Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 04-16-2014, 09:58 PM
 
Location: Minneapolis (St. Louis Park)
5,993 posts, read 10,192,034 times
Reputation: 4407

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spade View Post
Love how I am seeing that a great many if not most of the development is in Downtown Houston. Definitely the hottest market of the city right now.
Pardon my ignorance, but I thought Houston and Dallas were among the few U.S. cities that have notably stronger suburban growth compared to urban growth. Not hi-rise growth per se, but just overall units.

And that would make a ton of sense, considering both cities are on pace to add 1.0 to 1.5 million people this decade, and they can't all live in the city, or especially downtown.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-16-2014, 10:24 PM
 
6,843 posts, read 10,966,660 times
Reputation: 8436
Quote:
Originally Posted by Min-Chi-Cbus View Post
Pardon my ignorance, but I thought Houston and Dallas were among the few U.S. cities that have notably stronger suburban growth compared to urban growth. Not hi-rise growth per se, but just overall units.

And that would make a ton of sense, considering both cities are on pace to add 1.0 to 1.5 million people this decade, and they can't all live in the city, or especially downtown.
Houston and Dallas have more multifamily permits issued each year than every city (save for New York) and both also have more single family home permits than every other city too.

They are doing both, building up and densification of the core 50-170 square miles as well as continuing to go out into the horizon with single family homes. The difference from 2000-2010 is that now they're doing both (building up and spreading out) instead of just building cul-de-sacs and master planned communities like the decade before hand.

Either way, the areas they're spreading out in already exist, it's more like even the single family neighborhoods will fill in the "open fields" gaps more so than going further out passed last decades mark.

Either way, housing in general is needed in both cities. They only have 2.5 months supply of housing left and property values have appreciated 12% year over year, developers cant find the labor market needed to build on time and that's why both of their population growth has slowed down. There simply isn't enough housing presently for 150,000 people per year, so they have to settle with 110,000-120,000-130,000 people per year instead until more housing comes online and stabilizes eroding inventory and price increases. In addition, for Houston in particular, it's entire inventory of office space (the good Class A office space, not Class B or Class C - inferior products) has been wiped out and more is needed (70% of the pipeline is pre-committed). Miami is the same way, growth has slowed from anticipated amounts because of the housing shortage. It wont go back to normal until the market's prices stabilize and more housing is available.

I saw both places together in February, traffic is worse than I've ever seen it. It honestly looks like Washington DC and the DMV area now, which is not a good thing. I can see why DART's (Dallas Area Rapid Transit) ridership on rail increased by 30,000 randomly last year.

Last edited by Trafalgar Law; 04-16-2014 at 11:11 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-16-2014, 10:56 PM
 
Location: Philadelphia, PA
8,700 posts, read 14,698,612 times
Reputation: 3668
Quote:
Originally Posted by benleis View Post
For anyone who like me is more interested in pictures of what's currently being built. Check out: Seattle Aerial Photography. This has some aerial pictures from a few a days ago. About half way through the sequence you can see around South Lake Union where the constructions projects are most dense and there can be 10 cranes in a frame.
Very beautiful. Seattle is a very beautiful city and all of these new projects are really expanding the skyline!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-18-2014, 04:09 PM
 
Location: The City
22,378 posts, read 38,925,770 times
Reputation: 7976
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobjonesHS View Post
What is different about it? I haven't been back in over a decade, but there was so much decay when I last was there it must have changed at a pretty rapid rate to be spoken of so highly. Could you post some projects going on in D.C.? Is there anything on the scale of the beltline in Atlanta?

What about some of the other cities like Philly and San Fran? Anybody know anything about them?
DC is growing at a pretty astronomical rate right now - probably more impactful at the core punch than just about anywhere - has changed dramtically in the last 10-15 years - moreso than probably any other larger city

on Philly or SF - nope nada - move along
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-18-2014, 06:43 PM
 
Location: Austin
1,795 posts, read 3,167,649 times
Reputation: 1255
Houston is just a monster! Seems like every corner of that city. Something is being built, as well as the DFW.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-18-2014, 07:37 PM
 
Location: Atlanta ,GA
9,067 posts, read 15,798,960 times
Reputation: 2980
Here is the breakdown of construction spending per city:
1.NYC $8.5B(2012 $20b)
2.Dallas 5.2b
3.Houston 4.8b
4.Washington D.C. 4.6b(2012 9.6b!)
5.Atlanta 3.6b(2012 $4.9b)
6.L.A. 3.2b(2012-7.4b)
7.Miami $2.8b
8.Phoenix $2.6b
9.Boston $2.6b(2012 $6.7b)
10.Chicago $2.4b (2012 $7.1b)
13.Seattle $2.1b*(2012 $5.3b)

Full list here:
Seattle, Wash. - In Photos: The 20 U.S. Cities With The Most New Construction - Forbes
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-18-2014, 07:41 PM
 
Location: Atlanta ,GA
9,067 posts, read 15,798,960 times
Reputation: 2980
Quote:
Originally Posted by Min-Chi-Cbus View Post
Pardon my ignorance, but I thought Houston and Dallas were among the few U.S. cities that have notably stronger suburban growth compared to urban growth. Not hi-rise growth per se, but just overall units.

And that would make a ton of sense, considering both cities are on pace to add 1.0 to 1.5 million people this decade, and they can't all live in the city, or especially downtown.
Umm...YES!They can!Houston and Dallas are HUGE land wise.Not dense at all

I would bet having a city that is over 300 sq miles will get you as many projects as a more densely populated city that is 150 square miles
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-18-2014, 11:14 PM
 
7,132 posts, read 9,136,869 times
Reputation: 6338
I highly doubt Houston or the Dallas city propers will grow 1-1.5 million at all from 2010-2020. The cities would have to go under some serious densification and there would have to be 10s of thousands of units being produced maybe a year? No way.

He's right. The greater proportion of people moving to those metros are headed for the suburbs. If they were all headed for the central city or even the city proper, then their cores would be so walkable and dense by now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-18-2014, 11:22 PM
 
Location: Mishawaka, Indiana
7,010 posts, read 11,976,447 times
Reputation: 5813
1. Houston/Dallas
2. D.C.
3. Atlanta
4. LA
5. Chicago
6. St. Paul/Minneapolis
7. San Francisco

After that, no other cities really register.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-18-2014, 11:24 PM
 
Location: Mishawaka, Indiana
7,010 posts, read 11,976,447 times
Reputation: 5813
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ant131531 View Post
I highly doubt Houston or the Dallas city propers will grow 1-1.5 million at all from 2010-2020. The cities would have to go under some serious densification and there would have to be 10s of thousands of units being produced maybe a year? No way.

He's right. The greater proportion of people moving to those metros are headed for the suburbs. If they were all headed for the central city or even the city proper, then their cores would be so walkable and dense by now.

I agree.

Except that no matter how many people move to Houston and Dallas they will not become dense and extremely walkable cities, it isn't how they were built or designed. They're sunbelt cities and they will remain spaced out with less dense down towns and sprawling suburbs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top