U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [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)
 
Old 02-07-2012, 12:41 PM
 
2,560 posts, read 5,272,199 times
Reputation: 764

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by HtownLove View Post
and you don't think Houston doesn't have tons of empty land too? think again. If you are removing land from one you have to remove from both. Houston has the entire population of SA in the SW side of town. Houston has as many people as all of the SA metro area in its city limits, so go easy on your nonsense.



don't be silly. Bexar by itself is already huge. face it dude, there is no other area of Texas with as large a concentration of people as Houston. Danny did the calculations down to the zip codes last year. What takes you guys 400 sq miles to get to we get there in 150 sq miles. You can gerrymander all you like you are not going to match that.

You have no evidence to support this nonsense. non at all. I lived in SA for 4 years dude so you know you won't be fooling me. Danny and others did actual research and posted stats to back themselves up. all you are doing is saying what you think even though you don't know crap about anything. You can squeeze down Houston to the Size of SA or to any size you want to compare and Houston will still have more people than SA

This is data from 10 years ago, and still larger than SA:
Houston: Land Boundary

I already proved the zip code populations in the past to you and SA actually had a lil more in the core zip codes, its a much older cty and has a thicker grid. Read my post again and it says Houston has more people but not a million within he same land area. Houston is big but not any denser than SA or Dallas, thats the way texas cities are built.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-07-2012, 01:32 PM
 
Location: Up on the moon laughing down on you
18,509 posts, read 28,180,477 times
Reputation: 7598
Quote:
Originally Posted by SweethomeSanAntonio View Post
I already proved the zip code populations in the past to you and SA actually had a lil more in the core zip codes, its a much older cty and has a thicker grid. Read my post again and it says Houston has more people but not a million within he same land area. Houston is big but not any denser than SA or Dallas, thats the way texas cities are built.
you aint proved nuffing.

SA maybe be older, but that doesn't mean anything.

Houston has been bigger for 100 years now.
SA was bigger when SA had how many people 40,000 people. ancient history dude.
And Houston and Dallas has the same density in the city 3500 ppsm
San Antonio is far behind at 2800 ppsm

List of United States cities by population - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Facts are facts and all the data shows that Houston is bigger and more dense than SA. At 460 square miles SA is not as compact as you want people to believe, and with a million less people in that large an area you think the density would be the same?

you are not going to fool anyone dude.

Your core zip codes theory is also false.

here is a density map put out last year by the washington post.
Interactive map: 30 years of census data - The Washington Post

The core census tracts show that dt SA is populated as follows:

Census tract 1101:
Block gp 1- 955
Block gp 2- 654
Block grp 3- 1730

These 3 block groups go from highway to highway and includes neighboring areas that are not even part of downtown but only amounts to 3500 people

For Houston here is DT and only DT:
Census tract 1000- 4690 people
Census tract 2101- 9652

its no where near as many people as some other cities with popular Downtowns but it sure has more than what you claim

Zooming out to county levels you see that Harris is divided into regions. The beltway area plus Katy, Humble and Atascocita region equals 3.075 Million people. Keeping the same zoomed frame you see central SA has 600K while the other regions around the central core has 100k to 300k people.

Also the density of Bexar is 1300ppsm while harris is 2400 ppsm. both huge in land area but Harris has significantly more people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2012, 03:06 PM
 
9,385 posts, read 9,548,809 times
Reputation: 5786
Quote:
Originally Posted by bmorefella View Post
Doubt it cost of living is the main problem in Boston and Boston to me seems to be extremely crowded already!
Boston Gained 28,000 and Baltimore lost abut that smae amount 2000-2010, and they are within 3,000 of each other, with Baltimore with the silight edge as of 2010, but even right now Boston probably has a higher population than Baltimore.
Memphis is Iffy because of its nearly stable population (beeding out at a snails pace) but its at a high 670,000.
Detroit, unless some amazing stuff happens (which i hope happens) it will definaly fall to Boston, Memphis and Baltimore.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-09-2012, 09:52 AM
 
2,560 posts, read 5,272,199 times
Reputation: 764
Quote:
Originally Posted by HtownLove View Post
you aint proved nuffing.

