HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     
Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Sep 19, 2019, 10:40 AM
CaliNative CaliNative is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 1,184
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quixote View Post
Toronto's urban development patterns/strategies are unlike anything else in the developed world. That parcel situated between the highway and cemetery... speechless. Propose anything like that in LA (or even OC), and the NIMBYs will be sure to stymie it... thank goodness.
I like the fact that Toronto builds fast. I guess they don't have a "NIMBY" problem. Wish L.A. could build as fast. We need more affordable housing!

Last edited by CaliNative; Sep 19, 2019 at 8:58 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Sep 19, 2019, 1:37 PM
LA21st LA21st is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 3,463
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dariusb View Post
I know when I went to LA in 2013 I didn't recognize it. Previous to that the last time I was there was in 1994! Nearly 7 years later I'm sure the city has changed yet some more.
Yea, the city's mixed use developments have exploded in the past 5 years or so. And there's more foot traffic as a result. And it's still in the early stages of what it's going to be. Even the "sleepy" areas like Palms and Mar Vista are changing fast. West Holllywood, North Hollywood, arts district, Hollywood, Santa Monica, Koreatown South park, Historic core have probably seen the biggest changes for development in last 7 years. I lived in North Hollywood 3 years ago and its changed alot since then.

Last edited by LA21st; Sep 19, 2019 at 1:50 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Sep 19, 2019, 5:21 PM
IrishIllini IrishIllini is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 958
Quote:
Originally Posted by JManc View Post
Yeah Houston and Dallas. See post above. Both densifying pretty rapidly and both were heavily low density sleepy neighborhoods well into city centers. There's parts of them that will remain sprawling and low density but mostly outside the loop in Houston's case. For now.
More than Seattle, Portland, or Denver? I read an article a while ago that said most (if not all) of the growth in metro Houston was outside of Harris County. I’ve read similar article about Dallas. The largest share of the growth is outside of Dallas County.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Sep 19, 2019, 7:01 PM
N90 N90 is online now
Voice of the Modern World
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by IrishIllini View Post
More than Seattle, Portland, or Denver? I read an article a while ago that said most (if not all) of the growth in metro Houston was outside of Harris County. I’ve read similar article about Dallas. The largest share of the growth is outside of Dallas County.
False. Since 2010 Harris County has added 606k people. That's more people in that county than the entire Seattle CSA has added since 2010. And btw, that's more people than all of the suburban Houston counties put together (~ 480k in the suburban counties).

I don't know if Houston is densifying at Seattle rates because Seattle is seeing a massive uptick right in the core whereas for Houston it is spread throughout the inner loop and areas west of there but your statement about most (if not all) the growth outside Harris County is wrong. For 2 years during the oil bust the suburban counties grew faster and that's it. DT Houston has quadrupled its population and housing in just this decade and it still pales in comparison to the changes made in Midtown, Montrose, Museum district, upper kirby, greenway, uptown, etc inside the loop. But for this thread, Seattle probably is the fastest urbanizing city in the US this decade.

Last edited by N90; Sep 19, 2019 at 7:32 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Sep 21, 2019, 5:03 AM
memph memph is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,318
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cirrus View Post
Houston. Already in 2019 nobody in North America is converting single-family zones into dense neighborhoods faster than Houston. They still have to make it less car-oriented, but the infill is impressive and different than what other cities are seeing.

The future:
Waterloo is doing that too, on a smaller scale, but I'd say at a greater intensity. It's replacing a 1940s-1960s SFH area surrounding its universities with midrises and highrises, even along culs-de-sacs and crescents. The first buildings were single use but now they have retail at grade too.

This area used to be entirely SFH about 10 years ago.
https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.47608...7i16384!8i8192

Anyways, I'd say Toronto, Vancouver, Miami, Seattle, Portland, Houston, LA are the main ones that will built a lot of density outside of downtown/already very dense areas.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Sep 21, 2019, 5:09 AM
memph memph is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,318
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quixote View Post
Toronto's urban development patterns/strategies are unlike anything else in the developed world. That parcel situated between the highway and cemetery... speechless. Propose anything like that in LA (or even OC), and the NIMBYs will be sure to stymie it... thank goodness.
Well there's not a whole lot of backyards there so I guess that helps. I do wonder how they're going to manage to serve dozens of condos with only one road leading out though.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Sep 21, 2019, 5:25 AM
memph memph is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,318
Quote:
Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin View Post
I was going to mention Toronto's post-war sprawlburbs as a good example. Most of them are fully built out at this point, but still rapidly growing - and as a result almost all of them are creating new high-rise city centres, building LRT & BRT, redeveloping shopping malls, and building TODs around new high-frequency commuter rail stations.



