Which U.S. Cities Have Changed The Most This Decade?

[ThePhun1]

Originally Posted by PhilliesPhan

If Philadelphia is #44 out of 50 for cities that have changed the least in the last decade, then maybe the "lack" of change is a good thing. Back in 2007 (when I was 12 and living in West Philly), crime rates were still astronomically high, we had witnessed our second full year of growth after decades of population loss, and One Liberty Place was still Philly's tallest building. Just 10 years later, entire neighborhoods are being rebuilt as the city's population continues to grow, the city has outpaced the region and nation in job growth numbers, Center City is more vibrant and dense than it has been for decades, North and West Philly continue to get better and safer, there are solid schools in certain neighborhoods, and some truly exciting and transformational projects (ex. Schuylkill Yards, the cap over I-95, the 30th Street and North Station District Plans, etc) are in the works. Even if it isn't reflected in this report, the Philly of 2017 is a vast improvement over 2007's Philly.

Did you spend most of your days on the playground? And because of those crime rates, did your mom force you to go to Bel-Air?

[ThePhun1]

What's changed in Houston other than a few people trickling in?

[uaarkson]

Detroit lost hundreds of thousands of people in the last ten years, and entire neighborhoods disappeared. That's definitely a change.

[bobdreamz]

Originally Posted by dc_denizen

Well, downtown specifically.

the 'ruins of detroit' are no more (except MCS). Most have been refurbished.

other cities

* Miami - built a lot more white condos with balconies (and some interesting towers as well). need neighborhoods, not condos
* New York - tons of construction and evolving neighborhoods in the outer boroughs makes it a contender, despite vast size.
* SF, Los Angeles - not enough oomph to the current boom
* Seattle - tons of changes downtown, a contender for the title
* Austin - new towers, but have they filled in all the vacant lots behind 6th street? unacceptable...city should look more 'filled in', like portland. see also: nashville. but getting there.
* Chicago - plenty of new construction, evolving neighborhoods, solid growth especially considering stagnant urban area population
* DC - solid performance, matches growth rates. flies under the radar here.
* houston - so spread out its hard to tell sometimes. inner loop progressing nicely
* dallas - see houston
* portland - lagging its PNW peers
* Philly - livable areas keep expanding nicely

Care to explain this? Miami has a lot of real neighborhoods that aren't filled with high rise condos.
Ever been there?

[ThePhun1]

Originally Posted by uaarkson

Detroit lost hundreds of thousands of people in the last ten years, and entire neighborhoods disappeared. That's definitely a change.

No doubt...these people are just create articles to fill space. Forget if they make sense or not. The criteria for change is silly.

[caligrad]

Originally Posted by bobdreamz

Care to explain this? Miami has a lot of real neighborhoods that aren't filled with high rise condos.
Ever been there?

I agree but also disagree with you.

My 3rd visit to Miami in 10 years was this past June. The downtown/beach areas are doing nicely with the towering high rises with the huge driveways and parking garages....Some neighborhoods are doing nicely and are solid like little Havana, Wynwood and etc. those are GREAT.

But that being said....

I Then I have to ask you the question, have you seen what's happening outside of Miami? in the Burroughs of NYC ? The districts in LA? the outer bands of the Chicago loop ? the entire bay area ? Seattle? Houston ? Philly ? in comparison to those, the "Real neighborhoods" of Miami are in very poor shape. Seems like all of the investment is focused on the downtown and high-rise areas. The roads are terrible, sidewalks barely existed, the "Real" neighborhoods are seeing little to no development, and for a city that's actually land constricted, pedestrian/dense developments hardly exist in Miami.

Miami is trying sooo hard to make a mark and play with the bigger cities with its odd proposals for nearly a dozen thousand footers???? But its not paying attention to the bigger cities. Their downtowns are booming BUT their smaller hoods are also progressing and seeing tons of development. Miamis are not and are sadly being left behind. A solid downtown doesn't always make a city, the little neighborhoods do.

[caligrad]

This article is stupid. Doesn't make any sense. I oddly have to agree with the Phun 1 and say their criteria for "change" is silly and borderline ridiculous. What about Transit? business ? going green? infrastructure ? population ? Demographics? Crime? air pollution ? the amount of construction ? along with what was already listed.

To determine a serious "Change", its going to take a way longer list of criteria.

[bobdreamz]

Originally Posted by caligrad

I agree but also disagree with you.

My 3rd visit to Miami in 10 years was this past June. The downtown/beach areas are doing nicely with the towering high rises with the huge driveways and parking garages....Some neighborhoods are doing nicely and are solid like little Havana, Wynwood and etc. those are GREAT.

But that being said....

I Then I have to ask you the question, have you seen what's happening outside of Miami? in the Burroughs of NYC ? The districts in LA? the outer bands of the Chicago loop ? the entire bay area ? Seattle? Houston ? Philly ? in comparison to those, the "Real neighborhoods" of Miami are in very poor shape. Seems like all of the investment is focused on the downtown and high-rise areas. The roads are terrible, sidewalks barely existed, the "Real" neighborhoods are seeing little to no development, and for a city that's actually land constricted, pedestrian/dense developments hardly exist in Miami.

