Willy1

The new expansion at North Park Mall opened a couple weeks ago. It's incredible. The mall is absolutely huge now and the stores are mostly very upscale. The addition was really well hidden during construction. I would have never guessed that the new addition would be as big as it is. It seems bigger than the original mall...

Actually, you do drive through FW when you're leaving the South end of DFW. FW city limits do extend out there... All that land around American Airlines' HQ - Centerport - and the south end of DFW are 'in' FW.

The new hotel is going to be just to the west of the convention center. The water gardens are just south of the convention center. So it's walking distance to the Water Garden's which are currently closed for rennovations. This is a huge deal for FW. If the new 60 story tower goes up, that will be huge too... and rumors are swirling that the 60 story tower is going to happen too...

Thought I'd share the plans for FW's new Convention Center Hotel by Omni Hotels. It's going to be 38 stories and 500 ft tall. A rendering of the new tower is at the following link. (sorry, i don't know how to post pics here. Maybe someone else will be nice enough to do it for me?) http://www.fortworthgov.org/publicevents/c...i_rendering.jpg

Okay, I'm confused. I just read a reply to my response to Rosewood and now it's gone. Hmm.... Rosewood, I was going to reply to your claimes that I and stuck in a rundown bungalow, etc. But now I guess I can't because your last post has evaporated. I will say this, I'm not at all a $30,000 a year millionaire and I don't think you are who I had you pegged as being either...

I am from Fort Worth, but I will be moving to Dallas soon because of work. I start a new job next week in Dallas and can't justify the 1.5 hour, one way commute at over $3.00 a gallon. It would cost me $300 a week to get to and from work, and the drive time with morning and afternoon traffic would result in me in a bell tower with a deer rifle on the evening news. I should be used to commutting to Dallas given that I've lived in FW since graduating from college, but have never had a job in FW... always in North Dallas or Las Colinas. But, I took the last few years off to care for some family members and in that time the traffic around here has gotten much worse. Moving is the only option! The reason that I get mad when Dallas is attacked is because DFW really does exist as one big metro area more than it does as a cluster of mutually exclusive independent cities. Dallas and FW have a sibling rivalry thing going, but at the same time there is a certain amount of synergy that takes place in the Metroplex because of the fact that FW and Dallas are surrounded by suburbs that commute all over the rest of the Metroplex. I love FW, but I also love Dallas. I know that's rare to find a native FW guy whe loves Dallas, but I really do. Now, that said, I am the king of anti-snobby and anti-pretentiousness. I grew up in FW's "Old Money Zone", went to FW's answer to Highland Park High School and have spent my life surrounded by a lot of people with REAL money, not the flashy $30,000-a-year millionaires who charge $300 jeans on their credit cars and then make the minimum payments every month so they can make the payment on their leased H2. I know some of those people too. They make me shake my head when they pull up to their rented uptown townhouse in their $80K BMW. Okay, so there are plenty of people in Dallas who fit that mold, but there are people like that everywhere - Houston, FW, San Antonio, Austin... they're everywhere. There just seems to be this huge streak of new money in Dallas that flaunts itself with pride. When I was in LA a couple years ago, there were tons of Ferrarris and RR's driving around. In Dallas you see Hummers everywhere you go. It is the lasting legacy of the JR Ewing thing.... But, despite all the Paris Hilton Impersonators in Dallas, the city really does have a lot going for it... It's already very urban and getting more urban everyday. Dallas really is enjoying a crazy building boom right now. It's weird to me that Dallas is building so many high rises while NOTHING new is being built in FW and FW is one of the fastest growing cities in the country. Go figure.

WHEW! Well that's a big relief and I extend my sincere "I'm sorry" to Rosewood. I'm sure I will be posting another "I'm sorry" in the other thread too... So, Sorry Rosewood... I thought you were being serious. But, I stand by my statement about the hooker winning the lotto. ;-)

