HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions


Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Oct 19, 2019, 2:12 AM
LA21st LA21st is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 3,663
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sun Belt View Post
Not really. It's all relative. If Texas is expensive, that means that California and the Northeast are really f'n expensive.

Are people going to stop moving to Texas for Mississippi?

Texas has land, lots of it. California does not. New York certainly does not.

But they'll move to Tennessee or something.
It's not rocket science..
Every boom city slows down.
It's just delusional or wishful thinking Texas will keep growing the same way

Last edited by LA21st; Oct 19, 2019 at 2:26 AM.
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Oct 19, 2019, 2:18 AM
ThePhun1 ThePhun1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Houston/Galveston
Posts: 1,779
Quote:
Originally Posted by galleyfox View Post
Yep, also just basic geography. LA has a good port on the Pacific for direct trade with Asia that doesn't have to go through the canal, a time zone that is more convenient for Asian clients, great weather. Neither Houston not Dallas have the stupendous location, access or infrastructure that could make them into megacities.

Houston, in particular, is ignoring the waving red flag that is Harris County. If domestic migration has reversed in your city's main county with people fleeing to the exurbs and growth barely sustained by natural increase... well, 1950s Midwest has a story to tell.

https://kinder.rice.edu/2018/04/10/h...ris-county-not

https://kinder.rice.edu/urbanedge/20...-county-growth
Houston's MSA used to be Harris County and nothing else. There's now more megaburbs with good schools, McMansions and loveable suburban life. Most of Harris County sucks outside the 610 loop (with some good portions, such as the NASA area already close to built out). Of course people are moving to the fringes.

Last edited by ThePhun1; Oct 19, 2019 at 4:20 AM.
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Oct 19, 2019, 2:30 AM
ThePhun1 ThePhun1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Houston/Galveston
Posts: 1,779
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sun Belt View Post
Not really. It's all relative. If Texas is expensive, that means that California and the Northeast are really f'n expensive.

Are people going to stop moving to Texas for Mississippi?

Texas has land, lots of it. California does not. New York certainly does not.
California and even LA County has land. Much of it is remote, protected or very far from the city center. Much of it is desert; Vegas and the Mojave Desert are right around the corner from the Inland Empire.
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Oct 19, 2019, 2:34 AM
ThePhun1 ThePhun1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Houston/Galveston
Posts: 1,779
Quote:
Originally Posted by LA21st View Post
It's not high density. It's very low density

And yes, people will move to cheaper cities, as they always have.

What's the draw in Texas besides col?
Not much.
Houston can grow up in all directions, including very much in the city center.

And a generation ago Houston had no national vibe or draw, merely just existing for cheap housing good jobs. That has changed.
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Oct 19, 2019, 2:48 AM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is offline
N, N-Dimethyltryptamine
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: New Jersey - Somerset County
Posts: 29,051
^^^^

I just hope Texas and its cities continue the pro-business, pro-growth, pro-development, and pro-human living conditions stance. Maybe the state will use the lessons of other disasters in the making and not repeat those mistakes.

Some states are overdue for a catastrophic housing bubble, and rightfully so. Might wake them up and consider making prices humane.

I think Texas will eventually be the most populous state. Bound to happen. I just hope the poison IN THE FUTURE doesn't ruin a good state, if you know what I mean.
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Oct 19, 2019, 2:53 AM
LA21st LA21st is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 3,663
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePhun1 View Post
Houston can grow up in all directions, including very much in the city center.

And a generation ago Houston had no national vibe or draw, merely just existing for cheap housing good jobs. That has changed.

It will slow down, like everywhere else .
No reason to believe otherwise.
Theres evidence for the other option though.
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Oct 19, 2019, 2:56 AM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is offline
N, N-Dimethyltryptamine
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: New Jersey - Somerset County
Posts: 29,051
^^^^

The engine can keep going, 24/7... 365 days. Its a matter of encouraging people to move, construction to continue, and an environment that encourages businesses to grow, invest, and not go under water. Might it slow down, sure, but the engine can still continue to go. Texas is like a Diesel Engine. Those things last, but you have to properly maintain it, and not do anything that would damage the engine, which can all be avoided with proper care and wise planning and foresight.
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Oct 19, 2019, 2:58 AM
ThePhun1 ThePhun1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Houston/Galveston
Posts: 1,779
We have nothing but prairie in all directions except Galveston Bay. The coastal areas may suffer a big hurricane and slow down but progess will continue. More flooding, houses get built on stilts.
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Oct 19, 2019, 3:03 AM
LA21st LA21st is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 3,663
Anyone who thinks Dallas and houston will hit
20 million by 2050 is beyond delusional.
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Oct 19, 2019, 3:23 AM
ThePhun1 ThePhun1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Houston/Galveston
Posts: 1,779
Not impossible but so is a date between me and (insert name). I wouldn't want 20 million, more isn't always better. For various reasons (including coastal evacuations especially), I hope Houston caps off at 4 million in the city and 10 million in the area. Beloved old country towns are being lost via overshadowing or a good ol' bulldozer. Meanwhile, McMansions and strip mall stores are growing like bacteria.
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Oct 19, 2019, 3:29 AM
LA21st LA21st is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 3,663
It gained 4 million in the past 30 years.
12 million in next 30 is very impossible.
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Oct 19, 2019, 5:01 AM
jd3189's Avatar
jd3189 jd3189 is offline
An Optimistic Realist
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Loma Linda, CA / West Palm Beach, FL
Posts: 3,995
Come on guys, the thread was specifically considering LA if the growth conditions predicted in the 80s actually came to past. No offense to Houston, Dallas, or the other Texas cities, but if you want to talk about them, open up another thread about what if they became the largest cities in the US.




Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
LA, for a while now, has had slow growth, and has detached from the Sunbelt model of growth. The fringe isn't growing much anymore. The Sunbelt boomed due to weather, low cost, govt. subsidy (esp. military) and Mexican immigration. Really only the weather is relevant to LA now. It has the same advantages (and disadvantages) of the high-cost slow-growth metros.

I think LA will continue to grow, but slowly, and doubt it will be the largest U.S. metro in the next century, if ever. LA is already freaking huge. 18-19 million people by CSA. I cannot imagine 30 million people in LA.

Again, I was talking mainly about the projections made in an article in the other thread. And also, the Inland Empire is still going rapidly. There is a lot of space in San Bernardino and Riverside counties. Not to mention, LA is still a low rise city that can always build up slowly and densify like any other US city right now.

And you never know. New York could stagnate, city and metro wise. And all it takes is LA annexing a few more towns.
__________________
There is only one corner of the universe you can be certain of improving, and that's your own self.
-Aldous Huxley

Continue improving until the end.
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Oct 19, 2019, 5:06 AM
Crawford Crawford is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 19,226
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePhun1 View Post
We have nothing but prairie in all directions except Galveston Bay. The coastal areas may suffer a big hurricane and slow down but progess will continue. More flooding, houses get built on stilts.
It's not that you can't build, it's that there's no incentive to build when you can't get anywhere. Houston could never be a city of 20 million, because it would be unlivable at that size, unless it radically transformed (in which case it would be extremely expensive and NIMBY).

The issue in slow growth metros isn't that there's no buildable fringe, it's that it makes no sense to build endlessly when there are no good jobs, schools and services within easy distance. There is nothing, theoretically, stopping LA from sprawling to Bakersfield or NY sprawling to Binghamton, but why would professionals want a three hour commute and live in the sticks and send their kids to crap schools?
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Oct 19, 2019, 5:06 AM
jtown,man jtown,man is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Norfolk, Va
Posts: 2,237
Quote:
Originally Posted by LA21st View Post
Again, the southern cities boomed because of low col in last 30 years..
They're getting more expensive, not cheaper.

So theres no way the same growth rates will maintain.
Yes, they are getting more expensive. However, so are coastal cities, so they are still a bargain.
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Oct 19, 2019, 5:07 AM
jtown,man jtown,man is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Norfolk, Va
Posts: 2,237
Quote:
Originally Posted by LA21st View Post
Crawford pointed out why.
Once it gets more expensive, it's going to lose a ton of growth.

The same people getting priced out of the north east and California will get priced out of Texas, Florida and Georgia.
It's just a matter of time.
Texas will never...ever be as expensive as California. For a lot of reasons.
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Oct 19, 2019, 5:09 AM
Crawford Crawford is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 19,226
Quote:
Originally Posted by jd3189 View Post

And you never know. New York could stagnate, city and metro wise. And all it takes is LA annexing a few more towns.
NY has been relatively stagnant, by metro, for 50 years.

And I have no idea what you mean by "LA annexing a few more towns". LA cannot annex towns, there are no such nearby towns with millions of people, and that has nothing to do with metro population.
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Oct 19, 2019, 7:18 AM
SLO's Avatar
SLO SLO is offline
REAL Kiwi!
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: California
Posts: 9,840
Quote:
Originally Posted by LA21st View Post
It gained 4 million in the past 30 years.
12 million in next 30 is very impossible.
Yeah, I don't think so. I can see both passing 10 million and probably passing Chicagoland in population, but not LA.
__________________
“Some people, did something”
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Oct 19, 2019, 12:12 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 jd3189 View Post
And you never know. New York could stagnate, city and metro wise. And all it takes is LA annexing a few more towns.
Since 2010
NY CSA has grown by about 1.9%
LA CSA: 5% <---fringe growth in Riverside MSA


Outside of Chicago, NY CSA is the slowest growing region in the top 10 metropolitan areas.
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted Oct 19, 2019, 12:13 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 LA21st View Post
Anyone who thinks Dallas and houston will hit
20 million by 2050 is beyond delusional.
Did anybody say that?
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted Oct 19, 2019, 12:54 PM
dreadnought dreadnought is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Posts: 14
[QUOTE=jd3189;8721748 I read an article last night discussing how New York was able to maintain its dominance of the most populous city since the colonial era.[/QUOTE]

I don't know what article you read, but New York didn't become the most populous city until the opening of the Erie canal in the early 1800s. Philadelphia was the colonial-era largest city, and the second largest English-speaking city in the world (behind London, obviously.)
     
     
This discussion thread continues

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

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


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 6:20 PM.

     

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