The consolidation of San Antonio and Austin into a single statistical “megaregion” offers some obvious appeal to civic boosters and those concerned about future economic growth. While San Antonio’s national profile has increased in recent years, we are realistically the fourth city that comes to mind when most outsiders think of Texas.
San Antonio is actually larger than Austin in metropolitan population, but we still rank only either 25th or 29th among regions nationally, depending upon the metric. A combination of San Antonio and Austin, on the other hand, would today rank 15th and could be among the Top 10 by 2050 based on a continuation of current growth rates.
From a national and global perspective, a region comprising five or six million people in the next decade or so would attract more attention and opportunities than two separate regions of two or three million each. In one case, we’re in the same league as Seattle or Atlanta; in the other case we stack up against Indianapolis or Cincinnati.
It is easy to imagine the benefits that could result from a melding of the two cities into a single integrated region – with more corporate headquarters, international business, air travel, and professional sport franchise options among a few of the more obvious ones.
It also is easy to assume this future is more or less inevitable when one observes the nearly uninterrupted commercial development along IH-35 between San Antonio and Austin or notices the presence of both cities and the counties in between, in the rankings of the fastest growing places in America.
Intrigued by the impact this greater regional identity could have on the future of San Antonio, I set out to examine the question of how close a San Antonio-Austin megaregion is to becoming a reality.
While measuring metropolitan or regional identity is an inexact science, the Census Bureau has developed the most widely accepted and cited system for categorizing metropolitan regions.
For the purpose of this discussion, the two relevant categories used by the Census Bureau are Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSA) and Combined Statistical Areas (CSA). MSAs are defined as counties with a “high degree of social and economic integration (as measured by commuting to work) with the urban core.” The MSA for San Antonio, for example, comprises Bexar County (the urban core) and the seven surrounding counties.
CSAs, on the other hand, are often agglomerations of two or more MSAs that have a degree of social and economic integration, but not as much as in an MSA. For example, while San Francisco and San Jose each comprise separate MSAs, they are part of a single CSA – the “San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, Calif. Combined Statistical Area” – which ranks fifth nationally in population.
One way, then, of answering the question of how close a San Antonio-Austin megaregion is to becoming a reality is to answer the question of how close they are to becoming a single CSA. Contrary to my expectations, it turns out that the answer to this question is: not very close at all.
Some additional explanation of the data and methodology used to arrive at this conclusion is set out at the end of this article. As a general matter, however, the data shows that the level of interaction between Austin and San Antonio needs to increase more than 500% from the current level reflected by the most recent data before we could start referring to a San Antonio-Austin CSA.
While one might expect this gap to close along with the rapid growth in Hays, Comal, and Guadalupe counties, some statistical projections, which also are explained below, suggest that the current growth in those areas will not move the needle significantly. Moreover, an argument also can be made that the core areas of San Antonio and Austin are actually growing further apart due to the increasing congestion along IH-35.
For example, if a typical daytime trip between downtown Austin and downtown San Antonio ends up taking two-and-a-half hours – not unheard of these days and certainly possible in the future with all the growth along the corridor – then it almost makes as much sense to talk about a Houston-San Antonio CSA as it does to talk about one for San Antonio and Austin.
Despite these sobering statistics and realities, I still believe it is important for San Antonio’s future to plan for greater integration with Austin, and I hope to see this become a reality. While the 74 miles between the centers of the cities are certainly an obstacle to overcome, technology exists today that would permit San Antonio and Austin to function more as an integrated region by way of commuter rail, for instance. Additionally, advances in technology, including those already underway – think driverless cars – should make this even more feasible in the future.
Moreover, I think the benefits that could accrue from succeeding at this endeavor are extraordinary. Done right, it is not hard to imagine two unique cities sharing world-class amenities and a dynamic economy, interconnected by a transportation system that allows residents and visitors to experience the best of San Antonio, the best of Austin, and the best of the Hill County as part of a daily or weekly routine.
