HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Texas & Southcentral > Austin


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #661  
Old Posted Mar 19, 2024, 2:21 AM
wwmiv wwmiv is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Austin -> San Antonio -> Columbia -> San Antonio -> Chicago -> Austin -> Denver -> Austin
Posts: 5,710


I think I may be a tad too aggressive here, but… this is the form I think the urban areas will take over the next few decades.
__________________
Houston: 2.4m (+3.9%) + MSA suburbs: 5.4m (+12%) + CSA exurbs: 200k (+5%)
Dallas: 1.3m (+2%) / FtW: 1.0m (+10%) + suburbs: 6.4m (9%) + exurbs: 566k (+9%)
San Antonio: 1.5m (+6%) + MSA suburbs: 1.2m (+10%) + CSA exurbs: 82k (+3%)
Austin: 994k (+3%) + MSA suburbs: 1.6m (+18%)
Texas (whole): 31.29m (+7%) / Texas (balance): 8.6m (+3%)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #662  
Old Posted Mar 19, 2024, 3:59 AM
lzppjb's Avatar
lzppjb lzppjb is offline
7th Gen Central Texan
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Austin TX
Posts: 3,150
Recently, Firefly expanded their rocket testing facility in Briggs. And I think Bertram will see growth soon.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #663  
Old Posted Mar 19, 2024, 4:10 PM
drummer drummer is offline
World Traveler
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Austin metro area
Posts: 4,735
Man the orientation of that map took me for a loop at first, haha.

My only question is whether we would see more connectivity along the 281 corridor between Marble Falls and San Antonio given the E/W connection of 290 especially as a middle-point. That corridor has the potential to have growth contributing to both metros, even if it isn't nearly as much as what will be seen on the east side of the metros (bottom of your image). I think that could especially be impacted further if 290 ends up as an expressway all the way to I-10 someday...who knows? It would likely shift down and connect around Comfort or Kerrville rather than all the way to Junction. IF that ever happens (big IF), it would spur more growth in those areas as well - secondary to everything else, of course.

I suppose it's fair to just mark that 281 corridor with the 2070-2100 purple line (just noticed that).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #664  
Old Posted Mar 19, 2024, 6:40 PM
SproutingTowers's Avatar
SproutingTowers SproutingTowers is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Austin TX
Posts: 505
With more population will need more fresh water supply.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #665  
Old Posted Mar 19, 2024, 6:49 PM
ILUVSAT's Avatar
ILUVSAT ILUVSAT is offline
May the Schwartz be w/ U!
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Nomadic
Posts: 1,913
Quote:
Originally Posted by SproutingTowers View Post
With more population will need more fresh water supply.
The Carrizo-Wilcox Aquifer has yet to fully be tapped. It could provide water to more than a million additional people - mostly along the Toll-130 corridor, however.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #666  
Old Posted Mar 19, 2024, 7:21 PM
JoninATX JoninATX is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: The ATX
Posts: 3,376
I thought this was interesting. Texas ranks 4th in household size. Right beside Utah, California & Hawaii.

https://wisevoter.com/state-rankings...size-by-state/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #667  
Old Posted Mar 20, 2024, 2:29 AM
wwmiv wwmiv is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Austin -> San Antonio -> Columbia -> San Antonio -> Chicago -> Austin -> Denver -> Austin
Posts: 5,710
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoninATX View Post
I thought this was interesting. Texas ranks 4th in household size. Right beside Utah, California & Hawaii.

