DFW will reach 8.75 million residents by 2025

[Lakewooder]

kdogg, are you the one who first posted that map of the "Metroplex" before it was a "Metroplex" on here?

I posted in on Facebook and as I have lot of friends who are natives, it got many comments. We figured it's circa 1970.

[LAnative10]

Originally Posted by Lakewooder

kdogg, are you the one who first posted that map of the "Metroplex" before it was a "Metroplex" on here?

I posted in on Facebook and as I have lot of friends who are natives, it got many comments. We figured it's circa 1970.

Yeah, Im pretty sure that map is really old. Look how small Plano is in it.

[Lakewooder]

Yeah to some of us that has not changed!

[Saintmarks]

Originally Posted by Lakewooder

kdogg, are you the one who first posted that map of the "Metroplex" before it was a "Metroplex" on here?

I posted in on Facebook and as I have lot of friends who are natives, it got many comments. We figured it's circa 1970.

Agreed, has to be ancient, maybe even the 60's. No I-20 at all, no Joe Pool Lake, 635 and 820 not completed, no tollway above 635, no 114 to the airport. Hey no DFW airport!

[dfwcre8tive]

Originally Posted by LAnative10

Yeah, Im pretty sure that map is really old. Look how small Plano is in it.

And it's pre-DFW Airport, so it has to be late 60s/early 70s.

[aceplace]

Originally Posted by LAnative10

Its not flawed. You are just confusing CSA with MSA. Combined statistical areas measure people in an area without any paramaters. MSA's share the same economy, have high levels of people who commute from one to the other, have the same media market, etc. The most important from this list is the sharing the same economy. San Francisco and San Jose dont share one economy. Niether do Balto and DC. Dallas and Fort Worth do, so do Miami and Ft. Lauderdale.

Good summary, LAnative. I might also add that the criteria is also defined by percentage of a county workforce that commutes to another county for employment. If 25% commute, their county is considered to belong to the metro in the destination county.

For example, Fort Worth. Since 30% of Tarrant county commutes to Dallas, Collin or Denton counties, Tarrant is part of the Dallas metro.

The idea is that Tarrant could not have an independent economic existence, could not survive on its own. It can only survive as a part of a larger unit.

In the case of San Jose, the amount of commuting is well under the threshold required to include it in San Fran-Oakland metro. Not only commuting for work, but for entertainment, and other reasons. San Jose is in no way dependent on SF-Oakland for anything, and the SF economy and urban facilities is really beyond normal driving range of people in San Jose. It might as well be 100 miles away from SF-Oak for all the impact it has on them.

[kdogg817]

Originally Posted by aceplace

Good summary, LAnative. I might also add that the criteria is also defined by percentage of a county workforce that commutes to another county for employment. If 25% commute, their county is considered to belong to the metro in the destination county.

For example, Fort Worth. Since 30% of Tarrant county commutes to Dallas, Collin or Denton counties, Tarrant is part of the Dallas metro.

The idea is that Tarrant could not have an independent economic existence, could not survive on its own. It can only survive as a part of a larger unit.

In the case of San Jose, the amount of commuting is well under the threshold required to include it in San Fran-Oakland metro. Not only commuting for work, but for entertainment, and other reasons. San Jose is in no way dependent on SF-Oakland for anything, and the SF economy and urban facilities is really beyond normal driving range of people in San Jose. It might as well be 100 miles away from SF-Oak for all the impact it has on them.

My man ACEPLACE you know I disagree. 30% is a large percentage but not a overwhelmingly large percentage. That leaves 70% of tarrant county workforce that work in tarrant county. With addition of Dallas County workforce that commutes into tarrant those number may not offset but it would diminish that percentage. I would be willing to bet the majority of Tarrant residents commute to Las Colinas. Dallas is not the dominate city in the DFW metro. The vast majority of DFW fortune 500 companies are out side of the city of Dallas.

[lizziebeth]

Originally Posted by Saintmarks

Of all the major metro areas in the country, Dallas and Atlanta are the only two that can continue to grow in complete concentric circles in every direction without some form of geography getting in the way: an ocean, mountain range, large lake, swamp, desert, etc. Of course there are other factors, but that is an intriguing one. Plenty of land to continue sprawling all over the place.

Sad but true. But we have plenty of people here. No mas!!!

The map is pretty funny...just from my brief scan I noticed that the tollway stops at LBJ and the part of LBJ from 175 to 35 in SE Dallas is a dotted not-yet-developed line.

[aceplace]

Originally Posted by kdogg817

My man ACEPLACE you know I disagree. 30% is a large percentage but not a overwhelmingly large percentage. That leaves 70% of tarrant county workforce that work in tarrant county. With addition of Dallas County workforce that commutes into tarrant those number may not offset but it would diminish that percentage. I would be willing to bet the majority of Tarrant residents commute to Las Colinas. Dallas is not the dominate city in the DFW metro. The vast majority of DFW fortune 500 companies are out side of the city of Dallas.

Your quarrel is with Dallas municipality. That is irrelevant in the broader scheme of things.

The significant point is this... Tarrant countly is an economic dependency of the Dallas metro area.