Will San Antonio Texas and austin Texas become one just like DFW???... And if so will it be bigger and will it attract new media such as NFL MLB NHL?.. If so where would it rank among USA Metroplex's??

I think it's possible but not for a while though.

I don't think this would ever happen. First, they are a little far apart for that. But frankly, the biggest factor against this is that San Antonio and Austin both have distinct, unique identities and they are each self-supporting. There wouldn't really be a need for a metroplex between these cities.

Also, I don't think anyone should wish for this to happen as it would just encourage suburbanization and create huge traffic problems.

It's gonna happen. But at the same time, the area from Austin to Dallas will be filling in too. A 'SanAustin' metroplex may be just a prelude to something much bigger...


I don't think this would ever happen. First, they are a little far apart for that. But frankly, the biggest factor against this is that San Antonio and Austin both have distinct, unique identities and they are each self-supporting. There wouldn't really be a need for a metroplex between these cities.

Also, I don't think anyone should wish for this to happen as it would just encourage suburbanization and create huge traffic problems.

The development pressures may come from within these chain communities like San Marcos more than from big city developers and their suburbanizing ways. Smaller towns and cities in Texas are just as eager to grab new residents and development as their larger kin. As they grow outward, they will fill in the geographic gaps and while their residents may not commute to either of the large cities, they will travel there to shop and enjoy sports and concerts. Meanwhile, neither Austin nor San Antonio will be subsuming their identities to the other but they will leverage their combined synergies to attract capital and investments just like Dallas and Fort Worth do.

I used to commute from San Marcos to Austin nearly everyday, nowadays I live in San Antonio and head up to San Marcos every week.

Heading south from Austin, the Kyle-Buda-San Marcos area is filling out quickly. Many major housing developments were postponed or behind schedule due to the economy (Blanco Vista, Plum Creek). Huge housing developments and box stores. It is amazing how quickly the area has filled in since I moved to the area 4 years ago.

The gap between San Marcos and New Braunfels is not filling in at the same pace but there are some major developments. Pretty much the same story between New Braunfels and Schertz. Hays and Comal counties are attracting upscale, low-density housing developments around Canyon Lake and Wimberly.

Eventually the two cities will be similar to DFW but it will take decades. By then you would probably need to include Killeen and Temple.

Right now I live in Temple and everytime I go out there is always something new being built, I can just imagine what the growth will be like when they start the new Toyota Plant here. Also Kyle, Buda, San Marcos and New Braunfels are growing pretty rapidly as well.

Yes!! Hopefully it will... I live in San Marcos and the drive to San Antonio is completely filled except for San Marcos to new branfels... But other thing I don't get is that greater San Antonio consist of sa to new branfels and greater Austin consist from San Marcos to Austin.. I just wish they combined them already! That would be great

Yes!! Hopefully it will... I live in San Marcos and the drive to San Antonio is completely filled except for San Marcos to new branfels... But other thing I don't get is that greater San Antonio consist of sa to new branfels and greater Austin consist from San Marcos to Austin.. I just wish they combined them already! That would be great

A lot of metropolitan areas touch each other. In Louisiana, Greater New Orleans and Greater Baton Rouge literally touch, but they will never combine.

But yeah, seriously, this will never happen. They are simply too far apart. And just because suburban housing development is growing along the interstate doesn't mean they will magically be a metroplex. There might be a continuous line of housing development along the interstate but a metroplex is a place where the economies of the cities are intertwined. And frankly, the word metroplex is a word made FOR Dallas.

Dallas-Fort Worth is just that...a single metropolitan area that was branded as a "metroplex". Fort Worth is simply a suburb of Dallas that has become a center of activity. If anything it would make more sense for say..Austin and Round Rock to become a "metroplex". Austin and San Antonio will continue to keep their identity and I just seriously can't see them conjoining into some megacity.

On top of all that, there will be a time when the spreading suburbanization will stop. I get it that Texas is growing and all but the way you all are talking it would seem that all of the eastern half of Texas, from Houston to Dallas to San Antonio will be one HUGE metroplexistan, and that is just not going to happen.

A lot of metropolitan areas touch each other. In Louisiana, Greater New Orleans and Greater Baton Rouge literally touch, but they will never combine.

But yeah, seriously, this will never happen. They are simply too far apart. And just because suburban housing development is growing along the interstate doesn't mean they will magically be a metroplex. There might be a continuous line of housing development along the interstate but a metroplex is a place where the economies of the cities are intertwined. And frankly, the word metroplex is a word made FOR Dallas.