https://wisevoter.com/state-rankings...size-by-state/
High household sizes in Latino (and South and Southeast Asian immigrant) neighborhoods. This does NOT bode well for future sprawl as historical examples show that when immigrants and their kids intermarry and de-camp from the cities en masse, they prefer highly suburban housing. Much of the current housing boom in the south suburbs is being driven by exactly this dynamic. The vast majority of new build neighborhoods in Hays are split between Latinos and conservative whites. There are very few white liberals, very few Asians, and very few African Americans. This also doesn’t bode well for Democrats maintaining their advantage among Latinos in Texas, as they stop being exposed to white liberals in the cities and start exchanging ideas and discourse with white conservatives in the suburbs instead. Perhaps that may make both groups more moderate, or perhaps it might simply turn Tejanos into a 60-40 Republican constituency (the latter seems more likely). Latino and Asian immigrants actually intermarry with native-born whites at higher rates than did comparable generations of Irish and Italian immigrants. Republicans like to talk about how we are not integrating immigrants at a decent pace. The reality is that Latino and Asian immigrants largely do integrate themselves. And quicker, too, which is why household sizes are nowhere near where they were during the previous peaks of immigration.

The same dynamic happened (plus individual factors for each group) to not only both the Irish and Italians, but also to Jewish and Arab immigrants, to the Polish, among others, all of which ended up as highly suburban populations around the cities to which they immigrated with some exceptions (some Jewish groups who remain in cities, most Germans, Scandinavians, Scots-Irish, English/Anglo, Czech, and few others who were initial settler/founder populations and who remain largely rural today and anyone who is from the continent of Africa due to the unfortunate awful history of American slavery and racism… although that is changing more and more for the better even if much more work needs to be done). Basically, the settler populations are peoples who practiced authoritative nuclear family housing styles and the remainder are peoples who did not. Those who succeed in adapting their family housing style to authoritative nuclear family structure succeed (and are able to move up in society) after first being directed into the cities. Those who do not adapt do not succeed and are largely forced to stay in the cities by the economy. That’s just the overwhelming reality of it, for better and for worse.
__________________
Houston: 2.4m (+3.9%) + MSA suburbs: 5.4m (+12%) + CSA exurbs: 200k (+5%)
Dallas: 1.3m (+2%) / FtW: 1.0m (+10%) + suburbs: 6.4m (9%) + exurbs: 566k (+9%)
San Antonio: 1.5m (+6%) + MSA suburbs: 1.2m (+10%) + CSA exurbs: 82k (+3%)
Austin: 994k (+3%) + MSA suburbs: 1.6m (+18%)
Texas (whole): 31.29m (+7%) / Texas (balance): 8.6m (+3%)

Last edited by wwmiv; Mar 20, 2024 at 2:52 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #668  
Old Posted Mar 20, 2024, 12:05 PM
H2O H2O is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,641
Quote:
Originally Posted by wwmiv View Post
High household sizes in Latino (and South and Southeast Asian immigrant) neighborhoods. This does NOT bode well for future sprawl as historical examples show that when immigrants and their kids intermarry and de-camp from the cities en masse, they prefer highly suburban housing. Much of the current housing boom in the south suburbs is being driven by exactly this dynamic. The vast majority of new build neighborhoods in Hays are split between Latinos and conservative whites. There are very few white liberals, very few Asians, and very few African Americans. This also doesn’t bode well for Democrats maintaining their advantage among Latinos in Texas, as they stop being exposed to white liberals in the cities and start exchanging ideas and discourse with white conservatives in the suburbs instead. Perhaps that may make both groups more moderate, or perhaps it might simply turn Tejanos into a 60-40 Republican constituency (the latter seems more likely). Latino and Asian immigrants actually intermarry with native-born whites at higher rates than did comparable generations of Irish and Italian immigrants. Republicans like to talk about how we are not integrating immigrants at a decent pace. The reality is that Latino and Asian immigrants largely do integrate themselves. And quicker, too, which is why household sizes are nowhere near where they were during the previous peaks of immigration.

