Dallas/Ft Worth Metroplex

[Dominax]

DALLAS FORT WORTH METROPLEX

As looking through the websites of Emporis.com

that the population residental area has officially reached to 6 million people.

As they are still getting all suburbs upgraded by tommorrow they will be finish with it and you can see by searching through of defining cities like

or click here

http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/ci/?id=101322

Fort Worth

Arlington

Dallas

Plano

and more....

It may still show 5,931,956 but by tommorrow they have reupdated their population up to 6 million!

[tamtagon]

The North Central Texas Council of Governments estimates the January 1, 2006 population of the 16 county Metroplex area at 6,242,800.

http://www.nctcog.org/ris/demographics/population.asp

[tcole]

Emporis also seems to be about 60,000 residents behind NCTCOG estimates for Fort Worth.

[The Great Hizzy!]

Sweet Jesus. The Metroplex is up to 16 counties now? I can see the NCTCOG keeping stats such as these for the region but I don't think the census bureau looks at the Metroplex's CSI or CMSA as including 16 counties.

[RedScare]

Sweet Jesus. The Metroplex is up to 16 counties now? I can see the NCTCOG keeping stats such as these for the region but I don't think the census bureau looks at the Metroplex's CSI or CMSA as including 16 counties.

The Dallas CMSA consists of 12 counties. The Dallas Metro planning group, NCTCOG, similar to Houston's HGAC, consists of 16 counties. While the NCTCOG's population estimate includes more counties than the Census definition, it is a pretty safe bet that eventually the Metroplex will officially include all 16 counties.

[The Great Hizzy!]

That's a lot of farmland. But, hey, if it helps them lobby better for regional federal funds, more power to them. Hell, we need to get on the ball and try to lobby to add Beaumont and Lake Charles to ours. Maybe that'll help expedite expansion of I-10 from Lake Charles to Winnie, which is like 30 years behind schedule (hyperbole).

[Houston19514]

The Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington Metropolitan Statistical Area consists of the Dallas-Plano-Irving Metropolitan Division (containing 8 counties) and the Fort Worth-Arlington Metropolitan Division (containing 4 counties), for a total of 12 counties.

The Census Bureau also has the Dallas-Fort Worth Combined Statistical Area ("CSA"), which includes those 12 counties, plus 6 more, for a total of 18 counties.

The NTCOG covers 16 counties, but they are not just a subset of the 18 in the CSA. The NTCOG includes 14 of the 18 CSA counties, but adds two that are NOT in the Census Bureau's definitions (Erath and Navarro Counties).

Also, the NTCOG numbers have the area growing somewhate faster than the Census estimates. I have no idea how the NTCOG comes up with their estimate, or why it differs from the Census estimates (it is more than just their selection of which counties to include... on a county-by-county basis, the NTCOG numbers estimate higher than does the Census.) According to Census estimates, the 18-county D-FW CSA would have a January 1, 2006 population in the neighborhood of 6,100,000.

[JasonDFW]

That's a lot of farmland. But, hey, if it helps them lobby better for regional federal funds, more power to them.

It is still a lot of farmland, but remember that the counties aren't very big. Dallas and Tarrant counties together are only the same size as Harris.

Jason

[2112]

That's a lot of farmland...

Yes indeed. Much of the DFW metroplex consists of very scenic drives along the freeways, including the various farming areas in and around the metroplex. For example, the drive between Dallas and Forth Worth has rollling hills and some beautiful vegitation, something that living in Houston you hardly ever see. I mean, we have the greenery and vegitation, but we dont have the hills, and sometimes I am just full with envy when I think of those hills. Fortunately, much of that Dallas beauty has been left alone so that it can be enjoyed by all 6 million people who live in Dallas. By the way, there is a really neat BBQ joint as you start entering Dallas from I-45 south, going northbound. I think it's in Centerville or something. Anyways, it's got some of the most tender brisket anywhere in the state. I'm salivating right now just thinking about it.

