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.
haha yea this reminded me for a Simpsons quote for some reason:
Homer: Er, I need another extension on my mortgage payments. Manager: I understand that Mr. Simpson, but according to our computer,
your credit history is not good. It says here that you've been
predeclined for every major credit card. It also says that you
once grabbed a dog by the hind legs and pushed him around like
a vacuum cleaner. Homer: That was in the third grade! Manager: Yeah, well, it all goes on your permanent record. I'm sorry,
but if you don't come up with that money by tomorrow, the bank
is going to take your house. Homer: Well, good luck finding it, because I'm going to take the
numbers off tonight! Manager: Well, we'll look for the house with no numbers. Homer: Then I'll take off the numbers on my neighbor's house. Manager: So, well then we'll look for the house next to the house with
no numbers. Homer: [angrily] All right, you'll get your money.
Location: Austin, TX/Chicago, IL/Houston, TX/Washington, DC
10,138 posts, read 16,035,535 times
Reputation: 4047
Quote:
Originally Posted by andrew61
What surprised me was that San Antonio overtook Dallas as Texas' second-largest city. I have to admit I didn't see that one coming.
Haha, by the estimates it actually overtook Dallas back in 2003 and has since only widened the gap.
The difference here is though that San Antonio (in my opinion) has a much more active core area. It makes more use of it than Dallas does, and many in San Antonio see that area as a great place to live where as Dallas for some decades now has been tremendously losing clout to its suburbs and to Fort Worth.
Dallas's ambitious rail expansion isn't to serve the city as much as its to serve the suburbs, it has to work with the suburbs to last because its suburbs are gaining the upper hand. Plano the city itself is denser than Dallas, Arlington is denser than Dallas, & Fort Worth is out pacing Dallas itself.
Dallas in the last decade has tried to copy Fort Worth's downtown mold but its gotten mixed results, like Victory Park, they build an urban park but it failed. Now the project is the do what Fort Worth is doing with the Trinity River Development to make downtown a more attractive place and setting, its just not keeping pace with infill on the level of other Texas cities.
San Antonio is basing all their development around the core, Austin obviously is also, Houston's taken every opportunity and has come with successful experiments and results from its urban parks, its sports arena's, and other infill. Fort Worth is going through a downtown recreation, and Dallas is the one getting left behind in the distant.
To be honest, it may be apart of a larger Metropolitan Area area, but Dallas owes its suburbs more than they owe it. It's the reverse case with all of the other Texas cities.
Haha, by the estimates it actually overtook Dallas back in 2003 and has since only widened the gap.
The difference here is though that San Antonio (in my opinion) has a much more active core area. It makes more use of it than Dallas does, and many in San Antonio see that area as a great place to live where as Dallas for some decades now has been tremendously losing clout to its suburbs and to Fort Worth.
Dallas's ambitious rail expansion isn't to serve the city as much as its to serve the suburbs, it has to work with the suburbs to last because its suburbs are gaining the upper hand. Plano the city itself is denser than Dallas, Arlington is denser than Dallas, & Fort Worth is out pacing Dallas itself.
Dallas in the last decade has tried to copy Fort Worth's downtown mold but its gotten mixed results, like Victory Park, they build an urban park but it failed. Now the project is the do what Fort Worth is doing with the Trinity River Development to make downtown a more attractive place and setting, its just not keeping pace with infill on the level of other Texas cities.
San Antonio is basing all their development around the core, Austin obviously is also, Houston's taken every opportunity and has come with successful experiments and results from its urban parks, its sports arena's, and other infill. Fort Worth is going through a downtown recreation, and Dallas is the one getting left behind in the distant.
To be honest, it may be apart of a larger Metropolitan Area area, but Dallas owes its suburbs more than they owe it. It's the reverse case with all of the other Texas cities.
And many of Dallas' suburbs are no creating these fake Downtown areas, with lofts, condos, urban apartments (not those suburban style ones), with retail at the bottom. Some bars, too. The Legacy area in Plano is a great example. A lot of people that live there work in the nearby office parks that are home to some of America's largest companies (JC Penney, EDS, Dr. Pepper, Pizza Hut, etc.). And those are all in Plano city limits. Same thing is happening over in Irving with Las Colinas, that also is home to some of the nation's largest companies (Exxon, Kimberly-Clark...makers of Kleenex/Huggies, etc.). Not sure if families are leaving Dallas more now, or what, but Dallas being locked in by its suburbs is going to hurt, as they continue to get bigger. Not to mention Fort Worth.
