Most “complete” suburb in Houston? (Dallas, Fort Worth: crimes, income, taxes)

[ParaguaneroSwag]

Bridgeland

Is entering the mix. And their town center coming soon.


https://s.hdnux.com/photos/01/13/00/...io3x2_1000.jpg

[Redlionjr]

Originally Posted by jerbear30

I was thinking about this thread, and there is something at least a little misleading about the idea of a complete suburb. I mean Sugar Land has the Skeeters and the HMNS branch so that to me makes it feel like a city--but how many people in Sugar Land just go see the Skeeters and the smaller branch of the HMNS? Most probably also go to the city to see the major attractions, like the central HMNS or the Astros. Suburbs are by nature kind of parasitic--they take advantage of the city and they thrive of their proximity to it. In this sense, they're kind of all incomplete.

I mean I think most people are well aware that suburbs are really no match against the primary city in that area. We know suburbs are somewhat parasitic. But I would say there's also suburbs that pretty much offer their residents just enough where they don't feel the need to go to the primary city. That's why specific suburbs feel more complete than others just based off the sheer amount of amenities one get.

And I think you can tell the difference when it comes to "incomplete" burbs and "complete burbs". The Woodlands and Sugar Land feel like the most complete burbs in the region. Or at least the most complete burbs with a high quality of life.

[Nuclear Bear]

Originally Posted by NigerianNightmare

While it sorta is, their are also definitely suburbs in other countries and somewhat in the U.S that still hold the name of suburb, but have grown so much as to supplant the main city in a variety of ways. For example Arlington, while clearly a suburb has outright more pro-sports than the City of Dallas. Not to mention an E-sports Stadium. Irving with Las Colinas as also supplanted the main city in some ways, at least business wise. Of course if Irving or Arlington were to take it considerably further, they would join Fort Worth in being Satellite cities and technically no longer suburbs. But their are definitely complete suburbs in the sense a large percent of residents may commute or orient themselves around the main city but a growing part of residents never leave, and in some cases the suburb has "suburbs" of it's own, for it's region of the metro.

irving and arlington are suburbs...and neither has supplanted Dallas when it comes to sports or business.

Texas centric people have a habit of overvaluing suburbs.

The metroplex has 2 satellite cities: Dallas and Ft Worth. Everything else is a suburb.

[ParaguaneroSwag]

Irving is easily a suburb. Arlington is a “bridge city”

[NigerianNightmare]

Originally Posted by Nuclear Bear

irving and arlington are suburbs...and neither has supplanted Dallas when it comes to sports or business.

Texas centric people have a habit of overvaluing suburbs.

The metroplex has 2 satellite cities: Dallas and Ft Worth. Everything else is a suburb.

It’s a fact Arlington has more pro-sports than Dallas. It has at least 4 stadiums of note, and 2 pro-teams with their own stadiums not to mention the several others. Dallas has one shared stadium for the Mavs and Stars

Also their are more Fortune 500 companies in Las Colinas than in downtown Dallas. Obviously their suburbs in every metric, but it’s a fact that these suburbs has things the city itself cannot or does not offer. It’s not some weird Dallas diss, but my argument is having things the city doesn’t have doesn’t mean it’s not a suburb but it makes it more of a complete suburb and the graze isn’t oxymoronic, because you stay in the suburb for some of those amenities/jobs that the city doesn’t offer.

Like I said theirs also cases of suburbs outright dwarfing the city but that doesn’t happen in the U.S. Even in the U.S, their are individual suburbs more urban than the cities they feed into, albeit that’s more because of math and boundaries than on paper. But you get my point.

[Nuclear Bear]

Originally Posted by NigerianNightmare

It’s a fact Arlington has more pro-sports than Dallas. It has at least 4 stadiums of note, and 2 pro-teams with their own stadiums not to mention the several others. Dallas has one shared stadium for the Mavs and Stars

Also their are more Fortune 500 companies in Las Colinas than in downtown Dallas. Obviously their suburbs in every metric, but it’s a fact that these suburbs has things the city itself cannot or does not offer. It’s not some weird Dallas diss, but my argument is having things the city doesn’t have doesn’t mean it’s not a suburb but it makes it more of a complete suburb and the graze isn’t oxymoronic, because you stay in the suburb for some of those amenities/jobs that the city doesn’t offer.

Like I said theirs also cases of suburbs outright dwarfing the city but that doesn’t happen in the U.S. Even in the U.S, their are individual suburbs more urban than the cities they feed into, albeit that’s more because of math and boundaries than on paper. But you get my point.

Do you know what the word fact means? Im not sure if you do.

Dallas has two teams (Mavs and Stars) that play in Dallas. Name me the three teams that play in Arlington....since you are all about facts?


Just because a city has some stadiums, or a suburban office park does not make it a satellite city.

Pontiac Michigan, and Auburn Hills are not satellite cities of the Detroit metro area just because the Lions and Pistons used to play in those respective burbs.

Ft Lauderdale, Long Beach California, Oakland, San Jose., Tacoma, St Paul.....etc are satellite cities of their respective metro regions.

That means when someone gets on a plane from NYC they will tell someone they are flying to Oakland, or Orange County....etc

No one travels to Arlington, or Plano from out of state. They just state they are going to some surrounding city in the Dallas area.


