either way. I'm not sure when though. (I don't think it will by 2025.) I didn't have to do any research for that. It's common sense and logic.
Feel free to send me a message.
So your argument is that things are cheaper? Oh, and that its unknown whether Chicago's high rise projects will actually be inhabited? This is the reason that Houston will surpass Chicago?

For your 1st argument, if that was the case people would be leaving NYC, LA, and San Fran in droves. But they're not, people are willing to pay a higher price to live in those areas. Just as people who move to Chicago are willing to pay a higher price to live there.

High rise projects don't get approved unless there is enough demand for the project. Investors aren't going to waste their money on a project that won't give tem a significant return on their investment.

As far as Houston not surpassing Chicago by 2025, how are you gonna make an accurate prediction that far down the road? That is nearly 20 years.

Your lack of research just shows that you are making "uninformed speculations". You didn't look up any statistics on growth patterns, city proper gains vs. metro gains, city development, or even census predictions.

I see why you simply resorted to the "I'm right just because" approach. You don't have anytihng to back up what you say.

But whatever helps you sleep at night!

Hun.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2008, 08:44 PM
 
42 posts, read 31,586 times
Reputation: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gtownoe View Post
So your argument is that things are cheaper? Oh, and that its unknown whether Chicago's high rise projects will actually be inhabited? This is the reason that Houston will surpass Chicago?

For your 1st argument, if that was the case people would be leaving NYC, LA, and San Fran in droves. But they're not, people are willing to pay a higher price to live in those areas. Just as people who move to Chicago are willing to pay a higher price to live there.

High rise projects don't get approved unless there is enough demand for the project. Investors aren't going to waste their money on a project that won't give tem a significant return on their investment.

As far as Houston not surpassing Chicago by 2025, how are you gonna make an accurate prediction that far down the road? That is nearly 20 years.

Your lack of research just shows that you are making "uninformed speculations". You didn't look up any statistics on growth patterns, city proper gains vs. metro gains, city development, or even census predictions.

I see why you simply resorted to the "I'm right just because" approach. You don't have anytihng to back up what you say.

But whatever helps you sleep at night!

Hun.
We don't have to look up any growth patterns because they've been presented over and over! It's pretty obvious, but here you go.Investors can only project a return, not demand it.Since we're talking about hard numbers it looks like some people have been leaving those places you mentioned (cept for LA which is...oooh just another sunbelt city)City Mayors: Fastest growing US cities 2007 Who knows what's going to happen 20 years from now? I'm just making a guess like everyone else.Ok hunny! Sleep tight!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2008, 09:22 PM
 
Location: Marion, IA
2,796 posts, read 5,492,513 times
Reputation: 1579
The land area of DFW is about equal to Chi-town but they have 1/2 the popluation. There's no way it will work unless they either double the metroplex area or start living on top of each other and install an efficient mass transit system.

All of the major northern metros with more than 5 million people have an efficient mass transit system and a considerable chunk of the population uses it. DFW and Houston? They all hop in their cars every morning.

I don't think it will EVER happen. And if it does they will be stretching it and saying that the DFW metro is 100 miles in diameter. If you follow that logic then Chicagoland metro goes up about 3 million more w/Milwaukee, Madison, Rockford, etc.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-05-2008, 07:18 AM
 
Location: Washington D.C. By way of Texas
18,654 posts, read 27,097,861 times
Reputation: 9584
Quote:
Originally Posted by zz4guy View Post
The land area of DFW is about equal to Chi-town but they have 1/2 the popluation. There's no way it will work unless they either double the metroplex area or start living on top of each other and install an efficient mass transit system.

All of the major northern metros with more than 5 million people have an efficient mass transit system and a considerable chunk of the population uses it. DFW and Houston? They all hop in their cars every morning.

I don't think it will EVER happen. And if it does they will be stretching it and saying that the DFW metro is 100 miles in diameter. If you follow that logic then Chicagoland metro goes up about 3 million more w/Milwaukee, Madison, Rockford, etc.
DFW is currently building mass transit now. On the Dallas side, there will be 90 plus miles of light rail by 2013 including a connection to DFW airport on the Orange Line. There will also be a commuter line from Denton to the last stop on the Green Line on the Dart system and that will take commuters travelling from Denton to Dallas via the rail line. There is also a proposal to connect to the far Southern Suburbs like Waxahachie in the next decade or so.

On the Fort Worth side, they are also proposing a rail line to travel from DTFW to DFW airport. North Texas is building rail and they want it. They already have a commuter rail connecting DTFW to DTD.

In Houston, they are about start construction on more rail lines that when finished, will have over 40 miles of rail mostly covering the inner loop but also traveling from DTH to Uptown-Galleria.

Both Texas metros are heavily car dependant. But they are actually making a huge effort to build an efficient mass transit system. It will take time for the residents of both areas to get out of their cars because of the huge car culture. But the residents of both areas want rail and they want it bad considering that both systems are in the top 10 in light rail ridership numbers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-07-2008, 09:25 PM
 
492 posts, read 1,019,350 times
Reputation: 362
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gtownoe View Post
Can you provide me with some reasoning on why you think Houston's city proper will surpass Chicago's in the near future?
Chicago is currently undergoing a massive building boom in its downtown and core.
Houston is beyond booming. This is what Genetic Engineering & biotechnology news had to say "These days, the medical center skyline will soon surpass that of downtown skyline of Houston. Home to 75,000 professional life science jobs, the medical center expects to add another 50,000 new positions over the next few years to keep pace with its booming growth". Just think 50,000 new positions, that translates to at least 3 to 5 additional offshoot jobs. You are talking to the tune of a quarter of a million new jobs just in this particular sector! If one includes jobs generated in the energy sector, and at the the Houston port, forget it.
Article : Biotech Aims High in the Lone Star State Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology News - Biotechnology from Bench to Business
Port of Houston Authority | Business Development
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-07-2008, 09:58 PM
 
Location: USA
13,266 posts, read 10,405,281 times
Reputation: 4228
Quote:
Originally Posted by cjester View Post
Houston is beyond booming. This is what Genetic Engineering & biotechnology news had to say "These days, the medical center skyline will soon surpass that of downtown skyline of Houston. Home to 75,000 professional life science jobs, the medical center expects to add another 50,000 new positions over the next few years to keep pace with its booming growth". Just think 50,000 new positions, that translates to at least 3 to 5 additional offshoot jobs. You are talking to the tune of a quarter of a million new jobs just in this particular sector! If one includes jobs generated in the energy sector, and at the the Houston port, forget it.
Article : Biotech Aims High in the Lone Star State Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology News - Biotechnology from Bench to Business
Port of Houston Authority | Business Development
A quarter of a million people will not mean that Houston will surpass Chicago. It means it will close the gap.

Have you seen the development in Chicago lately?

Most of those residents will probably live in suburban Houston using past growth trends.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-15-2008, 10:55 AM
 
492 posts, read 1,019,350 times
Reputation: 362
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gtownoe View Post

Have you seen the development in Chicago lately?
There might be a "boom" going on in Chicago, but it is a very sickly one.
According to many developers there, they say that the Chicago's condominium boom has stalled and it's caught in a perfect storm. Do to a flood of new units landing in a sinking real-estate market.
The Chicago highrise Spire proposition, that you mentioned, as of May-08, bank financing had yet to materialize.
"the developer of a proposed 80-story condo tower in the South Loop faced foreclosure on a preconstruction loan".
Who Will Buy the Condos? - Chicago Magazine - May 2008 - Chicago
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top