HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #41  
Old Posted Oct 27, 2019, 7:47 PM
JManc's Avatar
JManc JManc is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Houston
Posts: 25,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigstick View Post
Sorry but Houston is a HELL HOLE...If anything it might start loosing population in the next decades, put some Hurricanes in the mix..
Cool story bro.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #42  
Old Posted Oct 27, 2019, 8:30 PM
M II A II R II K's Avatar
M II A II R II K M II A II R II K is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 47,484
It’s not like there’s a lack of space in Texas to necessitate a city there to grow to 20 million.
__________________
ASDFGHJK
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #43  
Old Posted Oct 27, 2019, 9:19 PM
dubu's Avatar
dubu dubu is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: bend oregon
Posts: 1,227
id get depressed living in texas because theres no snow. maybe there will be if theres a mini ice age.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #44  
Old Posted Oct 27, 2019, 9:24 PM
ChiSoxRox's Avatar
ChiSoxRox ChiSoxRox is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Fairbanks, Alaska
Posts: 1,756
IMO Houston's main drawback is transit. If you don't have access to, or want, a car the vast majority of Houston is effectively out of reach. Dallas/Fort Worth have an impressive light and commuter rail system despite being as sprawly (and under the same state policies), and while MetroRail is a nice start it seems to have stagnated.

There is also the looming spectre of sea level rise which will turn Buffalo Bayou (and much of the refineries) into an inlet of Galveston Bay by the end of this century (projected 3 foot rise and accelerating).
__________________
Like the pre-war masonry skyscrapers? Then check out my list of the tallest buildings in 1950.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #45  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2019, 12:54 AM
Trae's Avatar
Trae Trae is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Los Angeles and Houston
Posts: 4,381
Quote:
Originally Posted by benp View Post
Houston has had net negative domestic migration the last 2 years, and the overall working age population has not kept up with the total population the last 5 years. Total births per year has been falling even though the total population has increased, while the deaths per year increased by almost 40%, and the death rate per capita increased almost 15%. Houston is getting older.

Houston is still a boom or bust kind of town.
Houston has about -9k is domestic migration the last two years during the worst economic slump its had since the 1980s.

Total births had a very small dip of a few hundred during this economic slump (which makes sense). Houston still has one of the youngest populations in the US too, so not where you're seeing that it's getting older. The international migration numbers in the 2010s have seen a very healthy increase over the 2000s.

Source: https://www.recenter.tamu.edu/data/p...gar_Land%2C_TX

The overall urban core in the Houston area is increasing faster than any other in the Texas Triangle. There's been a residential highrise and 3-to-4 story townhome boom. Some of it is due to the recent flooding and people wanting to live higher up.

If the city can improve on transit (aka not let this BS BRT go through and give the voters what they voted for...LRT), build more flood control, and allow for the incorporation of the unincorporated areas which is now larger than the city, I think Houston can continue to grow healthy.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #46  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2019, 1:20 AM
Dariusb Dariusb is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Killeen, TX
Posts: 416
I don't see Houston's metro getting that big. Maybe about 12 million. I think the metro in Texas that has the best shot of getting anywhere near 20 million is the Dallas/Ft. Worth area. Whatever happens will be interesting to see how this all plays out.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #47  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2019, 1:41 AM
Trae's Avatar
Trae Trae is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Los Angeles and Houston
Posts: 4,381
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dariusb View Post
I don't see Houston's metro getting that big. Maybe about 12 million. I think the metro in Texas that has the best shot of getting anywhere near 20 million is the Dallas/Ft. Worth area. Whatever happens will be interesting to see how this all plays out.
Even DFW will have a hard time getting there. It definitely feels more crowded now than ever before, and the vast majority of the growth has taken place north of DFW Airport. The economic opportunity for those on the southern side isn't as high. You've seen this correlate with increases in crime, specifically murder, in south Dallas. I think at a point, other metro areas like Kansas City (which is a mini-DFW) and Oklahoma City can receive more of the spillover growth once DFW gets above 12M as people/companies look for a slightly smaller, less congested metro to relocate but still have some big city amenities.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #48  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2019, 1:46 AM
C. C. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1,882
Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed View Post
NYC is susceptible to stronger storms, but nowhere near as susceptible as Houston to a powerful hurricane. That's a false equivalence.

Cat 5 hurricanes need 80F water temps to sustain that intensity. This doesn't happen in the open ocean near NYC. But the Gulf of Mexico is often that warm for most of hurricane season.
Accepted that Houston is more susceptible to stronger storms than NYC, but with climate change, NYC will be tested by serious weather events unlike ever before.

Sandy was just a small prelude of what's to come for coastal cities, unfortunately.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #49  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2019, 1:50 AM
C. C. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1,882
del
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #50  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2019, 12:03 PM
jtown,man jtown,man is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Norfolk, Va
Posts: 2,237
Quote:
Originally Posted by dktshb View Post
Yeah, aren't Americans moving less now? Couple that with lower birth rates and a huge slowdown of immigrants coming to this country. Wouldn't all that sort of put an end to most cities seeing any large booms in their populations? Probably at the end of this century when most all of us are gone there may be huge influxes of movement internally and from other countries do to a warming climate.
Where did you get that a huge slowdown of immigration is coming to the US?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #51  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2019, 12:39 PM
Crawford Crawford is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 19,229
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtown,man View Post
Where did you get that a huge slowdown of immigration is coming to the US?
It already happened. Immigration rates have plummeted in recent years, which is a catastrophe for urban America and for business start-up activity.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #52  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2019, 1:26 PM
yuriandrade's Avatar
yuriandrade yuriandrade is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 609
The US have added 33 million people/decade in 2000, in 2010 it slowed to 27 million and will probably be between 23-24 million in 2020. It probably go below 20 million on the next decade.