Dallas-Fort Worth is just that...a single metropolitan area that was branded as a "metroplex". Fort Worth is simply a suburb of Dallas that has become a center of activity. If anything it would make more sense for say..Austin and Round Rock to become a "metroplex". Austin and San Antonio will continue to keep their identity and I just seriously can't see them conjoining into some megacity.

On top of all that, there will be a time when the spreading suburbanization will stop. I get it that Texas is growing and all but the way you all are talking it would seem that all of the eastern half of Texas, from Houston to Dallas to San Antonio will be one HUGE metroplexistan, and that is just not going to happen.

Oh.. Makes a lot of sense now.. Thanks!

Will San Antonio Texas and austin Texas become one just like DFW???... And if so will it be bigger and will it attract new media such as NFL MLB NHL?.. If so where would it rank among USA Metroplex's??

Isn't the distance between them eighty miles? If so, I say they will never become one market. First, could an airport be built somewhere towards the center of the two metropolitan areas and close enough to serve both of them? Los Angeles is a metropolitan area one hundred miles across which is what San Anaustinonio would look like if the two became a similar type metropolitan area. But the mountains surrounding Los Angeles pretty much existed as stencil to help confine the creation of that huge metropolitan area. Also, in Dallas - Fort Worth, there are now three major freeways and numerous streets connected Dallas with Fort Worth along with many others connecting them indirectly.
And as a previous poster cited, the Austin metropolitan area seems bent on developing itself north and in a direction away from San Antonio.
However, I can see an impressive corridor developing between Austin and San Antonio.

Oh.. Makes a lot of sense now.. Thanks!

Fort Worth is not a suburb. It has a population nearing a million. It has a downtown. It has its own hospital district. It has a zoo which is one of the best in the nation while it is located thirty-five miles from Dallas. Fort Worth has its own colleges. It has its own community college system. Fort Worth has a huge aerospace industry. It is headquarters for a huge gas field as well. It has a famed museum district. It has a large number of billionaires living in the city. It has its own freeway system including a loop. It is a major confluence for railroad lines. It has the hottest real estate in the nation when the economy isn't in recession while its population is growing faster than any other city in the Dallas - Fort Worth area. Fort Worth has its own drinking water. It has a culture which is more western than Dallas while it also has its own unique geography which is a higher elevation than Dallas while the city has more hills. It has its own school district. It has its own convention facilities with a city owned convention center hotel.

A lot of metropolitan areas touch each other. In Louisiana, Greater New Orleans and Greater Baton Rouge literally touch, but they will never combine.

But yeah, seriously, this will never happen. They are simply too far apart. And just because suburban housing development is growing along the interstate doesn't mean they will magically be a metroplex. There might be a continuous line of housing development along the interstate but a metroplex is a place where the economies of the cities are intertwined. And frankly, the word metroplex is a word made FOR Dallas.

Dallas-Fort Worth is just that...a single metropolitan area that was branded as a "metroplex". Fort Worth is simply a suburb of Dallas that has become a center of activity. If anything it would make more sense for say..Austin and Round Rock to become a "metroplex". Austin and San Antonio will continue to keep their identity and I just seriously can't see them conjoining into some megacity.

On top of all that, there will be a time when the spreading suburbanization will stop. I get it that Texas is growing and all but the way you all are talking it would seem that all of the eastern half of Texas, from Houston to Dallas to San Antonio will be one HUGE metroplexistan, and that is just not going to happen.

As the cities of Lafayette and Baton Rouge are seperated by 24 miles of bridges of which the swamps below are now being utilized to handle the runoff from a flooding Mississippi River, the cities of Baton Rouge and New Orleans are seperated by similar bridges as the latter city averages 8 feet below sea level and is has to be completely surrounded by levees. Not just that, but tens of thousands of square miles in and around this area is actually below sea level or is quite swampy.
A suburban area for New Orleans will exist on a line stretching for eighty to a hundred miles along a highway with these arteries being built by constructing the highway by digging a huge channel in the middle or channels on each side and piling up the dirt on each side creating places for people to live.

Fort Worth is not a suburb. It has a population nearing a million. It has a downtown. It has its own hospital district. It has a zoo which is one of the best in the nation while it is located thirty-five miles from Dallas. Fort Worth has its own colleges. It has its own community college system. Fort Worth has a huge aerospace industry. It is headquarters for a huge gas field as well. It has a famed museum district. It has a large number of billionaires living in the city. It has its own freeway system including a loop. It is a major confluence for railroad lines. It has the hottest real estate in the nation when the economy isn't in recession while its population is growing faster than any other city in the Dallas - Fort Worth area. Fort Worth has its own drinking water. It has a culture which is more western than Dallas while it also has its own unique geography which is a higher elevation than Dallas while the city has more hills. It has its own school district. It has its own convention facilities with a city owned convention center hotel.

