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 think the main difference between the Des Moines/Omaha metros' growth rates is the City of Des Moines' sluggishness. If it were not for the flat growth in Des Moines proper, the DSM metro would be rapidly gaining on Omaha, even moreso than it is now. Greater Des Moines' growth since 2000 is ~11%, Omaha's is a little over 7%: not a huge difference, but important in the long-run.
Polk County enjoys growth by natural increase, domestic migration, AND international migration (all 3 components of change). Douglas County, Nebraska only grows by natural increase and immigrants. More people are leaving it than moving to it!
Also, keep in mind that Omaha's metro also includes 8 counties in two states (DSM has 5), and is artificially inflated by Council Bluffs, which has been a significant city in its own right for a long time. All of Des Moines' suburbs have basically grown from nothing. Also, Omaha has nearly twice Des Moines' area, and benefits from the fact that Nebraska is sparsely populated, and it has little in-state competition. Des Moines must compete with at least 9 cities over 50,000 in its own state.
Both areas are growing at very healthy rates, however.
Well, first of all, you have to look at the overall region. Atlanta vs. Louisville is a perfect example of that.
Secondly, your point brings up the whole dallas vs. houston argument. Houston proper is twice the size of dallas proper, yet DFW's metro area is about 500,000 people more than Houston's.
There are lots of metro areas that span states, ie KC/KC, St. Louis/E. St. Louis, Cincinatti/N. Kentucky. So I dont think there is anything wrong with that...fact is, lots of people from CB commute into Omaha for jobs. That's what goes into the MSA stats and they are part of the same region. Not saying CB is not its own separate city, but they're the smaller principle city in the OMaha MSA...kind of likeFt. Worth to Dallas, St. Paul to Minneapolis, KC, KS to KC, MO.
Having said all that, both Greater DSM and Omaha are nice...but I still give the edge to Omaha b/c it has greater transportation access (multiple low cost carriers), its Zoo is world class and consistently ranks at the top of american zoos, it has the college world series, and it's close to the Loess Hills and on Iowa's other great river, the Missouri.
Des moines, I give credit for being the capital, a world class farmer's market, close proximity to Chicago. And it's hard as an Iowa native to pick Omaha over Des Moines...I'm a hawkeye fan all the way, but from my evaluation, I give the edge barely to OMaha...and that's just a sliver.
I think they're both great cities. both are growing in their own ways, though It would be a long time before Des Moines MSA ever catches Omaha's....just like DFW catching Chicago as that's my MSA"s next goal...maintaining our current #4 rank and catching Chicago in the next 25 years, which by my calculations will not happen....but it will come close.
....just like DFW catching Chicago as that's my MSA"s next goal...maintaining our current #4 rank and catching Chicago in the next 25 years, which by my calculations will not happen....but it will come close.
Hmmm... Its possible, but very optimistic for DFW. Growth would have to remain as strong as it is now for those 25 yrs., and that will be hard to sustain. Also, Chicagoland is starting to show some signs of life after slow growth. Besides those factors, you need to be watchful of Houston's strength, Washington D.C.'s continued growth, but mostly Metro Atlanta. ATL has added about 1,000,000 people just since 2000! Even DFW may not be able to match that.
Hmmm... Its possible, but very optimistic for DFW. Growth would have to remain as strong as it is now for those 25 yrs., and that will be hard to sustain. Also, Chicagoland is starting to show some signs of life after slow growth. Besides those factors, you need to be watchful of Houston's strength, Washington D.C.'s continued growth, but mostly Metro Atlanta. ATL has added about 1,000,000 people just since 2000! Even DFW may not be able to match that.
Actually, DFW is expected under 3 different scenarios evaluated by the US Census bureau to hold on to its number 4 ranking and come within a stone's throw of Chicago in one scenario.
Atlanta is the wild card. In one scenario, Atlanta takes over Houston as the number 5 largest MSA in the country, but is expected not to take over DFW.
But I dont think it's an optimistic view. I think it's a realistic view. The NCTCOG also has similar projections using their own forumulas different than the Census Bureau. DFW has lots of land yet to be built on, and it has ranked number 1 or 2 in corporate headquarter relocations for the better part of this past decade. You can also make the argument for Atlanta as well, can it sustain its current growth rates? You can say the same a/b Houston as well. But my feeling is that the sunbelt will continue to experience healthy growth rates. DFW is still growing anywhere from 130-150,000 people per year. Same with Houston. Same with Atlanta. Same with Phoenix. Most of these areas still have lots of land. And they tend to be more business friendly areas, so jobs continue to migrate southward.
