Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Even without the so called "downtown annexation" Philly's central business core is almost twice the populated than Chicago's CBD core.
Philly CBD core: 57,000
Chicago CBD core: 33,000
Chicago is lucky it has a larger overall land area than Philly, because if they were equal, Philly would probably surpass Chicago in city population by 2050.
Do all discussion threads go in circles like this one?
Not sure why this debate continue to run in circles. If you want to say downtown Philly is a 2mi radius from City Hall... then Chicago has 60,000 more people in the same radius from it's City Hall. Not really anything more to debate.
Here are the details:
I put a lot of maps and links in prior posts. But here is a summary of basic facts.
1. "Downtown Philly" is defined as the population within a 2 mile radius of City Hall. 180k people live in that area.
2. In Chicago about 240,000 people live within 2mi radius from Chicago City Hall, called "the Central Area." And this is a smaller area given much of that radius includes Lake Michigan (1 mi from City Hall) and Millenium/Grant/Maggie Daley Parks (0.5 miles from City Hall.)
This has been the fastest growing central urban area in the US over the past 5 years as well as the decade before that. Growth continues to accelerate, with an increase of 86,000 over that 15 year span. Obviously a lot of other cities have gained more population overall, but not in their central core.
Leading that is the central area, defined as neighborhoods generally within 2 miles of City Hall. Chicago's central area gained an estimated 42,423 people in 2010-2015, according to the survey. The Census Bureau in 2012 reported this area grew faster in the first decade of the century than any downtown in the country, adding 48,000 people. But with an unprecedented construction wave underway, growth has hit the gas, with the area—roughly the Loop, plus the Near North, Near South and Near West sides—growing almost as much in five years as it did in the previous 10.
The area now is home to an estimated 238,259 residents
Separate from this:
1. The Loop is 1.6 sqmi. It is where the commercial skyscrapers are. 33,000 people live there- used to be about 1/3 of that if you go back 20 years. About 600,000 people are there during business hours.
2. Center Center City Philly is 2sqmi and has about 60,000 people.
So more people live in Center City than the Loop... but that is not a proxy for "downtown populations" of the 2 cities. Those are 2 small parts of each downtown... and they are not even equivalent size.
Interesting fact Philadelphia has 69 buildings 300 ft. Or over not impressive even for a mid size city. But Chicago has added 69 buildings 300 + since 2010. In the same time Philadelphia only added 10. San Francisco, Boston, and Seattle all have. More buildings 300 + than Philadelphia. But Philadelphia does beat all those cities downtown's square mileage wise.
Interesting fact Philadelphia has 69 buildings 300 ft. Or over not impressive even for a mid size city. But Chicago has added 69 buildings 300 + since 2010. In the same time Philadelphia only added 10. San Francisco, Boston, and Seattle all have. More buildings 300 + than Philadelphia. But Philadelphia does beat all those cities downtown's square mileage wise.
Of course, there were no buildings in Philadelphia taller than City Hall (548') until 1987 due to the so called "gentlemen's agreement." Regardless, tall buildings in themselves don't result in a large and vibrant downtown population. Look at Houston: If my stats are correct, Houston has 97 buildings above 300' but its downtown isn't particularly buzzing with residents and things to do.
Last edited by Pine to Vine; 07-29-2017 at 11:59 AM..
Interesting fact Philadelphia has 69 buildings 300 ft. Or over not impressive even for a mid size city. But Chicago has added 69 buildings 300 + since 2010. In the same time Philadelphia only added 10. San Francisco, Boston, and Seattle all have. More buildings 300 + than Philadelphia. But Philadelphia does beat all those cities downtown's square mileage wise.
69? Huh? Where are you getting your statistics from? Philadelphia is approaching at least 90 buildings over 300 feet tall.
Over 300 FT tall According to Emporis:
**Does not include those under construction**
San Francisco - 115
Philadelphia - 84
Boston - 67
Seattle - 62
Interesting fact Philadelphia has 69 buildings 300 ft. Or over not impressive even for a mid size city. But Chicago has added 69 buildings 300 + since 2010. In the same time Philadelphia only added 10. San Francisco, Boston, and Seattle all have. More buildings 300 + than Philadelphia. But Philadelphia does beat all those cities downtown's square mileage wise.
Until the late 1980's there was an unwritten rule in Philly that you could not build a building taller than William Penn's statue which sits on top of City Hall at 548 feet. Then Willard Rouse III built the first skyscraper in 1987, One Liberty Place, which is 947 feet. After that several more have been built, but tall buildings are a relatively new thing to Philly. I think the Comcast building is the tallest now at 975 feet.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