Congratulations to the City of Dallas on reaching the 6 million mark!

[tamtagon]

I got these Ranally Metro Area data from the Rand McNally Commercial Atlas & Marketing Guide.

Rank - - Core City - - Population -- Change '00-'04 - - Area square miles

1) New York City------19,799,374-----------2.3%---------------6905

2) Los Angeles--------13,671,048-----------5.2%---------------3224

3) Chicago--------------9,026,690------------3.2%---------------4068

4) San Francisco-------6,034,656------------0.7%---------------2041

5) Philadelphia---------5,931,045------------2.0%---------------3912

6) Miami-----------------5,307,359------------7.3%---------------1660

7) Dallas----------------5,154,855-----------10.1%---------------3360

8) Washington DC----4,904,263------------7.1%----------------3479

9) Boston---------------4,748,174------------1.5%---------------3609

10) Detroit-------------4,694,293-------------1.1%---------------3656

11) Houston-----------4,472,646-------------9.6%---------------2576

12) Atlanta-------------3,992,259------------10.2%--------------3132

13) Phoenix------------3,495,656------------13.6%--------------2071

14) Seattle-------------3,165,807-------------4.2%---------------2604

29) San Antonio------1,511,381--------------7.5%---------------1032

37) Austin-------------1,122,107--------------11.2%--------------1071

59) El Paso-------------729,987----------------5.0%---------------469

23) El Paso/Juarez---2,004,987--------------34.5%--------------529

The biggest difference between OMB Census and Ranally metro area definition is that Ranally is not restricted to county boundaries. Ranally metro areas contain at least 70 persons per square mile and at least 20% of the labor force commute to the central urban area.

[TxDave]

Congratulations to the City of Dallas on reaching the 6 million mark!

I hate to split hairs, especially on such a friendly post, but the City of Dallas does not deserve the Congrats - it is the region that has reached the population threshold.

Because of the variation in the way that we define our 'cities' and 'metro areas', we will probably never be able to truly compare these areas without some kind of controversy or objection.

[slfunk]

So the U.S. Census Bureau has a different stat then the NCTCOG. NCTCOG which studies the numbers more closley then the US Census puts Dallas over 6 mil. The US Census Bureau puts DFW just short of 6mil. At any rate DFW seems to have topped Philadelphia. Which is no new news, but comes from another source.

Dallas-Fort Worth now No. 4 in nation

Dallas Business Journal - 3:06 PM CDT Thursdayby Glenn HunterEditor

Link: http://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/stories/...tml?jst=b_ln_hl

Dallas-Fort Worth has vaulted past greater Philadelphia to become the nation's fourth-largest metropolitan area, the Greater Dallas Chamber said Thursday.

The chamber based its claim on U.S. Census Bureau data that, in July 2005, showed D-FW in fifth place with 5.819 million residents, just behind Philadelphia's 5.823 million.

However, the chamber says, because the Metroplex gains about 365 new residents every day -- compared to just 72 for Philadelphia -- D-FW overtook the Pennyslvania metro last year and since has pulled well ahead.

D-FW's new position won't be official until July 2007, the chamber said, when the census bureau releases its latest population estimate.

Dr. Lyssa Jenkens, the chamber's chief economist, said the new ranking would cause "companies around the world to see Dallas-Fort Worth with new eyes."

Economist Ray Perryman, CEO of The Perryman Group in Waco, said surpassing Philadelphia would send a signal to investors that D-FW is "a fast-growing area, and that the area is indeed fast-growing relative to other areas.

"It's not a huge change," Perryman added, "but people will make note that we're moving up higher, that we're becoming more dynamic."

The chamber said New York, Los Angeles and Chicago are the nation's most populous metropolitan areas, in that order. Miami; Houston; Washington, D.C.; Atlanta; and Detroit round out the top 10, in that order, following D-FW and Philadelphia.

ghunter@bizjournals.com | 214-706-7109

[RedScare]

Dr. Lyssa Jenkens, the chamber's chief economist, said the new ranking would cause "companies around the world to see Dallas-Fort Worth with new eyes."