I totally understand. I do realize that Fort Worth has its own identity and economy but still...I think just about everyone would agree that Dallas is the principal city in the area.

As the cities of Lafayette and Baton Rouge are seperated by 24 miles of bridges of which the swamps below are now being utilized to handle the runoff from a flooding Mississippi River, the cities of Baton Rouge and New Orleans are seperated by similar bridges as the latter city averages 8 feet below sea level and is has to be completely surrounded by levees. Not just that, but tens of thousands of square miles in and around this area is actually below sea level or is quite swampy.
A suburban area for New Orleans will exist on a line stretching for eighty to a hundred miles along a highway with these arteries being built by constructing the highway by digging a huge channel in the middle or channels on each side and piling up the dirt on each side creating places for people to live.

I was just explaining to the OP that the official metropolitan lines touch even though they are not combined, since they asked why the Austin and San Antonio areas don't touch.

And honestly, I think most people that wish or expect these types of things to happen are just way too optimistic. Like I said before, the growth will have to stop eventually. Just because cities are growing fast does not mean that they will just grow and grow until they meet another city. Things like that don't happen. At the same time, everyone is so optimistic about growth in the urban core. So, which is it? Will cities continue to grow outward until some giant area is formed or will they see growth in the city themselves. I, for one, believe in cities, not suburbs.

I know this is about San Antonio and Austin, but what about DFW reaching into Oklahoma? Serious discussion has been brought up that the northern part of DFW and other surrounding areas may reach into Oklahoma.

Fort Worth is not a suburb. It has a population nearing a million. It has a downtown. It has its own hospital district. It has a zoo which is one of the best in the nation while it is located thirty-five miles from Dallas. Fort Worth has its own colleges. It has its own community college system. Fort Worth has a huge aerospace industry. It is headquarters for a huge gas field as well. It has a famed museum district. It has a large number of billionaires living in the city. It has its own freeway system including a loop. It is a major confluence for railroad lines. It has the hottest real estate in the nation when the economy isn't in recession while its population is growing faster than any other city in the Dallas - Fort Worth area. Fort Worth has its own drinking water. It has a culture which is more western than Dallas while it also has its own unique geography which is a higher elevation than Dallas while the city has more hills. It has its own school district. It has its own convention facilities with a city owned convention center hotel.

Dallas is still the anchor city, though. People know Dallas, not Fort Worth. However, that is quickly changing. What's up with the big chip on the shoulder from Fort Worth lately? Starting to sound like OKCers.

I know this is about San Antonio and Austin, but what about DFW reaching into Oklahoma? Serious discussion has been brought up that the northern part of DFW and other surrounding areas may reach into Oklahoma.

If North Dallas did grow all the way into Oklahoma, figure the metropolitan area would have about 30 million people in it. Now if you are talking about just a corridor area between Dallas Parkway and Preston Road growing all the way to stretch into Oklahoma one day, it wouldn't surprise me.

If North Dallas did grow all the way into Oklahoma, figure the metropolitan area would have about 30 million people in it. Now if you are talking about just a corridor area between Dallas Parkway and Preston Road growing all the way to stretch into Oklahoma one day, it wouldn't surprise me.

I can't remember the specifics, I just remember it was mentioned on here before. I think it had more to do with suburbs such as Denton and Sherman depending on their growth. Or, perhaps the highway 75 corridor between McKinney and Sherman? Still, as you said, it would be a stretch. But, with current water issues going on, people may migrate north closer to the Red River along the border?

Back to the topic, how is New Braunfels growing? Steady at least?

San Antonio and Austin will not merge anytime soon. Everyone who thinks otherwise needs to check out the massive urban expanse that runs between New York and Philadelphia and realize that even those two areas are considered separate. Now go and look at the land between San Antonio and Austin and realize just how impossible it is for a merger to occur in our lifetime if ever.

I can't remember the specifics, I just remember it was mentioned on here before. I think it had more to do with suburbs such as Denton and Sherman depending on their growth. Or, perhaps the highway 75 corridor between McKinney and Sherman? Still, as you said, it would be a stretch. But, with current water issues going on, people may migrate north closer to the Red River along the border?

Back to the topic, how is New Braunfels growing? Steady at least?

I did a thread on this phenomenon created by the relationship between two parallel running thoroughfares in north Dallas with Dallas Parkway referred to as the "Platinum Corridor" for office buildings and with Preston Road referred to as the "Golden Corridor" for shopping. This area stretches for 23 miles from downtown Dallas all the way to Frisco. While this stretch has more office space than in all of downtown Dallas, it contains most of the city's upscale shopping while Northpark represents the lone exception as it is located nearby on Central Expressway. There are lots of expensive homes within and near this stretch.
What amazes people are the expensive homes now being built in Prosper and Celina north of both the Stonebriar commercial shopping district, and highway 380 while they are contained within this same remarkable stretch formed by an ever expanding Dallas Parkway (tollway) bordering to the west and Preston Road (289) bordering to the east furthering demand for even more upscale shopping in the future.

