News:

Thanks to everyone for the feedback on what errors you encountered at https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=33904.0
Corrected several already and appreciate your patience as we work through the rest.

Main Menu

San Antonio-Austin Mega Metro

Started by ethanhopkin14, July 27, 2023, 01:08:24 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

ibthebigd

I wonder what the area would be like if they built 1 large airport between Austin and San Antonio and say Delta had built a hub there.

SM-G996U



thisdj78

Quote from: ibthebigd on July 31, 2023, 05:25:11 AM
I wonder what the area would be like if they built 1 large airport between Austin and San Antonio and say Delta had built a hub there.

SM-G996U

I watched the documentary and sounds like the window has passed on a large joint international airport. But I could see a 3rd national/regional airport there....they could just expand New Braunfel's existing airport to accommodate commercial traffic. Similar to what was done with Sanford Airport near Orlando, which is now a base for Allegiant Airlines.


Bobby5280

There is a good bit of anti-highways drivel in that article. They bring up the "failure" of Houston's $3 billion Katy Freeway expansion (traffic is even worse now than ever) without mentioning important factors. The Houston metro is continuing to see rapid population growth which equals more vehicles on local highways. Then there is the terrible design of the surface street grid across much of the metro. No access controls at all. Every driveway, side street, etc just empties out directly onto main arterials. Conflict ensues. Traffic jams on the freeways can actually be caused by gridlock taking place down on the surface streets next to the freeways. But let's build some damned bike paths to solve the f***king problem!! Morons.

Like it or not, all the major highways going in, out and around the Austin-San Antonio megapolis will need to be upgraded and expanded. The upgrades will be critical if the forecast claiming that region will double in population by 2040 comes true. That would be over 10 million people. There's already over 5 million in that region now. Not only will the highways need serious attention, but so will many of the surface streets. Major surface arterials move traffic far better when traffic signals are spaced far apart and access to lesser side streets and driveways are cut off or at least greatly limited. There has to be at least some traffic filtering on the surface street level. We see some of this design in much newer suburban developments. Houston has been a big city for so long you pretty much have to drive clear out to The Woodlands to see any such street design.

They can try building light rail and commuter rail service in the Austin-San Antonio megapolis. Doing so costs so damned much money and will only offer limited benefits. That's because the region is so spread out and was built with personal motor vehicles in mind. The combo of rail travel and walking works in very few places in the US. It doesn't even work everywhere in Europe either.

GaryV

I see ASA and I'm back in high school geometry studying congruent triangles.

Finrod

Quote from: cbalducc on July 30, 2023, 11:14:59 PM
San Austinio?

Could just go with San Austin, or San AntAustin?  The latter looks silly but seems easy to say.
Internet member since 1987.

Hate speech is a nonsense concept; the truth is hate speech to those that hate the truth.

People who use their free speech to try to silence others' free speech are dangerous fools.

Road Hog


thisdj78

Balcones Metroplex (I think I may like this one better than my first suggestion of Central Texas Metroplex)
or Hill Country Metroplex (though the words country and metroplex together is an oxymoron)

hotdogPi

Quote from: thisdj78 on August 09, 2023, 08:29:59 AM
(though the words country and metroplex together is an oxymoron)

Different definition of "country", but isn't this what Singapore and the adjacent land in Malaysia are?
Clinched, minus I-93 (I'm missing a few miles and my file is incorrect)

Traveled, plus US 13, 44, and 50, and several state routes

I will be in Burlington VT for the eclipse.

StogieGuy7

#34
Quote from: thisdj78 on August 09, 2023, 08:29:59 AM
Balcones Metroplex (I think I may like this one better than my first suggestion of Central Texas Metroplex)
or Hill Country Metroplex (though the words country and metroplex together is an oxymoron)

That's all fun stuff, but it's never going to be like D/FW because Austin and SA are each distinct metropolitan areas each with their own center and their own culture. They may blend together and, in that respect, form a "megalopolis" but it won't be like the "Metroplex" which is - in essence - a single huge metropolitan area. Think more like New York/Philly or Chicago/Milwaukee or LA/San Diego.

jgb191

More than eighty miles separates Austin and San Antonio.  Maybe similar distance to those of Oakland and Sacramento, Philadelphia and Newark, Denver and CO Springs, Chicago and Milwaukee, and Orlando and Tampa.  Correct me if I'm way off on those pairings.