Mississauga is the most notable - in the 60s/70 its city centre looked like this:


Now:


And here's the longer term plan to continue filling it in, including upgrading the current BRT to LRT:




Also in Mississauga is the Lakeview Village redevelopment, which will add 8,000 residential units & 4,000 jobs:


Here's the long-term vision for Brampton. What's currently a sprawling industrial estate:

Is planned to transform into this over the next few decades:



Vaughan's city centre, which is in the process of developing a post-war industrial / big box wasteland around a new subway extension & BRT:


Langstaff Gateway redevelopment in Markham, which would add 15,000 residential units (plus commercial) around a commuter rail station:


It's also art of the larger Richmond Hill/Langstaff Gateway Urban Growth Centre, congruent with Richmond Hill's new city centre:


Markham's other city centre:


Still suburban, but at least they'll be dense.
The Brampton redevelopment isn't of an industrial estate though, it's of a golf course and sports complex west of Highway 410.

I wouldn't say that most Toronto's post-war suburbs are fully built out. A lot of them are still building subdivisions, it's mostly just Burlington, Mississauga and Newmarket that are built out, and Mississauga's growth has slowed significantly (Burlington and Newmarket were slower growing for a while). Vaughan is still building a lot of subdivisions around Kleinburg; Brampton and Milton all over the place; North Oakville; East Gwilimbury... even Markham, Ajax, Pickering, Aurora and Richmond Hill on a smaller scale.

The subdivisions are getting denser and denser though. I check them out every now and then and the playgrounds are often quite bustling whereas if you take your kid to your typical suburban playground it'll be pretty empty. And of course even though most suburbs are seeing greenfield development, it's not as much as before and that's because of the shift to highrises. Toronto should have a weighted density of around 20,000 ppsm in 2050 at this rate, which would put it roughly in between the current weighted densities of the Boston and New York urban areas.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Sep 21, 2019, 8:00 PM
austlar1 austlar1 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Austin
Posts: 2,707
Nimby-ism is alive and well in Austin, so I think most densification will happen in re-purposed shopping center or light industry locations simply because many of them are well located vis-a-vis transit options, and mid-rise or possibly even high rise development in such settings would not arouse too much local opposition. There is still a lot of room for sprawl in the Austin area, but commute times have become a major issue due to intense freeway congestion and lack of rail transit.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Sep 21, 2019, 11:19 PM
pdxtex's Avatar
pdxtex pdxtex is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 2,517
Quote:
Originally Posted by austlar1 View Post
Nimby-ism is alive and well in Austin, so I think most densification will happen in re-purposed shopping center or light industry locations simply because many of them are well located vis-a-vis transit options, and mid-rise or possibly even high rise development in such settings would not arouse too much local opposition. There is still a lot of room for sprawl in the Austin area, but commute times have become a major issue due to intense freeway congestion and lack of rail transit.
is this a thing down there?? we have a dying mall id like to see this happen too.
__________________
Portland!! Where young people go to retire.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Sep 22, 2019, 5:00 AM
austlar1 austlar1 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Austin
Posts: 2,707
Quote:
Originally Posted by pdxtex View Post
is this a thing down there?? we have a dying mall id like to see this happen too.
So far, only one major regional shopping mall has been repurposed, but another prime mall location (Barton Square) is slowly sinking and likely to be redeveloped within the next decade. Highland Mall, located about four miles north of downtown, was converted into the headquarter campus for Austin Community College and several largish (Texas Doughnut type) four to five story apartment houses have gone up there as well. More are in the works, and nearby underutilized commercial properties adjacent to Airport Blvd. are also seeing apartment development. Major arteries like South Lamar, North Lamar, Burnet Road and East Riverside have seen commercial strip centers replaced with apartment projects. At least one medium sized single story shopping center has undergone complete redevelopment with a big housing component. Similar projects are planned elsewhere. This is all aided by the retail meltdown, and I expect the process to accelerate as more and more large, medium, and small single story shopping centers lose retail tenants. A very large mid-rise and high-rise redevelopment project called Catalyst (offices and housing) in the vicinity of East Riverside adjacent to the Oracle campus between downtown and the airport is currently being held hostage to neighborhood NIMBY's concerned that the project will bring too much affluence to the rapidly gentrifying neighborhood and put the squeeze on adjacent affordable rental complexes that would likely end up being torn down or rehabilitated. Former industrial land in north Austin next to the very successful Domain complex is being converted to office and residential. This is all happening outside of the downtown core but well within the city limits of Austin.

Last edited by austlar1; Sep 22, 2019 at 5:12 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Sep 22, 2019, 4:39 PM
llamaorama llamaorama is offline
Unicorn Wizard!
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 3,456
I don't think any American city will densify substantially and come to rival the old urban cores of NYC, Philly, SF, etc. The long term trend has been a reduction in density, going back decades. However I do believe will happen is that extremely low density cities will bend closer to the norm if they are growing and are economically healthy.