The same dynamic happened (plus individual factors for each group) to not only both the Irish and Italians, but also to Jewish and Arab immigrants, to the Polish, among others, all of which ended up as highly suburban populations around the cities to which they immigrated with some exceptions (some Jewish groups who remain in cities, most Germans, Scandinavians, Scots-Irish, English/Anglo, Czech, and few others who were initial settler/founder populations and who remain largely rural today and anyone who is from the continent of Africa due to the unfortunate awful history of American slavery and racism… although that is changing more and more for the better even if much more work needs to be done). Basically, the settler populations are peoples who practiced authoritative nuclear family housing styles and the remainder are peoples who did not. Those who succeed in adapting their family housing style to authoritative nuclear family structure succeed (and are able to move up in society) after first being directed into the cities. Those who do not adapt do not succeed and are largely forced to stay in the cities by the economy. That’s just the overwhelming reality of it, for better and for worse.
Those historical trends are somewhat inverted now, though. Suburbs were overwhelmingly white due to exclusionary zoning and lending practices. By the time those policies were officially outlawed in the 60s, they were perpetuated by economic factors. Minimum lot sizes and price based restrictive covenants in the suburbs kept most minorities out. Now that more urban lifestyles have become more desirable, the highest real estate values are closest to the core, especially in high-growth, wealthy cities like Austin. Moving up no longer means moving out, it means moving in. Because inner-city land prices are already so high, I think that will actually increase the trend towards sprawl development for larger households.

The problem with such long term forecasts is that we can't continue this kind of sprawl with carbon burning single occupant vehicles as the principal means of transportation without severely impacting the global climate. The planet could literally be uninhabitable by 2100 if we don't reverse course.

Last edited by H2O; Mar 20, 2024 at 12:19 PM. Reason: Always end on a positive note
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #669  
Old Posted Mar 20, 2024, 8:50 PM
wwmiv wwmiv is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Austin -> San Antonio -> Columbia -> San Antonio -> Chicago -> Austin -> Denver -> Austin
Posts: 5,710
Quote:
Originally Posted by H2O View Post
Those historical trends are somewhat inverted now, though. Suburbs were overwhelmingly white due to exclusionary zoning and lending practices. By the time those policies were officially outlawed in the 60s, they were perpetuated by economic factors. Minimum lot sizes and price based restrictive covenants in the suburbs kept most minorities out. Now that more urban lifestyles have become more desirable, the highest real estate values are closest to the core, especially in high-growth, wealthy cities like Austin. Moving up no longer means moving out, it means moving in. Because inner-city land prices are already so high, I think that will actually increase the trend towards sprawl development for larger households.

The problem with such long term forecasts is that we can't continue this kind of sprawl with carbon burning single occupant vehicles as the principal means of transportation without severely impacting the global climate. The planet could literally be uninhabitable by 2100 if we don't reverse course.
Have you considered that both are moving up and out, just to different destinations and from different places?

One group is moving from inner-city poverty (away from former ghettos and places that are now gentrifying) into middle class suburbia.

The other group is moving from middle class suburbia into new build upper middle class, “luxury,” and true luxury units in inner city areas that are in the middle of or have completed gentrification.

Both groups are moving up and out (of their current neighborhoods).
__________________
Houston: 2.4m (+3.9%) + MSA suburbs: 5.4m (+12%) + CSA exurbs: 200k (+5%)
Dallas: 1.3m (+2%) / FtW: 1.0m (+10%) + suburbs: 6.4m (9%) + exurbs: 566k (+9%)
San Antonio: 1.5m (+6%) + MSA suburbs: 1.2m (+10%) + CSA exurbs: 82k (+3%)
Austin: 994k (+3%) + MSA suburbs: 1.6m (+18%)
Texas (whole): 31.29m (+7%) / Texas (balance): 8.6m (+3%)