Miami is trying sooo hard to make a mark and play with the bigger cities with its odd proposals for nearly a dozen thousand footers???? But its not paying attention to the bigger cities. Their downtowns are booming BUT their smaller hoods are also progressing and seeing tons of development. Miamis are not and are sadly being left behind. A solid downtown doesn't always make a city, the little neighborhoods do.

Is this a joke?
Houston ?
You are also comparing Miami which is only 120 years old to centuries old cities like Philly and the boroughs of NYC with their intact zoning densities?

[mhays]

It's a valid point. Real urbanity is going up across many newer cities too.

[BnaBreaker]

.

[CaliNative]

The "coolification" & development of the borough of Brooklyn over the last 10 years has been amazing. No longer in the shadow of Manhattan. Even the Bronx is showing life. L.A. & San Diego have changed greatly, mostly for the better--real rail rapid transit networks, downtown development etc. Homeless problem though has gotten worse in both cities, although solutions are starting to emerge.

[skyscraperpage17]

Originally Posted by uaarkson

Detroit lost hundreds of thousands of people in the last ten years, and entire neighborhoods disappeared. That's definitely a change.

Detroit's been losing hundreds of thousands of people with entire neighborhoods disappearing for the past several decades. People in 1987 were saying the same thing you're saying now.

So in the sense that Detroit continues to decline and remain a blighted city overall, no that hasn't changed.

[LA21st]

Originally Posted by bobdreamz

Is this a joke?
Houston ?
You are also comparing Miami which is only 120 years old to centuries old cities like Philly and the boroughs of NYC with their intact zoning densities?

That's a bad excuse. LA isn't old either and it has tons of urban vibrant areas.

[north 42]

Originally Posted by skyscraperpage17

Detroit's been losing hundreds of thousands of people with entire neighborhoods disappearing for the past several decades. People in 1987 were saying the same thing you're saying now.

So in the sense that Detroit continues to decline and remain a blighted city overall, no that hasn't changed.

The decline has slowed immensely in the past few years though, DT and Mid town are booming with billions of dollars in new investment,new residents, shops, restaurants and offices! Anyone who has been to Detroit recently can easily see how much the city has changed for the better! Blight is being removed or renovated in much of the city, and the city is investing in some of the outer neighbourhoods as well. The city has changed immensely in the past ten years, something most would never have seen coming!

[Sun Belt]

Originally Posted by LA21st

That's a bad excuse. LA isn't old either and it has tons of urban vibrant areas.

Los Angeles was founded in 1781. LA's prewar 1940 population was 1,504,277.


Miami (incorporated in 1896 pop 300) was a marshy swampy area until the early 20th century and until the invention of AC it was a miserable place to be in the summer.

1940 pre war pre AC population was 172,172.

[LA21st]

Originally Posted by Sun Belt

Los Angeles was founded in 1781. LA's prewar 1940 population was 1,504,277.


Miami (incorporated in 1896 pop 300) was a marshy swampy area until the early 20th century and until the invention of AC it was a miserable place to be in the summer.

1940 pre war pre AC population was 172,172.

LA was a tiny pueblo until the late 1890s or so. There isnt that much of difference in the age of the cities. LA boomed more before 1940/1950, yes. It's still a newer city compared to the midwest and east coast.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by uaarkson

Detroit lost hundreds of thousands of people in the last ten years, and entire neighborhoods disappeared. That's definitely a change.

Detroit has almost certainly not lost hundreds of thousands of people in the past 10 years.

[skyscraperpage17]

Originally Posted by north 42

The decline has slowed immensely in the past few years though, DT and Mid town are booming with billions of dollars in new investment,new residents, shops, restaurants and offices! Anyone who has been to Detroit recently can easily see how much the city has changed for the better! Blight is being removed or renovated in much of the city, and the city is investing in some of the outer neighbourhoods as well. The city has changed immensely in the past ten years, something most would never have seen coming!

I understand what you're trying to get at, but the thread is about cities that have changed the most. By that measure, I think of places such as Denver (that have added over 1 million peopl) or Seattle that rapidly developing into a skyscraper forest. Basically, I think of places that are unrecognizable. Detroit isn't there (yet).

[IrishIllini]

Seattle has probably changed the most in the past decade. Most sunbelt metros haven't really seen any dramatic changes, they've just grown. NYC, Chicago, Boston, DC, Philadelphia, etc. have seen a good deal of construction. NYC and Chicago have added dozens of towers each. A lot of revitalized neighborhoods in many of our older urban areas.

[JManc]

Originally Posted by ThePhun1

What's changed in Houston other than a few people trickling in?

A LOT. Not Austin a lot but I moved down here right around the time things started progressing and it's changed dramatically since I've been here. Contrast to my hometown in NY where it's been losing people steadily for 40 years and the mayor shows up and schools close when a Home Depot and a IHOP have a grand opening. The skyline really hasn't change much but the urban fabric particularly inside the loop certainly has.