I think this quote belongs in the Chamber of Commerce Homer Quote Hall of Fame.

All around the world, Corporate CEOs are gushing, 'Look, DFW just passed Philly!' I can't wait for a Houston CofC homer to top that quote.

[scarface]

Dallas-Fort Worth now No. 4 in nation

Dallas Business Journal - 3:06 PM CDT Thursdayby Glenn HunterEditor

Link: http://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/stories/...tml?jst=b_ln_hl

Dallas-Fort Worth has vaulted past greater Philadelphia to become the nation's fourth-largest metropolitan area, the Greater Dallas Chamber said Thursday.

ghunter@bizjournals.com | 214-706-7109

very good news for Dallas/Ft. Worth. DFW seems to be leading this entire state!

[Houston19514]

So the U.S. Census Bureau has a different stat then the NCTCOG. NCTCOG which studies the numbers more closley then the US Census puts Dallas over 6 mil. The US Census Bureau puts DFW just short of 6mil. At any rate DFW seems to have topped Philadelphia. Which is no new news, but comes from another source.

It has little to do with studying the numbers "more closely." The NCTCOG numbers are for a different (and larger) geographical area than are the census numbers. Hence the larger population estimate.

[slfunk]

It has little to do with studying the numbers "more closely." The NCTCOG numbers are for a different (and larger) geographical area than are the census numbers. Hence the larger population estimate.

I just looked up information from the U.S. Census Bureau. I have posted it in the skyscraper forum under the Texas/Southwest section. Anyway, U.S. Census studies the same 11 counties as the NCTCOG. Now you can go look up how NCTCOG studies the population which they do watch closer then U.S. Census because the NCTCOG works with North Texas muncipalities and agencies to forecast things like water needs, power, infrastructure, schools, fire services etc. This the U.S. Census Bureau because it studies population at a more national level then local level.

U.S. Census Bureau MSA map

http://ftp2.census.gov/geo/maps/metr...s_0603_rev.pdf

NCTCOG 2006 population estimate brochure.

http://www.nctcog.org/ris/demographics/pop...opestimates.pdf

[Houston19514]

I just looked up information from the U.S. Census Bureau. I have posted it in the skyscraper forum under the Texas/Southwest section. Anyway, U.S. Census studies the same 11 counties as the NCTCOG. Now you can go look up how NCTCOG studies the population which they do watch closer then U.S. Census because the NCTCOG works with North Texas muncipalities and agencies to forecast things like water needs, power, infrastructure, schools, fire services etc. This the U.S. Census Bureau because it studies population at a more national level then local level.

U.S. Census Bureau MSA map

http://ftp2.census.gov/geo/maps/metr...s_0603_rev.pdf

NCTCOG 2006 population estimate brochure.

http://www.nctcog.org/ris/demographics/pop...opestimates.pdf

Huh? The NCTCOG study that estimates 6,000,000 + covers 16 counties . Look at the link you posted. (And you have not made your case that the NCTCOG watches "closer then U.S. Census." I suspect they use some different criteria and some of the same, gathered from the very same sources)

[JasonDFW]

Slfunk: The Census uses 12 counties not 11.

Collin

Dallas

Delta

Denton

Ellis

Hunt

Johnson

Kaufman

Parker

Rockwall

Tarrant

Wise

Houston19514: The numbers from the NCTCOG differ from the Census regardless of whether they use the same 12 county area or the 9/16 standards the NCTCOG has. It's a foregone conclusion that the census estimates are inferior to local methods. The census admits their methods used between standard census periods are very crude, and are overturned constantly by local governments. They are especially bad in an area like Phili though.

Jason

[Coaster]

Does the NCTCOG make estimates on other metro areas in the United States and Texas? Or, do they just report on the population of DFW?