SA maybe be older, but that doesn't mean anything.

Houston has been bigger for 100 years now.
SA was bigger when SA had how many people 40,000 people. ancient history dude.
And Houston and Dallas has the same density in the city 3500 ppsm
San Antonio is far behind at 2800 ppsm

List of United States cities by population - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Facts are facts and all the data shows that Houston is bigger and more dense than SA. At 460 square miles SA is not as compact as you want people to believe, and with a million less people in that large an area you think the density would be the same?

you are not going to fool anyone dude.

Your core zip codes theory is also false.

here is a density map put out last year by the washington post.
Interactive map: 30 years of census data - The Washington Post

The core census tracts show that dt SA is populated as follows:

Census tract 1101:
Block gp 1- 955
Block gp 2- 654
Block grp 3- 1730

These 3 block groups go from highway to highway and includes neighboring areas that are not even part of downtown but only amounts to 3500 people

For Houston here is DT and only DT:
Census tract 1000- 4690 people
Census tract 2101- 9652

its no where near as many people as some other cities with popular Downtowns but it sure has more than what you claim

Zooming out to county levels you see that Harris is divided into regions. The beltway area plus Katy, Humble and Atascocita region equals 3.075 Million people. Keeping the same zoomed frame you see central SA has 600K while the other regions around the central core has 100k to 300k people.

Also the density of Bexar is 1300ppsm while harris is 2400 ppsm. both huge in land area but Harris has significantly more people.
lol you didnt count all the tracts that cover downtown SA just the ones you wanted. SA's downtown boundaries go way outside the tracts you listed So now your saying Houston has a bigger downtown population than SA? No way.
Anyway we are not comparing downtowns cause if we are SA's downtown is at another level and getting better. Houston is getting better too, but is not equal to SA's.

And the comparison I am talking about is when I listed the zip code populations over 200 square miles the central loops and San Antonio and Houston were comprable. I can look for my post and post again if you like. Like i said Houston is bigger for sure because its sprawl continues but its not much bigger the first 300-500 square miles.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-09-2012, 10:40 AM
 
Location: Up on the moon laughing down on you
18,509 posts, read 28,180,477 times
Reputation: 7598
Quote:
Originally Posted by SweethomeSanAntonio View Post
lol you didnt count all the tracts that cover downtown SA just the ones you wanted. SA's downtown boundaries go way outside the tracts you listed So now your saying Houston has a bigger downtown population than SA? No way.
Anyway we are not comparing downtowns cause if we are SA's downtown is at another level and getting better. Houston is getting better too, but is not equal to SA's.

And the comparison I am talking about is when I listed the zip code populations over 200 square miles the central loops and San Antonio and Houston were comprable. I can look for my post and post again if you like. Like i said Houston is bigger for sure because its sprawl continues but its not much bigger the first 300-500 square miles.
like I said, until you post anything to back your crap up I am done.

And I want Standardized Data at that. Your version of DT SA includes whole neighboring areas. If I do the same and include the 3rd, 4th and 5th wards you know Houston will again crush SA. So for both I went with what I knew living in both areas and from maps. The maps I see as downtown includes the areas with commercial buildings, hotels, etc. That is, I only used the Central Business district. Your version includes areas that are primarily residential areas.

Your version of DT includes all of the King William District. Yes King William has lots of Restaurants, some Arts, etc but King Williams is a separate residential District it is not DT. Lavaca, South Flores, South Town, Tobin Hills, Five Points, etc are not DT dude. I would Give you I10 to Hemisphere Park and South Alamo to about 35. And that is being generous. The area I gave includes areas like this:

San Antonio, TX 78201 - Google Maps


I doubt anyone would agree with that being part of a central business district. I should have said the southern boundary should be East Chavez

This is King William:
78201 - Google Maps

nice area but nothing Downtown about it.