Who are you? I am biting my tongue to keep from saying what I have already deleted twice now. Do you not realize - or care - that you are offending people with posts like this one? If you don't see it... this post is offensive to the following and for the following reasons: 1. Houstonians who are fond of Montrose... you refer to people in this site as "numbskulls" because they have a preference for Montrose over Oak Lawn and even belittle them by name-dropping the names of "glamourous publications" that some how make you glamourous because you subscribe to them all.... 2. Dallasites who happen to be fond of Oak Lawn the way it is. You refer to the bars in Oak Lawn as "seedy" and by association you implied that all the "gays", as you put it, are seedy. You mention the "seedy" activity that IN YOU OPNION takes place in the bars, yet the first question that popped in my mind was HOW DO YOU KNOW WHAT GOES ON IN THOSE BARS UNLESS YOU GO TO THEM YOURSELF? And, if you go to them yourself - does that make you seedy? 3. The people who might happen to live in the "scary" apartments or areas that you deem to be unworthy. Uh, newsflash for you... Dallas is NOT primarily a city of wealth. In fact, the weathy people of this country make up less than 1% of the population so even if you really do have the kind of money that you're posing to have on this site, then YOU are the minority, not the majority - even in Dallas. 4. People who have affection for older homes and like to preserve the history of neighborhoods. I live in a 1925 cottage in a neighborhood that most people would love to live in. But, I won't sell my house because I know they'll tear it down and build some horrible McMansion which, despite the income of the "new money" McMansion dwellers, ruins the integrity of 100-year-old neighborhoods in many cases. 5. The people who do not live in North Dallas. Here is another news flash for you. ALL of Dallas is not booming. Much of Dallas is - but there are areas of the city that are incredibly neglected and run down and continue to fall into a more and more depressing state while other areas of the city continue to flourish. Uptown, Downtown, and Oak Lawn are experiencing a lot of building, growth, and revitalization. But, go to West, South, or parts of East Dallas and you'll see that there are many parts of the city where Uptown-like growth is not happening. And, the city of Dallas itself is not booming in terms of populatin growth. In fact, Dallas is sliding down the population rankings while other cities in the state are booming and either passing or catching up to Dallas....

This thread kind of pisses me off because it represents the reason people in other cities have the misperception that all Dallasites are pretentious snobs who do nothing but brag about the money that they don't really have. $30,000 a year millionaires are the worst! I realize that taste is like class - it can't be purchased otherwise everyone would have it. And, I realize that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but I don't even like the rooms in most of those pics. Most of them look like a hooker won the lotto and did the decorating herself. The only room I like is the bathroom and that's because it's simple, modern, and ellegant. The bedroom and Library are hideous. They look like Sigfried and Roy should be lounging around with half a dozen white tigers. The dining room reminds me of some thing from The Empire Strikes Back. I can almost see Darth Vader standing at the far end of the room when Han Solo, Leia, and Chewy walk in to his trap.... And what's with all that cheesy gold plating slathered all over everything? The bar looks like something from a strip club.

I agree that the rivalry exists. I'm not denying that. What I'm saying is that it's more one sided than it is a mutual rivalry. I'm sure all the Dallasites YOU know have an anti-Houston conversation every time YOU talk to them, because I'm sure YOU somehow bring it up or initiate it. What I'm saying is that rarely do you ever hear people in Dallas just sitting around Houston-bashing. Even in the Dallas and Fort Worth Forums there isn't any (or at least very little) Houston-bashing going on.... I know that in the FW forum, anytime Houston comes up mostly positive things are said about your city. FW people actually like Houston, in general. In the Dallas forum you are probably more likely to run into a few Houston-bashers... but they're not locking dozens of threads because it gets out of control or anything even near that level. In fact, there are threads in the San Antonio sub-forum that have been locked because the Houston vs Dallas flame war erupted over there. Houstonians seem to have a problem even discussing other cities without somehow turning the conversation back to how bad Dallas sucks. Now, THAT is ludicrous!!! And it also indicates that Houstonites have more of a tendency to bash Dallas than Dallasites tend to bash Houston. You certainly don't hear people in the Dallas or FW forums discussing Chicago or Philly and suddenly getting side-tracked by any Houston-bashing eruptions. Now, I have a feeling I know a lot more Dallasites than you do - but maybe not - given the fact that I've grown up in DFW, always worked in Dallas, and spend most of my time there. I can honestly say that I've never had a Houston-bashing conversation pop up out of nowhere with any of the Dallasites I know... And, while sitting around in various parts of Dallas - Uptown, Turtle Creek, HP, etc - I have never heard a Houston-bashing session erupt from anyone around me. On the other hand, I can honestly say that I used to work with 3 women all of whom grew up in Houston and were very passionate about Houston... and all of them used to dog on Dallas regularly even though they hadn't lived there in Houston in over a decade. And no one had to say anything to inspire such unsolicited Dallas bashing. Now, with that said, I seriously doubt that those three women represent all of the Greater Houston Metro Area. I'm merely stating that from my observations - as an honest to goodness outside party (I consider myself a FWorthian, not a Dallasite) - it seems to me that Houstonites do in fact Dallas-bash more than Dallasites Houston-bash. It has just been an observation I have made. I never said that Dallasites are perfect or blameless. I never said they NEVER Houston-bash or that they don't contribute to the rivalry between Houston and Dallas. I just think that Dallasites spend way more energy Fort Worth-bashing than they do bashing any other city, including Houston. Maybe Houstonites are just more vocal about their dislike for Dallas. Maybe the Dallasites simply chose to say nothing and voice their dislike of Houston by simply snubbing them. Who knows. I think it's sort of like UT, A&M and Texas Tech. UT considers OU to be their biggest rival. A&M considers UT to be their biggest rival. Texas Tech Considers A&M to be their biggest rival... It's sort of the same thing between the large cities in Texas. Houston thinks Dallas is their biggest rival. Dallas thinks FW is their biggest rival. And San Antonio thinks Houston is their biggest rival.