Location: Austin, TX/Chicago, IL/Houston, TX/Washington, DC
10,138 posts, read 16,035,535 times
Reputation: 4047
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scarface713
And many of Dallas' suburbs are no creating these fake Downtown areas, with lofts, condos, urban apartments (not those suburban style ones), with retail at the bottom. Some bars, too. The Legacy area in Plano is a great example. A lot of people that live there work in the nearby office parks that are home to some of America's largest companies (JC Penney, EDS, Dr. Pepper, Pizza Hut, etc.). And those are all in Plano city limits. Same thing is happening over in Irving with Las Colinas, that also is home to some of the nation's largest companies (Exxon, Kimberly-Clark...makers of Kleenex/Huggies, etc.). Not sure if families are leaving Dallas more now, or what, but Dallas being locked in by its suburbs is going to hurt, as they continue to get bigger. Not to mention Fort Worth.
Haha yeah I remember Las Calinas in Irving, I used to live in Irving before at one point a while ago (its where I lived when I was in the Metroplex). It was a very nice area (and pretty too) and Las Calinas always had good amount of activity. The park off MacArthur would always be busy and full regardless of what time of day it would be.
It's one of the main reasons why I really love the Metroplex a lot too, that was a great area of the city and to be frank even when my family & I lived in Dallas (Irving actually) we never liked going into Dallas all that much to do anything. When moving to Houston, Houston made the entire metro area realize and understand that they need it more than it needs them. Everything about Houston (almost everything) is in the city itself, and of that 60% of those things being inside the Inner Loop.
My parents instantly loved that more so than Dallas's mode because it gave us a chance to explore our city and a reason to get out of the house more so. It actually best fit the mold to why my parents likes Washington DC & Chicago too.
The thing with Dallas is, and I don't mean this as a knock to them at all but whatever differences and similarity between the city of Dallas & Houston that exist today are just for the present times. Houston already leads in being the more urban city between the two, and in my opinion, wait scratch that its almost a fact (as the Census indicates) that that Houston is pushing further ahead of Dallas more so. In urban planning class here in Austin, my professor went over a unit on downtown revitalization and Dallas was our Texas model for what not to do to revitalize downtown. Fort Worth & San Antonio were the positive models.
Dallas missed its chance to get more professional sports arenas in downtown, it builds all these mega expensive projects that look flashy like Victory Park and its very costly and they fail because Dallas goes for one demographic instead of the whole. They aren't doing anything to implement nightlife into downtown or more shopping. Houston's done everything Dallas hasn't in this regard.
Fort Worth is doing everything Dallas hasn't to get more to liven the more attractive downtown core area and also with a distinct culture and influence of its own. And to me personally I think the suburbs like Plano, Irving, & Arlington are totally enjoying this, Dallas is paying for everyone's mass transit but its not going to make much commission off of that, it hasn't yet at all in the last decade and it shows today with figures.
Dallas is really cool and I legitimately like it a ton, and they're very aggressive to get things done, but they do NOT plan ahead at all or plan carefully and to be honest they really could ask Fort Worth for advice on how to help revitalize their downtown. They need it, other cities in Texas are leaving Dallas behind (city wise) in terms of development and infill with the right kind of projects. I know Dallas has lots of stuff going on too for infill but its met with a lot of bad luck like high vacancy rates, financing troubles, and things like that, hopefully they can pick up and compete more with their suburbs soon.
Chicago and Houston missing estimates by 150,000, Dallas only growing by a few people. The frustrating part is rationally speaking there were some severe undercounts - especially given how those cities behaved during the 2000's. Chicago was more stable than it has been in 50 years, Houston and Dallas are going gangbusters. The cities will all lose federal funding they thought they would receive - and in actuality the "missing people" were and are probably in the cities right now.
Chicago and Houston missing estimates by 150,000, Dallas only growing by a few people. The frustrating part is rationally speaking there were some severe undercounts - especially given how those cities behaved during the 2000's. Chicago was more stable than it has been in 50 years, Houston and Dallas are going gangbusters. The cities will all lose federal funding they thought they would receive - and in actuality the "missing people" were and are probably in the cities right now.
The City of Houston still grew by about 145K residents though. That's almost as much as Chicagoland grew this decade, IIRC. Dallas went stagnant and only grew by about 9,000 people (less than a percent). I think the most interesting this is the severe overestimation of the growth in DFW. The final Census numbers even put it below the estimate given in 2009.
I thought downtown Dallas had come a long way. It seems downtown Dallas has added a lot more residents and offices than Downtown Fort Worth. It's the areas outside of Downtown Dallas that are hemorrhaging.
That would be my guess anyway. Is downtown dallas really still that bad? I think they have come a long way.
And nothing against Forth Worth, but that is simply a city that has a ton of suburban growth occurring inside its city limits, like Kansas City, MO, Indianapolis etc. It's just getting growth that otherwise would be in suburbs, but they have the land to compete.
Not sure it's a fair comparison. Although Downtown Fort Worth is nice has has been growing too.
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.
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.
