DFW is so divided. Houston isn't. (Dallas, San Antonio: neighborhood, best school districts, living in)

[ReppingDFW]

I'm glad Dallas didn't swallow up the suburbs. Things run more efficient with the smaller city governments administering the area, as opposed to just Dallas trying to manage a larger swath of land and population. I can drive through the 'burbs without having to worry about massive pot-holes.

[dallasboi]

Yeah I like the million suburb layout too....Thats alot of areas that the city of Dallas don't have to worry about. As the City of Houston spreads....so does the city srevices wich puts a strain on the old Houston neighborhoods aaaand the new incorporated neighborhoods that were excellent before Houston took them over....now "in-decline" they go.

[Mark Senior]

The difference folks: 60-70 years ago or as recent as maybe 40 years, Houston only had West University Place and Bellaire. Neither of these cities, especially WU wanted to expand.

So when Houston continued to grow, which it has since it was founded, and with the establishment of ETJ's by the state of Texas, which restrict areas within "x" miles of city limits from incorporating this paved the way for Houston or any other city, S.A. Austin and most recently Fort Worth annex "into" it's ETJ the ETJ would then be extended again out even farther, to the mileage allowed repeating the process over and over

A law or laws created some 10-20 years ago, have now restricted how fast a city can annex... Must give advance notice, allow an area to incorporate itself if it wishes, some time frame to response to this and other condictions before a city can annex, unless a town or area ask a city to annex them. Such as Whitehouse, 1 1/2 miles from the Tyler's city limits asked Tyler to consider annexing them... Whitehouse about 8,000 pop. wanted Tyler,, lowest the state city tax rate. and good city services. I digress...

Now, Dallas way back 40-70 years ago, already had cities of Arlington, Mesquite, Garland, Irving, etc that were growing and annexing as Dallas was, Dallas tried to "strip" annex as to not be "land locked" but eventually the competition of other cities did land lock them. Not the same situation as Houston.

Later all the boomtown bedroom communites to the north, such as McKinney just annexed and annexed as fast as they could, so we have what we have today... burbs headed on toward Oklahoma lol. Watch out Sherman! a northern suburb might likely land lock you soon lol.

[Metro Matt]

Originally Posted by Trae713

As I sit here getting sidetracked from my studies, i was wondering why were cities and suburbs in DFW able to annex and make themselves bigger, while most smaller towns and suburbs around Houston were swallowed into Houston? Could Dallas have no annexed more of the suburbs around it? Why didnt city leaders in Katy or Cypress (when it was a city) go through annexation processes and become bigger? It seems that only Houston was allowed to annex, while DFW cities and suburbs annexed until they reached the next one. It just seems weird to me how in one state, you have two metro areas that are so different in that way.

Fort Worth recently annexed a whole bunch of land on the northside.

[stoneclaw]

i kind of like DFW's clean, organized look of the suburb towns myself. It reminds me of Denver Colorado in a way. Over the years, Houston's been trying to identify and divide itself into small management districts like Upper Kirby, Midtown, Medical Center, Museum District, Ghandi district, and West Bellaire/China Town. But it still feels so afterthought.

There are too many areas outside of those districts that have crumbling infrastructure/roads. It would be so much better if there were boundaries for those areas outside of the districts. Although, Houston's layout results in a more international and somewhat "Vibrant" feel, many of areas in Houston still are neglected and are looking beaten down of urban decay.

stoneclaw/C2H (ComingtoHouston)

[Trae713]

Originally Posted by Mark Senior

The difference folks: 60-70 years ago or as recent as maybe 40 years, Houston only had West University Place and Bellaire. Neither of these cities, especially WU wanted to expand.

So when Houston continued to grow, which it has since it was founded, and with the establishment of ETJ's by the state of Texas, which restrict areas within "x" miles of city limits from incorporating this paved the way for Houston or any other city, S.A. Austin and most recently Fort Worth annex "into" it's ETJ the ETJ would then be extended again out even farther, to the mileage allowed repeating the process over and over

A law or laws created some 10-20 years ago, have now restricted how fast a city can annex... Must give advance notice, allow an area to incorporate itself if it wishes, some time frame to response to this and other condictions before a city can annex, unless a town or area ask a city to annex them. Such as Whitehouse, 1 1/2 miles from the Tyler's city limits asked Tyler to consider annexing them... Whitehouse about 8,000 pop. wanted Tyler,, lowest the state city tax rate. and good city services. I digress...