I agree that FW should be adding taller structures to the DT FW Central Business District. But, the height of a city's downtown has little to do with its population. There are many cities that have a much taller skyline than their population should suggest, and there are many cities that have a much larger population than the skyline would suggest. Cities with taller skylines than their population would suggest: All of these cities fail to make the top 20 largest cities list, but far out-rank some of the cities that are much larger than they are. * Atlanta - one of the tallest skylines in the nation, yet only ranked 42nd in population at 419,122. Atlanta's Bank of America Building is the 7th tallest building in the nation at 1023 feet. It's the tallest building in the country outside of NYC and Chicago. * Seattle's B of A building is the 16th tallest building in America, yet Seattle is only the 23rd largest city.. and it's not just a tall skyline it's very dense. It ranks up there with Dallas or Houston, I would say. * Pittsburg - the 56th largest city, but an 840 foot tower. * Clevland - 947-footer, but only the 36th largest city... * Miami - 64 stories @ 776 ft. #46 with a population of 380K. Like Honolulu, this citie also has many more skyscrapers that you would normally see in a city of this size... not much larger than Arlington TX (pop 360K). * Honolulu HI, has 48 buildings that are in the 30 - 45 story range. Yet this citiy's population is only 377K Cities with smaller skyline than their population would suggest: All of these cities have relatively small skylines yet all are among the 20 largest cities in the nation. * phoenix 1.4 million, tallest building is 40 stories and 486 ft tall. Most buildings are in the 20-25 story range. * san diego - 1.26 Million. tallest building is 34 stories @ 500 ft. * san antonio - 1.23 Million. tallest is 38 stories @ 546 ft. * san jose - 904K... 17 stories @ 279 ft. * jacksonville - 778K... 42 story @ 617 ft * columbus - 730K... 41 story @ 629 ft * austin - 681K... 33 story @ 516 ft * Memphis - 672K... 33 story @ 470 ft * Baltimore - 636K... 40 story @ 528 ft. * fort worth - 619K... 40 story @ 567 ft The prime example here to me is that Atlanta is the 42nd largest city in the U.S. Yet has a skyline that dwarfs the skyline of Phoenix, which by now has probably surpassed Philly as the 5th largest city. There are also cities that have far more high rise buildings than you would suspect from a city their size, yet the buildings may not be particularly tall.

The interview I saw today was the GM of the Super Dome and he was saying it was going to have to be torn down because it is no longer structually sound and because of the heavy storm and evacuee damage. According to him, the roof is more damaged than it appears on TV. Don't know if it's true... it's just what I heard. Sad. They're also reporting that after all is said and done, Baton Rouge will be the new largest city in LA. They're expecting less than half New Orleanites to return after the city is able to take them back. But, only time will tell whether or not that comes true.

