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.
Personally, I wish Houston DIDN'T have so much land in it's city limits, and confined it's area to a much more reasonable size. If it were up to me it would be at least half the land it covers today. Maybe less. It skews so many angles and really makes it hard to compare certain stats to other cities.
That said, I highly doubt Houston's MSA will pass up Chicago's any time soon. Same goes for DFW (not passing Chicago any time soon). Metro Houston and metro Dallas-Ft. Worth have a history of going back and forth with each other over growth rates. They will both continue growing to be sure, but which one is most likely to pass up Chicago first is anybody's guess. Still too close to call that one, even if DFW does currently have a slight lead.
I agree with the people who are saying Houston-city will pass up Chicago-city long before MSA will pass MSA. Especially if Houston keeps annexing it's suburbs. Given THAT particular tendency Houston has, it could happen next week (sarcasm).
Houston has not annex land since the 90,s and emerging areas have actual taken to buy land from Houston to deal with their own growth
Houston has not annex land since the 90,s and emerging areas have actual taken to buy land from Houston to deal with their own growth
It's city limits are still much larger than Dallas, so there is no getting around that basic fact. The better question is "would Dallas have a larger population if it had the same city limit boundaries as Houston?"
It's city limits are still much larger than Dallas, so there is no getting around that basic fact.
Who is trying to get around anythig I am just updating out of date info, Houston has not annex since kingwoods in the 90,s and sold off some land to other areas , that wanted to but it for future growth
Houston has not annex land since the 90,s and emerging areas have actual taken to buy land from Houston to deal with their own growth
The 90's weren't that long ago. The only reason I mentioned it was because Houston has a history, and a recent one at that, of being annexation-happy. A lot of the growth spurts in population over the last 40 years can be attributed to this.
The 90's weren't that long ago. The only reason I mentioned it was because Houston has a history, and a recent one at that, of being annexation-happy. A lot of the growth spurts in population over the last 40 years can be attributed to this.
It's city limits are still much larger than Dallas, so there is no getting around that basic fact. The better question is "would Dallas have a larger population if it had the same city limit boundaries as Houston?"
Probably not actually, but they would be much, much closer. It would be very close. And it would also depend on where the lines were drawn. Both cities are pretty much equally dense once you take all factors into account. Both are also rapidly densifying their respective inner-cities, and each has their most dense neighborhoods slightly outside of their cores (Houston-Gulfton, Dallas-Vickery Meadow).
No land as in every square mile is spoken for, though most of that is suburban i don't think it was necessary to bring up density numbers.
The person I quoted above said Dallas will become more dense. Just pointing out that it has a long ways to go. I wouldn't consider 3,500 people per sq mile too awfully dense.
Personally, I wish Houston DIDN'T have so much land in it's city limits, and confined it's area to a much more reasonable size. If it were up to me it would be at least half the land it covers today. Maybe less. It skews so many angles and really makes it hard to compare certain stats to other cities.
That said, I highly doubt Houston's MSA will pass up Chicago's any time soon. Same goes for DFW (not passing Chicago any time soon). Metro Houston and metro Dallas-Ft. Worth have a history of going back and forth with each other over growth rates. They will both continue growing to be sure, but which one is most likely to pass up Chicago first is anybody's guess. Still too close to call that one, even if DFW does currently have a slight lead.
I agree with the people who are saying Houston-city will pass up Chicago-city long before MSA will pass MSA. Especially if Houston keeps annexing it's suburbs. Given THAT particular tendency Houston has, it could happen next week (sarcasm).
They both may not even pass Chicago up.. I'd personally like to see Houston at a sold number 4 for a little while by city, metro, and economy before leaping Chicago in any of those areas... But that's just me. I wouldn't be against it if we become the 3rd largest city and 5th largest metro still.
The 90's weren't that long ago. The only reason I mentioned it was because Houston has a history, and a recent one at that, of being annexation-happy. A lot of the growth spurts in population over the last 40 years can be attributed to this.
Most of Houston annex was into areas that were undevolped at the time... the few times Houston did annex a established area the populatiion was prop lest that 10,000.. It a miscocpetion Houston went around eatting up all the communties when in reality many of them did not even exist prior to annex.. Houston like most cities in america hUS saw it growth in pop thu most immigration both from in the U.S and Out
1920 -1930 75.5%( casue was a large influx of Blacks from other southern cities)
1940-50 saw a 55% ( due to the war effort which saw massive amount of fedral money, pump into Houston then emerging oil companies)
1950-1960 57.4%( The medical center become fully online as did the highways
1970-1980-31.4%( Biggest oil boom period)
200-2010) saw 150,000 katrina move here, belive that more that 2/3 have stayed
Correction kind woods was 37,00 at the time of annex in 94 making it the largest , as of now 80,000
Houston is able to reach a population of 586,000 people in the 96 square miles within it's Inner Loop. At about 5 square miles larger than Chicago's land area (so about 240 square miles), it gets to a population of 1,218,300. Noticeably 45% of Chicago's present population. While that's considerably smaller and less dense, the massive 599 square miles of land area is just a tax absorbing buffer. Within it's ETJ (extra-territorial jurisdiction) there are some 1.7 million people living there, that aren't in any city that can be annexed into Houston.
The city leaders have mentioned they wont be annexing anything anymore, except for the site of the new Exxon Mobil corporate campus, which was the agreement for the tax abatement. I believe they've already taken that area in and are done annexing.
As for surpassing, I honestly don't care for that.
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.