But the US Census Bureau predicts DFW in the year 2030 in all 3 scenarios will maintain its number 4 ranking. Houston and Atlanta will battle for #5.
Philly will fade away as many of the other Non NYC/Chicago northern cities.
And FYI: From July 1, 2000 to July 1 2006, DFW added 866,657 people. Atlanta added 856,266 people. Though that would mean that Atlanta had a larger growth rate since it had fewer people at baseline, but as long as DFW matches the raw number, it will continue to stay ahead.
This translates to 144,000 per year vs. 142,000 per year in Atlanta. This is where raw numbers can be useful.
Here's what Atlanta Regional commission is predicting for itself:
Atlanta Regional Commission | Press Releases (http://www.atlantaregional.com/cps/rde/xchg/arc/hs.xsl/81_2657_ENU_HTML.htm - broken link)
They're actually less than the estimates of the Census Bureau: 6.97 Million
NCTCOG (aka DFW) predicts 9.1 million (which is most in line with Scenario 1).
Houston predicts 7.5 million, which would maintain their number 5 ranking, but put it way behind DFW. I dont think that will be the case either. I think Houston will keep pace with DFW and continue to be roughly 500,000 behind DFW. http://products.rednews.com/base/mem...7_Hotspots.pdf
Last edited by metroplex2003; 07-06-2007 at 04:04 PM..
One thing I can tell you is that Iowa's urban areas with the exception of Des moines will continue to experience mild to moderate growth.
Sioux City got a shot of hope as Frontier Airlines, which is a low cost carrier has announced service into Sioux City with 3 daily flights to Denver.
Hopefully Sioux City can reclaim lost ground since 2001. At one time, Sioux City used to have mainline jets from America West, United, TWA (American), Northwest, and propeller service via US Airways at its peak. The low cost carriers such as Southwest and Frontier basically killed Sioux City airport when they started servicing nearby Omaha's Eppley airfield.
The airline recession along with low fare carriers changed the dynamics of Sioux City and commercial aviation in that region. Sioux City went from being Iowa's 3rd busiest airport to only having one airline.
So hopefully I'll see a turnaround there as it is a well known fact that low cost carrier's stimulate airport traffic and growth.
I'm still hoping for my hometown airline to offer nonstop service to Sioux City from DFW (American). My other hometown airline, Southwest, will continue to service only high density markets, so I've lost hope on them.
You can also make the argument for Atlanta as well, can it sustain its current growth rates? You can say the same a/b Houston as well. DFW is still growing anywhere from 130-150,000 people per year. Same with Houston. Same with Atlanta. Same with Phoenix.
All of the cities you named have seen just incredible growth. However, Atlanta is unique in that they are surrounded by unincorporated areas (not suburbs), and so it's my belief that there are much fewer restrictions on growth. Also, ATL's metro is 28 COUNTIES!!! It must be hard to have all of those people on the same page. By that same token, however, Houston is America's largest city w/o zoning laws, so there's little regulation there, as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by metroplex2003
Most of these areas still have lots of land.
Very true. All can expand in four directions, which is very advantageous compared to NE cities, or even those on the W. coast.
Quote:
Originally Posted by metroplex2003
But my feeling is that the sunbelt will continue to experience healthy growth rates.
Indisputable. I would not be surprised if things begin to slow, however, as housing prices become very expensive. Keep in mind that industrial cities like Detroit and Milwaukee were growing very quickly at one time, also.
Quote:
Originally Posted by metroplex2003
But the US Census Bureau predicts DFW in the year 2030 in all 3 scenarios will maintain its number 4 ranking. Houston and Atlanta will battle for #5.
Philly will fade away as many of the other Non NYC/Chicago northern cities.
But what about Miami? Currently #7?? They are kicking butt, as well. Washington (#8) is expanding rapidly, too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by metroplex2003
This translates to 144,000 per year vs. 142,000 per year in Atlanta. This is where raw numbers can be useful.
Its interesting that the differences are so small. If either gets a major boost or bust, you may see one break out. I'm wondering what role immigration will play in future growth... To my knowledge, Dallas has a large immigrant population (moreso than Atlanta). If we have tougher enforcement or a new bill or something, will that take away a source of growth? How does immigration to DFW compare to Houston?
The airline recession along with low fare carriers changed the dynamics of Sioux City and commercial aviation in that region. Sioux City went from being Iowa's 3rd busiest airport to only having one airline.
