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.
The difference feom Seattle and these cities are that the Seattle Metro is growing denser while these metros are expanding outwards. Its no secret that seattle is pinned in but the sound and the mountains whichs limits growth outwards. But in the past decade the area has seen a boom with cities like Bellevue growing at rapid rates with its downtown and urban areas poping up condos every few months. Some seattle suburbs between the city and tacoma have doubled in size the past 2 decades with many about to eclipse 100,000. Seattle by city limits is by far the smallest of these cities but the seattle metro to me has always felt bigger imo. If you add the area around seattle to the city until you get to the size of houston. It would have a much larger population I believe. If already calculated that state for the city of dallas and seattles population stood signifacantly larger.
Thats just NOT true anymore.Has not been true at least since within the last decade at least.
Quote:
Denver, Atlanta, Miami, Salt Lake City, and Las Vegas
ranked among the metro areas in which suburban growth slowed the most.
By contrast, the near collapse of the housing market yielded “windfall” population gains for cities
and inner suburbs, which held on to migrants that might have moved outward. City and dense suburban counties grew progressively faster after 2005-2006 (Figure 5). Census estimates through 2009
showed that of 34 cities with populations over 1 million, 23 grew faster in 2008-2009 than in 2005-06,
with several (such as Dallas, Seattle, and Washington, D.C.) growing faster than in any year earlier in
the decade.22
The central counties of the Philadelphia, Chicago, Atlanta, and Denver metro areas illustrate this
urban rebound (Figure 6). In all except Chicago, the central counties’ growth rates eclipsed those of
the remainder of the area toward the end of the decade, as suburban growth waned. Th
^It's not like they're wrong. Drive through Atlanta and Seattle. Then drive through Houston or Dallas. After that, if you tell me that Houston has as many trees as ATL or Seattle, I'm gonna think that you didn't even look out the window. I've been to Houston several times and grew up in Dallas. And I was in ATL last summer. There is no comparison.
Houston and especially Dallas are practically treeless compared to Atlanta and Seattle.
WHAT?!?
Houston is VERY green for being the 5th largest metropolitan area, are you kidding me?
Sure its no Atlanta or Seattle, but those cities are way less developed than Houston plus they have the geographical advantage.
Houston is so large it covers several different regions of Texas:
Piney Woods on the north side of town
Gulf Coastal Plains on the south side of town
Prairies & Lakes on the west side of town
Swamps & marshes on the east side of town
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.