This is LoneStar:
78201 - Google Maps
nothing downtown about it


This is Lavaca:
78201 - Google Maps

nothing downtown about it.

Yes these are multiple residential only areas so if you include them then yes your downtown will look bigger, but you have to do the same for Houston.

This is what I gave for Houston:
Houston, TX 77201 - Google Maps

The area I gave for Houston is mainly skyscrapers. And that doesn't even include all the residential towers bordering Downtown near Pierce or the warehouse District in East Downtown.

I could do like you and include these residential condos:

Houston, TX 77201 - Google Maps

Or this area just feet from DT:
Houston, TX 77201 - Google Maps

Face it, SA goes to small residential shanties before you blink an eye. Houston may not be the highly urban NE major cities, but any one can zoom around on Google maps and see that SA goes from CBD to shot gun houses in a blink of an eye. DT Houston is bigger and more populated. At 5, 10, 25, 50, 100 and 200 sq miles Houston is bigger. You have no evidence to show that SA is comparable on any level
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-09-2012, 08:53 PM
 
2,560 posts, read 5,272,199 times
Reputation: 764
Quote:
Originally Posted by HtownLove View Post
like I said, until you post anything to back your crap up I am done.

And I want Standardized Data at that. Your version of DT SA includes whole neighboring areas. If I do the same and include the 3rd, 4th and 5th wards you know Houston will again crush SA. So for both I went with what I knew living in both areas and from maps. The maps I see as downtown includes the areas with commercial buildings, hotels, etc. That is, I only used the Central Business district. Your version includes areas that are primarily residential areas.

Your version of DT includes all of the King William District. Yes King William has lots of Restaurants, some Arts, etc but King Williams is a separate residential District it is not DT. Lavaca, South Flores, South Town, Tobin Hills, Five Points, etc are not DT dude. I would Give you I10 to Hemisphere Park and South Alamo to about 35. And that is being generous. The area I gave includes areas like this:

San Antonio, TX 78201 - Google Maps


I doubt anyone would agree with that being part of a central business district. I should have said the southern boundary should be East Chavez

This is King William:
78201 - Google Maps

nice area but nothing Downtown about it.

This is LoneStar:
78201 - Google Maps
nothing downtown about it


This is Lavaca:
78201 - Google Maps

nothing downtown about it.

Yes these are multiple residential only areas so if you include them then yes your downtown will look bigger, but you have to do the same for Houston.

This is what I gave for Houston:
Houston, TX 77201 - Google Maps

The area I gave for Houston is mainly skyscrapers. And that doesn't even include all the residential towers bordering Downtown near Pierce or the warehouse District in East Downtown.

I could do like you and include these residential condos:

Houston, TX 77201 - Google Maps

Or this area just feet from DT:
Houston, TX 77201 - Google Maps

Face it, SA goes to small residential shanties before you blink an eye. Houston may not be the highly urban NE major cities, but any one can zoom around on Google maps and see that SA goes from CBD to shot gun houses in a blink of an eye. DT Houston is bigger and more populated. At 5, 10, 25, 50, 100 and 200 sq miles Houston is bigger. You have no evidence to show that SA is comparable on any level
I'm going to look for my post I put up before and S.A. and Houston are comparable in central loop populations. You posted a census tract with 9k and another with 4k and those are not in downtown Houston, look at your little link again. If im not mistaken that is 9th ward or something like that. It is the census tract that is NE of downtown the other tract u listed is east of the downtown inner loop with 4k. The same for Houston about going single home residential in some portions just outside downtown.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-10-2012, 05:04 PM
 
Location: Up on the moon laughing down on you
18,509 posts, read 28,180,477 times
Reputation: 7598
Quote:
Originally Posted by SweethomeSanAntonio View Post
I'm going to look for my post I put up before and S.A. and Houston are comparable in central loop populations. You posted a census tract with 9k and another with 4k and those are not in downtown Houston, look at your little link again. If im not mistaken that is 9th ward or something like that. It is the census tract that is NE of downtown the other tract u listed is east of the downtown inner loop with 4k. The same for Houston about going single home residential in some portions just outside downtown.
all the tracks I listed are of downtown Houston. and there is no 9th ward in Houston. We had 6 wards.