An identifiable Austin-San Antonio region also would be a place literally and figuratively on the map in ways that the two separate cities would not. While Austin and San Antonio can both claim to be great cities with a lot to offer individually, together they have the potential to form one of the most dynamic and culturally rich regions in the United States. Perhaps, even the first place people think of when they think of Texas.
Grasping this future is not only a challenge, but it seems very unlikely to happen by accident. Rather, it will require deliberate, thoughtful, and bold action by community leaders to lay the groundwork for this integration, and progress will be seen over decades, not years.
Explanation of Data Cited Above
A statistics mechanism called the “Employment Interchange Measure” is used to determine whether two MSAs should be part of a single CSA. The “Employment Interchange Measure” is determined as “the sum of the percentage of employed residents of the smaller entity who work in the larger entity and the percentage of the employment in the smaller entity that is accounted for by workers who reside in the larger entity.” Adjacent MSAs are made part of a CSA when the Employment Interchange Measure between the two areas exceeds 15%. Further information on these concepts can be found here.
The most recent data regarding commuting between counties is from 2006-2010 and can be found here. By aggregating the available data for the various counties comprising the Austin and San Antonio MSAs, I calculated an Employment Interchange Measure of 2.5% for a hypothetical San Antonio-Austin CSA. This figure equals the percentage of total workers residing in the Austin MSA, the smaller entity, that work in the San Antonio MSA (0.88%) plus the percentage of total workers employed in the Austin MSA that reside in the San Antonio MSA (1.62%).
In order to roughly estimate the potential impact of growth along the IH-35 corridor since 2006-2010, I multiplied the commuting data from 2006-2010 for each county in the San Antonio and Austin MSAs by the estimated population growth rate for each such county between 2010 and 2015, thus, making an attempt to capture the impact of the rapid growth in Hays, Comal, and Guadalupe counties. Surprisingly, this made little difference with the Employment Interchange Measure which remained stuck at 2.5% even if these growth rates were assumed to continue through 2020.
The lack of projected change seems due to the influence of rapid growth in all portions of the Austin MSA, including areas that do not have a high interchange with the San Antonio MSA like Williamson County. This means that under the assumed growth rates, the percentage of workers employed in the Austin MSA that reside in the San Antonio MSA actually declines, despite a significant increase in the raw numbers of those commuting to the Austin MSA from the San Antonio MSA.
Top image: A yield sign is posted near the High 281 North to Loop 1604 interchange. Photo by Scott Ball.
Related Stories:
Austin Poised to Become First ‘Sanctuary City’ In Texas
Commentary: Austin, San Antonio Would Benefit From a Regional Airport
Karl,
I do love dreamers and I sincerely hope you will not lose your ability to do so. In the meantime, please don’t be too disappointed or surprised when the people at large decide to do something other than what you expect.
Thanks for your comment. It is a long range vision, but I think it is achievable if people really want it. I think the idea of the DFW metroplex or the greater San Francisco bay area seemed pretty far fetched once upon a time too, and now those regions are firmly ingrained in the upper echelons of regional economies worldwide. I guess my main point here was that if people want this future, we probably can’t just sit around and wait for it to happen because it could easily never happen .
Very enjoyable read. Thank you, Mr. Baker.
Rail is of utmost importance. In the City of San Antonio, but also between the big Texas cities.
Thank you! I support rail as it seems to make a lot of sense. I’m not sure how to get there but have no doubt that we can get there if a real commitment is made. It sort of boggles the mind when you think of the infrastructure projects that were completed in the 19th century (transcontinental railroad) in a fraction of the time that has been spent just talking about passenger rail between Austin and San Antonio.
Great writing and very well put together! Thank you. A CSA consideration probably is as simple as “get me here from there in 30 minutes.” That I believe is the biggest game changer. Quite a bit of potential and many pieces to put together. My wife and myself are considering a condo in downtown Austin when we see some definitive transportation plans to and from our great cities.
