Dallas Development/Growth Question

[Acntx]

Originally Posted by DabOnEm

I think what will be interesting is how these areas (specifically on the Dallas side) develop in the future since the housing won't be as mixed. Outside of the hilly areas near Cedar Hill and JPL where custom home lots are selling out fast, the entire south side of the Dallas area is full of tract starter home neighborhoods. I wonder how it'll mature in the future. No clue why the the south side wasn't the most favored either because Collin County has the least interesting landscape in all of DFW, but maybe that's what made it easier to develop.

The southern half of DFW is a broad area spanning multiple cities and towns, each with their own development plans for future growth and housing. As with any vast part of a major metropolitan area, there are starter home neighborhoods, established neighborhoods, newer neighborhoods, upscale areas with custom homes, and communities with zoning that favors large-lot residential development over the typical high-growth, sprawl model that many places embrace at some point.

The northern suburbs (and mid-cities) have all of this as well, including tract home communities going up on the fringes of the metro that require lengthy commutes to existing job centers. The fate of tract starter home neighborhoods south of Dallas will follow the trends seen elsewhere across the region. Some will age better than others. Some will not. Those with more desirable traits, such as better schools, low crime, proximity to existing or new employment hubs will continue to be sought after.

[dixjohe]

Areas south of DFW with suburbs like Waxahachie, Midlothian, and Mansfield will continue to fill with residential housing.
East suburbs like Terrell, and Forney will also continue to fill in.
The north will continue its projectory to the Oklahoma border. Tons of development along the planned DNT. Sherman and Denison will be engulfed in the process. Surrounding areas east of Preston will be developed if haven't. Bryan County Oklahoma will get in on some of the growth as it slows down.

[barnicles]

This was touched on briefly but the real reason is actually due to the topography more than anything else. The city and suburbs are on a slight incline. The farther north you go, the higher your are in terms of elevation. Like the issue with the trinity river, when you come to try to deal with sewage treatment for an entire metroplex, you need to go higher, and let things flow down. Developers run into much more expensive projects when they are trying to pump things up. So the city build UP from the Trinity River, and yes the poorest neighborhoods were built much lower in elevation and thus sitting on the sewer plane initially....

It's really as simple as that. Sherman sits at just about the highest elevation in Texas and then it lowers consistently until you get to sea level.... That's why going north is always more desirable for developers.

EDITh, I just realized this is an old question. Well... still good info.