Who remembers when the “San Austinio” megalopolis didn’t exist? (Houston: moving to, estimates)

[ashbeeigh]

Originally Posted by Suesbal

Did you get my attempt at a joke?

You can never tell online and I haven’t interacted with you before to tell.

[NBTX11]

Originally Posted by yadigggski

It's pretty crazy how much it's developed over the last 5-10 years. I think the only undeveloped area between the two is between Koehlenberg Road in NB and the outlets in San Marcos. Even then it looks like development is creeping into that area. I wonder if it'll ever be a recognized CSA like DC/Baltimore.

And just like that, 6,000 more houses and a major development project going in around Kohlenburg road in New Braunfels, filling in the last empty place between Austin and San Antonio.

Large development eyes New Braunfels area | Community Alert | herald-zeitung.com

[NBTX11]

Originally Posted by Need4Camaro

I just drove between AUS / SATX a few days ago. The areas between the two are up and coming but there is still a lot of rural land between them too. A lot of improvements happening on I-35 though.

It would be difficult for the two to be recognized as a CSA. Baltimore and D.C. are only 35 miles apart from each other. Austin and SATX are about 80 miles apart with a lot of undeveloped land if you move too far from the interstate. D.C. / Baltimore, Dallas / FortWorth, San Francisco / San Jose are completely developed even away from the interstates. It will probably be much like I-35 is driving from San Antonio to DFW. A lot of towns built up between them but no official adjacent established CSA. I don’t know of any CSA’s of two adjacent towns that exist with the distance between Austin and San Antonio.

There is not a lot a lot of undeveloped land. There is a little bit of undeveloped land. New Braunfels has grown from 30 or 35 thousand in the early 2000's to close to 100,000 today.

[Need4Camaro]

Originally Posted by NBTX11

There is not a lot a lot of undeveloped land. There is a little bit of undeveloped land. New Braunfels has grown from 30 or 35 thousand in the early 2000's to close to 100,000 today.

I’m talking about when you get further from I-35. If you look at places like DFW, D.C./Baltimore, San Francisco/San Jose you’ll see that even further away from the highways they are completely built out and once can drive for miles and miles away from the interstate and still be within endless suburbia. Areas between Austin / SATX gets rural very quickly once you leave the proximity of I-35.

More than likely the areas between Austin and San Antonio will be suburban along the interstate similar to how I-35 runs in and out of towns all the way to DFW, just less gaps, but I don’t foresee the two becoming a CSA

[ashbeeigh]

Originally Posted by Need4Camaro

I’m talking about when you get further from I-35. If you look at places like DFW, D.C./Baltimore, San Francisco/San Jose you’ll see that even further away from the highways they are completely built out and once can drive for miles and miles away from the interstate and still be within endless suburbia. Areas between Austin / SATX gets rural very quickly once you leave the proximity of I-35.

More than likely the areas between Austin and San Antonio will be suburban along the interstate similar to how I-35 runs in and out of towns all the way to DFW, just less gaps, but I don’t foresee the two becoming a CSA

What you’re forgetting is that a lot of this “undeveloped land” is family ranch land or large acreage lots. It’s developed already...it’s just spaced out. No one is selling their hilly canyon lake view that they’ve had since 1985 to build condos.

[LocalPlanner]

Originally Posted by ashbeeigh

What you’re forgetting is that a lot of this “undeveloped land” is family ranch land or large acreage lots. It’s developed already...it’s just spaced out. No one is selling their hilly canyon lake view that they’ve had since 1985 to build condos.

Yeah, the eastern Hill Country between SA and Austin doesn't seem rural to me anymore. It's just exurbia.

[Need4Camaro]

Originally Posted by ashbeeigh

What you’re forgetting is that a lot of this “undeveloped land” is family ranch land or large acreage lots. It’s developed already...it’s just spaced out. No one is selling their hilly canyon lake view that they’ve had since 1985 to build condos.

Which is basically the reason it will not become a CSA. Just towns close together.

CSA’s are also typically economically dependent on each other with one city more dominant than another. San Antonio and Austin are not strongly economically co-dependent, they are just fairly close in proximity.

[ashbeeigh]

Originally Posted by Need4Camaro

Which is basically the reason it will not become a CSA. Just towns close together.

CSA’s are also typically economically dependent on each other with one city more dominant than another. San Antonio and Austin are not strongly economically co-dependent, they are just fairly close in proximity.

And I think most natives are okay with that. Texans like their land. We are the size of Germany. And not much of the land is “public” like other states because of our culture of “my rights.”

Originally Posted by LocalPlanner

Yeah, the eastern Hill Country between SA and Austin doesn't seem rural to me anymore. It's just exurbia.

Yep. Marion, Santa Clara, etc. heritage hills in that area and

Las Brisas in seguin come to mind as great neighborhoods that are spread out. No one in those neighborhoods, in 100 years, will be doing what is happening up here in Austin, selling land to add two smaller new builds because people want to live there, like what is happening in Austin.

[Need4Camaro]

Originally Posted by ashbeeigh

And I think most natives are okay with that. Texans like their land. We are the size of Germany. And not much of the land is “public” like other states because of our culture of “my rights.

Never said they wouldn’t be. I personally don’t want it to happen either. One poster asked if Austin and SATX would become a CSA but mainly stated my doubts. The I-35 cooridoor is growing up but the land between in other areas is still very sparsely populated compared to the land between San Jose/San Francisco, Baltimore/D.C. ect ... I think we will be more like Milwaukee/Chicago .. there are seamless towns of suburbia that you pass through between Chicago and Milwaukee along I-94 but the two are not a CSA. The distance between Chicago and Milwaukee are also more similar to Austin and SATX than the other CSA’s I mentioned.

In order for SATX / Austin to become a CSA, 15% of commuters from either metro will have to travel to either metro regularly for work and I personally don’t see that coming to past either.

[NBTX11]

Originally Posted by Need4Camaro

Never said they wouldn’t be. I personally don’t want it to happen either. One poster asked if Austin and SATX would become a CSA but mainly stated my doubts. The I-35 cooridoor is growing up but the land between in other areas is still very sparsely populated compared to the land between San Jose/San Francisco, Baltimore/D.C. ect ... I think we will be more like Milwaukee/Chicago .. there are seamless towns of suburbia that you pass through between Chicago and Milwaukee along I-94 but the two are not a CSA. The distance between Chicago and Milwaukee are also more similar to Austin and SATX than the other CSA’s I mentioned.

In order for SATX / Austin to become a CSA, 15% of commuters from either metro will have to travel to either metro regularly for work and I personally don’t see that coming to past either.

Point taken, however two minor points, Austin and San Antonio are closer together than Chicago and Milwaukee by about 15 miles, and secondly, there is more open space between Chicago and Milwaukee, especially on the Wisconsin side and the Wisconsin side is growing much slower than South Central Texas.