Arlington, Plano, Irving.....where are the Airports for these cities?
What about the transit authority?
Do any of these cities have a real CBD?


Those cities depend on Dallas and Ft Worth for those things....hence being large suburbs.

Obviously their suburbs in every metric, but it’s a fact that these suburbs has things the city itself cannot or does not offer.

again....you and this word "Fact"......now I'm really wondering if you know what that word means.
This goes back to my original point of certain people in Texas way overvaluing suburbs.

Please explain to me what Arlington, Irving and Plano has that Dallas can't offer.
I'm genuinely curious.

[Nuclear Bear]

Originally Posted by ParaguaneroSwag

Irving is easily a suburb. Arlington is a “bridge city”

Arlington aint a city. Its just a large suburb.

Denton, Galveston, Tyler, Longview, Waco are cities.

Arlington is just an overgrown suburb located between Dallas and Ft Worth.

Arlington wouldn't exist without Dallas or Ft Worth. All those other cities can (and did) stand on their own without the huge nearby city.

[DabOnEm]

Originally Posted by Nuclear Bear

Pontiac Michigan, and Auburn Hills are not satellite cities of the Detroit metro area just because the Lions and Pistons used to play in those respective burbs.

These are definitely satellite cities because outside of the sports teams that did play there, both had a large amount of jobs (multiple factories and office parks) to the point where people from actual suburbs commuted to these cities...hence why they are satellite cities.

Ft Lauderdale, Long Beach California, Oakland, San Jose., Tacoma, St Paul.....etc are satellite cities of their respective metro regions.

No these cities aren't satellite cities either. These are ALL core cities of their respective metro areas. The only one you could maybe say was a satellite city was Long Beach but even then it's still much more of a core city for LA and has it's own sphere of influence.

[WRM20]

Originally Posted by Nuclear Bear

Arlington aint a city. Its just a large suburb.

Denton, Galveston, Tyler, Longview, Waco are cities.

Arlington is just an overgrown suburb located between Dallas and Ft Worth.

Arlington wouldn't exist without Dallas or Ft Worth. All those other cities can (and did) stand on their own without the huge nearby city.

Arlington actually is a city. It's been incorporated since 1884, and has its own government and everything. It has actual businesses and everything.

[NigerianNightmare]

Originally Posted by Nuclear Bear

Do you know what the word fact means? Im not sure if you do.

Dallas has two teams (Mavs and Stars) that play in Dallas. Name me the three teams that play in Arlington....since you are all about facts?


Just because a city has some stadiums, or a suburban office park does not make it a satellite city.

Pontiac Michigan, and Auburn Hills are not satellite cities of the Detroit metro area just because the Lions and Pistons used to play in those respective burbs.

Ft Lauderdale, Long Beach California, Oakland, San Jose., Tacoma, St Paul.....etc are satellite cities of their respective metro regions.

That means when someone gets on a plane from NYC they will tell someone they are flying to Oakland, or Orange County....etc

No one travels to Arlington, or Plano from out of state. They just state they are going to some surrounding city in the Dallas area.


Arlington, Plano, Irving.....where are the Airports for these cities?
What about the transit authority?
Do any of these cities have a real CBD?


Those cities depend on Dallas and Ft Worth for those things....hence being large suburbs.



again....you and this word "Fact"......now I'm really wondering if you know what that word means.
This goes back to my original point of certain people in Texas way overvaluing suburbs.

Please explain to me what Arlington, Irving and Plano has that Dallas can't offer.
I'm genuinely curious.

First of all I never called them satellite cities, I specifically stated if they took it much further they would become satellite cities, recognizing that they weren’t there yet. I already listed things Irving and Arlington have that Dallas doesn’t. Nearly half of the Fortune 500 companies in Dallas area are in Las Colinas neighborhood not even scattered around Irving. Dallas city has one more, but their not all located in Downtown Dallas. If you want to work at the HQ of the two biggest DFW companies guess what, you have to go to Las Colinas. That is something the city of Dallas cannot offer.

Also for Arlington for some reason you think theirs only
4 professional sports teams. I didn’t say the 4 biggest leagues in America. I said professional sports teams. The XFL team, WNBA team and virtually every professional E-Sports event are held in Arlington. Not to mention the largest public institution in Dallas is in Arlington (UTA).

Dallas doesn’t really have a large college (enrollment-wise) that isn’t in the suburbs, although SMU is an important institution it’s also private.

I’m personally going to a Convention in Arlington that won’t require me to drive through the city of Dallas to access. I might checkout Dallas because it is a great city. But the event im going to isn’t not in Dallas city limits… im might not even go to Dallas once in my trip. You cans say the same about most American cities, it’s not some unique Dallas diss.

For some reason your taking it personal when I used the word fact because guess what, I was using facts. You then try to obfuscate my words when I never called Arlington or Irving a satellite city and never even mentioned Plano. I said they offered things the city doesn’t which is true. Many suburbs do, I put fact because I was spitting facts then you had some problem with me putting that word there even though you didn’t properly attack my points…

I also don’t overvalue suburbs. I’ve been to plenty of places around the world andromeda I said their are cities where the suburbs outright dwarf them, the reason why I don’t really mention more than that is because of forum rules. But Manila for example is one example of a city dwarfed by its suburbs.