Thank you, Guillermo. 30 minutes would be fantastic. However, I would be happy with 60 or 70 minutes without having to worry about traffic or delays and being able to work or read along the way in a stress free environment. That would be a big improvement from what we have now, which is really only getting worse.
Instead of spending billions on fixes to draw us closer to those weirdos up North, perhaps we should go old school and put everyone on scooters.
Think three wheelers like the Mitsubishi Spider; Harley-style trikes with sidecars if you are saddled with a significant other or lucky enough to have a dog; the new electric Bolt out of California for those who want to save the environment; glossy, super efficient Italian Vespas for those who want to pay more for that old money look, etc, etc… With the proper saddlebags, windshields, and rain gear – San Antonio would kick start every economy known to man – rev those economic engines, so to speak. And we could allow the existing rail lines to haul the heavy loads and get on with the ‘bidness of Texas.
I define a heavy load for the purpose of this comment/argument as the people with antique mindsets who hang out at the Pink Dome. Those staffers and lobbyists and elected officials who pretend time is not passing and write/attempt to pass/actually pass Bill of Rights infringing bills all while knowing they are just cluttering up the courts with ACLU/CCR/Southern Poverty Law Center challenges.
Even without lane splitting, the commute from downtown San Antonio to Downtown Austin an be done on a motorcycle at any hour in 90 minutes or less if the rider knows the roads well enough and has a GPS equipped smart phone with a decent data plan.
Conclusion: I-35 has never been the only way to waddle ones way to Austin and San Antonio has never needed that silly, bullsh*t slinging town. And don’t even get me started on Houston and their addiction to dino blood and energy pyramid schemes.
But nice article overall. Data is always useful, even if you disagree with the conclusions drawn from it.
GUILLERMO,
Do you and your wife live in downtown San Antonio?
Yes. My office is downtown and my home is North Central. Austin is being considered as a second home.
I’ve thought about this often since I once heard Graham Weston mention it in a speech years ago. He said that one of the biggest mistakes that leaders in both SA and Austin failed to do decades ago was develop & market the cities as one diverse economic region.
I don’t think it’s too late, and Karl–I really appreciate you bringing this up. It is a 20 year vision, but one that would yield huge gains in the long-term. We should start the conversation with city leaders.
It is good to know other folks are thinking about the same topic and I don’t think anything is too late either. One of the interesting things about this research for me is that it actually contradicted some preconceived notions I had in the sense that had assumed that the cities really were tied together in a more meaningful way and that it was just a matter of time until we started thinking of them as part of a single region. Now, I don’t think it is “just a matter of time” but rather something that easily could or could not happen. I think the first step is for people to understand what is at stake and that choices will determine the outcome. Send me a email if you want to visit more sometime.
Why think small regarding either a SA-Austin mega region or a SA-Houston mega region. How about a SA-Austin-Houston mega mega region. If your going to dream, dream big.
I personally think a SA-Austin region is more viable with the distance between center cities being more than double in the case of SA and Houston. Maybe the day will come when travel back and forth to Houston can be done in an hour or so but I have a harder time seeing it now.
DFW International is one of that area’s linchpins, but its development hasn’t been a completely smooth ride. Although Love Field has been a blessing to the city of Dallas, I think it’s fair to say that it has also, to a certain degree, antagonized DFW International’s full potential. I believe a regional airport of the same type, connected to both cities with high speed rail, would be a boon for San Antonio-Austin. There was probably a window of opportunity to plan such a project before Austin built their new airport and San Antonio proceeded with its expansion. Looking ahead, either of these city airports could easily become, like Love Field, a complicating factor towards the establishment of a regional facility. Your thoughts on a regional airport?
As you identified, the airport question is complicated and I wouldn’t pretend to understand what goes into developing an airport. For me personally, I find the convenience of SAT really nice but have occasionally traveled to AUS for direct flights. At this stage, my guess is that the sunk costs in both city airports is too much to abandon to create an entirely new airport. I also think a lot of regions nationally have multiple airports (but usually one major international one) and perhaps that is the future here as well (my money being on AUS to be the one to assume that role ). I would also add that just because DFW had something to do with the integration of Dallas and Fort Worth, this doesn’t mean the same has to apply to San Antonio and Austin.