San Antonio and Austin will not merge anytime soon. Everyone who thinks otherwise needs to check out the massive urban expanse that runs between New York and Philadelphia and realize that even those two areas are considered separate. Now go and look at the land between San Antonio and Austin and realize just how impossible it is for a merger to occur in our lifetime if ever.

You would be shocked at the rate of growth in the communities between the two. The population of Texas is expected to double before 2030. Well over half of the growth will occur along the I-35 corridor.

Just because the state is growing and there is suburban big box growth on the I-35 corridor does not mean that those 2 cities will become some "metroplex". I really just don't understand all these stupid terms like "San Austinonio" etc..Cities and Metro areas are bound by one principal city. There is absolutely no possibility that Austin and San Antonio will become some mega-region or whatever the buzz word is. There places will surely continue to grow but that in NO way means that they will form a metroplex. And, like I said before I just don't get why people would even want that to happen. Instead, I think people should be hoping for both cities to grown their urban cores and offer good amenities in the city instead of building out and out and out.

If North Dallas did grow all the way into Oklahoma, figure the metropolitan area would have about 30 million people in it. Now if you are talking about just a corridor area between Dallas Parkway and Preston Road growing all the way to stretch into Oklahoma one day, it wouldn't surprise me.

This will never happen. Not in our lifetimes. A 30,000,000 person Dallas CSA would be 8,000,000 people larger than NYC. Not happening.

And honestly, I think most people that wish or expect these types of things to happen are just way too optimistic. Like I said before, the growth will have to stop eventually. Just because cities are growing fast does not mean that they will just grow and grow until they meet another city. Things like that don't happen. At the same time, everyone is so optimistic about growth in the urban core. So, which is it? Will cities continue to grow outward until some giant area is formed or will they see growth in the city themselves. I, for one, believe in cities, not suburbs.

Texas is going to have some serious revenue issues in the near future due to the exact reason for this kind of growth. Low-to-no taxes. When the revenue crisis, which is coming, hits Texas and it can no longer maintain its infrastructure it will coming slow down pretty seriously. Our economies are built on bubbles these days and Texas is a bubble which is great right now. But bubbles burst and it gets ugly for a little while afterward.

^ The luxury of having low taxes, is if you're short you can pull emergency strings to start taxing vs a place already highly taxed. Where would new revenue come from? And I think his comment about Dallas having 30 million people metro was sarcastic.

Aside, Austin is trying hard to build it's own image. I don't think it would enjoy banding together with SA. It is also a state capitol which politically provides a barrier between the two cities beyond physical level imo.

^ The luxury of having low taxes, is if you're short you can pull emergency strings to start taxing vs a place already highly taxed. Where would new revenue come from? And I think his comment about Dallas having 30 million people metro was sarcastic.

Aside, Austin is trying hard to build it's own image. I don't think it would enjoy banding together with SA. It is also a state capitol which politically provides a barrier between the two cities beyond physical level imo.

The prediction of 30 million takes into account the 20 million in the Los Angeles metropolitan area divided by total square miles. If the boundaries of the Dallas area one day reached up into Oklahoma, I was just predicting the DFW area would be a third larger than the Los Angeles area.
However, I think the argument is that the corridors of Preston Road and the Dallas Parkway will one day stretch all the way to the Oklahoma border and beyond.

^ The luxury of having low taxes, is if you're short you can pull emergency strings to start taxing vs a place already highly taxed. Where would new revenue come from? And I think his comment about Dallas having 30 million people metro was sarcastic.

Aside, Austin is trying hard to build it's own image. I don't think it would enjoy banding together with SA. It is also a state capitol which politically provides a barrier between the two cities beyond physical level imo.

That sounds good in theory but in practice its not quite so easy. The ideological low tax crowd is in control of Texas right now. This ideological view holds the belief that cutting taxes, no matter how much, no matter what kind of taxes, brings economic growth. raising taxes, even temporarily, even a little, will be a very very hard sell politically.

Texas is going to have some serious revenue issues in the near future due to the exact reason for this kind of growth. Low-to-no taxes. When the revenue crisis, which is coming, hits Texas and it can no longer maintain its infrastructure it will coming slow down pretty seriously. Our economies are built on bubbles these days and Texas is a bubble which is great right now. But bubbles burst and it gets ugly for a little while afterward.

You do realize that Texas is already facing a +$25 billion budget shortfall?