I like the idea of each city having its own airport instead of a shared airport.  Although if they were to share the same airport, their combined passenger numbers would be approaching those numbers at IAH and SFO putting it in the top 15 busiest; it would also be the busiest non-hub airport in the nation (should Delta add a hub in the hypothetically combined airport that would easily make it among the top ten busiest).
We're so far south that we're not even considered "The South"

ethanhopkin14

Quote from: StogieGuy7 on August 09, 2023, 09:44:58 AM
Quote from: thisdj78 on August 09, 2023, 08:29:59 AM
Balcones Metroplex (I think I may like this one better than my first suggestion of Central Texas Metroplex)
or Hill Country Metroplex (though the words country and metroplex together is an oxymoron)

That's all fun stuff, but it's never going to be like D/FW because Austin and SA are each distinct metropolitan areas each with their own center and their own culture. They may blend together and, in that respect, form a "megalopolis" but it won't be like the "Metroplex" which is - in essence - a single huge metropolitan area. Think more like New York/Philly or Chicago/Milwaukee or LA/San Diego.

My only rebuttal is that Dallas and Fort Worth are very different culturally.  Dallas is still big money, real estate and insurance, high paced and now jumping on the trend of being a playground for trust fund babies while Fort Worth still seems to cling to their cow town past.  Sure, there is a bit of both in each, but as for a whole, Dallas and Fort Worth have always felt like two distinct cities, not satellite versions of each other. 

Bobby5280

There are numerous examples of Binary Cities in the US. Minneapolis-St Paul, Davenport-Moline, Midland-Odessa, Gulfport-Biloxi, Tampa-St Petersburg, Allentown-Bethlehem, etc.

Dallas-Fort Worth are technically still binary cities (even with their own separate skyscraper skylines), but the DFW metroplex is a bit unique for how so many of its "suburbs" have turned into cities. Arlington, Irving, Garland, etc all feel very urban now. I think the SF Bay Area is the only other multi-city region in the US that is comparable. But growth in the Bay Area is somewhat limited by geographic features (not to mention horribly high living costs). The DFW metroplex still has lots of room grow. The metroplex will likely pass the 8 million mark in population before 2030.

ethanhopkin14

Quote from: Bobby5280 on August 10, 2023, 02:26:43 PM
There are numerous examples of Binary Cities in the US. Minneapolis-St Paul, Davenport-Moline, Midland-Odessa, Gulfport-Biloxi, Tampa-St Petersburg, Allentown-Bethlehem, etc.

Dallas-Fort Worth are technically still binary cities (even with their own separate skyscraper skylines), but the DFW metroplex is a bit unique for how so many of its "suburbs" have turned into cities. Arlington, Irving, Garland, etc all feel very urban now. I think the SF Bay Area is the only other multi-city region in the US that is comparable. But growth in the Bay Area is somewhat limited by geographic features (not to mention horribly high living costs). The DFW metroplex still has lots of room grow. The metroplex will likely pass the 8 million mark in population before 2030.

Then you have Rio Grande Valley that is like a continuous stream of suburbs with no anchor cities. 

Bobby5280

I don't think many Americans realize more than a million people live in that cluster of small cities in the South end of Texas.

Stephane Dumas

Quote from: thisdj78 on August 09, 2023, 08:29:59 AM
Balcones Metroplex (I think I may like this one better than my first suggestion of Central Texas Metroplex)
or Hill Country Metroplex (though the words country and metroplex together is an oxymoron)

How about "Balconeplex" or Balconplex, depending of the spelling? ^_^;

jgb191

Quote from: Bobby5280 on August 11, 2023, 04:14:18 PM
I don't think many Americans realize more than a million people live in that cluster of small cities in the South end of Texas.

Hidalgo County alone is approaching a million; plus if you add Cameron, Willacy, and Starr Counties, the RGV area totals up to almost 1.4 million.
We're so far south that we're not even considered "The South"

US 89

Quote from: Bobby5280 on August 10, 2023, 02:26:43 PM
There are numerous examples of Binary Cities in the US. Minneapolis-St Paul, Davenport-Moline, Midland-Odessa, Gulfport-Biloxi, Tampa-St Petersburg, Allentown-Bethlehem, etc.

Dallas-Fort Worth are technically still binary cities (even with their own separate skyscraper skylines), but the DFW metroplex is a bit unique for how so many of its "suburbs" have turned into cities. Arlington, Irving, Garland, etc all feel very urban now. I think the SF Bay Area is the only other multi-city region in the US that is comparable. But growth in the Bay Area is somewhat limited by geographic features (not to mention horribly high living costs). The DFW metroplex still has lots of room grow. The metroplex will likely pass the 8 million mark in population before 2030.

Seattle-Tacoma is pretty comparable. Bellevue is a "suburb" type city with its own high-rise skyline.


Bobby5280

The Seattle-Tacoma region is a legitimately large binary city metro. But like the San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose region additional growth is limited by geography. Living costs aren't as high as the Bay Area, but they're still pretty high. The DFW metroplex has had the advantage of a whole lot of wide open territory ready for additional development. If housing costs grew too expensive in one area there would always be other more affordable areas where newly arriving residents could choose to live. That's how the DFW turned into the 4th biggest metro area in the US. In current trends continue the DFW metroplex will eventually pass Chicagoland to be the 3rd most populous metro in the US.



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.