Before 9/11, we had 3 airlines @ Dubuque Regional. We lost 2 of them, and still have only one, but have seen overall passenger numbers rise. DBQ is now Iowa's 3rd busiest airport, behind only Des Moines & CR. Impressive. A new terminal building is in the works, so I wouldn't be surprised if we get a few more airlines. We are also going to get AmTrak service to Chicago in a few years.
All of the cities you named have seen just incredible growth. However, Atlanta is unique in that they are surrounded by unincorporated areas (not suburbs), and so it's my belief that there are much fewer restrictions on growth. Also, ATL's metro is 28 COUNTIES!!! It must be hard to have all of those people on the same page. By that same token, however, Houston is America's largest city w/o zoning laws, so there's little regulation there, as well.
Very true. All can expand in four directions, which is very advantageous compared to NE cities, or even those on the W. coast.
Indisputable. I would not be surprised if things begin to slow, however, as housing prices become very expensive. Keep in mind that industrial cities like Detroit and Milwaukee were growing very quickly at one time, also.
But what about Miami? Currently #7?? They are kicking butt, as well. Washington (#8) is expanding rapidly, too.
Its interesting that the differences are so small. If either gets a major boost or bust, you may see one break out. I'm wondering what role immigration will play in future growth... To my knowledge, Dallas has a large immigrant population (moreso than Atlanta). If we have tougher enforcement or a new bill or something, will that take away a source of growth? How does immigration to DFW compare to Houston?
Yes but Atlanta proper only has 480,000 people. I"ve used this argument multiple times in debating Houston vs. Dallas. Yes Houston is the 4th largest city proper in the US, but area Houston drops to #6 (actually this year or next it is expected to be #5). Dallas proper only has 60% of the land area as Houston proper, but its area population swells to 6.1 million people. So you have to take into consideration the MSA. Incorporated or unincorporated, both areas have unlimited growth potential b/c of plentiful land.
I agree Atlanta metro has lots of counties. But you have to remember DFW also has lots of counties (and more importantly buildable land) and as growth continues up towards Oklahoma, more counties will be incorporated into the official MSA stats. I dont think number of counties necessarily equates b/c I believe GA counties may on average have less area/county....as officially DFW is at 12 counties and has 6.1 million people compared to what you're saying Atlanta's 28 counties with only 5.1 million people. But then DFW has over 1000 people more per sq. mile than Atlanta area. The 16 county area defined by NCTCOG puts DFW at around 6.5 million people. If those 4 counties are added in the 2010 census, then the lead increases if Atlanta MSA continues with its current definition.
I love Atlanta, dont get me wrong. I just think it's optimistic that it will catch DFW. I acknowledge the optimism of DFW catching Chicago, but I think it's realistic that DFW hold it's current #4 ranking. THis is assuming the Bay Area doesnt change their MSA stat to include San Jose, which right now San Jose is included in the CMSA stat. I do believe the forumulas put forth by both NCTCOG, US Census Bureau, and Atlanta's own numbers that they're predicting for itself. The last 6 years, they have pretty much added the same number of people per year. I think Atlanta taking over Houston is a realistic possibility and Houston maintaining its position over Atlanta is also realistic. Miami and DC's growth has not been as much as Atlanta, Houston, Dallas, and Phoenix. DC has some limitations geographically. So does Miami geographically. Unless both areas start massively building upwards, but the current upward building is only catering those who can afford high 6 figure to 7 figure housing.
And in my Dallas vs. Houston posts, I have mentioned a role for immigration and also its potential effect on the Dallas, Houston, and Atlanta growth rates in comparison to each other.
But here's my view on the direction it will take whether people like it or not: I do believe there will be a point where we secure our border...b/c that is the only thing both sides of the aisle agree on. But I do think we are going to find a way to obtain immigrants not just from our southern neighbor, but from various parts of the world in a legal way to work the jobs no one else wants.
THose jobs will continue to be in Sunbelt cities such as Atlanta, Dallas, Houston, Phoenix, where all the corporations are moving.
As for Dallas proper vs. Atlanta proper since you were mentioning unincorporated areas...I have repeatedly stressed the importance of MSA or urbanized area stats. B/c if you use proper population stats, you're going to run into things such as San Antonio being a more major city than Atlanta. It also has lots of unincorporated areas that it can grow into since it is not surrounded by suburbs. But I'm not sure I buy into that when defining the majorness of a city/region. Atlanta only has 483,000 people within its city limits. SA >1 million. No one will ever say SA is more major or bigger than Atlanta...now in other posts across this forum, I have also made mention of the fact that most city propers are not growing at any huge rates. The 2nd or 1st fastest growing city proper with over 500,000 people in the US goes to Ft. Worth, but again, I dont put much stock into it.
