Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
slfunk

North Texas Tops 6 Million

Recommended Posts

Please no slander comparisons b/w metro areas whether it be Houston, San Antonio..etc. This is just informative, respond respectively. Thanks

N. Texas population tops 6M

16-county area added nearly 150,000 people in 2004; 8 million expected by 2020

Christine Perez

Staff Writer

The economy may have slowed, but North Texas population growth is continuing at a brisk pace.

The number of people living in the 16-county North Texas area now tops 6 million and is expected to reach nearly 8 million by 2020, according to new statistics released exclusively to the Dallas Business Journal by Dallas-based School District Strategies L.L.C.

It is difficult to tell whether the gains move the Metroplex up in national rankings. A 2003 report from the U.S. Office of Management and Budget, which relies on U.S. Census data from 2000, shows Dallas-Fort Worth as the country's fifth-largest Metropolitan Statistical Area, behind New York-Newark-Edison (18.3 million), Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana (12.4 million), Chicago-Naperville-Joilet (9.1 million) and Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington (5.7 million).

From 1990 to 2000, Dallas-Fort Worth grew at a 30% clip -- six times faster than the Philadelphia MSA, which grew 5% during the same time period.

The Metroplex gained 148,900 people in 2004 -- an increase of 2,500 over 2003's growth of 146,400. The current population estimate stands at 6,014,465.

"The consistent growth is a great affirmation for the area," said Rocky Gardiner, demographer at SDS. "We sustained growth of about 150,000 during a national economic downturn. Builders continued to add homes at a record pace, and this helped sustain the local economy.

"People lost jobs here, but they didn't leave," Gardiner said.

Gardiner, former manager of research for the North Central Texas Council of Governments, joined SDS last October. The company was launched in January 2001 as a sister company to Dallas-based Residential Strategies Inc.. It provides enrollment forecasting, facility planning, demographic studies, mapping and other services to school districts in the Dallas-Fort Worth and Austin markets.

Specific city and county population estimates will be available in April from COG, Gardiner said.

At current growth rates, the Metroplex is on track to add 1.4 million to 1.5 million people during the first decade of the new millennium.

"We thought the '90s were good when we added 1.2 million people," Gardiner said. "Even if we plateau these next five years, we'll still top that by 2010. Worst-case scenario would be 1.3 million for the decade."

Trends show a continual graying of the population, due to the aging of baby boomers, those born during 1946-1964. In 2000, people aged 55 and older comprised about 8% to 12% of the North Texas population. By 2010 it will double to 20%, and by 2020 it will reach 25%, according to SDS.

Migration trends

After dropping to a near standstill in 2003, the Metroplex saw an increase in "internal migration" -- relocations from other parts of the United States -- in 2004. About 6% of local growth came from that segment last year. Though it's up from 2003, it still pales in comparison to 1997 and 1998, when internal migration accounted for more than 40% of growth.

About half of 2004's population gain came from births; the balance, about 43%, came from international migration.

Gains in internal migration during 2004 mirror reports from local homebuilders, who say they're seeing an increase in relocation traffic. This has caused several companies, including Highland Homes, to cool its focus on entry-level homes and build more homes in the $375,00 to $700,000 range.

Fred Balda, who heads up the residential division of Hillwood, said he has been surprised by the continuing growth.

"After 9/11, we expected business to fall off and tempered our development plans a bit, expecting decreases," he said. "But every year since 2001 has exceeded expectations. I am baffled by the growth."

Homebuilders in Greater Dallas-Fort Worth began work on 44,000 new homes last year. This compares to 40,000 home starts in 2003. For its part, Hillwood delivered 1,600 lots in 2004. If all goes as planned, the company expects to deliver 2,000 this year.

"We've had a good story, but there is a lot of caution in the air," Balda said. "Over the last year or two, margins for the builders have been awful. Developers haven't been hit yet, but in time we will be. There is plenty of demand for our lots right now, but ultimately, we all need job growth to sustain demand. The market created about 20,000 new jobs in 2004 -- we need that to be closer to 100,000 new jobs. People are projecting 50,000 to 80,000 new jobs for 2005. That's OK, but not great."

Even without an abundance of new jobs, population is projected to reach 7.95 million by 2020, according to Gardiner. He said this will put a strain on infrastructure and will drive continued expansion to outlying areas in all directions.

"Dallas-Fort Worth is almost like the central business district of the United States," he said. "There are no oceans, no mountains, nothing to constrain growth or keep it from happening."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oy vey.