Basically, I think stringy, underbuilt places with a lot of population growth like Nashville and Charlotte could easily double their density from maybe 2,000 people per square mile to 4,000 or so, matching places like Dallas and Phoenix. This would come from growth in the urban core to some extent, but also housing demand leading to more suburban apartment and townhome construction and subdivisions getting designed with much smaller lots.

However the only cities with the conditions necessary to go beyond the peak suburban density of 4,000 to 5,000 ppsm are not growing fast enough or are losing people outside their cores. Chicago will continue to build upwards inside the core but its outer areas and metro is shrinking. LA has a lot of pressure to grow upwards inside its existing footprint but the region is stagnating due to a very high cost of living, and average household sizes will probably decrease as neighborhoods gentrify and counter any increase in overall population or density.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Sep 22, 2019, 4:51 PM
llamaorama llamaorama is offline
Unicorn Wizard!
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 3,456
Quote:
Originally Posted by N90 View Post
False. Since 2010 Harris County has added 606k people. That's more people in that county than the entire Seattle CSA has added since 2010. And btw, that's more people than all of the suburban Houston counties put together (~ 480k in the suburban counties).

I don't know if Houston is densifying at Seattle rates because Seattle is seeing a massive uptick right in the core whereas for Houston it is spread throughout the inner loop and areas west of there but your statement about most (if not all) the growth outside Harris County is wrong. For 2 years during the oil bust the suburban counties grew faster and that's it. DT Houston has quadrupled its population and housing in just this decade and it still pales in comparison to the changes made in Midtown, Montrose, Museum district, upper kirby, greenway, uptown, etc inside the loop. But for this thread, Seattle probably is the fastest urbanizing city in the US this decade.
Harris County is big though, how much of that was in the northwest corner along the Grand Parkway and going up towards Tomball? It's still mostly greenfield sprawl.

What remains to be seen is what happens to areas that are outside the 610 loop but inside the Beltway or at most with Hwy 6/FM 1960. Beyond the core inner loop gentrification areas I am not seeing much evidence of middle ring suburban growth beyond a few specific parts of West Houston.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Sep 22, 2019, 8:52 PM
isaidso isaidso is offline
The New Republic
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: United Provinces of America
Posts: 9,371
Quote:
Originally Posted by Obadno View Post
The high rises mixed in with fields just screams CHINA to me.
That type of built form existed in Canada long before China started building high rises.
__________________
World's First Documented Baseball Game: Beachville, Ontario, June 4th, 1838.
World's First Documented Gridiron Game: University College, Toronto, November 9th, 1861.
Hamilton Tiger-Cats since 1869 & Toronto Argonauts since 1873: North America's 2 oldest pro football teams
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Sep 22, 2019, 9:05 PM
jtown,man jtown,man is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Norfolk, Va
Posts: 2,144
Denser in the future? Most places.

Actually dense? Probably not(although that is subjective).

Americans, baring a few places, are anti-dense. And I mean like 99.9% of places in this country. Even in NYC there are some NIMBYs that complain about traffic or increased density. It's a real issue here.

People think a 4 story stick apartment building is adding incredible density. It might be a huge upgrade from what was there before, but it ain't dense.

Last edited by jtown,man; Sep 23, 2019 at 2:28 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Sep 22, 2019, 9:36 PM
Quixote's Avatar
Quixote Quixote is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 5,967
Quote:
Originally Posted by llamaorama View Post
I don't think any American city will densify substantially and come to rival the old urban cores of NYC, Philly, SF, etc. The long term trend has been a reduction in density, going back decades. However I do believe will happen is that extremely low density cities will bend closer to the norm if they are growing and are economically healthy.

Basically, I think stringy, underbuilt places with a lot of population growth like Nashville and Charlotte could easily double their density from maybe 2,000 people per square mile to 4,000 or so, matching places like Dallas and Phoenix. This would come from growth in the urban core to some extent, but also housing demand leading to more suburban apartment and townhome construction and subdivisions getting designed with much smaller lots.

However the only cities with the conditions necessary to go beyond the peak suburban density of 4,000 to 5,000 ppsm are not growing fast enough or are losing people outside their cores. Chicago will continue to build upwards inside the core but its outer areas and metro is shrinking. LA has a lot of pressure to grow upwards inside its existing footprint but the region is stagnating due to a very high cost of living, and average household sizes will probably decrease as neighborhoods gentrify and counter any increase in overall population or density.
DTLA proper (bounded by the three freeways and the LA River) is huge... the size of Midtown Manhattan (59th to 14th Streets). Most of it is light-industrial wasteland ripe for upzoning and redevelopment, and we've already seen skyscraper proposals outside of the main core (Main being the eastern boundary). And there's been little NIMBY resistance so far.

There's still the major issue of Skid Row, and new subway lines need to be built, but the potential's there to build an urban core that rivals Chicago's. And unlike Chicago, LA doesn't have the problem of a shrinking metro population.
__________________
“Stop being a spectator ... and start being an active participant.”

