Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Does Denver have anything that matches the contiguous urbanity of the McKinney corridor? Colfax or Broadway maybe, but they're much wider and have more of that sun-belty vibe.
I think if you focus on Dallas' urban core, it is actually more classically urban in feel, and gives off more of a big city vibe.
McKinney in that image is more sunbelt because it's all new build, Colfax and Broadway have older architecture in the examples you gave. Something similar to that street view of McKinney might be Welton St.
Hard decision for me but I am going to go with Dallas. At least if we are talking about city limits alone. Denver has a few blocks within its downtown that are definitely more traditional urban. Dallas has no match for that portion. But that portion really isn’t that big in all honesty. Dallas’ Uptown, Discovery Plaza, etc put it at the top.
People here are saying the obvious that Dallas is a very car centric metro. But have you been to Denver? LMAO
Hard decision for me but I am going to go with Dallas. At least if we are talking about city limits alone. Denver has a few blocks within its downtown that are definitely more traditional urban. Dallas has no match for that portion. But that portion really isn’t that big in all honesty. Dallas’ Uptown, Discovery Plaza, etc put it at the top.
People here are saying the obvious that Dallas is a very car centric metro. But have you been to Denver? LMAO
Dallas is more suburban over its entire metro than Denver is, even accounting for size. Dallas' core isn't all the big either.
Discovery Plaza in the middle of downtown Dallas? I'm not sure that puts it over the top. And how much better is Uptown than Capitol Hill? Cap Hill definitely seems like a older, classic neighborhood.
Hard decision for me but I am going to go with Dallas. At least if we are talking about city limits alone. Denver has a few blocks within its downtown that are definitely more traditional urban. Dallas has no match for that portion. But that portion really isn’t that big in all honesty. Dallas’ Uptown, Discovery Plaza, etc put it at the top.
People here are saying the obvious that Dallas is a very car centric metro. But have you been to Denver? LMAO
Yea, it seems like the area in the daytime of those videos aren't all that busy, but perhaps it's more of a nightlife district.
There's some nightlife there, but most of Uptown's is a little bit south. That particular area is definitely busy on weekends (daytime - 11pm). It's the tail end of the McKinney Ave. Trolley so you get a lot of people either starting or ending there on their way to/from Klyde Warren Park/Arts District. The Katy Trail is also fairly close.
During the week, it depends on the time of day. Lunchtime is reasonably busy but the busiest is from 3:30pm-onwards. That's when you have school letting out, late afternoon/early evening rush hour, people going out for dinner/happy hour or other services (e.g. barbershops, shopping).
Denver feels more urban but Dallas feels substantially bigger. I think the gap in urbanity between Denver and Dallas is not big enough to offset the size difference so I voted Dallas. Dallas also has a solid core for a sunbelt city.
Does it though? I haven't been in a decade and it seems to have improved but so has everywhere else. Dallas is the 4th largest MSA, but smaller sunbelt MSAs like Miami, Atlanta, San Diego, and Houston have better cores. Has Austin's core passed Dallas'? Nashville?
Does it though? I haven't been in a decade and it seems to have improved but so has everywhere else. Dallas is the 4th largest MSA, but smaller sunbelt MSAs like Miami, Atlanta, San Diego, and Houston have better cores. Has Austin's core passed Dallas'? Nashville?
I’m not sure if you came before or just after Klyde Warren Park was completed. But here’s an interesting article about growth in Dallas’ core
Details: The Atlanta Fed compared the six years before and after construction of Klyde Warren Park to see if the pace of other development grew.
The researcher used six other Sunbelt Cities — Atlanta, Austin, Houston, Fort Worth, Nashville and San Antonio — as a control group.
By the numbers: Dallas added 50% more square feet of office space in the six years after the park was built compared to the six years before and two times as many multifamily units.
Compared to other Texas cities, Dallas' multifamily construction grew 42% faster.
Dallas did even better when compared to all the other six cities, with 51% faster multifamily construction.
From the link in the article
Quote:
Relative to its peers, Dallas experienced faster office and multifamily construction growth after lid construction began in 2012. Dallas added 1.3 million square feet of office space, a rate that is 50 percent faster than what occurred in the six prior years. Multifamily housing (apartments and condominiums in buildings with 5 or more units) grew even faster. Dallas added nearly 5,300 individual multifamily units after starting the lid, more than twice as many units as the six years before. I should note, though, that this period spans the housing market collapse of 2008. However, most large southern cities were doing well after 2012 as their economies slowly recovered from the Great Recession and developers took advantage of low interest rates. Still, compared to the control group cities, Dallas appeared to outperform. If we subtract the percentage growth in office and multifamily space from that of other large southern cities—either just in Texas or pooling all seven cities together—the growth in Dallas still looks exceptional. Compared to other Texas cities, Dallas office space grew 18 percent faster and multifamily grew 42 percent faster. In percentage growth terms Dallas's performance looks even better when we include Atlanta and Nashville in the control group, suggesting that whatever immediate growth that happened around the park did not simply divert growth from elsewhere in the city.
I also looked at the annual growth relative to 2012 for each city's hotels and retail space. Hotel room growth was weaker in Dallas than in peer cities, suggesting that new hotels built near the park might have come at the expense of other locations in the city and did not represent a net addition to supply. Perhaps parks are simply a more attractive amenity to residents than tourists, or maybe—given the relatively brief exposure—tourists were more indifferent to freeway noise and pollution ex ante. Retail growth never recovered after the Great Recession, but it didn't look particularly worse in Dallas than for the control group of cities.
Of course, none of this evidence is definitive. Cities are complex, and numerous idiosyncratic factors affect a cities labor demand, attractiveness to workers or their capacity to supply new houses and offices. Still, when looking at investment activity, Dallas's growth in multifamily and housing and office construction is at least consistent with the idea that building the Klyde Warren Park lid over the freeway in downtown Dallas made the city a more attractive place to live and work.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