I lived in Big D and Addison after college.

Both are fine place, but I never saw a lot of love between Dallas and Ft. Worth.

But all these marketing documents make it sound like it's one big happy place.

They are STILL fighting about the Wright Amendment. That's how much Luv there is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"Dallas-Fort Worth is almost like the central business district of the United States," he said. "There are no oceans, no mountains, nothing to constrain growth or keep it from happening."

So, if DFW is "like the central business district of the United States", THEN, since the U.S. is essentially the leader of the world, and as far as we know, there are no confirmed other worlds with any kind

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All friendly rivalry fun aside, I'm glad they got to the 6 mil mark. As someone has mentioned over at thier forum, the entire Texas triangle of D-H-SA will soon be one large mega-opolis. It's all good. Texas rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the Houston Metro area? I hear that the don't include areas up north in Montogomery county like The Woodlands, and far south in Brazoria county. Does anybody know about the makeup of the Houston Metro area and which areas it includes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am happy to hear Dallas Fort Worth is at 6 million people. I am routing for any Texas city. Other states have one main city to fall back on, in Texas we have several. For instance, Georgia only has Atlanta as a power house city. Places like Texas and California have plenty. Texas has Dallas, Fort Worth, Houston, Austin, San Antonio, El paso, and so on. So does California.

And when companies want to relocate their headquarters to Texas, I wouldn't care what city they relocate to, as long as they come to Texas, although it would be good if they came to Houston. Like Burger King.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the population increase from 2005-2010 continues at the same rate as during 2000-2004, the Dallas-Fort Worth population will be 6.9 million in 2010, 8 million by 2015, and 9.1 by 2020 that's assuming a yearly population increase of 3%.

Year ------------3% per year---------------2.5% per year-----------------2% per year

2006--------------6,194,000-------------------6,164,000---------------------6,134,000

2007--------------6,379,000-------------------6,318,000---------------------6,256,000

2008--------------6,570,000-------------------6,475,000---------------------6,381,000

2009--------------6,767,000-------------------6,636,000---------------------6,508,000

2010--------------6,970,000-------------------6,801,000---------------------6,638,000

2015--------------8,080,000-------------------7,694,000---------------------7,328,000

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think it's Houston - Baytown - Huntsville.

It seems odd that the woodlands would not be included. To my understanding, there is a huge commute pattern from the woodlands into the city. But then, maybe I dont understand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The CSAs are done by whole county (not portions). For Houston-Galveston-Sugarland, this includes:

Brazoria

Chambers

Fort Bend

Galveston

Harris

Liberty

Montgomery

Walker

Waller

Walker is the newest county to be added, according to the US Census Bureau.

I don't have accurate estimates but I imagine that Houston's CSA population is at about 5.4 million by now if not more. DFW's CSA has consistently been between 580,000 - 650,000 larger than Houston's since about 1998 (it has fluctuated between 2000 and 2003 so it's hard to tell if you now estimate on the higher end or the lower end).

Other recently changed CSAs:

* Miami-Fort Lauderdale is now Miami-Fort Lauderdale-West Palm Beach

* Atlanta has added two new counties (whose names I can't remember). Atlanta's CSA has somewhere in the neighborhood of 20 counties but these counties' combined land area isn't that much bigger than those included in Houston's or Dallas's CSA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I feel the same way. Whatever is good for the state. New companies moving here will help the Texas economy.

:lol: I agree 100%......I now live in LA........ (sorry guys...occupational reasons)

and right now California and Texas are the only two states in which it seems the ENTIRE state is one economic force rather than just a booming city....like Chicago or NY. Anything that benefits TX has my vote......... I have visited many states in our Union..........nothing is quite like TX. I miss it.

Any word on a long time ago proposed supertrain (monorail....or magnetic bullet-type) to connect the Golden Triangle? I wish developers had vision of say, 50 years hence, instead of just the 5-10 year projection it seems we keep maintaining. As a TX megalopolis takes form, wouldn't it be nice, for once, to already have fantastic transportation available.....instead of playing catch-up with the pop. growth?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I the only one here who has access to the internet, or does it just seem like it? I've delayed posting an answer to this great mystery regarding what is included in the Houston metro area, thinking surely someone else could be bothered to actually do a TINY bit of research, rather than continuing what has become the usual practice on this board ... throwing up a post of what you think you heard or imagined you read about this or that, with no effort to confirm or provide a source for the information.

