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.
Agreed. It's kind of unclear. Did they completely ignore the other 4 boroughs or did they look at them each individually? Or maybe they just isolated Manhattan but kept the other 4 together?
I would guess they're measuring city proper, but who even knows .....
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
They don't give a lot of information, which goes with what you were saying about taking these types of lists with a grain of salt. Often times people on these forums interpret these lists as concrete proof or undeniable facts.
Well I mean for sure Manhattan has a disproportionate amount of Commercial dev in NYC. Still, it doesn't mean Brooklyn or Queens etc are commercial basket cases... NYC anchors a large economic region of over 20 million - really all of that should be counted. Metro regions are interconnected so commercial development in Yonkers is very much connected to what is happening in Manhattan in the same way that Samsung Canada is HQ'd in Mississauga, which is part of the Greater Toronto Area and very much connected to what is happening in Toronto.
You failed to understand my point. The key of which is Toronto's commercial areas are more decentralized than Chicago's. In order to fully understand the commercial aspects of both cities you have to compare regions. The point i'm making regarding growth is forward looking. I already conceded Chicagoland is the bigger economy and region in the here and now. I could give a rats behind about Knight Franks list of super cities - by the looks of it they don't know much about the cities they are comparing in terms of Borough's, City Proper's or Metro Regions...
Silly comment that doesn't really warrant a response
Well I don't really think the Horseshoe is exactly comparative to Chicagoland at the present time but it certainly is more comparable to a CSA than a CMA or even the GTA. Definitely! Underlined again you're just being silly. Neither Chicago, Houston nor Toronto will have a hope of meeting Mexico City or NYC in population for over 100 years and that is being generous.. That said, those three do compare more well to one another in population metrics in the near future.... You surely can't deny that lol...
Bring it up all you want. You always do so you're prolly not going to stop. You love to poke about it.. No need to deny. Give in to her lol... I've invited you up here since she is on your mind so much! I'll even show you the legacy areas
I think the term Legacy City is not to note the age of its founding and areas of a much older city still present. But it does have to do with the ---> the era of its largest growth. So if its biggest growth was MANY decades ago like late 19th early 20th century. It gets a Legacy City stance. If its key growth stats were in that latter 20th century and more currently. It is not titled a Legacy city. Does not matter if it was founded in the 1700s. As LA was by the Spaniards. But it's super-city growth was mostly mid-20th century onward.
^^Legacy Cities are by far in slower growth mode today too. A Legacy city also is more past its golden age then today. So where you see your city is you can look into in links on it.
I'm not sure it is even a real Technical term but got thrown out there lately. The US older former Industrial cities and those of its Rust-Belt get title the Legacy cities. Somewhat past their "Glory Days". You city I do not think you would see yours as that group? Just saying.
Our nation's "Legacy Cities" are the former industrial powerhouses and urban economic hubs rich with history and culture dotted throughout the Northeast to the Great Lakes regions that experienced dramatic decline through the 1980s. The loss of manufacturing, flight of urban residents to the suburbs, and other changes driven by broad social and economic factors have caused these cities to struggle to remain economically relevant.
Just a random US link. If you want? Or believe your city fits that? Not for me to say. I'd be demeaning and label reinforced. if I said it technically - it is not one. So you can state where it falls.
A C-D thread on it. Noting LA as NOT a Legacy city. Yet it was a Spaniard settlement in the 1700s and parts of its street-grid was their design.
I think the term Legacy City is not to note the age of its founding and areas of a much older city still present. But it does have to do with the ---> the era of its largest growth. So if its biggest growth was MANY decades ago like late 19th early 20th century. It gets a Legacy City stance. If its key growth stats were in that latter 20th century and more currently. It is not titled a Legacy city. Does not matter if it was founded in the 1700s. As LA was by the Spaniards. But it's super-city growth was mostly mid-20th century onward.
^^Legacy Cities are by far in slower growth mode today too. A Legacy city also is more past its golden age then today. So where you see your city is you can look into in links on it.
