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.
Dallas and Atlanta are huge centers of transportation and logistics. If Chicago grew as large as it did, there's no reason Dallas and Atlanta can't keep growing into eventual Megapolises. Dallas is doing it now and unlike Houston, it's not susceptible to flooding and hurricanes. I have a cousin who used to live in the Houston area with her baby until her apartment flooded during Hurricane Harvey, then decided to pack up and head for Dallas and has no plans to return to Houston.
Congrats to her and her baby.
But Harvey probably put less of a hurt into Houston than the oil bust. Houston has gotten flooded three times before Harvey and still grew well over 100,000. Besides, DFW has weather problems of its own.
I think Houston will always be a fast growing city, since it’s a port town compared to places like Atlanta, Dallas, and Phoenix. Those areas can only grow so much.
Opposite is true. I have greater faith in the future of desalination than preventing sea level rises, so I think Houston being a coastal city does it no benefit in terms of future growth. Houston can always increase density but only sprawl in certain directions. DFW cab sprawl in any direction while also increasing density.
When comparing these new figures with the 2010 census we find that the growth of DFW and Greater Houston is almost identical as of this year for this decade.
DFW has gained 973,448
Greater Houston has gained 972,011
anecdotal evidence aside these are the numbers as they stand now.
I think Houston will always be a fast growing city, since it’s a port town compared to places like Atlanta, Dallas, and Phoenix. Those areas can only grow so much.
Those areas can grow a lot. Since they aren't coastal, they are much less susceptible to certain natural disasters and the effects of global warming, plus there's not much standing in the way that prevents them from sprawling in practically every direction.
I think a lot of people besides a select few are happy that Houston is “failing.” Lol.
Houston is definitely “coastal,” but it’s further inland at the same time. And the fast growing areas are much further inland, like Montgomery County (north) and West Houston. League City and Clearlake are fast growing too, but they aren’t right on the coast. Houston is not in bad of a shape like New Orleans, New York City, and Miami when it comes to rising sea levels; Galveston will be affected, but that area loses population anyway.
Also, now that I think about it, Houston was probably affected due to slow international migration. Of course, we may not know this to be factual until the international data comes out, but we can see how DFW is more domestic.
Again, I don’t think Harvey will play a huge role in Houston’s “fail” than oil and gas. Though, I wouldn’t leave it completely out due to national attention, but several flooding events didn’t stop it from growing more than, at most times, all metro areas in the nation. So, maybe, this oil bust was/is worse than what I’d expected.
Cleveland.com has an interactive US county map. If you know a metro’s counties, you can add up the metro totals.
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.
