Texas Cities 2011

[desertpunk]

The 2011 Census Estimates of metropolitan areas are in: http://www.census.gov/popest/data/me...EST2011-01.csv



1. Dallas - Ft. Worth ....................... 6,526,548

2. Houston .................................... 6,086,538

3. San Antonio ............................... 2,194,538

4. Austin ....................................... 1,783,519

5. El Paso ......................................... 820,790

6. Mc Allen - Edinburg - Mission .......... 797,810

7. Corpus Christi ................................ 431,381

8. Brownsville - Harlingen ................... 414,381

9. Killeen - Temple ............................. 411,595

10. Beaumont - Port Arthur ................. 390,535

11. Lubbock ....................................... 290,002

12. Laredo ......................................... 256,496

13. Amarillo ....................................... 253,823

14. Waco ............................................ 238,564

15. College Station - Bryan ...................231,623

16. Longview ...................................... 216,666

17. Tyler ............................................ 213,381

18. Abilene .........................................166,416

19. Wichita Falls ..................................150,261

20. Midland ......................................... 140,308

21. Odessa ......................................... 140,111

[Dallas star]

I can foresee the Austin metro reaching 2 million by 2025. Perhaps a DFW-Austin-San Antonio megalopolis in the works? ha.

[jonathaninATX]

Originally Posted by Dallas star

I can foresee the Austin metro reaching 2 million by 2025. Perhaps a DFW-Austin-San Antonio megalopolis in the works? ha.

If Austin continues to grow at 50,000 or so a year, Austin metro will hit 2 million by 2017.
There already saying that the greater Austin metro area already over 2 million which they are including the Temple & Killeen area which puts it around 2.2 million. We will have to wait and see how it plays out.

[FLAWDA-FELLA]

Looks like the DFW and Houston metros are going to remain in the top 2 positions for quite some time. Within the next decade or two, I wouldn't be too surprised to see the S.A. and Austin metros in a dead heat for number the 3rd spot.

[desertpunk]

Interestingly, Ft Worth - Arlington breaks out at 2,180,758. If counted separately from the DFW CSA, Ft. Worth is now as large as San Antonio. San Antonio is the laggard and at that, continues to grow quite nicely. But it is being overshadowed by the breakout metros of Austin and Ft Worth.

Also, the stealthy explosion in South Texas bears watching. Planners down there really need to get a better handle on the sprawling growth that's devouring precious farmland and turning those counties into a Phoenix-like agglomeration of small cities.

[ichabodius]

Originally Posted by desertpunk

Interestingly, Ft Worth - Arlington breaks out at 2,180,758. If counted separately from the DFW CSA, Ft. Worth is now as large as San Antonio. San Antonio is the laggard and at that, continues to grow quite nicely. But it is being overshadowed by the breakout metros of Austin and Ft Worth.

From 2010 -2011 the San Antonio Metro grew by 2.45% while DFW and Houston grew by 2.32% and 2.31% respectively. Ft. Worth-Arlington considered separately from Dallas grew by 2%.

[desertpunk]

Originally Posted by ichabodius

From 2010 -2011 the San Antonio Metro grew by 2.45% while DFW and Houston grew by 2.32% and 2.31% respectively. Ft. Worth-Arlington considered separately from Dallas grew by 2%.

From 2000-2010, San Antonio grew 25% vs. 37% for Austin, and 26% for Houston. Ft. Worth grew 24.9%. So while in one year, S.A. saw a higher growth rate, the trendlines continue to favor Austin and Houston while Ft Worth, which has broken out from a decades long period of steady but not high growth, has certainly kept pace. Needless to say, the term "laggard" is relative when it comes to Texas and its strong growth.

[ichabodius]

Originally Posted by desertpunk

From 2000-2010, San Antonio grew 25% vs. 37% for Austin, and 26% for Houston. Ft. Worth grew 24.9%. So while in one year, S.A. saw a higher growth rate, the trendlines continue to favor Austin and Houston while Ft Worth, which has broken out from a decades long period of steady but not high growth, has certainly kept pace. Needless to say, the term "laggard" is relative when it comes to Texas and its strong growth.

It is true that San Antonio has historically (at least for the latter half of the 20th century) lagged in population growth compered to DFW, Houston and Austin. Ft. Worth has the luxury of being in the same CMSA as Dallas so its growth is hard to judge independantly. You characterize Ft. Worth as breaking out of a long trend of moderate growth and overshadowing S.A. when San Antonio as its own MSA has the same characteristic and has grown at a slighty higher rate than the Ft, Worth MSA for 12 years.
Sorry about splitting hairs I dont mean to come off as petty (and Im not a rabid civic booster) just wanted to proffer a qualification to your statement.

[desertpunk]

Originally Posted by ichabodius

It is true that San Antonio has historically (at least for the latter half of the 20th century) lagged in population growth compered to DFW, Houston and Austin. Ft. Worth has the luxury of being in the same CMSA as Dallas so its growth is hard to judge independantly. You characterize Ft. Worth as breaking out of a long trend of moderate growth and overshadowing S.A. when San Antonio as its own MSA has the same characteristic and has grown at a slighty higher rate than the Ft, Worth MSA for 12 years.
Sorry about splitting hairs I dont mean to come off as petty (and Im not a rabid civic booster) just wanted to proffer a qualification to your statement.

That's fine. I'm interested in San Antonio. Do you think it could lead in growth this decade? What are the drivers that could catapult the S.A. metro to the ranks of a Dallas or Houston? I think Austin is in a big move and I guess I really meant Ft Worth the city as a breakout story while indeed the immediate MSA has been merely chugging alongside many others.

San Antonio has quite a variety of economic engines. I wonder if there's any one that could catalyse the city's growth prospects. And with the coming austerity for defense, does San Antonio actually stand to benefit? Or could they see cuts?

[TexasBoi]

Originally Posted by jonathaninATX

If Austin continues to grow at 50,000 or so a year, Austin metro will hit 2 million by 2017.
There already saying that the greater Austin metro area already over 2 million which they are including the Temple & Killeen area which puts it around 2.2 million. We will have to wait and see how it plays out.

While I believe this was inevitable, are they really starting to include the Killeen and Temple area with Austin now. I know before I left Killeen, the city was growing one way which was South. It was growing towards Austin mostly because it had no choice and most of Austin's growth is North. Have those two grown that much.

[rmr78666]

Shouldn't Bryan - College Station be in there around #14-15? It's around 228,000 for the metro.

[jonathaninATX]

Originally Posted by TexasBoi

While I believe this was inevitable, are they really starting to include the Killeen and Temple area with Austin now. I know before I left Killeen, the city was growing one way which was South. It was growing towards Austin mostly because it had no choice and most of Austin's growth is North. Have those two grown that much.

Temple & Killeen have grown alot with almost half a million people, the growth here is crazy.

[shakman]

WOW... I always thought of Midland and Odessa as one metro area.

[desertpunk]

Originally Posted by rmr78666

Shouldn't Bryan - College Station be in there around #14-15? It's around 228,000 for the metro.

Fixed!