Census: Texas is the hot place to live!! (Houston, Dallas: apartment, construction)

[Mike78613]

Yee-Haww!

Way to go TEXAS!!

Census: Texas is the hot place to live - Yahoo! News (broken link)

[blueskies49]

If it's controlled growth, it's good but for the most part it's not, IMO. Too many people at once, the traffic, the construction, it's just a headache.

[Trainwreck20]

It is the frying pan or the fire....I guess it is better to have growth and a job than no growth and no job. I agree that there are a lot of people moving here, but hard to tell what the long term effect is....

[beowulf7]

I read about it in the Houston Chronicle as well. Where I live (D/FW) experienced the biggest population boom. I hope it doesn't lead to overpopulation and the problems it causes.

[Lakewooder]

Dallas is trying to go denser (Forward Dallas Plan) and having luck with the transit-oriented developments along DART rail and converting old office buildings downtown to residential. DART rail is about to double its scope in the next couple of years and other independent rail lines are being considered. Also Dallas leads the nation in old apartment teardowns, over 7,000 units last year. They are being replaced with more urban, taller and denser buildings, some with retail on the first floor. The Trinity River is being redeveloped near downtown to include large apartment buildings, Calatrava suspension bridges, lakes and even a whitewater course.

[Lucidus]

As usual this article does not give enough information to satisfy the average City-Data user.

The metropolitan areas of Texas ranked by percent growth from July 06 to July 07:

Austin-Round Rock 4.3
Killeen-Temple-Fort Hood 3.5
McAllen-Edinburg-Mission 3.0
San Antonio 2.8
Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington 2.7
Laredo 2.5
Odessa 2.3
Midland 2.3
Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown 2.2
Tyler 2.0
Brownsville-Harlingen 2.0
Sherman-Denison 1.4
El Paso 1.3
College Station-Bryan 1.3
Victoria 1.0
Longview 0.9
Waco 0.8
Lubbock 0.8
Amarillo 0.8
Beaumont-Port Arthur 0.5
San Angelo 0.4
Abilene 0.3
Corpus Christi 0.2
Wichita Falls -0.9

Texas metropolitan areas ranked by absolute growth from July 06 to July 07:

Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington 162,250
Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown 120,544
Austin-Round Rock 65,880
San Antonio 53,925
McAllen-Edinburg-Mission 21,020
Killeen-Temple-Fort Hood 12,428
El Paso 9,110
Brownsville-Harlingen 7,502
Laredo 5,608
Tyler 3,907
Odessa 2,921
Midland 2,847
College Station-Bryan 2,511
Lubbock 2,149
Waco 1,917
Longview 1,880
Amarillo 1,858
Beaumont-Port Arthur 1,806
Sherman-Denison 1,584
Victoria 1,089
Corpus Christi 1,011
Abilene 521
San Angelo 426
Wichita Falls -1,307

Texas metropolitan areas ranked by size as of July 07.

Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington 6,145,037
Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown 5,628,101
San Antonio 1,990,675
Austin-Round Rock 1,598,161
El Paso 734,669
McAllen-Edinburg-Mission 710,514
Corpus Christi 414,376
Brownsville-Harlingen 387,210
Beaumont-Port Arthur 376,241
Killeen-Temple-Fort Hood 370,008
Lubbock 267,211
Amarillo 242,240
Laredo 233,152
Waco 228,123
Longview 203,611
College Station-Bryan 203,371
Tyler 198,705
Abilene 159,343
Wichita Falls 148,148
Odessa 129,570
Midland 126,408
Sherman-Denison 118,675
Victoria 113,797
San Angelo 108,085

Source:
Estimates of Population Change for Metropolitan Statistical Areas and Rankings: July 1, 2007 to July 1, 2007

[Trainwreck20]

I did think it was odd the article gave absolute ranking instead of percent, which to the average resident is more 'apparent', probably.

So Austin metro is 80% the size of the SA metro? SA always looks much bigger to me, probably all the nice highways .

I wonder what the average population growth in the US was last year...?

EDIT: Okay, it appears that the US growth rate is right aroun 0.9 percent, so if you subtract that out, you get the influx growth as oppose to the average growth in the country as a whole. the following Texas areas were 'shrinking' compared to the average US growth:

• Waco 0.8
• Lubbock 0.8
• Amarillo 0.8
• Beaumont-Port Arthur 0.5
• San Angelo 0.4
• Abilene 0.3
• Corpus Christi 0.2
• Wichita Falls -0.9

[tstone]

Originally Posted by beowulf7

I read about it in the Houston Chronicle as well. Where I live (D/FW) experienced the biggest population boom. I hope it doesn't lead to overpopulation and the problems it causes.

LA is the poster-boy city for the problems you're implying. One just needs to visit to see how terrible some things are there, or failing that- read about it on the LA board on this site... combined with insane housing costs.

I'm afraid all of these ''visions'' are just turning Dallas and Houston into something they aren't. Let's pray these two metro areas don't get ruined in the same way that people have already ruined SoCal.

[Lucidus]

Originally Posted by Trainwreck20

I did think it was odd the article gave absolute ranking instead of percent, which to the average resident is more 'apparent', probably.

So Austin metro is 80% the size of the SA metro? SA always looks much bigger to me, probably all the nice highways .

I wonder what the average population growth in the US was last year...?

EDIT: Okay, it appears that the US growth rate is right aroun 0.9 percent, so if you subtract that out, you get the influx growth as oppose to the average growth in the country as a whole. the following Texas areas were 'shrinking' compared to the average US growth:

• Waco 0.8
• Lubbock 0.8
• Amarillo 0.8
• Beaumont-Port Arthur 0.5
• San Angelo 0.4
• Abilene 0.3
• Corpus Christi 0.2
• Wichita Falls -0.9

That is an interesting way to look at the data. I caluculated an average for all U.S. metro areas in excel and the average was 1.1.

So all of these areas are "shrinking" compared to the national average:

Victoria 1.0
Longview 0.9
Waco 0.8
Lubbock 0.8
Amarillo 0.8
Beaumont-Port Arthur 0.5
San Angelo 0.4
Abilene 0.3
Corpus Christi 0.2
Wichita Falls -0.9

[KerrTown]

What's causing the huge population growth in DFW? I can't believe Atlanta is second and then Houston etc...