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.
Location: Austin, TX/Chicago, IL/Houston, TX/Washington, DC
10,138 posts, read 16,047,399 times
Reputation: 4047
Advertisements
Houston's city population at some point will pass Chicago on by.
The metropolitan population however probably won't. I do not see that happening for a good 50 years, and that's a big "if" it ever can.
Houston's growth is impressive but lets not forget Chicago's metropolitan population is 4 million larger than Houston's, Houston is only 60% of Chicago's metro population.
The city population does not matter, for 30 years Houston's city population has been larger than Philadelphia's, but for those same 30 years Philadelphia has been considered a larger city because it's metropolitan area has been larger. Not only that but it is denser as well.
Granted density does not describe a city, subjectivity does, what appeals to each and every individual applies to a city, with that respect, Houston still has a few decades of playing cat and mouse with Chicago.
Lets not forget another city that entered the big leagues not too long before Houston, LA. LA got to the same tier of importacne as DC and Chicago, and many would say it passed Philadelphia and Boston by. It went through tremendous growth to do so. Witht he growth of the population came the need for bigger city amenities and LA made those amenities their concern and started to build upon them. Look at where it is now.
Chicago is an example as well, it entered the big leagues as nothing more than the "new kid" on the block with Philadelphia, Boston, Baltimore, DC, and New York City already running the show, but look at how important of a city it is now.
With that being said, I think Houston can do it too, but it's going to take years of work, and dedication and a lot of blood and sweat to accomplish it. Nothing comes easy, certainly not this.
If Houston were to pass Chicago's city population by 2025, it still wouldn't feel like a bigger city than Chicago, but say hypothetically Houston takes charge and makes all the changes in the right direction for decades to come, and 50 years passes by, 2060 Houston could be more prominent than Chicago. We never know what might happen.
The metropolitan population is not changing for the next 40 years or so, it's going to be behind Chicago there, and maybe even behind Dallas then too, I can promise that. And I think a diversified economy is going into the right step for Houston's future, something we have learned from Detroit's downfall, and Pittsburgh's as well. Pittsburgh made a come back, but it can't ever be as strong as it was in the past.
We'll just have to keep our eyes close on the target, and the target being Houston. It's where all the eyes are at these days.
Love it, Hate it, but you have to respect it, it is where the people are moving too and the jobs.
Houston sucks. Haha, but really, Houston boosters act like the growth is going to last forever. If we were to take a step back, and look at the history of America's cities, we would see there is a period of tremendous growth, and then it all levels out. Houston's only way of surpassing Chicago on a city level would be because of its endless boundaries. On a metro scale, Chicago and Milwaukee would have combined long before Houston reaches 10 million, let alone 12.5+ million.
As I've said before, I think this is Houston's last big gain, and it will show tremendous signs of slowing down by 2020.
Houston sucks. Haha, but really, Houston boosters act like the growth is going to last forever. If we were to take a step back, and look at the history of America's cities, we would see there is a period of tremendous growth, and then it all levels out. Houston's only way of surpassing Chicago on a city level would be because of its endless boundaries. On a metro scale, Chicago and Milwaukee would have combined long before Houston reaches 10 million, let alone 12.5+ million.
As I've said before, I think this is Houston's last big gain, and it will show tremendous signs of slowing down by 2020.
People have been saying that about Houston for a while. Houston's only slowdown has been in the 80s, since it was first founded. The only way Houston slows down is if it starts getting expensive (with all the land WE have?), and Texas' business climate goes down the drain. Houston's economy is getting more diversified, and the energy industry is a very diverse industry itself (not just oil like many want to believe). You see all of this "Going Green" stuff nowadays? Only helping the Houston economy as the energy companies down here look to be more efficient.
I think a lot of people want to believe a city like Houston is suppose to "stay in its place" and not rise up (much like LA did before, and Chicago before that). It's fun watching this city grow up now. It's reaching that tier with Chicago fast.
people have been saying that about houston for a while. Houston's only slowdown has been in the 80s, since it was first founded. The only way houston slows down is if it starts getting expensive (with all the land we have?), and texas' business climate goes down the drain. Houston's economy is getting more diversified, and the energy industry is a very diverse industry itself (not just oil like many want to believe). You see all of this "going green" stuff nowadays? Only helping the houston economy as the energy companies down here look to be more efficient.
I think a lot of people want to believe a city like houston is suppose to "stay in its place" and not rise up (much like la did before, and chicago before that). It's fun watching this city grow up now. It's reaching that tier with chicago fast.
