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.
I don’t get the sense of that at all. Nothing like guns. It was a much bigger deal when I-540 cut through North Raleigh when houses had to be moved. And neighborhoods complained so loud on I-440 that they built a brick wall to try and contain some of the noise. At least here, the main commuter rail proposal now (Garner-to-Durham) would run on already-built lines.
But even the botched Durham-to-Chapel Hill line which would have built new rail, the main issue was a hospital. All the major stakeholders including the voters signed off on the line, while Duke finally said the line would interfere with their medical equipment. The other secondary issues were cost and why the first line would go to Chapel Hill rather than bigger commuter destinations like RTP/airport/Cary/Raleigh.
Most people don’t frame rail as a sign the government is telling them what to do or taking away their cars. Because most people attached to their cars simply won’t ride the rail. Whether the money spent is the best use of tax money is the main issue, as it is with most things in the US.
So back of the envelope math here, if the Triangle grew at the same rate in the 20s and 30s that it did last decade, and Harnett, Lee, and Alamance joined, it would around 3.6 million in 2040. So we could get there around mid 2040s. So probably behind others already closer to the mark (Austin and Charlotte).
As the baseline population grows, annual rates of growth diminishes. Austin seems to defy that typical scenario but it too will see slower growth rates, even as it continues to add substantial numbers of new residents. Austin's future at 4M+ is likely more tied to it combining with San Antonio than it is to natural growth. I'm not saying that it won't get there by itself over time, but I think it's more likely to get there first by combining.
Again, look at Atlanta. I wish I had MSA/CSA maps of metro Atlanta over time. It has exploded in growth in the last 40 years but it has also added counties along the way. The physical footprint of it now is just enormous.
I personally don't forsee AUS and SATX becoming a CSA.. ..they're about 80 miles apart from each other... It's not quite the same as DFW (35 miles) and San Francisco / San Jose (50 miles) - Development is also not consistent if you leave the immediate proximity of I-35. They're also two distinctively different cities with altogether different culture, vibe, and reasons for living there and large swaths of geographically protected regions (Edwards Aquifer and Hill Country). Add onto the fact that most of Austin's job growth is happening in the northern sector of the city.
Austin and San Antonio will probably have a relationship more like Los Angeles and San Diego with intermittent development patterns between them.
I personally don't forsee AUS and SATX becoming a CSA.. ..they're about 80 miles apart from each other... It's not quite the same as DFW (35 miles) and San Francisco / San Jose (50 miles) - Development is also not consistent if you leave the immediate proximity of I-35. They're also two distinctively different cities with altogether different culture, vibe, and reasons for living there and large swaths of geographically protected regions (Edwards Aquifer and Hill Country). Add onto the fact that most of Austin's job growth is happening in the northern sector of the city.
Austin and San Antonio will probably have a relationship more like Los Angeles and San Diego with intermittent development patterns between them.
The fact that an Austin/SA CSA is even being suggested tells me that deep down, people know both places are at the end of their rope as far as growth. As Austin's average price tag passes 600K, people are really going to start scrutinizing what they're getting for their money. SA"s growth rate tapered off pretty drastically in the 2010's, which is what we'll see with Austin in the 2020's.
The fact that an Austin/SA CSA is even being suggested tells me that deep down, people know both places are at the end of their rope as far as growth. As Austin's average price tag passes 600K, people are really going to start scrutinizing what they're getting for their money. SA"s growth rate tapered off pretty drastically in the 2010's, which is what we'll see with Austin in the 2020's.
I don’t think so just because the amount of Jobs here at least announced is crazy. Like the number of jobs from the new Factories alone guarentees, Also because Austin is in growth loving, Texas while it might be more difficult building within the city limits. Certain suburbs could absorb an abnormal amount of that growth. Just with the amount of Jobs created from new Tesla expansion and Samsung expansion and the amount of work divide out for just construction of said project, I’m sure at least 7,000 new jobs not to mention thousands of jobs created in construction and thus thousands of family members just from these two factory builds/expansions. I wouldn’t be surprised if growth accelerated from the roughly 50,000-60,000 new Austinites a year somewhere closer to 100,000.