Now, Dallas way back 40-70 years ago, already had cities of Arlington, Mesquite, Garland, Irving, etc that were growing and annexing as Dallas was, Dallas tried to "strip" annex as to not be "land locked" but eventually the competition of other cities did land lock them. Not the same situation as Houston.

Later all the boomtown bedroom communites to the north, such as McKinney just annexed and annexed as fast as they could, so we have what we have today... burbs headed on toward Oklahoma lol. Watch out Sherman! a northern suburb might likely land lock you soon lol.

Makes sense. I guess with having two major cities already in North Texas, growth that spilled over into these smaller cities that wanted to get big, so they annexed.

Originally Posted by ReppingDFW

I'm glad Dallas didn't swallow up the suburbs. Things run more efficient with the smaller city governments administering the area, as opposed to just Dallas trying to manage a larger swath of land and population. I can drive through the 'burbs without having to worry about massive pot-holes.

Houston gets more potholes due to the terrain and water table. There are still plenty of crappy roads all around these DFW suburbs. Only some of the Northern burbs have streets paved in gold. There are different issues that come up with having a whole bunch of smaller cities, but I just thought it was interesting that none of the smaller cities and towns around Houston decided to annex land (like Katy, Humble, etc.). Cypress and Fairbanks are two cities than deannexed themselves and became unincorporated areas.

[Sunderpig2]

Originally Posted by Trae713

As I sit here getting sidetracked from my studies, i was wondering why were cities and suburbs in DFW able to annex and make themselves bigger, while most smaller towns and suburbs around Houston were swallowed into Houston?

A lot of towns around Houston have been able to become cities, avoid annexation, and grow in size. There's a long history of that. Seabrook, Webster, League City, and Sugar Land are just a few examples. Not sure where you get the idea that most have been swallowed up.

Houston's fairly divided too. Any place where you have a distinct transition from an old community to a newer one, two very different demographics next to each other, and/or the classic joke of industry next door to a neighborhood (no zoning whatsoever).

It's frightening just how similar Dallas and Houston are...

[blkgiraffe]

Originally Posted by crankywithakeyboard

For whatever reason it's this way, I am glad DFW doesn't swallow up all the suburbs like Houston tends to do. The suburbs here in DFW can keep their personalities, events, etc. Each suburb is different and it's really fun to go to events in different areas. Suburbs also attract company headquarters by keeping their uniqueness.

I really like this layout instead of the Houston swallow-up-the-decent suburbs-then-watch-them-decline strategy. Example: Clear Lake.

Originally Posted by Sunderpig

A lot of towns around Houston have been able to become cities, avoid annexation, and grow in size. There's a long history of that. Seabrook, Webster, League City, and Sugar Land are just a few examples. Not sure where you get the idea that most have been swallowed up.

Houston's fairly divided too. Any place where you have a distinct transition from an old community to a newer one, two very different demographics next to each other, and/or the classic joke of industry next door to a neighborhood (no zoning whatsoever).

It's frightening just how similar Dallas and Houston are...

You're contradicting yourself here.

[marcopolo2000]

Originally Posted by crankywithakeyboard

For whatever reason it's this way, I am glad DFW doesn't swallow up all the suburbs like Houston tends to do. The suburbs here in DFW can keep their personalities, events, etc. Each suburb is different and it's really fun to go to events in different areas. Suburbs also attract company headquarters by keeping their uniqueness.

I really like this layout instead of the Houston swallow-up-the-decent suburbs-then-watch-them-decline strategy. Example: Clear Lake.

Lets not act like suburban decline doesn't happen in DFW. I'm sure formerly "nice" suburbs like Irving, Richardson,Duncanville, Lewisville,Carrollton,etc were once much better than what they are now. Even Plano is seeing a decline.

[Trae713]

Originally Posted by Sunderpig

A lot of towns around Houston have been able to become cities, avoid annexation, and grow in size. There's a long history of that. Seabrook, Webster, League City, and Sugar Land are just a few examples. Not sure where you get the idea that most have been swallowed up.

Houston's fairly divided too. Any place where you have a distinct transition from an old community to a newer one, two very different demographics next to each other, and/or the classic joke of industry next door to a neighborhood (no zoning whatsoever).

It's frightening just how similar Dallas and Houston are...

There were some cities and suburbs annexed into Houston. And those suburbs you named, only two can get above 100k. Houston burbs back then didn't care to annex. DFW burbs seems to have annexed as much as they could before the land was taken. So, they are pretty different.