Those crazy scenarios for growth won't happen anywhere. Natural growth plunging, immigration on low levels, age average high and relatively much less people available on Rust Belt to fuel domestic migration to the Sun Belt.

About Houston, let's assume the add some sparsely populated counties (west and north) on their CSA reaching something like 35,000 km² of area (today it's 30,600 km² ). For a population of 15 million, that would be only 400 inh./km². That's less than England or Netherlands. At this point, as I said in one of the locked threads, it wouldn't work as a big metropolis, but a region with several nodes working as independent cities, with ultra-low density suburbs instead of fields between them. So even if those growth rates kept going, it wouldn't look like a metropolis like Los Angeles or London.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #53  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2019, 1:36 PM
M II A II R II K's Avatar
M II A II R II K M II A II R II K is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 47,484
Maybe more like Sydney with its satellite cities then.
__________________
ASDFGHJK
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #54  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2019, 3:16 PM
destroycreate's Avatar
destroycreate destroycreate is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,290
I don't think Houston's environment or infrastructure could even handle 20 million. And would we even want that?
__________________
**16 years on SSP!**
Previously known as LaJollaCA

https://www.instagram.com/itspeterchristian/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #55  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2019, 3:36 PM
Sun Belt Sun Belt is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: The Envy of the World
Posts: 4,931
Quote:
Originally Posted by C. View Post
Accepted that Houston is more susceptible to stronger storms than NYC, but with climate change, NYC will be tested by serious weather events unlike ever before.

Sandy was just a small prelude of what's to come for coastal cities, unfortunately.
Apparently you've never heard of the 1938 storm that crushed Long Island and New England. That was long before The Climate Change started!!!

It was a cat 5, cat 3 at landfall, destroyed 60,000 houses, killed nearly 700 people.

Last edited by Steely Dan; Oct 28, 2019 at 3:46 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #56  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2019, 3:59 PM
Trae's Avatar
Trae Trae is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Los Angeles and Houston
Posts: 4,381
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sun Belt View Post
Apparently you've never heard of the 1938 storm that crushed Long Island and New England. That was long before The Climate Change started!!!

It was a cat 5, cat 3 at landfall, destroyed 60,000 houses, killed nearly 700 people.
That and the random intraplate earthquake which can hit at almost anytime up there. Natural disasters happen all over this country and some places like the NE can have several types. This is why I don't understand when people point the finger at the Gulf Coast, specifically Houston, when the area they're in is not immune.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #57  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2019, 4:06 PM
Crawford Crawford is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 19,229
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trae View Post
This is why I don't understand when people point the finger at the Gulf Coast, specifically Houston, when the area they're in is not immune.
You don't understand the difference between high risk and extremely low risk?

As has already been stated, the water is too cold this far north. There are no Cat-5s coming to NYC. In contrast, the Gulf is extremely warm, so Cat-5s can come anytime. Of course there are damaging storms in the north, but it's almost impossible for something greater than Cat-3 hitting this far north, so the relative risk is much less.

It's like comparing the risk of tornados between Oklahoma and Vermont, or the risk of wildfires between California and Michigan. Yes, all these areas have risk, but the risk isn't remotely comparable.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #58  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2019, 4:16 PM
Trae's Avatar
Trae Trae is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Los Angeles and Houston
Posts: 4,381
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
It's like comparing the risk of tornados between Oklahoma and Vermont, or the risk of wildfires between California and Michigan. Yes, all these areas have risk, but the risk isn't remotely comparable.
There's higher chances of hurricanes hitting the NE than tornadoes in Vermont or wildfires in Michigan. You're assuming the absolute worst risk of a Cat-5, but it doesn't take a Cat-5 to cause tremendous damage (see Sandy). I never said the Gulf Coast was not at a higher risk for hurricanes either, but to believe the NE is immune to hurricanes or earthquakes is being dishonest.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #59  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2019, 4:33 PM
jtown,man jtown,man is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Norfolk, Va
Posts: 2,237
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
It already happened. Immigration rates have plummeted in recent years, which is a catastrophe for urban America and for business start-up activity.
What do you mean by plummeted?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #60  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2019, 4:34 PM
iheartthed iheartthed is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 2,737
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trae View Post
There's higher chances of hurricanes hitting the NE than tornadoes in Vermont or wildfires in Michigan. You're assuming the absolute worst risk of a Cat-5, but it doesn't take a Cat-5 to cause tremendous damage (see Sandy). I never said the Gulf Coast was not at a higher risk for hurricanes either, but to believe the NE is immune to hurricanes or earthquakes is being dishonest.
Literally no one is saying the northeast is immune to hurricanes.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:04 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.