Houston proper prior to its one time Katrina burst despite its no zoning laws and unlimited growth potential through unincorporated areas only grew at a scant 11,000 people per year. And let me say that 11,000 people a year for a city proper is actually very healthy growth....but it just underscores how regional populations stats in the form of Urbanized Area or Metropolitan Statistical areas is more important, especially for cities like Atlanta which is only the 34th largest city proper city in the US. Its rank climbs to #9 using MSA, #11 using urbanized area (which captures the immediate urban vicinity rather than using rural urban counties with sparse populations on the fringes) But even Atlanta has been unable to annex cities just like Dallas has not been able to. But not sure it's necessary..b/c the Atlanta region is a major player in the United States and very successful. It's been very successful just like DFW has been in its own right.
I do prefer DFW over Atlanta b/c it's more diverse. Lots more Asians allows DFW to support a Korean Town, Vietnamese Town, Chinatown, of course Little Mexico, etc. Restaurants selection overall is better here. And though Atlanta has the world's busiest airport, DFW has two airports to choose from and a 3rd one being planned. DFW also has a larger airport with more growth potential. IT's also home to the world's largest airline: American, which just happens to be your hometown airline in dubuque.
And talking a/b land: DFW has 9200 sq miles of land in its immediate 12 county area. That's plenty to grow on
But since this is a Des Moines vs. Omaha forum, you can meet me on the larger cities forums at Houston vs. Chicago or Houston vs. Dallas.
Before 9/11, we had 3 airlines @ Dubuque Regional. We lost 2 of them, and still have only one, but have seen overall passenger numbers rise. DBQ is now Iowa's 3rd busiest airport, behind only Des Moines & CR. Impressive. A new terminal building is in the works, so I wouldn't be surprised if we get a few more airlines. We are also going to get AmTrak service to Chicago in a few years.
Yes but before 9/11, the service you were getting was more propellers. Sioux City prior to the airline recessions had mostly jet service with some propellers mixed in. Southwest (which is also HQ'd here in Dallas) and to a certain extent Frontier killed Sioux City airport. Sioux City in its heyday was clearly the undisputed 3rd busiest in the state. Regular 737, 727's, and DC9 service came to our airport. United offered service to both Denver and Chicago, TWA to St. louis, NWA to Minneapolis, US Air to KC, and AMerica West to Phoenix. Now Omaha has captured a 75% market share of the Siouxland market due to a variety of reasons: one the airline recession, and 2) the age of the low cost carriers.
But Sioux City is a majorly underserved area...it's the 4th largest MSA in the state, and it serves an area population outside of its immediate MSA of roughly 350,000 people. Those people have been going to OMaha mainly, and a slight amount to Sioux Falls. But before the low cost carriers and airline recessions, Sioux City proved it could support mainline jet service as the planes were flying full.
But Sioux City is poised for a comeback. It's a well known fact that when a low fare carrier enters a market, it not just adds flights, it stimulates massive growth of an airport. the FAA has termed this the "Southwest Effect". This is partly why Omaha has been more successful than Des Moines airport for so long. This is why Houston Hobby had been successful. This is why CHicago's Midway got resurrected from the dead.
But Sioux City is grabbing Frontier, a low cost carrier, and Frontier will be sending over a 74 seat aircraft, which should compete heavily with Northwest Airlines' 50 passenger regional jet service.
Now having said all that, I must be very realistic here, the only reason Sioux City and Dubuque can even battle it out for 3rd busiest is b/c the Quad Cities, which has a much big area population, airport is located on the Illinois side. Let's be realistic here, Quad Cities (Aka Davenport MSA) is much larger than either Sioux City or Dubuque. It also has low fare service via Air Tran. And not to put down which side of the river the airport is on, other major cities such as Cincinatti have a similar set up. Cincinatti airport is located in Kentucky. So the Davenport MSA's airport is much larger than either.