Are the NCTCOG population numbers for DFW being compared to US Census numbers for Philly and other metros? Or, does the NCTCOG also arrive at population figures for other US metros when they make their list?

[slfunk]

Huh? The NCTCOG study that estimates 6,000,000 + covers 16 counties . Look at the link you posted. (And you have not made your case that the NCTCOG watches "closer then U.S. Census." I suspect they use some different criteria and some of the same, gathered from the very same sources)

Made my case that the NCTCOG watches the numbers more closely then the U.S. Census Bureau. Umm, just to the link and read up on the NCTCOG. It works at a local level and only has to track what is going on here in the North Texas Region. Much more closely then the U.S. Census could do since it performs at a national level. NCTCOG on their site somewhere talks how it tracks the numbers and how it defers from the U.S. Census bureau which relies heavly on mail-ins (every 10 years), trying to count the homeless, etc. Both agencies do have different methods.

[Spades]

Are the NCTCOG population numbers for DFW being compared to US Census numbers for Philly and other metros? Or, does the NCTCOG also arrive at population figures for other US metros when they make their list?

Probably not. I'm sure every major metro area has something very similar to what DFW has. Whatever Philly has, you can compare that to the NCTCOG. They use just the census to compare to Philly. If you go by the CSA which I believe is 16 counties, then it's just over 6.2 million. But if you go by MSA, it just passed the 6 million mark. Basically, the NCTCOG and US Census are saying the same thing. One just covers one half of the year, and the other study covers the other half of the year but it's easier to believe the NCTCOG over the US Census because they are more familiar with the area. I would believe the same for Houston's as well.

[Houston19514]

Made my case that the NCTCOG watches the numbers more closely then the U.S. Census Bureau. Umm, just to the link and read up on the NCTCOG. It works at a local level and only has to track what is going on here in the North Texas Region. Much more closely then the U.S. Census could do since it performs at a national level. NCTCOG on their site somewhere talks how it tracks the numbers and how it defers from the U.S. Census bureau which relies heavly on mail-ins (every 10 years), trying to count the homeless, etc. Both agencies do have different methods.

The only thing you've proven is that you haven't read the NCTCOG website very carefully (recall your confusion about the number of counties included in their estimates).

Yes, indeed, NCTCOG has a methodology for their estimates. Guess what, so does the US Census Bureau, and you can find it on THEIR website. To state that they have a methodology does not even suggest, let alone "make the case", that their estimates are ipso facto better than another set of estimates based on another methodology.

Likewise, just having estimates done locally by local people proves nothing. I'm just guessing here, but I think the Census Bureau probably has more resources and more people assigned to the task of population estimates than does the NCTCOG (as well as a good deal more experience). And they also collect information from many of the same sources as does NCTCOG.

[C2H]

well arguing about who's statistics are more accurate kind of seem like a moot point to me. Dallas/Ft. Worth is more than likely at the 6 million mark. Especially if the metroplex is adding 365 new residents per day. That's 10,950 new residents per month. With that alone, i'm sure DFW is well over the 6 mil mark by now.

In response to scarface coment:

Is Dallas/Fort Worth leading the entire state?

[Coaster]

The chamber said New York, Los Angeles and Chicago are the nation's most populous metropolitan areas, in that order. Miami; Houston; Washington, D.C.; Atlanta; and Detroit round out the top 10, in that order, following D-FW and Philadelphia.

Something is really wrong with this list. Does anyone know why the San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose metro area is not on this list? The bay area cities are every bit as connected by population, freeways, and buildings as Dallas and Fort Worth are, in fact more so. There are more people in the SF bay area than DFW. I don't know how the NCTCOG defines metropolitan areas but a top ten list of the largest metro areas that does not include the SF bay area can not be very accurate.

[slfunk]

Does the NCTCOG make estimates on other metro areas in the United States and Texas? Or, do they just report on the population of DFW?

