Downtown: how should it be defined? (market, Boston, population, houses)
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.
The problem in comparing downtown populations is different people and often different cities have their own definitions. For instance, Philadelphia supposedly has nearly twice as populated downtown area as San Francisco. Boston and Philly are reported to have downtown populations that exceed Chicago, which I find difficult to believe.
I live in Toronto and according to the City the "downtown" population - now synonymous with a more broadly defined Central Area - is apparently around 150,000. This definition includes quite a bit beyond the areas of the financial, entertainment and shopping districts and the high rise apartment and condo belt, but also close-in neighborhoods such as The Annex, Kensington Market and Cabbagetown that are filled with rowhouses. I think in the case of Toronto 75,000 is a more reasonable estimate. Perhaps this is sort of akin to Philadelphia's Center City.
This sort of definition seems akin to including all of Manhattan below 59th or even 96th Street in a "central area", or a good chunk of Chicago's lakefront districts.
The problem in comparing downtown populations is different people and often different cities have their own definitions. For instance, Philadelphia supposedly has nearly twice as populated downtown area as San Francisco. Boston and Philly are reported to have downtown populations that exceed Chicago, which I find difficult to believe.
I live in Toronto and according to the City the "downtown" population - now synonymous with a more broadly defined Central Area - is apparently around 150,000. This definition includes quite a bit beyond the areas of the financial, entertainment and shopping districts and the high rise apartment and condo belt, but also close-in neighborhoods such as The Annex, Kensington Market and Cabbagetown that are filled with rowhouses. I think in the case of Toronto 75,000 is a more reasonable estimate. Perhaps this is sort of akin to Philadelphia's Center City.
This sort of definition seems akin to including all of Manhattan below 59th or even 96th Street in a "central area", or a good chunk of Chicago's lakefront districts.
Some others on this board are more familiar with Philly's Center City, but I know that Center City is considered "downtown". This includes something like 2 or 3 square miles with a population near 100,000. Center City is very compact, and the reason that it's so populated is because it's full of mixed-use development, including tons of residential (which is mixed in with financial, entertainment, shopping, etc.). This gives Philly a "European" vibe to me, because so much of American cities are built to have their residential districts outside of the downtown area (even Chicago's major mixed-use neighborhoods are north of downtown).
It seems like their definition of dowtown is a CBD (office buildings, theater districts, lots of shopping, etc). For NYC, they count two "dowtowns", Midtown and Dowtown. Is Midtown dowtown? No at all, but it is a CBD. If they were using a center city definiton, they probably would have counted all of Manhattan south of 59th street or so.
San Francisco has plenty of people living in dense neighborhoods in the center but I guess not so many in the area that's considered downtown.
The problem in comparing downtown populations is different people and often different cities have their own definitions. For instance, Philadelphia supposedly has nearly twice as populated downtown area as San Francisco. Boston and Philly are reported to have downtown populations that exceed Chicago, which I find difficult to believe.
I live in Toronto and according to the City the "downtown" population - now synonymous with a more broadly defined Central Area - is apparently around 150,000. This definition includes quite a bit beyond the areas of the financial, entertainment and shopping districts and the high rise apartment and condo belt, but also close-in neighborhoods such as The Annex, Kensington Market and Cabbagetown that are filled with rowhouses. I think in the case of Toronto 75,000 is a more reasonable estimate. Perhaps this is sort of akin to Philadelphia's Center City.
This sort of definition seems akin to including all of Manhattan below 59th or even 96th Street in a "central area", or a good chunk of Chicago's lakefront districts.
I currently live in Center City, Philadelphia. I've been to Chicago twice, and only had a couple of hours to explore, since I was only there to transfer on a bus - so this is by no means an expert opinion. But I would believe that more people live in Center City Philly than downtown Chicago. The "Loop" itself is a small geographic area that seemed to be primarily office buildings, comparable to the part of Center City Philadelphia along Market Street and JFK in - lots of people spending their days there, not a lot of people living there. However, a lot of Center City Philadelphia outside of that area is made up of mixed use buildings, which are desirable as places to visit , places to work, and places to live.
If you also take into the account the neighborhoods immediately surrounding Downtown Chicago - which seemed like more "vibrant" places than the Loop itself, and compare that to Center City and the areas immediately surrounding it, which while mostly nice and popular, don't offer quite as much, then I would not be surprised if the population for Chicago went ahead of Philadelphia.
I don't really know how they view it - but if it did, I think that would probably push Chicago's population over Philadelphia in terms of downtown living. In Philadelphia, there is no distinction really - it's all just Center City (although there are specific neighborhoods within Center City). People seem to talk about "the loop" as its own thing, from what I know of it. I guess it would take someone from Chicago to answer that question. But I can confirm that Center City in Philadelphia is the whole chunk of the portion of Philadelphia which falls within the original boundaries of the entire city of Philadelphia - Vine Street on the north, South Street on the south - and river to river, about 25 blocks east to west. And a very little geographic portion of that area is single use.
The attached link roughly is the borders of what is considered Center City Philadelphia, most is fairly mixed use and the lower third in the link (anything above South St is considered center city) hardly has any commercial space.
I think this thread was overkill (myself included) on the Chicago/Philly downtown comparison but there was some interesting stats and perspective on the comparison of downton populations of the two cities
I think this thread was overkill (myself included) on the Chicago/Philly downtown comparison but there was some interesting stats and perspective on the comparison of downton populations of the two cities
That thread got really scary. Particularly since they're both great cities with a lot to offer with no real reason to be in competition.
But Philadelphia has a pretty definable downtown area that has historical precedent going back centuries - the original city borders which go back to the 1600's. So there's nothing to even argue about on that front. Granted, real estate people and landlords will try to push the border to get the most money out of people. But I have a hard time seeing a future in which any gentrification will change that long of a historical precedent. Originally, anything outside of that small area were their own cities, up until the City-County Consolidation in the mid 1800's.
Lots of other cities went through a era where they rejected the fact that people can live downtown - that it should just be for commerce. This never really happened in a large scale in Philly, so there is no need to re-define anything. If other cities start developing vibrant neighborhoods adjacent to their current single-use downtowns, then they can certainly redefine their downtowns. History moves. I just recently moved from Minneapolis, and the Warehouse district - lots of which may technically even be part of downtown, but lies north of what is typically considered the modern CBD, has had a growing population for a while, and acts like one would expect a proper downtown to act. Dense living arrangements, restaurants and entertainment nearby and within walking distance to the modern financial district. The modern skyscraper CBD tended to make it non-friendly to residents to live in (besides a few luxury high rise condos), and as cities become re-urbanized there are certainly going to be new lines drawn as to what's considered downtown and what's not, since it makes no immediate sense to knock down or convert their skyscrapers into mixed-use buildings.
Cities that have a lot of mixed-use buildings will have a higher downtown population. These tend to be colonial cities: Boston, New York, Philly (and I would include Toronto as well), because they were laid out before there were "central business districts."
Cities like Chicago and San Francisco are newer and more "rational" in design so buildings are more segregated by use. Don't forget, both cities were nearly destroyed (Chicago Fire, 1871 and San Francisco Earthquake, 1906) and had were rebuilt in a more organized fashion.
That doesn't mean that "downtown" isn't an arbitrary distinction.
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.
Particularly since they're both great cities with a lot to offer with no real reason to be in competition.