Last edited by wwmiv; Mar 21, 2024 at 1:19 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #670  
Old Posted Dec 23, 2024, 7:32 PM
Riverranchdrone Riverranchdrone is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Austin
Posts: 985
What is everyone's thoughts about Austin losing in the population rankings to other cities?
First dropping out of the top 10 biggest city in the nation to Jacksonville Florida. Now dropping from the 4th biggest city in Texas to 5th due to Forth Worth beating us. I swear Austin was suppose to be over a million a few years ago. Are we the victims to bad census counting?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #671  
Old Posted Dec 23, 2024, 7:41 PM
The ATX's Avatar
The ATX The ATX is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Right here, right now
Posts: 12,730
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riverranchdrone View Post
What is everyone's thoughts about Austin losing in the population rankings to other cities?
First dropping out of the top 10 biggest city in the nation to Jacksonville Florida. Now dropping from the 4th biggest city in Texas to 5th due to Forth Worth beating us. I swear Austin was suppose to be over a million a few years ago. Are we the victims to bad census counting?
Austin proper may have slow growth for a while because it got too expensive. But the burbs are booming as much or more than ever, and it's the MSA population that matters most depending on context of course. Plus the State allowed about 6K people to de-annex from the City earlier this year.
__________________
Follow The ATX on X:
https://x.com/TheATX1

Things will be great when you're downtown.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #672  
Old Posted Dec 23, 2024, 8:33 PM
GoldenBoot's Avatar
GoldenBoot GoldenBoot is offline
Member since 2001
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Terra Firma
Posts: 3,412
Yes. City proper population really means nothing. It's the metro and CSA populations that matter.

Here's are some very basic examples of why city proper size doesn't matter:

-Mesa, AZ (suburb of Phoenix) is more populous than Atlanta, GA
-Colorado Springs is more populous than Miami, FL
-Tulsa, OK is more populous than Tampa, FL
-Wichita, KS is bigger then New Orleans, LA
-Henderson, NV (suburb of Las Vegas) is more populous than Orlando, FL
-Plano, TX (suburb of Dallas-obviously) is more populous than St. Louis, MO
__________________
AUSTIN (City): 993,588 +3.30% - '20-'24 | AUSTIN MSA (5 counties): 2,550,637 +11.70% - '20-'24
SAN ANTONIO (City): 1,526,656 +6.41% - '20-'24 | SAN ANTONIO MSA (8 counties): 2,763,006 +8.01% - '20-'24
AUS-SAT REGION (MSAs/13 counties): 5,313,643 +9.75% - '20-'24 | *SRC: US Census*
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #673  
Old Posted Dec 24, 2024, 5:08 PM
Lobotomizer's Avatar
Lobotomizer Lobotomizer is offline
Frontal Lobe Technician
 
Join Date: Jul 2021
Posts: 485
Quote:
Originally Posted by The ATX View Post
Austin proper may have slow growth for a while because it got too expensive. But the burbs are booming as much or more than ever, and it's the MSA population that matters most depending on context of course. Plus the State allowed about 6K people to de-annex from the City earlier this year.
I believe moving forward declining household size will make adding a lot more population in the city proper unlikely.

Increasingly Austin is a city of the elderly, along with childless adults. Where a generation ago a family of four lived you now have a widow living alone, or a DINK couple with their "fur babies".

Families live in the surrounding metro counties, Williamson and Hays in particular. Of course this is a generalization, but the data shows this to be the case, and the trend has only accelerated.
__________________
Aw, snap! You just got Lobotomized!

Last edited by Lobotomizer; Dec 24, 2024 at 5:40 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #674  
Old Posted Dec 27, 2024, 4:55 AM
Lobotomizer's Avatar
Lobotomizer Lobotomizer is offline
Frontal Lobe Technician
 
Join Date: Jul 2021
Posts: 485
I just delved into the latest census estimates for Texas, and there are some interesting facts at least a couple of people here may be interested in hearing.

One thing I noticed which I believe is new is the Hispanic population is now the largest group in Texas at 39.8%. Non-Hispanic White is the second largest at 39.6%. Texas has been a minority-majority state for a while, but Non-Hispanic Whites had been the largest group.