I dont think anyone questions the growth or strength of the Houston or Texas economy - the thing is maintaining this for many years and after achieving a huge populations confounds the issues. Also spreading out further becomes more difficult the area will start to lose cohesion or prximity to the core. or House values will rise with density. Either way it will tough to sustain this level of growth forever. Either way it is exciting to watch and see how it is handled - in some ways with the level sprawl it has never been done before - even LA has maintained higher density almost two-fold compared to Houston so from that perspective the lower density sprawl is new to watch form that perspective
Also the development is another factor on jobs in the area - if growth slows all the jobs and related industries engineering etc will not have the work creating a void for this employed sector. I am not saying it can't but as it gets bigger and bigger sustaining growth becomes more and more difficult - history can show this...
I dont think anyone questions the growth or strength of the Houston or Texas economy - the thing is maintaining this for many years and after achieving a huge populations confounds the issues. Also spreading out further becomes more difficult the area will start to lose cohesion or prximity to the core. or House values will rise with density. Either way it will tough to sustain this level of growth forever. Either way it is exciting to watch and see how it is handled - in some ways with the level sprawl it has never been done before - even LA has maintained higher density almost two-fold compared to Houston so from that perspective the lower density sprawl is new to watch form that perspective
I think this is the problem. People are stuck on the 19th and 20th century way of cities. The metro area does not have to revolve around one core of the city. We have the main core in Houston (Inner Loop), but there are more employment centers outside of it, and the suburbs are starting to create their own employment centers, as well as attract companies (for example, The Woodlands is home to Anadarko and Sugar Land is home to Minute Maid).
It'll be hard to sustain this growth, but this growth has been going on since 1950. I'm betting most people on the western side of Houston, that have jobs in the city, don't even work Downtown, but instead in other areas like the Energy Corridor, Memorial City, or Westchase. This is just one example, too.
Quote:
Also the development is another factor on jobs in the area - if growth slows all the jobs and related industries engineering etc will not have the work creating a void for this employed sector. I am not saying it can't but as it gets bigger and bigger sustaining growth becomes more and more difficult - history can show this...
If growth slows, that should only help the job market, as less people would move here without jobs.
Houston sucks. Haha, but really, Houston boosters act like the growth is going to last forever. If we were to take a step back, and look at the history of America's cities, we would see there is a period of tremendous growth, and then it all levels out. Houston's only way of surpassing Chicago on a city level would be because of its endless boundaries. On a metro scale, Chicago and Milwaukee would have combined long before Houston reaches 10 million, let alone 12.5+ million.
As I've said before, I think this is Houston's last big gain, and it will show tremendous signs of slowing down by 2020.
I do agree that Houston will eventually slow down. But what makes you think they will slow down by 2020? What signs are being shown as of right now that you believe this will happen. In regards to Houston's energy economy, they are getting ready to build the first offshore wind farm in the nation in a state that leads the NATION in wind technology.
I think this is the problem. People are stuck on the 19th and 20th century way of cities. The metro area does not have to revolve around one core of the city. We have the main core in Houston (Inner Loop), but there are more employment centers outside of it, and the suburbs are starting to create their own employment centers, as well as attract companies (for example, The Woodlands is home to Anadarko and Sugar Land is home to Minute Maid).
It'll be hard to sustain this growth, but this growth has been going on since 1950. I'm betting most people on the western side of Houston, that have jobs in the city, don't even work Downtown, but instead in other areas like the Energy Corridor, Memorial City, or Westchase. This is just one example, too.
If growth slows, that should only help the job market, as less people would move here without jobs.
I understand the development very well - I mean the core as in the arts and cultural center - as you get further away evne surbaban living becomes less atrractive - access to culture is further and further away. Maybe malls and walmarts and chain restaraunts are built but that is not what i mean
and on your second point - two-fold
1 - then the growth stops (people stop moving)
2 - there is a job sector that is building out the infrastructure - houses, roads, offices, walmarts - that group has to be pretty large in an area that added 1 million people in ten years - it takes a lot of people to build all this - no building, no jobs in this sector
Location: Austin, TX/Chicago, IL/Houston, TX/Washington, DC
10,138 posts, read 16,047,399 times
Reputation: 4047
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dncr
^^
Houston sucks. Haha, but really, Houston boosters act like the growth is going to last forever. If we were to take a step back, and look at the history of America's cities, we would see there is a period of tremendous growth, and then it all levels out. Houston's only way of surpassing Chicago on a city level would be because of its endless boundaries. On a metro scale, Chicago and Milwaukee would have combined long before Houston reaches 10 million, let alone 12.5+ million.