There sure is a lot of finger pointing going on surrounding who is a fault for the Katrina disaster. Just to point out a few things that haven't been mentioned - at least not that I read, so sorry if I'm repeating someone else. 1. Everyone is acting like there should have been some massive Federal relief on the ground in NOLA the day Katrina hit and cleared NOLA. But, have we already forgotten that it was all over the news for the first 24 hours or so, that NOLA had been sparred from the direct hit and doomsday scenario that many weather professionals had been predicting? The levees didn't fail during the storm. They started failing on Tuesday - the day after Katrina hit. That has to be part of the reason for a delay in response. People started being rescued from roof tops on Wednesday, the day after the flooding started. 2. The people who were being rescued slowed down a lot of the response to their needs when they started looting guns and shooting at rescue helicopters. That resulted in a hesitation for rescuers to go in to NOLA for fear of their own safety and added to the impression that help wasn't there when it needed to be. 3. Some of the people who "need to be rescued" simply are refusing to leave - even now. I saw on the news earlier today one of the national guard boats insisting that a family of about 12 people get in the boat and be evacuated. They refused to get in the boat even when they were informed they wouldn't have food, clean water, electricity or maybe even another chance to get out for over a month. Everyone is so quick to blame the government, or Bush. Others are quick to pull out the race card and start throwing that around. I'm so sick of hearing how this is a race issue. IT IS NOT! I'm the first to admit that our government has it's faults. But, the people left in NOLA when the storm hit were simply the victims of not having the money/means to leave. If anyone should be blamed for them being stranded there it is the local and state govt., not the federal govt. Them staying in NOLA had nothing to do with the color of their skin other than the fact that NOLA is 70% black and 30% below poverty-level income. Those are the people who were still there when the storm hit. And, when you see the media labeling black people as "looters" and white people as "looking" that is not the federal governemnt at work, or Bush's fault... That is the media!!!! And, I agree with whoever said that the race issue goes both ways. I have encountered just as many racists who were black as I have white or hispanic racists. Prejudice knows no color. Does the race issue still exists - sure it does but it's not like it was in 1950. These days it's not just white people who are the oppressive racist... racism has evolved into a situational thing. If a black man is trying to join a historically all-white country club he's going to have some problems. If a rich white man's Benz breaks down in South Central LA and he has to walk 1 mile to get help - he's going to have some problems. It's all a matter of who you are and where you are and whether or not it's a bad time to be you in that situation. Last week, it just happened to be a really bad time to be a poor person who couldn't afford to leave New Orleans.

It's going to take 2 or 3 months before they can get the power back on in NOLA, then it's going to take another 3-6 months to pump all the water out. THEN, they're going to start letting people back into NOLA. Not only is the city destroyed, but it is closed off from incoming people. They're not letting anyone back in now and won't until it's safe. They're trying to get 100% of the people out right now. As for why you haven't heard about Dallas taking in refugee's.... who knows. Maybe it's because Dallas doesn't have the facilities to take in 25K people under one roof. Dallas has 600 at Reunion with the number growing by the minute. The only big stadiums we have in DFW are open air - Texas Stadium and the Cottom Bowl. It's too hot for people to live in outside. However, one thing that they are doing here is opening up vacant apartments to refugees rent free for a couple months. Employers are also going over to Reunion and giving out job applications to the refugees to help them make ends meet until things get better. Some are being hired on the spot and they're paying them at the end of every day so they don't have to wait for their money. There is a huge out-pouring of concern and relief in Dallas and Fort Worth area. Of course, even the good deeds done in Dallas at a time like this are drawing snide comments from people on this forum. I'm sure glad that the Houstonites in here aren't as trite and shallow as the Dallasites they're so quick to condemn. I would hate to think that people in Houston would ever accuse Dallasites of being self-centered or shallow, and then turn around and slam Dallas for not having place to house 25K people, especially when the people of Dallas are doing whatever they can to help. And, I know no one on this forum would actually be happy about the population of Houston suddenly increasing by 25,000 over night because that would make them guilty of being self-absorbed and self-centered for being happy about profiting from the losses of others. And everyone in THIS FORUM knows that those sort of characteristics and behaviors are only found in the people of North Dallas.