Also, Texas added more people (562,941) than it has in almost twenty years, and the third most ever. Only on 2006 and 1982 did the state add more people. 319,569 of that growth was through international immigration, which is the most ever in the state. That is nearly 57% of the population growth of Texas!

The county level data doesn't release until March, but I have my own projections based on the last decade of data. I looked at the Austin Metro's share of Texas' growth for the last decade, discarded the two highest and lowest years, and got an average of 13.5%,. The highest was in 2021 at 17.89%, while the lowest was 2023 at 10.58%.

Based on the above information my 2024 estimates for the Austin metro will put it at 2,549,272 which is an increase of 75,997 over the 2023 data we have available. However, the census bureau retroactively updates all previous year's estimates annually with the release of the new data. I suspect the prior year's numbers will be updated to show a higher population. If not this will be an increase of 75,997 people, which would the most the Austin metro has ever added in a year. 72,029 in 2020 is the current largest annual increase.

Last thing that stood out to me was what I had mentioned before regarding international immigration. The Austin metro has averaged around 8.5% of Texas' international immigration the last several years. If that holds true with these latest estimates, that would be an increase of 27,163 (35.74% of the growth) in the Austin metro. This would far exceed the previous high of 11,073 which occurred just last year in the 2023 estimates. I read the census bureau was changing the way they were calculating international immigration, so I'm certain that is part of the reason for the massive increase.
__________________
Aw, snap! You just got Lobotomized!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #675  
Old Posted Dec 27, 2024, 5:05 AM
gillynova's Avatar
gillynova gillynova is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Austin / Bay Area
Posts: 2,790
Love the insights and knowledge Lobotomizer! Imma share some of your findings to my friends
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #676  
Old Posted Dec 27, 2024, 5:32 AM
Lobotomizer's Avatar
Lobotomizer Lobotomizer is offline
Frontal Lobe Technician
 
Join Date: Jul 2021
Posts: 485
Glad you found it interesting. It's difficult to find an in depth analysis, so I usually delve deep into the data myself.

I can't wait until March to see the official county level data!
__________________
Aw, snap! You just got Lobotomized!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #677  
Old Posted Dec 27, 2024, 6:22 AM
SproutingTowers's Avatar
SproutingTowers SproutingTowers is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Austin TX
Posts: 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lobotomizer View Post
I believe moving forward declining household size will make adding a lot more population in the city proper unlikely.

Increasingly Austin is a city of the elderly, along with childless adults. Where a generation ago a family of four lived you now have a widow living alone, or a DINK couple with their "fur babies".

Families live in the surrounding metro counties, Williamson and Hays in particular. Of course this is a generalization, but the data shows this to be the case, and the trend has only accelerated.
I live in Circle C and see a lot of women pushing strollers with either dogs or cats in them.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #678  
Old Posted Dec 27, 2024, 3:08 PM
Lobotomizer's Avatar
Lobotomizer Lobotomizer is offline
Frontal Lobe Technician
 
Join Date: Jul 2021
Posts: 485
Quote:
Originally Posted by SproutingTowers View Post
I live in Circle C and see a lot of women pushing strollers with either dogs or cats in them.
Yes, a large percentage of the world is now below replacement level which over the coming decades is going to lead to a whole lot of problems. As much as we have all heard about overpopulation, it's looking increasingly like the real crisis is going to be declining population with a whole lot of old people without enough young people entering the workforce and paying taxes.
__________________
Aw, snap! You just got Lobotomized!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #679  
Old Posted Dec 27, 2024, 5:42 PM
SproutingTowers's Avatar
SproutingTowers SproutingTowers is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Austin TX
Posts: 505
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #680  
Old Posted Mar 10, 2025, 4:27 PM
JoninATX JoninATX is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: The ATX
Posts: 3,376
2024 metro estimates coming out March 12th @ 11 pm.

Last edited by JoninATX; Mar 11, 2025 at 3:38 PM.
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 > Regional Sections > United States > Texas & Southcentral > Austin
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:16 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.