Just because the state is growing and there is suburban big box growth on the I-35 corridor does not mean that those 2 cities will become some "metroplex". I really just don't understand all these stupid terms like "San Austinonio" etc..Cities and Metro areas are bound by one principal city. There is absolutely no possibility that Austin and San Antonio will become some mega-region or whatever the buzz word is. There places will surely continue to grow but that in NO way means that they will form a metroplex. And, like I said before I just don't get why people would even want that to happen. Instead, I think people should be hoping for both cities to grown their urban cores and offer good amenities in the city instead of building out and out and out.

Define metroplex. I thought it was a large urban area that encompasses several cities and suburbs.

*I do have a correction. The population of Texas is expected to double by 2050 to over 50 million. Population projections for Hays and Comal counties expect doubling by 2030, reaching 500,000.

No one is claiming that either city will lose its identity. The fact is that San Antonio and Austin are becoming more economically connected each year and the growth reflects that. I agree with you that I would much rather have higher density in existing urban cores and see the advancement of intra-urban commuter infrastructure. But this is Texas...

You do realize that Texas is already facing a +$25 billion budget shortfall?

I knew it was big but i wasn't sure how big. A lot of states are facing major shortfalls. Just to clarify, I don't see a Detroit or Michigan type of freefall in the future for Texas but I don't think the type of growth you're seeing now will last much longer. That's going to bring the growth of the Austin-San Antonio corridor down a notch.

We were projected to have a pretty significant shortfall in Kentucky but revenue took a sharp uptick lately that looks to cover most of it. Does Texas have a plan to cover the shortfall. I don't see it being possible to cut 25 billion out of the state's budget.

This will never happen. Not in our lifetimes. A 30,000,000 person Dallas CSA would be 8,000,000 people larger than NYC. Not happening.

I'm not saying it will ever happen. I'm saying the potential for the stretch created by the Platinum Corridor of Dallas Parkway and the Golden Corridor of Preston Road could extend that distance someday. For this to happen, there needs to be more upscale housing built. Those are already being built in the cities of Prosper and Celina which are located, get this, north of 380! As it stands now, there is a string of impressive shopping located along every significant crossroads for the length of 23 miles beginning at Highland Park Village north of downtown located at the intersection of Preston Road and Mockingbird Road, then continuing on to Preston Center located at the intersection of Loop 12 and Preston Road, to the Dallas Galleria located at the LBJ Freeway and Dallas Parkway, to the Shops at Briar Creek located at the Bush Freeway and Dallas Parkway, and ending at Stonebriar located at 121 and Preston Road.
The next real estate expansion is expected to take place north of there at 380 between Dallas Parkway and Preston Road.
This is what they are talking about.
If the expansion of this stretch fuels the expansion of the Central Expressway Corridor as well, the population could become quite impressive indeed.

Define metroplex. I thought it was a large urban area that encompasses several cities and suburbs.

*I do have a correction. The population of Texas is expected to double by 2050 to over 50 million. Population projections for Hays and Comal counties expect doubling by 2030, reaching 500,000.

No one is claiming that either city will lose its identity. The fact is that San Antonio and Austin are becoming more economically connected each year and the growth reflects that. I agree with you that I would much rather have higher density in existing urban cores and see the advancement of intra-urban commuter infrastructure. But this is Texas...

Metroplex was a term made up to market the Dallas - Fort Worth area specifically. With DFW airport residing at both the geographical center and at the population center of the metropolitan area, the name really fits.

I knew it was big but i wasn't sure how big. A lot of states are facing major shortfalls. Just to clarify, I don't see a Detroit or Michigan type of freefall in the future for Texas but I don't think the type of growth you're seeing now will last much longer. That's going to bring the growth of the Austin-San Antonio corridor down a notch.

We were projected to have a pretty significant shortfall in Kentucky but revenue took a sharp uptick lately that looks to cover most of it. Does Texas have a plan to cover the shortfall. I don't see it being possible to cut 25 billion out of the state's budget.

Being as our society is almost halfway to acheiving perfection as well as equality where every baby is born, not black and white, beloved forum members, but a golden brown, it would be a shame for us to run out of money. We are so close! You would think they could just counterfeit a lot more of it. Better yet, couldn't they just claim to have counterfeited it as this would save millions and billions of future trees! It would seem we could just write IOU's to future generations of our posteriety so they could pay them off in increments which would save lots of paper!
See, I don't think we can afford to sustain a Utopia for very long, but we could acheive a snapshot of it. Indeed, if our leaders would just be willing to save money by wearing peasant uniforms like they do over in communist China, all that savings could be added together and compounded. Ultimatelty, that dream of perfection could be reached where every citizen was riding around in a limosine and living within a twenty room mansion with five and a half bathrooms!
Then right before it all fell apart desolving into reality, beloved forum members, we could then preserve it by taking pictures to upload them in encyclopedias on the World Wide Web so an eternity of future generations can enjoy it. I have a dream!
I'm just saying.