According to the US Census Bureau, which you can find at Census.gov:

The Houston Metropolitan Area consists of the following counties:

Austin, Brazoria, Chambers, Fort Bend, Galveston, Harris, Liberty, Montgomery, San Jacinto, and Waller.

There is also a new concept called the "Combined Metropolitan Area". For Houston that includes the above-listed counties plus Walker and Matagorda.

According to the 2003 county estimates (the latest that have been released by the Census Bureau), Houston's Combined Metropolitan Area has 5,176,061 people. That's a 7.5% increase since 2000 (a greater rate of growth than Dallas-Fort Worth has experienced in that period).

I'll come back later and explain why I am just a little skeptical of the posted article's claim that D-FW has reached 6 million.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'll come back later and explain why I am just a little skeptical of the posted article's claim that D-FW has reached 6 million.

Why? It's based largely on the same reference material you just used.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why? It's based largely on the same reference material you just used.

y

Yeah, and as stated, those "D-FW" figures are for a 16-county area!

Seriously, you can go one mile east of the LBJ and be on a rolling prairie with no one around...and that's still Dallas County! I'm assuming Collin County is in this count and thus, every county that touches it, as well. Denton is probably counted in there, but jeez, where does it end? The idea that Denton is part of D-FW is laughable to me. Most people I know in Denton only go to Dallas for the airport...and it's in Ft. Worth.

The point is, "The Metroplex" is a myth. I lived there 98-2000 and it is not one area of connected cities. Nor should it be counted as one. Southern California deserves this distinction. It really is one giant metro area. D-FW is two cities, three or four large towns and a few suburbs surrounded by a several small - medium towns that are a day trip away.

For the record, I don't believe Baytown is a legitimate suburb of Houston. Nor is Galveston. I really believe the cities should be joined by development or at least culture to be counted as one. I doubt most people in Baytown could tell you who the mayor of Houston is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just something I've noticed.. certain forumers here are VERY hostile towards the DFW region. It's sad that when you see a factual piece of evidence as a 'threat' against your own self-appointed superiority, you fire back with unbacked remarks that sound like they came off some elementry school yard.

Would any of you like to draw us some lines as to where the "Fort Worth side" ends and where the "Dallas side" begins? Barring rivers, I'm having trouble seeing those lines that people here are so adamant about. Anyone know?

Please. Enlighten me.

600px-Large_Dallas_Landsat.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You'll note that while there used to be quite a distinction between a lot of the cities, this has changed significantly over the last 30 years. ('74, '89, '03)

Landsat_Gallery_379_1_full.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just something I've noticed.. certain forumers here are VERY hostile towards the DFW region.  It's sad that when you see a factual piece of evidence as a 'threat' against your own self-appointed superiority, you fire back with unbacked remarks that sound like they came off some elementry school yard.

Would any of you like to draw us some lines as to where the "Fort Worth side" ends and where the "Dallas side" begins?  Barring rivers, I'm having trouble seeing those lines that people here are so adamant about.  Anyone know?

Please.  Enlighten me.

600px-Large_Dallas_Landsat.jpg

Okay, how about Highway 360?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is development on both sides of 360 that extends east and west continuously into both Dallas and Fort Worth.  Try again.

No. From space it may seem there's continuous development. From the ground, there are big gaps and rolling hills.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I LOVE THIS CRAP!!!!

We are now using satellite imaging, SATELLITE IMAGING for crying out loud, to fuel the Houston-Dallas-Fort Worth rivalry!!! This is simply hysterical!

We ALL are really a disfunctional bunch, arent we!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a FTW native and Houstonian (albeit expatriate) by choice, I do not think that there exists any rivalry between Houston and Fort Worth (at least from Cowtown's perspective - ok, maybe a little envy towards the size and scope of Houston's stockshow - but that is mostly reverential). Between Dallas and Houston, sure. Between FTW and Dallas, absolutely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DFW is a homogenous metro zone (as evidenced by the sat photos posted above). On the ground, it feels different, just as Sugarland feels different from Kingwood and Uptown feels different from The Strand.

I think that the true problem arises (in particular in FW) when the name "Dallas area" or other similar apelations are applied to DFW as a whole. Dallasites will maintain that that is just how the "world" views the region and it is not their (Dallas') responsibility to correct for such. FW's view is pretty much that we are not responsible for the rest of the world's ignorance and do pretty much what we can to highlight our strengths and remind those in error of their mistakes. I personally have advised flight attendants on flights into DFW to not refer to the flight as "heading to Dallas."

