Quote:
Originally Posted by Stay Stoked Brah
That is my own criteria to come up with cities. doesn't mean you or anybody else has to use the same. I don't think New York is transforming the most because it is already uber urban. Manhattan building a 100 story building doesn't transform the city. A city that develops green and brownfields to towers, townhouses, condos is seeing a greater transformation.
|
That's fine... but it just helps steer a topic from the get-go to have some criteria, rather than leave it totally undefined and create a free-for-all of responses... and we end up repeating the same stuff in thread after thread in the City Discussions subforum.
As for New York, I understand that it is obviously already very "urban", but that in no way means that it is not continuing to urbanize and transform -- outpacing anywhere in North American by a very, very, very long stretch.
There are very different baselines from which to start such a measurement. So yes, if a place like Charlotte is filling in a 10 square block area of parking lots and warehouses with office buildings, condos, and retail, then it is transforming/urbanizing its core remarkably. New York is simply on a much higher level... a level that does not replace parking lots with condos, but replaces existing multistory buildings with thousand foot towers (
14 in the past 10 years). And buildings have certainly been/are being built on brownfields in New York.
This topic is fully up for interpretation due to the relative sizes, densities, and activity occurring in various cities... without some criteria, that is.