San Antonio and Austin will not merge anytime soon. Everyone who thinks otherwise needs to check out the massive urban expanse that runs between New York and Philadelphia and realize that even those two areas are considered separate. Now go and look at the land between San Antonio and Austin and realize just how impossible it is for a merger to occur in our lifetime if ever.

:yes:

I knew it was big but i wasn't sure how big. A lot of states are facing major shortfalls. Just to clarify, I don't see a Detroit or Michigan type of freefall in the future for Texas but I don't think the type of growth you're seeing now will last much longer. That's going to bring the growth of the Austin-San Antonio corridor down a notch.

We were projected to have a pretty significant shortfall in Kentucky but revenue took a sharp uptick lately that looks to cover most of it. Does Texas have a plan to cover the shortfall. I don't see it being possible to cut 25 billion out of the state's budget.

The fight over budget cuts have been very nasty, with health and education being the hardest hit. Business leaders brag about the state lacking a personal or corporate income tax as a huge plus in attracting jobs but it also makes the state vulnerable to wild swings in revenue.

Can someone give me an example of any other place besides Dallas that is like this? This kind of thing just doesn't really happen.

Can someone give me an example of any other place besides Dallas that is like this? This kind of thing just doesn't really happen.

Minneapolis & st paul?

Can someone give me an example of any other place besides Dallas that is like this? This kind of thing just doesn't really happen.

San Francisco-Oakland
Raleigh-Durham
Tampa-St. Petersburg

Can someone give me an example of any other place besides Dallas that is like this? This kind of thing just doesn't really happen.

Yes, DFW airport is what makes the Dallas - Fort Worth area different. If you are from outside of the area, understand that the Dallas / Fort Worth area is really three cities with one of them illegitimate. In other words, there are a million people living between the cities of Dallas and Fort Worth making it different from Minneapolis / St. Paul. While the population of Arlington is approaching 400,000, DFW airport, located just to that city's north, happens to be located in the middle of the Metropolitan area, by freak chance, positioned both at the geographical and population center of it. Or, think about it this way, as a designated "airport city," DFW airport has six fortune 500 companies located around it.
The Dallas - Fort Worth area is truly one market with DFW airport at the center of it, while the San Jose / San Francisco / Oakland area has located at the center of it a huge bay. So, the Bay Area isn't a single market.

Fortune 500 companies located around DFW airport.
1) American Airlines - Fort Worth
2) ExxonMobil - Irving
3) Gamestop - Grapevine
4) Flour Corp. - Irving
5) Kimberly-Clark - Irving
6) Commercial Metals - Irving

^ That is some interesting info. I've always wondered why DFW has so many names to represent it. It seems like that big airport is the main key to connections between that region. Whoever planned it sure was a genius.

So my guess here is if one wants SA and Austin to conjoin, by some miracle luck, there needs to be something smack in the middle to be the focal point in tying the two together.

^ That is some interesting info. I've always wondered why DFW has so many names to represent it. It seems like that big airport is the main key to connections between that region. Whoever planned it sure was a genius.

So my guess here is if one wants SA and Austin to conjoin, by some miracle luck, there needs to be something smack in the middle to be the focal point in tying the two together.

As the decision to split up I-35 to run through both the cities of Dallas and Fort Worth helped in unifying the area, the I-20 bypass and the three freeways connecting the cities also helped in that capacity. At one time, plans called on building an I-35 central up through Arlington to go along with the I-35 East and West. So, the interstate system really helped.
Also, the Dallas - Fort Worth area has five county seats serving as strong pillars with the cities of Dallas, Fort Worth, Denton, McKinney and Rockwall.
As the area is a vast distribution center, it has to be spread out in sprawl fashion to fit in 700,000,000 square feet of industrial space, so the business centers also tend to be spread out to be better located to serve the area.
And, finally, the universities aren't located in a single area like they tend to be in Houston. They too are spread out in Richardson, Dallas, Arlington, Fort Worth, and Denton to serve the whole metroplex.

San Francisco-Oakland
Raleigh-Durham
Tampa-St. Petersburg

All of these places are not the same situation as Austin and San Antonio. All of these places are 30 miles away from each other or less. San Antonio and Austin are 80 miles apart. See the difference??

Like I said before, it would make more sense for a place like Austin and Round Rock to become a "metroplex" if there can be such a thing since metroplex really is just a metropolitan area....