I think a regional airport might really make sense in 20 to 30 years and it probably make sense to look at doing some long-range planning so there are potential locations available.
You forget that if San Antonio ever decided to secede from Texas, we are an airport super power in our own right when you count all the C-130s, et al that can roll down our strips.
All the combining and co-joining and joint basing in the world won’t disguise or eliminate the well maintained tarmac, the air wings (fixed and rotary) and all that built for stout hangar space sitting pretty inside Bexar County. Think a little on all those little federal pockets we call Lackland, Kelly, Randolph, Ft Sam, Camp Bullis, etc, etc.
And recall that the City of San Antonio and the County Commissioners are always cutting deals with the DOD with give and take on both sides.
In comparison, Austin is a yappy little Chihuahua annoying the well fed and rested Rottweiler to the south. And so Atlas shrugs.
Great article; mega political headwinds. There was a plan in the late ’80s to build a regional airport East of 35 and link both cities with high speed rail. Obviously Bergstrom closing changed that.
We just lost the possibility of Rail due to RR not wanted to share tracks….lots of issues to chew on in my opinion.
Lastly, Fort Worth and Dallas have managed to retain their very distinct identity as the two cities “merged”. Perhaps because it has been in progress for many decades. My concern, politically, is the ability of a fairly conservative, careful growth “town” like SA, coming to mutual agreements with Austin.
Thanks for the comments. In my view, San Antonio and Austin are likely to always retain very distinct identities regardless of whether they ever combine to form a “megaregion.” The question for me is not whether the cities merge into “one” but rather whether there can also be a integration of the two cities that allows each to benefit significantly from their relative proximity to the other.
You mention commuter statistics. The RMA mentioned the high number of IH 35 commuters back and forth feet wen Austin/SA as well as the cities in between. Any idea how many?
David,
While I can’t post all my data analysis here, all the numbers are available at the link provided to the census website. However, I think the data below should help give you a flavor. For each county, the first number is the total number of persons residing in that county that worked in the other metro (e.g., from Bexar or Comal, these are persons working in the Austin MSA and vis-a-vis for Hays and Travis. The second number is what percentage of the total number of workers residing in that county are represented by the first number. Thus, around 9% of the workers in Comal and Guadalupe are commuting to the Austin MSA (mostly to Travis or Hays County). Likewise, you have about 5% of the folks in Hays commuting to somewhere in the San Antonio MSA.
Bexar County 3,875 0.53%
Comal County 3,742 8.29%
Guadalupe County 5,112 9.08%
Hays County 3,519 5.15%
Travis County 1,842 0.37%
Thus, the total number of persons cross commuting between metros was about 20,000 in 2006-2010. This is certainty not an insignificant number when it comes to impacting traffic along I-35, but it is a fairly small number when one compares it to the approximately 1.7 million workers across both regions as reflected in the same data set.
Misleading to compare DFW, SF Bay Area to SA-Aus. They’re really more like Tampa Bay-Orlando in terms of distance, connectivity by one interstate, and economic separation with some overlap but not as interdependent as it might seem. Maybe NY-Philly or LA-San Diego as other examples. One way to look at it is that Dallas and Ft. Worth are separated by two suburban cities (one in certain areas) while SA and Austin proper are separated by two counties. DFW is one media market and one MPO while SA and Austin are separate. Only recently did SA’s MPO even expand to include New Braunfels. SA and Austin don’t even costume claim to be in the same regions of the state! Doesn’t mean there can’t be syergy and regional cooperation between the two cities, but folks expecting a southcentral TX metroplex will likely be kept waiting. It’s not going to keep me up at night in any case because both cities are strong enough to stand on their own merits regardless of how someone at the OMB classifies them.