I'm not sure it is even a real Technical term but got thrown out there lately. The US older former Industrial cities and those of its Rust-Belt get title the Legacy cities. Somewhat past their "Glory Days". You city I do not think you would see yours as that group? Just saying.
Our nation's "Legacy Cities" are the former industrial powerhouses and urban economic hubs rich with history and culture dotted throughout the Northeast to the Great Lakes regions that experienced dramatic decline through the 1980s. The loss of manufacturing, flight of urban residents to the suburbs, and other changes driven by broad social and economic factors have caused these cities to struggle to remain economically relevant.
Just a random US link. If you want? Or believe your city fits that? Not for me to say. I'd be demeaning and label reinforced. if I said it technically - it is not one. So you can state where it falls.
A C-D thread on it. Noting LA as NOT a Legacy city. Yet it was a Spaniard settlement in the 1700s and parts of its street-grid was their design.
This is a pretty dumb definition of legacy city in my opinion. It basically says well if you have extensive old areas that are established but are more successful in modern times in terms of growth, you are simply not a legacy city. I don't know who comes up with this black and white stuff anymore than to create some useless talking point to get the masses arguing endlessly on C v C.
For Toronto, there is plenty of pre WWII and pre 20th century architecture to enjoy mixed in with the new. So for me its a combination of legacy and rising. This notion that if you have extensive Pre WWII or Pre 20th century bones you are or have to be in slo mo growth is ridiculous.
Well I mean for sure Manhattan has a disproportionate amount of Commercial dev in NYC. Still, it doesn't mean Brooklyn or Queens etc are commercial basket cases...
yeah I bet Brooklyn alone could rank pretty highly against other US cities. Queens would probably be pretty average, BX & Staten Island don't have as much as other boroughs in this category but still I don't see any reason to exclude any of them. It's one thing to ignore metro areas and just look at only city limits but here they're not even looking at a fraction of the city limits.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fusion2
NYC anchors a large economic region of over 20 million - really all of that should be counted. Metro regions are interconnected so commercial development in Yonkers is very much connected to what is happening in Manhattan in the same way that Samsung Canada is HQ'd in Mississauga, which is part of the Greater Toronto Area and very much connected to what is happening in Toronto.
Yeah this is a good point too. Another good example would be Philly. Philly metro has most of their wealth and shopping in the suburbs, particularly King of Prussia, which is the main shopping area of the region. So what happens there is connected with what happens in Philly city limits and other parts of the area.
So I'm assuming that this only looked at city limits, or in NYCs case, just one part of the city limits I guess.
I take these lists generally speaking as a grain of salt. Especially American one's that can't for the life of them understand the differences in how the two countries measure metro areas differently. In this, I don't have a lot of faith in Knight Frank's ability to 'measure' Toronto' either.
Knight Frank has nothing to do with America, it is a London based firm:
Also why are there people saying things like only Manhattan was evaluated and not the other boroughs or parts of the metropolitan area? I think they need to double check the links in the OP, because that's definitely not just Manhattan.
Also why are there people saying things like only Manhattan was evaluated and not the other boroughs or parts of the metropolitan area? I think they need to double check the links in the OP, because that's definitely not just Manhattan.
We were talking about a different list that somebody else brought up about commercial real estate. That's the Manhattan one. Idk how or why we started talking about that separate list though. I forgot what the thread was about for a minute.
Also why are there people saying things like only Manhattan was evaluated and not the other boroughs or parts of the metropolitan area? I think they need to double check the links in the OP, because that's definitely not just Manhattan.
I'm aware Knight Frank isn't American - I was making a point to someone else.. As for what they are comparing i'm not seeing apples to apples comparisons looking at things on the surface.... If they are comparing just city proper boundaries i'm even more worried about the index. As the only guy said however, we were responding to another link posted by another poster.
The two wealthiest people live in Seattle and work in nearly the same neighborhood near the CBD. The third wealthiest is giving his money away via the first.
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.