Are the NCTCOG population numbers for DFW being compared to US Census numbers for Philly and other metros? Or, does the NCTCOG also arrive at population figures for other US metros when they make their list?

Just North Texas. NCTCOG stands for North Central Texas Council of Governments.

[Coaster]

Here is an interesting disclaimer from Wikipedia's listing of 100 largest metro areas of the world.

This page lists the 100 largest metropolitan areas of the world, listed by population. This is a controversial issue rather difficult to quantify, as unlike national subdivisions, there are no defined borders for such an area. Many of the figures for individual cities are highly controversial, and in some cases numbers which differ by millions are given by different sources. In some countries there are official definitions, but they are not consistent on a global basis, nor even necessarily within countries. (For example the United States metropolitan areas are based mainly on county boundaries, but counties are generally smaller and more evenly sized in the eastern half of the United States than in the western half). In addition, the underlying structure of different metros varies: comparing a highly centralised city with an agglomeration of smaller settlements may not be very meaningful. Commuting patterns and other aspects of urban behaviour which underlie the metro area concept differ greatly around the world. Thus all population figures for specific metros should be treated as interpretations rather than hard facts, and rankings and comparisons of metros should be treated with great caution.

(end)

So in other words, its all a bunch of BS!

[houstonfella]

If you circle 16 counties, parishes, whatever, in southeast texas known as Greater Houston, you'd have 6 mil folks as well. In reality, of course, Houston retains its America's Fourth City title and Houston alone is big, sprawling and getting bigger. Of course, our Fortune 500 companies (2nd only to NYC) paint an impressive portrait. Not to say Dallas and its 750 Oklahoma counties shouldn't be considered a force to take lightly. But Houston and her Bays and Gulf of Mexico should never be under-estimated. And we constantly get under-estimated by the northestern press and california as well. Great going, I'd say, to Texas' two 'mega tropolises.' If Houston and Dallas were not growing and competing, then we'd lose out in Texas. That, fortunately, will not happen. Let's go Hou, Dal, Aus, SA, and any other city in the Texaplex that would like to brag on its own merits. Texas is No. 1 in my heart and I love watching our metro areas kick butt ... this one is for Atlanta, Chicago, Phoenix, etc. So, Dallas, go ahead on with your 6.2 or is it now 6.6 million population? But one thing is for sure, this sunbelt state knows how to grow 'em big.

[tamtagon]

Let's go Hou, Dal, Aus, SA, and any other city in the Texaplex that would like to brag on its own merits.

El Paso may be the next boom town.

[Coaster]

El Paso may be the next boom town.

Yeah, people love living in dirt .

[Gary]

If you circle 16 counties, parishes, whatever, in southeast texas known as Greater Houston, you'd have 6 mil folks as well. In reality, of course, Houston retains its America's Fourth City title and Houston alone is big, sprawling and getting bigger. Of course, our Fortune 500 companies (2nd only to NYC) paint an impressive portrait. Not to say Dallas and its 750 Oklahoma counties shouldn't be considered a force to take lightly. But Houston and her Bays and Gulf of Mexico should never be under-estimated. And we constantly get under-estimated by the northestern press and california as well. Great going, I'd say, to Texas' two 'mega tropolises.' If Houston and Dallas were not growing and competing, then we'd lose out in Texas. That, fortunately, will not happen. Let's go Hou, Dal, Aus, SA, and any other city in the Texaplex that would like to brag on its own merits. Texas is No. 1 in my heart and I love watching our metro areas kick butt ... this one is for Atlanta, Chicago, Phoenix, etc. So, Dallas, go ahead on with your 6.2 or is it now 6.6 million population? But one thing is for sure, this sunbelt state knows how to grow 'em big.

This post got me thinking. If one was to look at the actual geographical boundaries that NCTCOG was using, how many square miles would that be? And considering this, would the greater Houston area be more populous using this criteria?