David, I basically agree with most of what you are saying here. On the issue of Tampa Bay-Orlando, I agree 100% that this is probably the most apt comparison to what exists between San Antonio and Austin today. In fact, here is a link to a post by someone else comparing the two examples relative to the “mega-region concept” that I found interesting: http://urbanscale.com/blog/5-key-ingredients-create-mega-region/ If you do further research, you’ll find that the same conversation relating to Austin and San Antonio exists with respect to Tampa Bay and Orlando.
My references to DFW or the SF Bay Area were there to explain key concepts (e.g., what is a CSA) but also to illustrate what the economic benefits of a megaregion might be in the future (i.e., explaining what benefits this linkage might have).
Where I would challenge you is the assumption that what was possible in the 1970s dictates what is possible today or 20 years from now. In the case of DFW, I find it interesting to reflect upon the fact that the population of the entire DFW metro area in 1970 (the 1st year Dallas and Fort Worth were combined for statistical purposes) was only 2,424,131 (in other words, about the size of the San Antonio MSA today). Obviously a lot has changed since then but I also think if you were to examine the road infrastructure that existed in 1940, you would have thought a Dallas-Fort Worth metro area of nearly 8 million people was pretty ridiculous as well.
I apologize as I should’ve thanked you for your article. I find this topic fascinating which is why I was compelled to comment.
I agree with you that 400% growth over forty years might have seemed crazy in the 70s, but the idea of one metro was already a reality by that point, with two interstates connecting the two cities and with ground already broken on DFW airport which further accelerated that growth. Keep in mind that up to that point neither Ft. Worth or Dallas could agree on a regional airport and operated separate commercial airports, Meacham and later Amon Carter Field in Ft. Worth and Love Field in Dallas. Amon Carter Field closed, while Love Field stayed open but under the Wright Amendment. This wasn’t Dallas-Ft. Worth’s idea, but rather the Federal Government which wanted to consolidate air travel in the region to save money.
And while I agree that conditions changed dramatically from the 1940s to the 1970s in terms of road infrastructure, I’d argue that we in 2016 are not on the cusp of a revolution in transportation along the lines of the National Interstate and Defense Highways Act of 1956. I wish that weren’t true but neither of our current Presidential candidates give me much reason to think otherwise.
But lets say I’m wrong and rail is built between SA and Austin in the next decade. If we look at the DFW area, to me it seems like it won’t make much difference in determining how people live and travel in the area, let alone how the area is viewed nationally. To use my family’s situation as an example, we live in Grand Prairie, which is predominantly located in Dallas county. However, we live in the small segment of the city which is located in SE Tarrant County. My wife commutes to South Dallas and I commute to Southlake in Tarrant County. On both of our commutes there is more or less continuous urbanization, much of which has existed for the last 20-50 years. Coming home from Southlake, I take the ramp from Highway 114 to 360 and even on a smoggy day I can easily see both the Dallas and Ft. Worth skylines. The only way I could see the SA and Austin skylines simultaneously is from a plane. I say this because it illustrates the relative convenience of travel between the two cities. Traffic is bad here, sure, but both of our commutes are under an hour and we can get anywhere in the Metroplex proper inside 90 minutes.
Prior to moving here we also looked at jobs in SA and Austin. Lets say my wife had gotten a job in S Austin and I got a job in Stone Oak. Our best option would probably be to live in either New Braunfels or San Marcos. Our commutes would be twice as far as they are now and maybe twice as long. You might say “that’s why we should put in rail.” But currently my wife works at the southern end of the Blue Line in Dallas and my route along Highway 360 crosses under the Trinity Railway Express (commuter rail linking Ft. W and Dallas). DFW has the most comprehensive transit system in Texas and arguably in the entire South but both of these rail lines are largely useless to us unless we want to triple our commute times or move to Irving or Lewisville (even then, I would have to take a bus and walk several miles to keep my job in Southlake). And it’s not just us, because DART’s ride share is something like 4%. But despite the inconvenience of mass transit to us, we’re able to get around relatively easily.
By the way, the TRE began operating between Dallas and Ft. Worth in 1996, almost three decades after DFW officially became a single metropolitan area.
