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.
There is way to many variables to say what will happen in 20 years but anythings possible.
exactly what I am saying. The Census may throw a curve ball and say okay only core counties are the metro now. That would knock out about 6 counties from the Houston metro.
They could also decrease the interaction threshold or increase it.
When the definitions were changed in 2003 from metros with 500K and more 29 of them added counties, 13 of them lost counties, 9 metros were split into two or more metros, 23 (Including Dallas and Fort Worth) were combined into one metro.
Quote:
Adding Counties to Metro Areas—Atlanta
Twenty-nine of the 102 largest metropolitan areas experienced a net addition of counties in the transition to the new system. Most of these metro areas are located in the middle and southern regions of the Country, where population is growing and spreading out quickly. Atlanta offers the most dramatic example of a Metropolitan area with additional counties in its definition. Metropolitan Atlanta is undergoing
rapid population growth, mostly in its suburbs, which grew by 44 percent in the 1990s. The new definition of
metro Atlanta reflects this sprawling suburban pattern and offers more than one choice for delineating the area. Under the old standards, Atlanta was a single MSA made up of 20 counties.
The new system creates the 28-county Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA MetroSA (the original 20 counties plus eight additional ones). It also gives the option of using the 33- county Atlanta-Sandy Springs-
Gainesville Combined Statistical Area (CSA), which includes the Gainesville MetroSA (one county), and four MicBullBoxer31 (one county each)
Quote:
Separating a Metro Area into Two or More New Areas— Raleigh-Durham
Of the 102 largest MSAs/PMSAs, nine split into two or more metro areas under the new system. These metro areas are scattered around the country. Similar to those metro areas that lost counties, the cleaving of these metro areas reflects the stricter commuting thresholds under the new system, and
perhaps an emerging economic independence separating formerly closeknit neighbors.
Under the old standards, the area of North Carolina known as the “research triangle”—the Raleigh- Durham-Chapel Hill, NC MSA–consisted of six counties. The new standards split the triangle into two metropolitan areas: the Durham, NC MetroSA and the Raleigh-Cary MetroSA.
Together, the two metro areas consist of the same six counties plus one additional county in the Durham
metro area. The Raleigh-Durham- Cary, NC CSA combines these two MetBullBoxer31 with the new one-county
Dunn, NC MicroSA (Figure 8). Like Raleigh-Durham, the new standards also split the former Vallejo-Fairfield-
Napa, CA PMSA into two MetBullBoxer31, and the Grand Rapids-Muskegon- Holland, MI MSA into three MetBullBoxer31
and one MicroSA.
Quote:
Combining Two or More Metro Areas into One Area—Dallas-Ft. Worth and New York
Twenty-three MSAs and PMSAs under the old system combined with neighboring areas to form new, larger MetBullBoxer31. In Dallas-Fort Worth, the combination produced a region with several different layers. Under the old standards, Dallas-Fort Worth, TX was a 12-county CMSA, divided into two PMSAs: Dallas (with eight counties) and Fort Worth-Arlington (with four counties) (Figure 9). The new standards create the unified Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX MetroSA, comprised of 12 counties (two of which are different from the originals). And because the metro area contains over 5 million people, OMB further delineated two Metropolitan Divisions within the region: Dallas-Plano-Irving and Fort Worth-Arlington. These divisions resemble the old PMSAs, and recognize that each of the areas still retains some individual economic
character. In addition, the new Dallas-Fort Worth, TX CSA includes the MetroSA and four surrounding micropolitan areas.
If the Dallas-Forth Worth changes are complex, the changes to the New York metro area might rank as mindboggling. Yet the new metropolitan geography that results is arguably more satisfying than the old one.18 The old New York PMSA consisted of eight counties—the five New York City boroughs and three New York state counties north of the city. Suburbs just across the Hudson River in New Jersey, and those just a county or two away on Long Island, occupied different PMSAs altogether. In cross-metropolitan analyses, the New York metro area (PMSA) often seemed an outlier because the city so dominated the area’s demographic and economic characteristics. With the release of the new standards, several former PMSAs in the New York CMSA combined to form the New York-Northern New Jersey- Long Island, NY-NJ-PA MetroSA, consisting of 23 counties in three states. This expansive new MetroSA incorporates four Metropolitan Divisions.
I don't know why people are so strong in their opinion that this will never pass this or this will always have more than this. The Census has the final say. In 2002 Dallas was ranked below Atlanta and right above Nassau-Suffolk. Now NS is no longer a separate metro and Dallas jumped 6 spots passing Atlanta, Houston, Detroit, DC, Philly. Boston dropped from the 4th spot to number ten. I bet at the start of 2003 nerds were online too saying Dallas would take 60 years before it passes Boston, because at the start of the year Dallas was at 3M and Boston was at 6M. But by summer, after the census had their say Boston was down to 4M and DFW was a full million ahead. Miami jumped from a small metro ranked at 24 to number 6.
So yes I agree with you Matty. There are too many variables to say such and such will or wont happen.
Houston has a strong chance of passing Chicago in city population in the next 20 years just by population growth alone--it also has the possibility of annexing more of the municipalities around or within it (though those aren't that populous). It's true that Chicago might have a population rebound by then and grow, but looking at the general trends for Chicago and how other large US cities that have already gone through the deceleration of population loss, stabilisation, and then slowly accelerating population growth, it seems unlikely that Chicago would buck completely what other cities have done and ramp up population growth significantly faster than other cities. Meanwhile, I can see a deceleration of growth for Houston (though not guaranteed as maybe the energy industry will actually be even more lucrative in the near future) but I don't see it having a massive deceleration or even registering a population loss.
In terms of the metro area, it seems very unlikely for that to happen within 20 years. The gap is simply much too big and Chicago's metro growth in absolute numbers isn't smaller enough than Houston's metro growth.
^ which is why the only thing that really matters is urban area population.
UAs are set by the census too, easily manipulated
Quote:
Originally Posted by OyCrumbler
In terms of the metro area, it seems very unlikely for that to happen within 20 years. The gap is simply much too big and Chicago's metro growth in absolute numbers isn't smaller enough than Houston's metro growth.
I guess you miss the whole post about how fluid metro definitions are. Ten years ago Boston was ahead of Dallas by 3M The same that Chicago is currently ahead of Houston, but after the metros were redefined DFW came out 1M ahead of Boston for a net 4M change.
You cannot be so set in current definitions. They don't stick.
I guess you miss the whole post about how fluid metro definitions are. Ten years ago Boston was ahead of Dallas by 3M The same that Chicago is currently ahead of Houston, but after the metros were redefined DFW came out 1M ahead of Boston for a net 4M change.
You cannot be so set in current definitions. They don't stick.
LOL give it up hun, Houston still has to pass up DFW before it can even begin to challenge Chicago, we both know city limits never tell the full story
LOL give it up hun, Houston still has to pass up DFW before it can even begin to challenge Chicago, we both know city limits never tell the full story
DFW just passed Houston in 2003. don't act like you didn't notice that DFW is a fast growing metro too. We are not talking city limits here. Did you read my posts? Can you? I can break it down for you if you would like
DFW has been bigger than Houston since the 90s though. It was called the Dallas-Fort Worth PMSA. The Dallas PMSA which was simply the Dallas-Irving-Plano division was smaller than the Houston PMSA.
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.
