Not may favorite example because the thread is on residential property taxes, but it is all I could find and I think it still illustrates the larger point why cities, despite the appearance of prosperity and years of growth, are finding they need additional revenue to meet obligations.
Four different Wells Fargo "campuses" in metro Des Mooines. One on the left is located in a traditionally built style (pre-WWII style), the other three are suburban. (Being generous to the 3 to the right) All 4 require approximately the same amount of above and below ground public infrastructure to service them, but look how much more bang for the buck you get in a traditionally developed office vs suburban.
Land is valuable. Infrastructure to support what is built on it is expensive. Is it any wonder our cities are hurting to try and figure out how they are going to pay to maintain everything? The last line, "Value/Acre" is most telling. This is what drives what these pieces of property pay in taxes for the land they are occupying.
http://www.arcgis.com/apps/MapJournal/index.html?appid=11cc819544c347cab87fcb8a7c9846e2