I think in the end, I think of myself as a Texan first and the city where I live second.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not surprised that the Dallas MSA is up to 16 counties. A lot of cities have experienced similar MSA expansion. In fact, now the New York MSA includes not only parts of New Jersey and Connecticut, but also northeast PENNSYLVANIA. If this trend continues, it won't be too much longer before Milwaukee is a suburb in the Chicago MSA, and San Diego is eaten by the Los Angeles MSA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I LOVE THIS CRAP!!!!

We are now using satellite imaging, SATELLITE IMAGING for crying out loud, to fuel the Houston-Dallas-Fort Worth rivalry!!!  This is simply hysterical!

We ALL are really a disfunctional bunch, arent we!

The next step is government wire taps. Someone will have recorded a conversation at the US Census Bureau's main office.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's impressive that Texas has several major cities like Dallas, Fort Worth, Houston and Austin. Most states just have one major city.

This is something to be proud of as a Texan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why? It's based largely on the same reference material you just used.

First of all, we don't really know what the "statistics" in the article are based on. They never tell us. That would be red flag number one.

Red Flag No. 2: They go on to compare apples to oranges. The article starts out talking about the 16-county area, i.e., the Combined Metropolitan Area. But then they pivot to pronounce that the Census Bureau figures show "Dallas-Fort Worth as the country's fifth-largest Metropolitan Statistical Area", based on the 2000 Census. That appears to be true, but that is comparing the DFW Metropolitan Statistical Area (a 12-county area, leaving out only the 117,698 people of Cook, Hood, Sommervelle, and Palo Pinto Counties). That compares to, for example, San Francisco without Napa, San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, Santa Cruz-Watsonville, Santa Rosa-Petaluma, and Vellejo-Fairfield; Washington DC without , among others, Baltimore; Boston without Manchester NH and Worcester. To say the least, it's rather misleading to have an article discussing the Combined Metroplitan Area population of D-FW and suddenly throw in a ranking of a different statistic altogether, without clarifying that you're doing so.

Red Flag No. 3 and the most important flaw:

The April 1, 2000 population of the D-FW Combined Metropolitan Area was 5,346,119. The latest Census Bureau estimate was for July 31, 2003, and it came to 5,707,368. That's a growth of 361,249. Now, the article does tell us (without giving a source or method for arriving at this estimate) that D-FW grew by 148,900 people in 2004. They never tell us what date their population estimate is for, so to be generous, I'll assume they are talking about Dec. 31, 2004. So, starting with their number of 6,014,465 for 2004 population, if we subtract their growth for 2004 (148,900) we get to a Dec 31 2003 population of 5,865,565. To get from the Census Bureau's July 31, 2003 estimate of 5,707,368 to their Dec. 31, 2003 estimate of 5,865,565 D-FW would have to have grown by 158,197 IN SIX MONTHS. Even this article doesn't suggest any such thing. (In fact they claim growth for the entirety of 2003 of only 146,400.) (If I have made any errors in my calculation, please point them out. I stand ready to be corrected.)

Put another way, if the article is correct, D-FW would have grown in 1 1/2 years, nearly as much as it grew in the prior 3 1/3 years. Color me skeptical.

I have no doubt that the D-FW Combined Metropolitan Area is getting close to 6,000,000, but I don't see any evidence, least of all in the information presented in this article, that it has already done so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
^ Still smells like sour grapes to me.

Ditto. and after all of the supposition, presumptions, and assumptions in his rant. he still didn't produce any information that would contradict the Census Bureau.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
^ Still smells like sour grapes to me.

Where are the sour grapes? Pardon me if I like to be factual and hold journalists and chambers of commerce to some standards.

Maybe D-FW did reach a population of 6,000,000 in 2004, but there is no evidence of it given in that article beyond a mere statement by a Dallas consultant with NO backup or support.

D-FW metro area is bigger than Houston and has been ever since Fort Worth was joined with Dallas by the Census Bureau. I hold no grudge against them for that, Good grief.

And if it makes you happier, I would expect D-FW to reach 6,000,000 in 2005. There, are those sweet enough grapes for you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Where are the sour grapes? 

