Houston 2nd largest city in the U.S. in the future? (apartment, buying)

[miamiman]

Originally Posted by Queen Palm

Miamiman, I'm confused as to why you keep bringing Houston's threat of a hurricane, when LA stays in constant threat of earthquakes (which there are no forewarnings), mudslides, forest fires, and torrential rainstorms. Chicago, blizzards and artic freezes in the winter.

If weather/natural disasters is a deterant, then LA wouldn't be as populated, now would it? And you're from Miami, FL I presume? So you know that Florida, every summer stays in threat of hurricanes. Has it dimished Miami's "importance"?

If it applies to one (Houston), then it would apply to all....

An devastating earthquake in LA would cause people to move away as well. LA has lucked out quite a bit, is the second most populous city in this country, and is, by all intents and purposes, a world-class city. This thread is about Houston hypothetically passing both Chicago and Los Angeles in population. I think everyone here would agree that it will take Houston DECADES to claim the number 2 spot. Who knows what kind of hurricanes will come up over the next 40+ years that will impede Houston's growth and eliminate the possibility of Houston passing LA in population for the next 100 years.

[Queen Palm]

Originally Posted by miamiman

An devastating earthquake in LA would cause people to move away as well. LA has lucked out quite a bit, is the second most populous city in this country, and is, by all intents and purposes, a world-class city. This thread is about Houston hypothetically passing both Chicago and Los Angeles in population. I think everyone here would agree that it will take Houston DECADES to claim the number 2 spot. Who knows what kind of hurricanes will come up over the next 40+ years that will impede Houston's growth and eliminate the possibility of Houston passing LA in population for the next 100 years.

hurricanes haven't impeded Houston's growth in the last 40 years. While the Texas Gulf Coast has seen it's bit of hurricanes, Houston isn't a city that stays in constant threat of it. AND, the growth, even in the last 5 years with the hurricane activity relatively pretty active (every year) hasn't impeded growth.

My point is that using or claiming hurricane activity in Houston as a deterrant to growth, is not a very strong argument. Plainly put, Houston, unlike Miami for example, isn't widely looked at as a city that endures constant threats of them, though it is something to consider as a possibility at some point.

Lastly, I don't think it would take Houston decades to hit the #2 spot. Time will tell tho.......

[AmberAzeneth]

A hurricane will not impede Houston's growth. It hasn't yet. If you recall Houston was hit with a major hurricane almost 2 1/2 years ago and that did not seem to deter the growth. In fact the city grew even more. More people have migrated here in spite of the hurricanes.

[Queen Palm]

exactly, Amber! exactly.

I reckon that a city like Miami, it's citizens count the cost of living there. Knowing full well it's susceptible to major hurricane activity, more often than not.

But that is the price (I assume) many are willing to pay to live in such a beautiful city. FWIW, it's not like hurricanes happen everyday......

[HAC NY]

You are all fools. Barring a large-scale natural disaster, Houston WILL NOT pass Los Angeles' population in your lifetime.

Do you really think Houston will forever grow at its current pace? Yea, just like Los Angelenos thought their city would forever grow at the rapid pace it did in the 1940s. How did that work out?

[DANNYY]

Originally Posted by HAC NY

Do you really think Houston will forever grow at is current pace?

Hell no.

And only a complete idiot would be expecting as such. Actually you know what, if you really believe Houston's rates will stay the same for decades to come, please let me know. That way I know who to put on ignore from here on out.

[Queen Palm]

Originally Posted by HAC NY

You are all fools. Barring a large-scale natural disaster, Houston WILL NOT pass Los Angeles' population in your lifetime.

Do you really think Houston will forever grow at its current pace? Yea, just like Los Angelenos thought their city would forever grow at the rapid pace it did in the 1940s. How did that work out?

my argument isn't really about whether or not Houston will be at the #2 spot. That's unforeseeable. I just think it's silly to argue that a hurricane would deter Houston's growth, period. That's just simply isn't the case.

[kidphilly]

Houston is too far inland Hurricane to really have any large impact on long term trends, seriously

assuming even modest growth I think it can pass Chicago in the city limits, but I cant see much beyond that. I just cant see moderate/high density development over a large area of Houston in that it in many ways goes against what the majority of transplants are seeking in Houston, cheaper housing with decent space and access to jobs, all these factors would be impeded by significantly expanded and in-filled density, even with all the space

To match Chicago population of today Houston would need to be about half as dense as Chicago or about 5,200 ppsm. To match LA of today the average densisty would have to be closer to 8K ppsm, that would be a 33% higher density city wide than currently exists in the inner loop, to me it just doesnt seem feasible given the majority of development in the densest areas of the city is still far below what would be required on average in the full 550 nsq miles

It just doesnt pass the smell test to me

[HtownLove]

Originally Posted by kidphilly

Houston is too far inland Hurricane to really have any large impact on long term trends, seriously

assuming even modest growth I think it can pass Chicago in the city limits, but I cant see much beyond that. I just cant see moderate/high density development over a large area of Houston in that it in many ways goes against what the majority of transplants are seeking in Houston, cheaper housing with decent space and access to jobs, all these factors would be impeded by significantly expanded and in-filled density, even with all the space

To match Chicago population of today Houston would need to be about half as dense as Chicago or about 5,200 ppsm. To match LA of today the average densisty would have to be closer to 8K ppsm, that would be a 33% higher density city wide than currently exists in the inner loop, to me it just doesnt seem feasible given the majority of development in the densest areas of the city is still far below what would be required on average in the full 550 nsq miles

It just doesnt pass the smell test to me

what are you talking about? Houston's density is already at 4200 ppsm, up from 3300 ppsm in 2000. 5200 ppsm is not as far off as you think. It will be there by the next census

[kidphilly]

Originally Posted by HtownLove

what are you talking about? Houston's density is already at 4200 ppsm, up from 3300 ppsm in 2000. 5200 ppsm is not as far off as you think. It will be there by the next census

did you read what I wrote, i said 5,200 seems possible, that 8K+ does not

next census, not so sure there but think it will get there

isnt the premis #2, not #3