I don’t think so just because the amount of Jobs here at least announced is crazy. Like the number of jobs from the new Factories alone guarentees, Also because Austin is in growth loving, Texas while it might be more difficult building within the city limits. Certain suburbs could absorb an abnormal amount of that growth. Just with the amount of Jobs created from new Tesla expansion and Samsung expansion and the amount of work divide out for just construction of said project, I’m sure at least 7,000 new jobs not to mention thousands of jobs created in construction and thus thousands of family members just from these two factory builds/expansions. I wouldn’t be surprised if growth accelerated from the roughly 50,000-60,000 new Austinites a year somewhere closer to 100,000.
Yea Austin is stretched pretty far to the north and to a lesser extent to the south. The west will be hard to ever develop because of the hills, lakes, and rich people. However, to the east there is an enormous amount of empty land that can be developed. Running out of space will not be a limiting factor for the metro hitting 4M...
Yea Austin is stretched pretty far to the north and to a lesser extent to the south. The west will be hard to ever develop because of the hills, lakes, and rich people. However, to the east there is an enormous amount of empty land that can be developed. Running out of space will not be a limiting factor for the metro hitting 4M...
Even South Austin the limiting factor is traffic. 45, to Downtown could be as little as 12 minutes and there is literally nothing in SE Austin, along 45, when it's very much in a commutable distance. MY guess as too why is nowadays, and probably in 20 years as the East and some of the northern parts of Austin get gentrified, the SW is the least desirable direction for growth. But you could fit 100,000 probably 300,000 people with a closer commuting time to Austin than Kyle.
The fact that an Austin/SA CSA is even being suggested tells me that deep down, people know both places are at the end of their rope as far as growth. As Austin's average price tag passes 600K, people are really going to start scrutinizing what they're getting for their money. SA"s growth rate tapered off pretty drastically in the 2010's, which is what we'll see with Austin in the 2020's.
In Austin proper the avg values are high but it does become slightly more reasonable in the burbs.. ..As interest rates increase and buyers slowly become less aggressive, my guess is RE values may become slightly more realistic.. ..slightly.. .but Austin's real problem is not enough housing supply compared to housing demand. It takes a long time to approve housing developments in the city proper. The suburbs are actually growing faster than the city proper currently and are slightly more affordable but not by much anymore, and they are also unable to build faster than demand.
Austin will probably keep growing for a considerable amount of time though. It is attracting tech jobs like nothing I've ever seen before. SATX growth has also seemed to spring back up a bit recently because of affordability issues in other TX metros making SATX more desirable, and it's not really a bad place anyway.
I don't think their growth will necessarily stop... ...but calling them a CSA is a bit overly optimistic IMHO - They're too far apart, cater to two different lifestyles, cater to entirely different industries, too many geographical barriers between the two, and don't really have the inter-commuting traffic necessary to merge the two... and honestly it's really just something I hope never happens..
Quote:
Originally Posted by NigerianNightmare
Even South Austin the limiting factor is traffic. 45, to Downtown could be as little as 12 minutes and there is literally nothing in SE Austin, along 45, when it's very much in a commutable distance. MY guess as too why is nowadays, and probably in 20 years as the East and some of the northern parts of Austin get gentrified, the SW is the least desirable direction for growth. But you could fit 100,000 probably 300,000 people with a closer commuting time to Austin than Kyle.
E.Austin could really use some love. There are massive swaths of undeveloped / empty land. If they could improve schools out that way and build more housing, they would go a long way to assisting Austin's housing affordability issues. They have plenty of room to build large mixed-use communities as well.. ..the only other issue out in E.Austin is.. ..well.. ..clay soil.. ..you can already see what it does to the roads out there (its terrible)... so I'm unsure how housing would hold up over a long period of time.
There's no way Birmingham's getting to 4 million anytime soon (Details that follow could follow similarly with a lot of the other metros on the list with how they could reach 4 mill, with them more likely to actually achieve it sometime soon. I just know Bham better.).