All of these places are not the same situation as Austin and San Antonio. All of these places are 30 miles away from each other or less. San Antonio and Austin are 80 miles apart. See the difference??

Like I said before, it would make more sense for a place like Austin and Round Rock to become a "metroplex" if there can be such a thing since metroplex really is just a metropolitan area....

I think the question i was referring to was specifically to DFW

I say Austin & San Antonio would connect. The reason is the cities in between them like Buda, Kyle, San Marcos, & New Braunfels are growing pretty fast. for example Kyle a city of 5,000 in 2000 shot up to over 30,000 in just ten yrs.

The Austin/S.A. corridor is a little similiar to what we have in Florida with the Tampa/Orlando(Orlampa) corridor growing towards each other as well. I also believe both of these corridors will eventually connect but probably not in our lifetime. I believe the cancelled HSR service that was proposed between Orl/Tpa, would have definitely accelerated a possible merger in 20-30 yrs. Are there any plans in the near future for HSR/Light Rail service for the Austin/S.A. corridor?

What you guys don't understand is that just because Austin and San Antonio are eventually going to meet in the middle, they are not going to become one big massive metropolitan area.

Seriously. Take a drive from Amherst, MA to to Fredericksburg, VA. That's a drive of nearly 500 miles. You can travel the entire distance driving through little more than cities and suburbs. There is virtually no break in development. However, that stretch is broken up into dozens of smaller metropolitan areas. An unending stretch of suburbs doesn't mean that two cities are going to merge. Hell, look at Trenton, NJ and Morrisville, PA. Even they are two separate metro areas!

What you guys don't understand is that just because Austin and San Antonio are eventually going to meet in the middle, they are not going to become one big massive metropolitan area.

Seriously. Take a drive from Amherst, MA to to Fredericksburg, VA. That's a drive of nearly 500 miles. You can travel the entire distance driving through little more than cities and suburbs. There is virtually no break in development. However, that stretch is broken up into dozens of smaller metropolitan areas. An unending stretch of suburbs doesn't mean that two cities are going to merge. Hell, look at Trenton, NJ and Morrisville, PA. Even they are two separate metro areas!

I agree. With the way Austin is growing to the north and with the cities of Waco and Temple located in between, an urban corridor could realistically exist between Austin and Dallas - Fort Worth before it exists between Austin and San Antonio. Eventually it will exist all the way between Dallas - Fort Worth and San Antonio.
What they now call the I-35 Corridor. Ultimately, between the triangle making up San Antonio to Dallas - Fort Worth to Houston and back, there are going to be five cities with populations over a million.

What you guys don't understand is that just because Austin and San Antonio are eventually going to meet in the middle, they are not going to become one big massive metropolitan area.

Seriously. Take a drive from Amherst, MA to to Fredericksburg, VA. That's a drive of nearly 500 miles. You can travel the entire distance driving through little more than cities and suburbs. There is virtually no break in development. However, that stretch is broken up into dozens of smaller metropolitan areas. An unending stretch of suburbs doesn't mean that two cities are going to merge. Hell, look at Trenton, NJ and Morrisville, PA. Even they are two separate metro areas!

I already answered you. You should go back and read other people's posts.

Flawda-Fella there is a proposed commuter rail system for the Austin-San Antonio area.

http://asarail.org/map.php

http://lonestarrail.com/index.php/lstar/about-project-overview/

I read your post and every one in here. That doesn't change the fact that San Antonio and Austin will never be in the same metropolitan area. Yes eventually there could be a million people living in a long stretch of suburbs between the two cities, but that doesn't mean the two cities will join. All it means is that San Antonio and Austin will be really, really big cities that happen to touch each other at their fringes...

lol nevermind I think Hudkina was referring to Ardamir.... my bad:)

His whole argument is based on his definition of "metroplex".

I know this is about San Antonio and Austin, but what about DFW reaching into Oklahoma? Serious discussion has been brought up that the northern part of DFW and other surrounding areas may reach into Oklahoma.

I hear what you're saying. I made a post about this very thing not too long ago on City-data. The northern reaches of the DFW metroplex are already knocking on sherman-Denison/Grayson County's door so the idea of the metroplex growing to the OK border is not that far fetched.

Alright, this whole metroplex thing is throwing a lot people off. Metroplex is specifically labeled for Dallas/Fort Worth, I doubt another place will be called that. I think a better title for this thread would be, will Austin/SA become a single metropolitan area...

Both are far enough apart to not be in the same comparison as DFW or "the metroplex"; until you have enough commuters between SA/Austin then it doesn't seem likely to happen.
.

Did a little research and who knew the term 'Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex' is a copyrighted term by the NTC lol

I don't think anyone wants to commute between San Antonio and Austin unless there is a high speed train connecting them like Beijing and Tianjin.