But in terms of future directions, I do think Sioux City's market is going to improve once again and retake its position. Dubuque currently beats Sioux City b/c all 4 of its flights are regional jets and Sioux City, which at one time had 8 flights to Minneapolis/St. Paul cut back service in the wake of the airline's economic problems. So NWA only has 2 regional jet flights to Sioux City with 2 propeller flights. American was much healthier than NWA, which is good b/c that's the airline I fly being based out of DFW airport (to me Southwest out of Love Field is inconvenient). However, Sioux City will have two airlines with Frontier stimulating a lot of regional traffic in its low fare structure. Dubuque would need to obtain a low cost carrier to compete with the projected increase in traffic that Frontier is expected to bring. So at least starting in Oct. when the Frontier service commences, Sioux City will be back at #3 for commercial aviation in talking a/b within Iowa borders. Quad Cities airport will always be 2nd busiest behind Des Moines, ahead of Cedar Rapids (which wasnt always the case until Air Tran came on board).
NWA will continue to offer 4 flights daily, and possibly add more to compete with Frontier for market share.
Frontier will add 3 flights daily to denver initially.
vs. Dubuque having 4 flights on American Eagle.
Now with all that said, I'm a huge supporter of American. It's the world's largest airline, and its largest hub is in DFW. American is important to Dallas' economy and its international connection to the world. I've been pulling for a DFW to Sioux City connection for a long time via American Eagle. Hopefully it can get done. Flying into Omaha and driving 70 miles is less than ideal, though it is on a mainline jet at least. But I continue to lobby for the service.
I'm happy Dubuque has American service...I wish Sioux City had that rather than Northwest...but realistically speaking, NWA has a big share of that area b/c of its proximity to Minneapolis/St. Paul...so it's natural for NWA to own Sioux City. But I was disappointed when American discontinued service to St. Louis in 2001, b/c I would have considered flying to Sioux City via St. Louis if it were competitive with Omaha.
Fortunately for Dubuque, its most major competitor is Quad Cities airport, which is 75 miles from you, and has low cost carrier service, however, it's easier to compete with Quad Cities than Omaha, which has an area population and market of close to 1 million people. This is important b/c Omaha can therefore attract larger jets (aka more seats) and more airlines including multiple low fare carriers to the market.
Cedar Rapids is not as much competition for Dubuque mainly b/c it has a very high fare structure. Incentives to fly out of Cedar Rapids is not as much.
Sioux City competes with Sioux Falls and Omaha. Both of which have low fare carriers and more seats available than Dubuque's competing markets. Waterloo also has a high fare structure b/c it's only served by NWA and only 4 flights.
Another advantage that Omaha has is it has the state's two main university hospitals located in Omaha. Des Moines does not have any major university hospital system. THis is more out of historic reasons as Iowa City has the main university hospital of the entire state. Though iowa city's programs are all world reknowned, it could have helped Des Moines if the state of Iowa split up operations like other states do...examples Univ of NE at Lincoln, and medical campus at OMaha. Univ. of Texas at Austin, with its medical campuses located in Dallas, Houston, Galveston, El Paso.
I think that could help Des Moines, and garner it more national and international recognition rather than sharing with Iowa City.
Omaha has Creighton and UNO, both of which have their respective strengths.
Dont get me wrong, love Iowa city. Has a great Ortho, Derm, Opth, Uro, OB, Int Med programs, but if it were in Des Moines with the undergrad pop. remaining in Iowa City, I think it might have been better overall for the state.
Des Moines' area population would have given more diversity to the pathology in the cases there given the fact Des Moines probably has the highest concentration of inner city population in the state. It's more centralized, so it can siphon off some leaking business from Sioux City and CB to Omaha's programs.
Wow! You know an awful lot about cities and airports!
Wrapping up my thoughts on DFW, Atlanta, Houston, and so on, I'd just say that its certain all will be benefitting in some way in the forseeable future. Growth is a certainty in all of those areas. However, I would not be surprised in the least if things start to slow down in a big way, say after 2020. Growth cannot continue without a breaking point. As I mentioned earlier, cities like Milwaukee, Detroit, and Cleveland were, at one time, growing as rapidly as DFW is now. Costs of doing business in the subelt will soon catch up to the rest of the nation, if not exceed it, and it may well balance back to the north or east. Housing, transportation, and the cost of living are rising so fast in some of these areas, it may not be long. Take California as an example of a state that has seen its once-swift growth slow considerably.
I guess I would sum up my comments by saying that the fact that we are even comparing Omaha and Des Moines has to be a compliment to Des Moines, given its smaller size. I frequently hear stereotypes about Iowa (farms, hicks, whatever), but if people only knew how far that was from the truth. Iowa is a mostly urban state, and the Des Moines metro has around 1/6 of the entire state's population (and climbing). Iowa's rural areas are de-populating, and so the trend goes on...
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.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought Philadelphia was still #5. I'm looking at this: 