I did not include anything east of the Downtown George R Brown Convention Center. Try again.


Show me these single family homes you talk about inside downtown.
The ones I posted of SA are in the heart of where you want to consider downtown
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-10-2012, 06:58 PM
 
Location: Cleveland bound with MPLS in the rear-view
5,530 posts, read 10,143,318 times
Reputation: 2384
I'm going to think way outside the box and put Minneapolis, Detroit and possibly Cleveland in the top 10 metros by 2030-2040, when I predict there to be a MAJOR water crisis in the country and world and coupled with global climate change and increasingly milder temps up North, I think people will want to swarm to areas lush with natural fresh water -- like the Great Lakes. I'd include Chicago too but it's already in the top 3.

This is meant to be more playful than anything, as I wouldn't put any money on this happening, but if it did, I can see these areas becoming increasingly vital and popular -- and rich! I know, I know.....it's not just "our" water, and we share it with Canada. To get around this, I predict (with this scenario) a full-scale war (Civil War II, if you will) between the U.S. and Canada and in 2 short weeks, the U.S. will take over most Canadian assets. USA! USA! USA!

Aaaaaaaand, dream over!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-10-2012, 07:09 PM
 
2,601 posts, read 4,074,417 times
Reputation: 2275
Quote:
Originally Posted by west336 View Post
I'm going to think way outside the box and put Minneapolis, Detroit and possibly Cleveland in the top 10 metros by 2030-2040, when I predict there to be a MAJOR water crisis in the country and world and coupled with global climate change and increasingly milder temps up North, I think people will want to swarm to areas lush with natural fresh water -- like the Great Lakes. I'd include Chicago too but it's already in the top 3.

This is meant to be more playful than anything, as I wouldn't put any money on this happening, but if it did, I can see these areas becoming increasingly vital and popular -- and rich! I know, I know.....it's not just "our" water, and we share it with Canada. To get around this, I predict (with this scenario) a full-scale war (Civil War II, if you will) between the U.S. and Canada and in 2 short weeks, the U.S. will take over most Canadian assets. USA! USA! USA!

Aaaaaaaand, dream over!
This is about city limits - not metros. Your dream is fun, though.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-10-2012, 07:24 PM
 
Location: Up on the moon laughing down on you
18,509 posts, read 28,180,477 times
Reputation: 7598
Quote:
Originally Posted by west336 View Post
I'm going to think way outside the box and put Minneapolis, Detroit and possibly Cleveland in the top 10 metros by 2030-2040, when I predict there to be a MAJOR water crisis in the country and world and coupled with global climate change and increasingly milder temps up North, I think people will want to swarm to areas lush with natural fresh water -- like the Great Lakes. I'd include Chicago too but it's already in the top 3.

This is meant to be more playful than anything, as I wouldn't put any money on this happening, but if it did, I can see these areas becoming increasingly vital and popular -- and rich! I know, I know.....it's not just "our" water, and we share it with Canada. To get around this, I predict (with this scenario) a full-scale war (Civil War II, if you will) between the U.S. and Canada and in 2 short weeks, the U.S. will take over most Canadian assets. USA! USA! USA!

Aaaaaaaand, dream over!
I predict the opposite. The polar icecaps are going to rapidly expand taking over most of Canada and making the Midwest the new Antartica. Everyone will flock to the south where the descending ice will create New Great Lakes in Southern Missouri.

midwest farms will cease to exist and the farmers will move south. Little Rock will be the new Windy City. New York Will be moved to New Orleans. Boston will combine with Houston, Philadelphia will Combine with Dallas, DC will remain where it is. Cleveland will combine with Birmingham and MSP will combine will combine with Atlanta.

To gain more resources the US will take over Mexico and kick everyone there out, and use the land for farming. USA! USA! USA!


Aaaaaaand, Dream over!
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.
Similar Threads
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