Are you kidding me? Do you ever actually READ this forum? At least in this forum, nothing can even be mentioned without some comparison to Dallas being brought into the conversation. Dallasites don't compare Dallas to other cities as much as people in other cities (uh-uhm) compare Dallas to other cities. In this thread someone made a reference to Dallas being the next Boston or Toronto and immediately it was assumed that "Dallas is comparing itself to Boston or Toronto", and then it was compared to Indianapolis, which was supposed to be some sort of insult to the city of Dallas... From what I've read on this forum - the HAIF - there are many examples (a lot of them now locked in an attempt to gain control of the out of countro Dallas bashing) of Houston doing exactly what you're claiming it doesn't do... "You rarely hear about Houston wanting to model itself after some other city". Okay, so maybe Houston isn't "modelling" itself after any other city, but there certainly are plenty of examples of Houston comparing itself to Dallas on here. I don't know why there is such a fascination with Dallas-bashing in Houston. Most Dallasites don't even give Houston a second thought muchless sit around Houston-bashing. Maybe that's the problem... Dallas ignores Houston for the most part and for some reason that pisses people off.

^ one problem though, is that many of the businesses in N.O. deal with the shipping trade. The port of N.O. is the largest port in the U.S. and sitting at the mouth of the Mississippi river is the life-blood of some of those companies. You take them off the river and they can't survive.

The hotels in DFW are filling up too... The Adam's mark lowered prices for refugee's to $69/night and the hotel is now full.... all 1800 rooms. From what I understand there is a steady stream of New Orleanites coming to Dallas as well. Reunion Arena is being transformed into a Red Cross Refugee/Relief center. I'm going to give blood because the Red Cross said they're in dire need of blood. I hate needles and might passout, but it will be worth it to help others. Everyone in Houston should consider giving too.... Can you imagine the amount of blood the two largest metro's in Texas could provide? That alone would be a huge help. I'm proud of Houston for opening the welcome wagon and helping out in such a big way. It's nice to see that Texas Hospitality really is still alive and well. Way to go Houston!!!!!

^ True. The numbers I gave were from the NCTCOG's on-going population count for all of North Central Texas. I should have made that clear - sorry. However, the NCTCOG's estimates are usually very close to reality and are always more current than the Census Bureau's. DFW has definitely passed the 6 Million mark. By the time the 2005 figures are released from the Census B. they will be a year old. That applies across the board, not to just DFW. Houston's numbers are out-dated by the time they're released too....

^ LOL... Point well taken Midtowncoog. So true. One of the complaints often heard from people who visit DFW or move here is how confusing it is to get oriented in the Metroplex because everything is named in some stupid way. All our freeways here have more than one name or at the very least a confusing name. Central Expressway is the same thing as 75 Central. The DFW Turnpike, is also I30 or the new one, Tom Landry freeway. Nortwest Hwy is also Loop 12. Airport freeway/183. Then there is I-35. There is I-35E and I-35W. 35E runs through Dallas and 35W through FW. So imagine being new to DFW and on your way to work you're listening to the traffic report.... "There is an accident at Central and Knox causing a back up to Northwest Hwy. There's also a 3 car pile up on the Tom Landry Freeway at Fielder and the back up is all the way to Loop 12 to the east and 820 to the west. Also in Tarrant county there is an overturned 18-wheeler on the north freeway and traffic is being diverted onto 820. The confusing part is that when you're sitting on Central Expressway or any other freeway and hear that report and you look at the signs around you... none of them say "Tom Landry Freeway" or "Central"/"Central Expressway". Then you have weird things like signs on central that read "NW HWY 1 mile", but if you're not from here and you're looking for "Loop 12" you're screwed. And then there are things that add to the confusion, like Midtowncoog pointed out. Everything here is named "North Texas" or "Big D" or "Metroplex" something or other. Car dealerships, car washes... Everything adds to the confusion. Even the media around here is inconsistent about the naming conventions.... The weathermen are always referring to DFW as "here in North Texas" or something like that.

It's not a major loss for Dallas... they'll end up opening up more upscale shopping to replace the couple that have closed. It's not like those spaces are going to sit empty... With all the uptown towers going up, there will be plenty of new upscale shopping added to Dallas in the next couple of years and far beyond that. But, I love the way some people in here would actually wish for Dallas to lose upscale shopping. What does that tell you about their mindset? Are they wanting to just see Dallas lose business, or are they wanting to see their city play catch up? Or both? In either case, they'd rather see a fellow Texas city hit hard times than see the state economy flourish. That spitefulness smells a lot like jealousy to me.

