Dallas and Fort Worth separate economic and population stats (Arlington: 2014, leasing)

[Trae713]

No, actually Pasadena and Pearland are larger than the woodlands. League city is about to be and Sugar Land will too once it annexes. Katy will never be a principal city though. All the new development in Katy is in Houston ETJ. The only land Houston is releasing to Katy are tiny parcels to the west of the City of Katy.

[PeopleAreStrange]

Originally Posted by AfroAmericanofColor

Neither Plano nor Irving are suburbs either. Garland and Mesquite are suburbs. Allen is a suburb. Plano and Irving are principle cities. Think of Houston. Both Katy and the Woodlands are located just too far away to be considered suburbs of Houston. Still, they don't have near the development around them right now as do Irving and Plano. I would think Katy will become symbiotic with the I-10 energy corridor in Houston. The Woodlands is just now separating itself from Houston though I do think it is already impacting the area around it. Conroe is fast becoming a suburb of The Woodlands as is the Spring area to the south of it in Houston.

Even McKinney is developing as a symbiotic part of Plano. In terms of where Dallas ends and North Dallas begins. I think Dallas ends at Preston Center along the North Dallas Tollway and at the Presbyterian Medical Center along the Central Expressway Corridor. Everything north of that is part of what is North Dallas. For example, as Texas Instruments is part of the Richardson Telecom Corridor, the old Park Central development (the Dallas version of Greenway Plaza) is to Texas instruments what Greenway Plaza is to the Galleria area in Houston.

As Houston has already incorporated The Woodlands agreeing to allow it to remain separate for the time being, the best it can ever be is a principle area of Houston. However, Katy can develop into a principle city in its own right spawning its own suburbs and having little to do with Houston in the future.

Plano and Irving are suburbs. They do not have CBDs, and they revolve around Dallas, the principle city for that side of the metroplex. Dallas and Fort Worth are the only principle cities in the DFW metroplex.

[JimBaker488]

Originally Posted by TexasTallest

THIS. ^^^

according to Wikipedia...

Five "principal" cities are designated within Houston–The Woodlands–Sugar Land metropolitan area:
Houston – 2,242,193
The Woodlands - 93,848
Sugar Land – 80,704
Baytown – 70,330
Conroe – 55,429

so The Woodlands is the second largest city in the Houston metro, with less than 100,000 people... in comparison here is the list of cities in the DFW metro with over 100,000 people from Wikipedias DFW page.

Dallas (1,207,420)
Fort Worth (757,810)
Arlington (365,860)
Plano (261,900)
Garland (228,060)
Irving (218,850)
Grand Prairie (176,980)
Mesquite (139,950)
McKinney (136,180)
Frisco (125,500)
Carrollton (121,150)
Denton (115,810)
Richardson (100,450)

13 cities in the DFW metro are over 100,000 people. Houston has ONE (Houston).

Thanks for the stats TexasTallest. So then like I'm saying here, Houston is a classic central anchor city within a large metro, but when one looks to North Texas Dallas would be a marginal anchor city at best. Dallas boosters go on and on about the "legend of Dallas", while always seeming to discount and play down the reality of Dallas as it relates to the other very significant cities in North Texas.

[rynetwo]

Originally Posted by TexasTallest

THIS. ^^^

according to Wikipedia...

Five "principal" cities are designated within Houston–The Woodlands–Sugar Land metropolitan area:
Houston – 2,242,193
The Woodlands - 93,848
Sugar Land – 80,704
Baytown – 70,330
Conroe – 55,429

so The Woodlands is the second largest city in the Houston metro, with less than 100,000 people... in comparison here is the list of cities in the DFW metro with over 100,000 people from Wikipedias DFW page.

Dallas (1,207,420)
Fort Worth (757,810)
Arlington (365,860)
Plano (261,900)
Garland (228,060)
Irving (218,850)
Grand Prairie (176,980)
Mesquite (139,950)
McKinney (136,180)
Frisco (125,500)
Carrollton (121,150)
Denton (115,810)
Richardson (100,450)

13 cities in the DFW metro are over 100,000 people. Houston has ONE (Houston).

Pasadena, Texas 152,272

Pearland, Texas 96,294

[Cowboys fan in Houston]

Originally Posted by JimBaker488

Thanks for the stats TexasTallest. So then like I'm saying here, Houston is a classic central anchor city within a large metro, but when one looks to North Texas Dallas would be a marginal anchor city at best. Dallas boosters go on and on about the "legend of Dallas", while always seeming to discount and play down the reality of Dallas as it relates to the other very significant cities in North Texas.

Jim, NO ONE DISPUTED THAT.

All we said is that there is no clear definition of where the "Dallas metro area" ends and the "Fort Worth metro area" begins. The two have grown together to the point that they can't be divided. The two are NOT separate metro areas any more, they are one and can no longer be divided.

The rest of your rant, you hallucinated. Nobody on here said Fort Worth is a suburb.

[Aceraceae]

Originally Posted by JimBaker488

Thanks for the stats TexasTallest. So then like I'm saying here, Houston is a classic central anchor city within a large metro, but when one looks to North Texas Dallas would be a marginal anchor city at best. Dallas boosters go on and on about the "legend of Dallas", while always seeming to discount and play down the reality of Dallas as it relates to the other very significant cities in North Texas.

Doesn't this legitimize the point you have been battling against in regard to having metropolitan divisions? With so many cities of large population it has just grown into one large area.

[Aceraceae]

Originally Posted by peterlemonjello

Jim, NO ONE DISPUTED THAT.

All we said is that there is no clear definition of where the "Dallas metro area" ends and the "Fort Worth metro area" begins. The two have grown together to the point that they can't be divided. The two are NOT separate metro areas any more, they are one and can no longer be divided.

The rest of your rant, you hallucinated. Nobody on here said Fort Worth is a suburb.

Beat me to it.

[AfroAmericanofColor]

Originally Posted by PeopleAreStrange

Plano and Irving are suburbs. They do not have CBDs, and they revolve around Dallas, the principle city for that side of the metroplex. Dallas and Fort Worth are the only principle cities in the DFW metroplex.

Concerning the city of Irving, the urban district of Las Colinas is already challenging downtown Fort Worth in size.
The city of Plano is surrounded by numerous business districts (corridors). And Richardson, Addison, Farmers Branch, McKinney, and Frisco aren't your typical suburbs as they each have major corporations based in them. Also add Allen, Carrolton, and The Colony to that. All told, there are eight suburbs surrounding the city of Plano not even including a portion of far North Dallas.

[TheOverdog]

Plano and Irving are suburbs. They do not have CBDs, and they revolve around Dallas,

Plano has the equivelent of a CBD (N Dallas Tollway Parker to Legacy) that employs more people and has multiple times more office space than the CBD in downtown Ft Worth. Look up TransUnion reports for population and office space sq footage.

[Exult.Q36]

Originally Posted by TheOverdog

Plano has the equivelent of a CBD (N Dallas Tollway Parker to Legacy) that employs more people and has multiple times more office space than the CBD in downtown Ft Worth. Look up TransUnion reports for population and office space sq footage.

Well, office activity has never been a Fort Worth strong point. The Dallas side of the metro area has always led that category. The Fort Worth area has a very low office vacancy rate compared to Dallas being over 20%. Because Downtown Fort Worth office vacancy rate is around 6% one could reasonably assume that office development will be on the rise in the near future. IMO the Dallas side of the metro has a over built office market. When the Fort Worth side of the metro does decide to build more office space to anticipate growth it could throw the DFW metro office vacancy rate back over 30%, due to Dallas over built market.