Stephen Duneier
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Sep 22, 2019, 10:33 PM
iheartthed iheartthed is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 2,577
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quixote View Post
DTLA proper (bounded by the three freeways and the LA River) is huge... the size of Midtown Manhattan (59th to 14th Streets). Most of it is light-industrial wasteland ripe for upzoning and redevelopment, and we've already seen skyscraper proposals outside of the main core (Main being the eastern boundary). And there's been little NIMBY resistance so far.
Fourteenth Street is a very, very, very generous definition of Midtown. I would draw the line somewhere around 30-32nd St.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quixote View Post
There's still the major issue of Skid Row, and new subway lines need to be built, but the potential's there to build an urban core that rivals Chicago's. And unlike Chicago, LA doesn't have the problem of a shrinking metro population.
1 - Chicago's core is growing. 2 - L.A. is quite far behind.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Sep 23, 2019, 1:19 AM
Quixote's Avatar
Quixote Quixote is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 5,967
Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed View Post
Fourteenth Street is a very, very, very generous definition of Midtown. I would draw the line somewhere around 30-32nd St.
That's Google Maps' definition. Regardless of geographic boundaries, DTLA proper is roughly the size of Manhattan from 59th down to 23rd or 14th Street... a huge area that isn't disrupted by freeways or waterways.

Quote:
1 - Chicago's core is growing. 2 - L.A. is quite far behind.
1) Chicago's core is already quite built-up.

2) For LA, I'm talking over the course of like 40-50 years.
__________________
“Stop being a spectator ... and start being an active participant.”

Stephen Duneier
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Sep 23, 2019, 5:50 AM
memph memph is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,318
Quote:
Originally Posted by llamaorama View Post
Harris County is big though, how much of that was in the northwest corner along the Grand Parkway and going up towards Tomball? It's still mostly greenfield sprawl.

What remains to be seen is what happens to areas that are outside the 610 loop but inside the Beltway or at most with Hwy 6/FM 1960. Beyond the core inner loop gentrification areas I am not seeing much evidence of middle ring suburban growth beyond a few specific parts of West Houston.
I think it could increase in the future. I assume you're thinking mainly of the neighbourhoods from Uptown to Westchase, but there is also some infill happening in Spring Branch, as well as development spill-over from Shady Acres to north of 610. Those areas already add up to a land area almost double that of San Francisco city proper, so I'd say that's pretty significant.

Anyways, I see Houston as a city in transition that hasn't quite reached the tipping point. It used to be that the core was poor and the suburbs were wealthy, and that encourage continued sub urbanization of the professional class (both their homes and workplaces). However, the city has sprawled so much that combined with worsening traffic, it's difficult for the upscale suburbs to function as a cohesive job market. The core has been gentrifying a lot, and the working class has been suburbanizing a lot, like the areas West of Bear Creek Park, around Mission Bend/Four Corners, Katy, Spring Fort Bend/Missouri City and much of the eastern suburbs are pretty economically and socially diverse.

I think we're starting to see the Loop and some west side areas being the preferred location for the professional class and if a few changes start to happen (ex improved public schools) I can see Houston start to change very fast and even the eastern half of the loop and areas like Independence Heights become desirable, and Gulfton start to get more desirable and redeveloped.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted Sep 23, 2019, 6:09 AM
ThePhun1 ThePhun1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Houston/Galveston
Posts: 1,734
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasPlaya View Post
Probably given 20-40 years per the OP. They present two different versions of future density: DFW has a midwestern feeling with it's orderly development and clean look and Houston's libertarian roots come out in it's haphazard, a "mother's type of love" look. Both cities have the bones to support a dense multi nodal metropolis.

However, Houston does need to figure out it's future in order to densify... Are they going to get very serious about flooding and are they going to get very serious about investing in a plan to development new industries. Houston has been getting more involved in its local public university which is not among the state's flagship.
At a certain point, Houston (and its suburbs) can't build out like they have in the past. You have to build up with more connected mass transit.

The huge addition of so much concrete means less places for water to soak into the soil and/or drain into the Gulf directly or indirectly. Minor tropical cyclones and seasonal rainstorms shouldn't paralyze any place so consistently.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted Sep 23, 2019, 9:29 PM
Tom In Chicago's Avatar
Tom In Chicago Tom In Chicago is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Sick City
Posts: 6,374
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quixote View Post
1) Chicago's core is already quite built-up.
Chicago's core is still growing. . . up until the mid-1980s everything around the Loop was heavy industry. . . that transformation from industrial to residential/office/hotel high rises continues to this day. . .

. . .
__________________
Tom in Chicago
. . .
Near the day of Purification, there will be cobwebs spun back and forth in the sky.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts

Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:21 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.