With an SA-Austin rail line the convenience would be even more restricted because the only thing linking the two cities is I-35, with lots of still undeveloped area in between. Neither city is likely to get comprehensive urban rail in the next 10-15 years, whereas Dallas has had the DART system since the 80s. There’s just no way of getting the critical mass transit requires when two cities like SA and Austin are 80 miles apart. Imagine more than doubling the distance between Dallas and Ft. Worth and you’d probably get something that looks a lot like SA and Austin do today, not a fully integrated urban area.
A commuter rail line isn’t going to bridge the gap because any trip which doesn’t originate in one of the corridor cities/suburbs is still going to take way too long for the average commuter to make a job worth it. Consider the location of key employment centers in the two cities. Will you be able to commute between the Medical Center and downtown Austin, or Brooks City Base and Round Rock?
This situation isn’t likely to improve no matter how much money is spent. The NE United States corridor has had high(ish)-speed rail and extensive freeway infrastructure in place for decades, but how many people live in Philadelphia and work in New York City, which are approx 80 miles apart? Those two metros have almost 30 million people between them but you’re much more likely to hear about the Northeast Megalopolis or the I-95 corridor than the NYC-Philly area. You could put 30 million people in SA and Austin and it would be the same story. “Texas Triangle” has achieved national prominence more readily than “San-Austin” or whatever you want to call it. If we’re going to focus on building up identities, it makes more sense to me to build up the entire triangle rather than one corner of it.
Again, this is not to say regional cooperation – maybe including rail – makes no sense in South-Central Texas. It merely illustrates that the intertwining of Dallas and Ft. Worth was inevitable at least as far back as 1956. On the other hand, spreading the urban cores out much further than 30 miles makes that intertwining very unlikely. You might have noted in your article that San Antonio doesn’t even have the commuter interchange to form a CSA with Kerrville, even though Kerrville is 20 miles closer than Austin.
Dallas and Ft. Worth have maintained their separate identities and sub-economies, but in all other respects the area is a single urbanized entity. SA and Austin will continue to grow for the forseeable future while remaining largely independent of each other in just about every respect. Cooperation should happen at a policy level and in areas which could have real benefit like tourism, but if such initiatives don’t make sense economically, then both cities are more than capable of thriving while doing their own thing.
David,
I really appreciate your comments and thinking on this issue and agree with a lot of your assessments. While it seems I see some things differently, I do share some of your skepticism about the current situation based on my research. The core of my article was really geared at debunking the idea that a San Antonio-Austin region was basically an inevitable future just down the road. While it doesn’t seem that you would have ever seen things that way, I do believe there are people here locally that have that idea in their mind.
On the issue of DFW vs. San Antonio-Austin, I agree with a lot of what you are saying but I diverge in the sense that I don’t think it is necessary for San Antonio and Austin to be integrated to the same degree as Dallas and Fort Worth for there to be substantial benefits from some shared regional identity. In the case of Dallas and Forth Worth, they actually have so much cross commuting that they are part of the same MSA. I agree that this future is very far distant. However, I do think a level of interaction sufficient to support a CSA is achievable and realistic but does require long-term investment and commitments.
On the issue of Kerrville, you made me curious so I looked and found that the Employment Interchange between Kerr County and the San Antonio MSA is around 11% per the most recent data. Thus, I wouldn’t be surprised to see a CSA encompassing Kerr County and the San Antonio MSA after the next census on maybe in 2030. However, I don’t think this will do too much to raise the profile of San Antonio outside the context of some select folk music fans 🙂
I am an intern with the Bexar County Democratic Party. We need regional area expansion . I supports the idea of growth in this area of the State of Texas, including a regional San Antonio-San Marcos-New Braunfels-Austin commuter rail line. This would be excellent for future growth of both of these major Texas cities as well as the regional communities located midway between both cities. It would provide excellent regional commuter rail line service for people to/from the Austin-San Antonio metropolitan areas and cut down on automobile traffic.