As I've said before, I think this is Houston's last big gain, and it will show tremendous signs of slowing down by 2020.
Haha, I'm normally out and about repping my birth city/home city (Chicago) more than Houston. But I won't discredit Houston in anyway, it's really proving to be a national player in economy and growth and based off the hatred I see from certain NYC posters, it's growth is getting on some of their nerves.
I'm not saying Houston is ever going to become a newer and better version of Chicago, that's impossible for Houston given it's city size and method of development, but what I am saying is that a few more years of "hardwork" for the city and it'll be comparable to Chicago then. Right now, Chicago > Houston. Later on, Chicago = Houston. I can see both my cities ending up on the same tier one day.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scarface713
People have been saying that about Houston for a while. Houston's only slowdown has been in the 80s, since it was first founded. The only way Houston slows down is if it starts getting expensive (with all the land WE have?), and Texas' business climate goes down the drain. Houston's economy is getting more diversified, and the energy industry is a very diverse industry itself (not just oil like many want to believe). You see all of this "Going Green" stuff nowadays? Only helping the Houston economy as the energy companies down here look to be more efficient.
I think a lot of people want to believe a city like Houston is suppose to "stay in its place" and not rise up (much like LA did before, and Chicago before that). It's fun watching this city grow up now. It's reaching that tier with Chicago fast.
Not to mention some of the other mass benefits of Houston and Texas in general, no state income tax, no problems with "labor unions" since there aren't any, no controversies with businesses monopolizing much.
Some other things that are leading to large growth for Houston is the port, with prices escalating in trade with Europe, the USA looks more to the West Coast and now the Gulf Coast for trade with Asia/Latin America. Putting LA and Houston at a whole new ball game for the first time ever. That same factor helped LA grow tremendously, and it'll help Houston too, to what extent, I do not know.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kidphilly
I dont think anyone questions the growth or strength of the Houston or Texas economy - the thing is maintaining this for many years and after achieving a huge populations confounds the issues. Also spreading out further becomes more difficult the area will start to lose cohesion or prximity to the core. or House values will rise with density. Either way it will tough to sustain this level of growth forever. Either way it is exciting to watch and see how it is handled - in some ways with the level sprawl it has never been done before - even LA has maintained higher density almost two-fold compared to Houston so from that perspective the lower density sprawl is new to watch form that perspective
Also the development is another factor on jobs in the area - if growth slows all the jobs and related industries engineering etc will not have the work creating a void for this employed sector. I am not saying it can't but as it gets bigger and bigger sustaining growth becomes more and more difficult - history can show this...
Yeah, to be honest the job market is quite unpredictable. The reason I didn't want to major in Business or even pursue an MBA degree was because I view Business the same as Philosophy class, things can change completely, studying the terms helps but studying the trends don't. No body knew the Recession was coming, and no body knows what's in it for the future.
So with that having been said, I am now going to sit back, get a Cherry IceE and some nachos and watch Houston in whatever it is planning on doing for the future. I find this a very fun time to be living in Houston! Quite excited for the changes to come.
It's only natural for something that has had tremendous growth to eventually slow down and pass the torch of growth to another, Philadelphia and Boston passed it to Chicago, Chicago passed it to LA, LA passed it to Houston, and eventually Houston will have to pass it to it's successor. LOL NYC's kept it since the beginning but that's the only exception.
I do know that the growth will eventually stop one day, but by then Houston might mirror other cities that have grown tremendously in the past, don't you think? And by then the job of it growing will be done and over with.
I understand the development very well - I mean the core as in the arts and cultural center - as you get further away evne surbaban living becomes less atrractive - access to culture is further and further away. Maybe malls and walmarts and chain restaraunts are built but that is not what i mean
A day/weekend trip into the city will be the fix then. There is a limit to how far away people will be to their jobs though.
Quote:
2 - there is a job sector that is building out the infrastructure - houses, roads, offices, walmarts - that group has to be pretty large in an area that added 1 million people in ten years - it takes a lot of people to build all this - no building, no jobs in this sector
This is what I thought you were trying to say. I don't think all of those jobs will just go away. There is a lot of construction needed in the city/metro. They'll focus on improving existing infrastructure instead of building new ones.
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.
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.