Sour grapes make good whine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These are the facts, and they are undisputed: Even if you add the population of Fort Worth (against their wishes, mind you), to the population of Dallas, Dallas IS AND CONTINUES TO BE smaller than Houston. Houston is the largest CITY in the state of Texas, and nationally, it falls right behind Chicago, Los Angeles, and New York. These are the facts, and they are undisputed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And now, this is the time when someone from Dallas will now attempt to redefine "City", "largest", and the word "is".

...standing by....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:overly dumb sarcastic tone: YOu'rE SToopId! DALLAS RuLez!!!!1!!11!!!!!1!  :wacko:

:mellow:

I'm with you 2112. Houston's number 4. Why argue something so simple? :huh:

Just a question: As a native Houstonian (I live in LA now) ...... I have always wondered what the draw is to Dallas anyway. I have only been there twice for some Beta Club conference several years ago........and well......... I wasn't really all that impressed. What's the big deal? Educate me.

I mean, it seems, from the forum and the little (emphasis on little) I have read, some of the cutting edge "stuff" tends to go to Dallas instead of Houston.....

and I would just chalk it up to the TV series, but uhhhhh, wasn't that like 20 years ago?! :P

So, enlighten me.......... why Dallas?

m.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
These are the facts, and they are undisputed: Even if you add the population of Fort Worth (against their wishes, mind you), to the population of Dallas, Dallas IS AND CONTINUES TO BE smaller than Houston. Houston is the largest CITY in the state of Texas, and nationally, it falls right behind Chicago, Los Angeles, and New York. These are the facts, and they are undisputed. And now, this is the time when someone from Dallas will now attempt to redefine "City", "largest", and the word "is".

...standing by....

This represents a fundamental insecurity of our city. Just because the Dallas area is growing we feel threatened.

The story did not say that Houston was NOT the fourth largest city. The story did not mention Houston. It simply said that the North Texas region is 6 million and growing. IT DOES NOT AFFECT HOUSTON AT ALL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The source is named in the first paragraph of the story. I think this proves you stopped reading after you saw the headline.

Nice try, genius. Tell me this... if I stopped reading after I saw the headline, how is it that I quoted a number of "statistics" and other matters from the article. Maybe YOU should try reading beyond the first sentence?

As to the "source"... did I say they didn't name a "source"? I don't think so. Yes, the "journalist" named a "source"... What I said was that we don't know what the "statistics" are based on because thy never tell us. Did they even start with census figures? What was their methodology? How did they (and by they I mean the consultants, not the "journalist") come up with their "estimate"? In the words of my post (which you quote, but apparently either didn't bother to read or were unable to comprehend) "we don't really know what the "statistics" in the article are based on. They never tell us."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This story is not that hard to believe. Additionally, it does not come at the expense of Houston. People aren't leaving Houston to move to Dallas. Why are we so defensive over this?

The statistics are based on the study conducted by the DBJ. Why is that so hard to swallow?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's hard to swallow for the reasons I explained in my post. To sum it up for you... it's hard to swallow because they don't back it up by giving any idea of how they came to their conclusion. It's also hard to swallow because it clearly contradicts the estimates put forth by the Census Bureau, as I demonstrated in rather great detail in my post.

NOTHING in my post indicated I thougth that D-FW growth comes at the expense of Houston or that I in any way, shape, or form am defensive or bitter over D-FW's growth. I just saw some objectively recognizable flaws in the information being presented, and thought I would call it to everyone's attention. But objective facts seem to be increasinbly unpopular on this board. Why are you so defensive about an objective, fact-based, well-thought-out challenge to the alleged "facts" presented? As I said in my earlier posts, I invite correction to my analysis, but all I've gotten so far is whining that the analysis shouldn't even be undertaken. How dare I challenge the Dallas Business Journal!

Further, maybe you are defensive about the possibility of D-FW reaching 6,000,000 population, but I'm certainly not. If you read my posts, you'll see that I happily predicted that they will probably achieve that milestone this year.

For the record, the "study" was not conducted by the Dallas Business Journal, it was conducted by the Dallas-based School District Strategies L.L.C. You really do have a problem with reading comprehension don't you?

And as to "why that is so hard to swallow," Let me go over this one more time: Try to read and follow along this time will you? We don't know what the "statistics" are based on because thy never tell us. Did they even start with census figures? What was their methodology? How did they (and by they I mean the consultants, not the "journalist") come up with their "estimate". In addition, as I said above (and have said in earlier posts as well) their conclusion is contradictory to the Census Bureau numbers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...