Imagine a San Antonio-Austin-Fort Worth-Dallas Megalopolis with at a population of 20 million plus :D

Imagine a San Antonio-Austin-Fort Worth-Dallas Megalopolis with at a population of 20 million plus :D

Think more along the lines of about fifty million. Los Angeles (those angels) already has 20 million and it has a wall to wall (mountain to mountain) population of about a hundred miles squared (10,000 square miles). The Dallas - Fort Worth area is about sixty miles squared with 6.5 million. I can envision a continuous corridor developing between the five metropolitan areas of San Antonio, Austin, Temple, Waco, and Dallas - Fort Worth.

Think more along the lines of about fifty million. Los Angeles (those angels) already has 20 million and it has a wall to wall (mountain to mountain) population of about a hundred miles squared (10,000 square miles). The Dallas - Fort Worth area is about sixty miles squared with 6.5 million. I can envision a continuous corridor developing between the five metropolitan areas of San Antonio, Austin, Temple, Waco, and Dallas - Fort Worth.

The entire state population is only at 25M at this time, and that 50M wouldn't even include Houston! I'd say 30-40 years from now we'll be very close to having almost continuous development along I-35 all the way from Denton-San Antonio

You have 12 million people that live between DFW & San Antonio.

Think more along the lines of about fifty million. Los Angeles (those angels) already has 20 million and it has a wall to wall (mountain to mountain) population of about a hundred miles squared (10,000 square miles). The Dallas - Fort Worth area is about sixty miles squared with 6.5 million. I can envision a continuous corridor developing between the five metropolitan areas of San Antonio, Austin, Temple, Waco, and Dallas - Fort Worth.

Man if Dallas to San Antonio becomes a continuous urban area I hate to see what I-35 will be like.

Man if Dallas to San Antonio becomes a continuous urban area I hate to see what I-35 will be like.

It's already a pain in the ass driving 5 miles to school everyday. :bash:

Dallas is still the anchor city, though. People know Dallas, not Fort Worth. However, that is quickly changing. What's up with the big chip on the shoulder from Fort Worth lately? Starting to sound like OKCers.

LATELY?


.... you don't know the history between the two cities, do you?

It's already a pain in the ass driving 5 miles to school everyday. :bash:

I bet. I've heard many traffic stories about that freeway.

Austin is going to great lengths not to sprawl out everywhere as two major city development plans are on the verge of passing and the city will direct its growth inside the "loop" rather than out with a goal for half a million added population within the boundaries between 290/71, 183, loop1, and I-35 and Downtown will more than double in size between now and 2039.
Of course the city can't do anything about the growth of the suburbs which can spread out, but I am glad Austin will not continue down that route.

Yee-haw! Texas studies 85-mph speed limit, fastest in US!! :eek:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/47729089

We're getting closer to autobahn territory.

We're getting closer to autobahn territory.

We still have a ways to go until we reach that.

I figured that D/FW are a "Metroplex" because they're two distinct metropolitan areas, with distinct commuter and other economic patterns that blend into one another. They're not integrated enough to be considered strictly one city, but at the same time, they are far too integrated to be considered two distinct entities. So they're kind of in a limbo.

It'll take a while for Austin and SA to achieve that sort of integration, both because of distance and because their economies are so distinct.

People are arguing over petty things here.

Will San Antonio and Austin ever be connected like dfw? No

Will there be continuos development between the cities one day? Most likely yes.

So to wrap this up, yes the cities will physically merge with suburban development along 35 but no it will never be the dfw area. And by time there is development between San Antonio and Austin dfw will be at 9-11 million people.

I figured that D/FW are a "Metroplex" because they're two distinct metropolitan areas, with distinct commuter and other economic patterns that blend into one another. They're not integrated enough to be considered strictly one city, but at the same time, they are far too integrated to be considered two distinct entities. So they're kind of in a limbo.



That is probably the best description of DFW I've ever came across.

This is an interesting proposition, to compare, use Tampa and Orlando. During the building boom in this area, they had thought the two cities would definitely merge quickly. The High Speed rail may have helped, and the nickname Orlampa was even in place.
Given that really, every city is distinct, those two are just as St Paul and Minneapolis are for another example. I guess Tampa and Orlando distance wise is similar to the original question, Austin and San Antonio, but, I mean a big Texas sized BUT, outside of a continuous annoying line of development of suburbs, will there be ANY cultural overlap at all? These two cities sound worlds away, and I live in one of them. And spent time/lived in the other two I mentioned.

Edit: Wow, I haven't posted in so long after lurking, I forgot I had or even where I got the avatar from!