The April 2005 population count of 6,013,650 million people is for the DFW Metroplex only. Since the official 2000 census count, DFW has added 738,800 people as of April 2005. Basically, it's a combination of what used to be two seperate metro areas; Dallas Metro and Fort Worth Metro and all the cities that were part of those two metro areas. It does not include the outer lying areas that are still considered to be in the "North Central Texas region"... Witchita Falls, Sherman/Denison, etc. are not included in the population count for the DFW Metroplex. The reason that the Fort Worth and Dallas metro areas were combined by the U.S.Census Bureau is because the commuter traffic patterns indicated that these two metro areas were actually one metro area because of the high number of people who were travelling between the FW and Dallas metro areas for work and play. The DFW Metroplex incompasses all of the 5 core counties: Dallas, Tarrant, Denton, Collin and Rockwall. The Metroplex also spills over into a portion of 4 other counties; Parker, Johnson, Ellis, and Kaufman. The North Central Texas region is comprised of the following 16 counties; Wise, Denton, Collin, Hunt, Palo Pinto, Parker, Tarrant, Dallas, Rockwall, Kaufman, Erath, Hood, Somervell, Johnson, Ellis, and Navarro counties. The confusion comes from poor choices in naming conventions and inconsistent use of correct names. North Texas is actually called "North Central Texas", and refers to the entire area surrounding the DFW Metroplex and streches from the Oklahoma border down to Central Texas. It is the same regional designation that is used to refer to West Texas, South Texas, Central Texas, East Texas, etc. There is a big difference between DFW Metroplex and North Central Texas (or North Texas). Sometimes the term "North Texas" is incorrectly used to describe the "DFW Metroplex". I hope that clears up a little bit of the confusion.

Good point, Gary.... The problem is, this thread may be titled "Houston vs. Dallas Shopping", but really it's just another opportunity to debate which city is better. "Shopping" is just a variable that could be replaced with anything and the debates and arguments would all be the same... You could title this thread "Houston vs. Dallas - cars, streets, parks, dumpsters, reporters, grocery stores, car lots... Hell, you could start a thread called "Houston vs. Dallas - which has hotter hookers" and it would still result in a debate that had nothing to do with hookers and everything to do with the egos in each city and those "egos" inability to admit that Dallas or Houston actually "one-ups" the other city in a specific area. We all know that Dallas out-does Houston on many points, and vice versa. These cities are in the same state... and that's pretty much where the comparisons end because the cities are nothing alike in reality. For instance, let's say this thread was about which city had better looking hookers. Someone on the Houston side would argue that Dallas Hookers have more missing teeth. Then someone on the Dallas side would state that the Dallas Hookers got together and formed a union and a dental plan was included, therefore Dallas hookers actually have better teeth. Then someone in Houston would fire back saying that the hookers with good teeth aren't actually "Dallas Hookers" because their corner is technically in Grand Prairie or Mesquite and that doesn't count because it's outside the city limits of Dallas and just because a hooker lives in "DFW" it doesn't mean they're a real Dallas Hooker - they're just counted as a Dallas hooker because of that anti-Houston consipiracy that exist up there in Dallas-Fort Worth... And, Houston Hookers are better looking because they have more tasteful tattoos... Then Dallas would point out that the best tattoo parlors are in Deep Ellum, therefore, the Dallas Hookers are better decorated. See my point? Just delete the "shopping" in the title of this thread and you'll have the real title of this thread. Okay, Okay... some of the people here might actually care about shopping... but how many "my mall is bigger than your mall" debates can one forum really have?

