smallest downtown for a city of 100,000 plus (compared, Atlanta, Boston)

[MurphyKing54]

Hampton, VA.

[Melchior6]

Miami.

[tmac9wr]

Originally Posted by bhj867

It's crazy I know.
proof
City of London - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It's also interesting that if you scroll down and look at the historical population of the City, there was once 200,000 that lived there.

Either way, it's obviously this part of the city is office-only considering there are over 340,000 people employed there.

[arch_genesis]

Originally Posted by eskercurve

I always thought St. Louis had a tiny downtown. The Arch and Laclede's Landing, the City Museum, and that one mall like area just NE of downtown were the only places you could go at night there. Very business-oriented downtown.

12,409 people live in downtown St. Louis and its nowhere near to reaching max capacity. More buildings to go up more existing buildings to be brought back to life.

[Ben Around]

Scottsdale, AZ, for sure. Its "downtown" has the look and feel of a town of 10,000.

[prelude91]

Originally Posted by bhj867

It's crazy I know.
proof
City of London - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I lived in London for a semester during college, and I would be surprised if the "city of London" is even a square mile large...It is almost 100% office buildings. Central London on the other hand is about as urban as it gets, and surpasses anything in the US (other than Manhattan of course.)

[grindin]

Orlando's DT is appropriate for a city of 200,000, but considering how sprawling the metro area is, it's pretty small in the scheme of things.

San Diego's Downtown area has really improved over the years.

I'm pretty surprised about the statistics about the City of London

[Boston14]

Providence

[bhj867]

Everytime I see providence's skyline I see visions of Family Guy in my brain.

[polo89]

Arlington Texas.