Which cities saw the biggest impact from urban infill development 2010-2020

[Dallaz]

Originally Posted by R1070

I don't view that as being that negative. Those areas with lower walk scores are becoming more dense which will lead to them becoming more walkable.

That’s the same way I view it as well. Philly isn’t a good comparison since it has well established urban density, which Dallas is trying to build.

[Mutiny77]

Originally Posted by masssachoicetts

SEATTLE!

Its crazy how much this city has grown. Yeah Atlanta and Dallas grew a lot, but im not a fan of office park/sprawly growth.

The topic is urban infill, not sprawl. Nobody should be mentioning any city because it had lots of exurban development in recent years.

[dallasboi]

Originally Posted by R1070

I don't view that as being that negative. Those areas with lower walk scores are becoming more dense which will lead to them becoming more walkable.

BINGO!!!.....Dallas is always 10 years ahead of what's seen currently...Cranes follow Cranes....New construction builds value....That 38% could spawn WAYYY more development immediately surrounding it than if those buildings were only built to fill in a hole that is already surrounded by built-up development....We have 68% of that


So......Bottom line.....Both situations are good.

We are completing neighborhoods with progressive urban infill... while creating New Neighborhoods with outlying new start urban-Esq developments.

-------62% extremely walkable Urban infill
-------38% Up-and coming Newly created FUTURE walkable areas.


It's like Highway construction.....The first freeway loop will always be the first boundary created to contain the building patterns in a growing NEW city(or stagnant old city ).

The second loop will always have pushback because it always seems unnecessary and a waste of money built "Out in the BOONDOCKS" .............Until development catches up and reaches it.


I look at that 38% as the new loop...............Until continuous URBAN infill reaches it.



Damn I talk too much!!

[Turnerbro]

Originally Posted by R1070

I don't view that as being that negative. Those areas with lower walk scores are becoming more dense which will lead to them becoming more walkable.

This can be true if they build new urbanism.

[DaBears02]

I think urban infill is more noticeable in sunbelt cities since those developments were most likely replacing strip malls instead of other urban development. I know northern cities are infilling just as fast but the change just seems a lot more noticeable in the south given their starting points. Cities like Atlanta, Charlotte, Houston, Dallas, Austin, Nashville, Miami, etc look substantially more urban than before. I would also add Seattle even though it’s not in the sunbelt. If I had to pick 1 out of all it would be Seattle.

[mhays25]

Dallas is creating urban-looking places where they didn't exist, sure. But how's transit in those places? Do they get into the double digits for transit commutes? And double digits for walking commutes? Or do most people still drive every day, and do the apartments have more parking spaces than units?

[TheProf]

Cleveland