Shopping: Does anyone really care which city has better shopping? I mean, are people so desperate to prove one way or another that Houston is better than Dallas that they're honestly going to try and compare the two cities on the basis of shopping? Man. That's really reaching if you ask me. But, I'll play along. Houston's Galleria is nicer than Dallas' - although Dallas Galleria just underwent a massive remodel and is very nice now. Dallas has North Park and Willow Bend - both high end retail-oriented malls. Dallas also has the Apparel Mart, World Trade Center, and the Design District (which is open to the public). Dallas, for a long time has been considered one of the premiere manufacturing and design centers of the southwest, although I think it's weaker now than it used to be. I'm not very familar with Houston shopping so I can't add more about Houston here. When it comes to the infrastructure and populations, when are people just going to realize that comparing Houston and Dallas is the same as trying to compare Apples and Oranges. Houston: the city has a long history of annexation which has resulted in a larger central city and smaller suburbs and also prevented Houston from becoming landlocked. Most growth has come by way of annexation. Most of the Harris County residents live in Houston proper (as far as I know). Dallas: the city has not been aggressive about annexing and therefore has become landlocked. For a long time the city iteself was growing at a rapid pace, but about 20 years ago there was a shift and suddenly many people started settling in the lower-cost suburbs surrounding Dallas - Richardson, Plano, etc. Now, the city of Dallas is surrounded by very large suburbs that actually have a greater total population than the city of Dallas. (in Dallas county, the population outside the city limits of Dallas exceeds the population inside the city limits). The Dallas-Fort Worth confusion. The most confusing thing about this is naming conventions. There is the City of Dallas. There is the City of Fort Worth. There is Dallas Metro. There is Fort Worth Metro. And, there is the Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex. These are all different ways of deviding up the larger combined metro area. Dallas Metro includes Dallas and the suburbs that surround Dallas within Dallas county and the counties to the north, east and south of Dallas County. Fort Worth Metro includes everything in Tarrant County and parts of the counties to the North, West, and South of Fort Worth. Some people in the Houston area seem to have some misperception that the creation of the "DFW Metroplex" was some sort of well calculated plan to steal the title of being the largest metropolitan area in Texas away from Houston Metro. That is not how it came about. The Census Bureau used to consider Dallas Metro and Fort Worth/Arlington Metro's as two seperate metro areas. But, as each of the mutually exclusive metro areas great in size and population the commutting patterns changed and that is what led to the reclassification that unified Dallas and Fort Worth metro's into one larger Combined Metro Area known as Dallas/Fort Worth. The census buereau does the same thing with Houston/Galveston Metro... they combined them because the commuters driving into Houston from Galv. justify it. With all that having been said. There is a certain part of the Dallas population that feels as if none of the rest of the Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex would exist in any significant size if the City of Dallas had not been the catalyst for growth in North Texas. Truth is, that is probably true to some degree. Even Fort Worth can attribute the recent rapid growth to the fact that the Eastern half of the Metroplex is filling up and not people are moving west. 20 years ago, in the mid-80s, Fort Worth was roughly half the size it is today. Houston is a very different city/metro than the DFW area. The geography is different. Houston is much greener and more humid. DFW is built on the southern tip of the Great Plains and is less humid, although not that much. The terrain in Houston is more rolling than the flat grasslands that DFW is built on. So, the real question here becomes what defines a city? Well, that's totally subjective. Some people think of a city only by what lies within the city limits. Others feel that a city is truly made up of all the surrounding municipalities as well. For instance, when people think of LA they usually lump the OC, Hermosa Beach, Long Beach, Santa Monica, Anaheim, and all the other little suburbs around LA into the greater notion of LA because there are frankly too many subs to keep up with. Dallas/FW is developing much the same way LA did.... Houston on the other hand is developing more along the lines of London. Sprawling and annexing anything that gets in it's way. Or sort of like NYC... there are 5 burroghs in NYC, but when you think of them, you know they're all part of the greater NYC. Manhattan is the most recognizable and largest. Bronz, Brooklyn, Queens, Statan Island... All individually recognized but part of the larger city. When someone says I'm from The Woodlands the first thing that pops into someone's mind is "Oh Houston". But, when someone from The Woodlands says "I'm from Houston" people don't jump down their throats because technically they're not from Houston. So I don't get what all the fuss is about. Every large city in the U.S. has suburbs. And every city in the U.S. experiences the similar "I'm from..." scenario. Anyway. LOL.... I think both cities have great shopping. And both cities are great cities... The problem is they're both in Texas and are the two largest metro areas... therefore they're stuck in this perpetual adolescent game of King of the Hill. At least it makes for some interesting rants and rages on public forums. LOL haha.

The Dallas-area Ikea opened on Aug. 3rd. It's gigantic.