There is a way it could get to 2 million sooner than expected: sprawl. Birmingham's got 1.5 core counties to the metro: Jefferson and somewhat Shelby. However that core extends near or slightly into two other counties: St. Clair and Tuscaloosa. If those two became pseudo-core cities like Shelby, then it could pull in some other metros. Tuscaloosa obviously pulls in Tuscaloosa. St. Clair has some outskirts pull on Anniston, Gadsden and northern Talladega (Shelby has some Sylacauga pull. Unlike other statistical areas, Talladega-Sylacauga isn't a main city/suburb dynamic. They're really two separate population centers on opposite ends of a skinny county). Absorbing those four would add half a million. Of course, this would be misleading, since the way Alabama counties are drawn don't lend themselves to describing metros well (notably the Pell City/Talladega/Oxford area).
That being said, Birmingham's got some issues it'd have to tackle, but the biggest that would probably snowball in it's need for attention compared to now is public transportation. If you think your city's public transit is bad, you haven't seen Birmingham's. It's almost nonexistent (though improvements are coming out soon). With current attitudes, the only way I could see a bigger transit spread is if transit wasn't looked at primarily as commuter traffic, but rather an avenue for tourism with the transit needing to add to the experience. Examples being a trolley from the zoo/botanical gardens to Richard Arrington via Homewood to the Intermodal Facility to get a good view of the city. Or a short elevated rail through the Red Mountain Cut that with a touristy voice over to actually explain that is an official National Natural Landmark. A line system of some sort could be based off linking the airport to the intermodal facility, and then having a couple of branches (1: Airport => Ruffner => Barbour Motorsports => extended to Logan Martin => Honda Plant => Talladega Superspeedway => near Cheaha; 2: Railroad Park => Red Mountain Park => Moss Rock => Oak Mountain => Montevallo; 3: Airport => Protective Stadium/BJCC => Legion Field => Birmingham Southern => Rickwood Field => CrossPlex => Miles College => extended to Watercrest Darter => Tannehill => Mercedes Plant => Tuscaloosa). Then add more commuter mass transit. It's a bit backwards, but car culture is quite strong in the metro.
I personally don't forsee AUS and SATX becoming a CSA.. ..they're about 80 miles apart from each other... It's not quite the same as DFW (35 miles) and San Francisco / San Jose (50 miles) - Development is also not consistent if you leave the immediate proximity of I-35. They're also two distinctively different cities with altogether different culture, vibe, and reasons for living there and large swaths of geographically protected regions (Edwards Aquifer and Hill Country). Add onto the fact that most of Austin's job growth is happening in the northern sector of the city.
Austin and San Antonio will probably have a relationship more like Los Angeles and San Diego with intermittent development patterns between them.
Austin is both a northern growth metropolitan area and a southern growth metropolitan area. The growth on both sides is pretty equal all things considered. Hays County is just as fast growing as Williamson County, possibly slightly faster according to census information. Both counties are in the Top 5 fastest growing in the United States and both have cities in the Top 10 fastest growing in the United States.
San Antonio's growth is almost exclusively to the north and a little bit to the west. That said an Austin and San Antonio CSA will not be happening. The distance between both, downtown to downtown is still a significant 85 miles and it takes a large volume of people to meet that commuter threshold at 15%.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Losfrisco
The fact that an Austin/SA CSA is even being suggested tells me that deep down, people know both places are at the end of their rope as far as growth. As Austin's average price tag passes 600K, people are really going to start scrutinizing what they're getting for their money. SA"s growth rate tapered off pretty drastically in the 2010's, which is what we'll see with Austin in the 2020's.
No.
Austin is 4th in the United States for population added in 2021 and 1st in the United States by percentage growth. It's also the only metropolitan area in the U.S. that is still adding as many people now as it did pre-COVID. It has been and still remains the fastest growing metropolitan area in the United States, something it has been for 22 years and counting. San Antonio is 8th in the United States in population gains in raw numbers and also well within the Top 10 in percentage gains. Yes, San Antonio's population growth has slowed down compared to the 2010s just as been the case to every U.S. metropolitan area minus Austin. That said, it's raw population growth is only a little bit down from its peak years, it is still adding over 35,000 people per year, which very few places in the United States are adding to their population gains.
Furthermore there has been a premature talk of an Austin and San Antonio CSA for 15 years, the discourse has nothing to do with the present state of population growth in these places or the United States.
And to your second statement, no, people are getting one of the safest major cities and metropolitan areas in the United States. Also one of the most educated with an economy at the forefront of the knowledge based transition. That sells itself.
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.
