Biggest Downtowns (best, better, place, ranking)

[rah]

Originally Posted by jayp1188

After those two, I'd say SF, Philly, and Boston all have similarly large downtowns. I'm not sure which is actually the biggest of the three, but they all pretty much seem to be about the same size to me.

Downtown SF has more towers, more office space, and more residents within an equivalent area, when compared to downtown Boston or Philly.

Originally Posted by rainrock

Center City core(just downtown) population is 58,000.

Which is less populated than Downtown SF, within an equal area as downtown SF. Therefore downtown SF has a larger AND denser downtown population than Philly. I'm sure you'll try to prove this wrong, good luck.

You have 58,000 residents within the "core center city" area, as described here: http://www.centercityphila.org/docs/...opleplaces.pdf

That area is 1.6 square miles.

Downtown San Francisco is also about 1.6 square miles, coincidentally, but it packs 80,000 residents into that area, as well as 40 million more square feet of office space than in Philly.

So to compare the two:

Center City Philly (the "Center City core"):

roughly 1.6 square miles
57,239 residents (as of 2010)
40 million square feet of class A/class B office space
the majority of the city's 363 highrises (including 76 skyscrapers)

Downtown San Francisco:

roughly 1.6 square miles
79,771 residents (as of 2010)
83 million square feet of class A/class B office space
the majority of the city's 412 highrises (including 84 skyscrapers)

Center City Philly, showing the "core", the "core + adjacent census tracts", and the entire "extended" area:



And here's downtown SF (note: these two maps are not at equal scales, the SF one is zoomed in more):



^SF was measured using census tracts, the most accurate measurement I could use (downtown SF has no official promotional website like Center City does, which is where i got that Philly data/map from). I'd guess that maybe 5,000 to 10,000 extra residents are counted for SF when measuring with tracts, because some tracts that include downtown areas happen to extend beyond downtown as well...but with a lead of over 20,000 residents within an equivalent area to center city, DT SF would undoubtedly still come out ahead if we could somehow get the boundaries 100% exact.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Stats are not needed for this to be believable, in my experience. Center city Philly "feels" very large, but downtown SF to me "feels" even larger, and the stats only prove why that is. Because it IS larger in terms of number of residents and the number of skyscrapers when compared to the equivalent sized area in Philly.

DT SF also has more office space than CC Philly (and i assume more retail space than CC too), so it would be reasonable to assume that DT SF has a larger workforce...but due to not having an official downtown website full of data, there are no numbers available for SF's total downtown workforce that I can find, so we can't know for sure.

Originally Posted by rainrock

Extended Center City Giard to Tasker the population is 180,000(7.8 sq mi) .Univ City adjacent to Center City has a population of 50,000 with another 50,000 students.

"extended" center city? 7.8 square miles?

lmao, talk about reaching...first off, you might want to know that "extended center city" is actually 5.6 square miles, not 7.8 square miles, and it has 164,512 residents, not 180,000 residents.

sources: http://www.centercityphila.org/docs/...opleplaces.pdf (population #'s + definitions of center city boundaries).
Google Maps Area Calculator Tool (to map out the land area in square miles)

And the majority of those 5.6 square miles (let alone 7.8 sq. mi.) are in no way "downtown" Philadelphia even though they're included within the "extended" center city area. That's an area nearly 3 times larger than downtown/the loop in Chicago (which interestingly is also about 1.6 square miles, just like the "center city core" and DT SF), or 5 times larger going by the incorrect 7.8 square mile definition...you're not trying to say that you think Philly's downtown is bigger in land area than downtown Chicago, are you? I think that right there outlines just how much extra area is taken in by the "extended" Center City definition. It's honestly pretty ridiculous to consider much, if anything, beyond the "center city core" as being within Philly's downtown.

Seriously, these following areas are considered "center city/downtown" when using that extended 5.6 square mile definition:

Philadelphia, PA - Google Maps
Philadelphia, PA - Google Maps
Philadelphia, PA - Google Maps
Philadelphia, PA - Google Maps


Sorry, but those do not look like downtown areas to me.

Maybe I'll "extend" downtown SF so that it encompasses 5.6 or 7.8 square miles too. I can assure you the 5.6 to 7.8 square miles including/surrounding downtown SF has at least as many people as the equivalent area in Philly, or at least comes close, and I'd be willing to bet the same is true of Chicago, and Boston can't be too far off from those three either...though at the moment I don't feel like spending any more time mining through data just to prove you wrong. But really, it doesn't matter, as 7.8 or 5.6 square miles would be way bigger than downtown SF, Boston, or Chicago anyways, just as it's way bigger than the true downtown Philly area (AKA the "center city core").

Center City Philly is big, no doubt, but you guys really need to put to rest the myth that it's the 3rd largest downtown in the US. None of the stats really add up to prove that claim, whether it's in terms of office space, highrises, or residential population, unless you use the gigantically inflated "extended center city" measurement, which is really just a comparison of apples to oranges when paired up against most other US downtowns, which largely are defined by much more conservative and realistic boundaries (and even with the extended center city definition, center city Philly still would not have the 3rd highest amount of office space in the US, and neither would it have the 3rd largest number of highrises in the US).

Anyways...

I'd say the ranking of the five biggest downtown populations in the US would most likely be:

1. NYC
2. Chicago
3. SF
4. Philadelphia
5. Boston

In terms of office space, the top 5 would be:

1. NYC
2. Chicago
3. Washington DC
4. SF
5. Boston

[75 South]

Interesting thread. I hope the top 5 post some pics.

[nei]

The Chicago Loop is somewhat larger than Downtown New York (Manhattan)

Not very many people live in the actual Downtown of Boston but the surrounding neighborhoods have lots of people and daytime visitors. Boston's downtown is smaller than Philly but the center city is still vibrant; the cities are laid out differently.

[nei]

Originally Posted by 75 South

Interesting thread. I hope the top 5 post some pics.

Here's two streetviews of Downtown Manhattan:

New York, NY - Google Maps

New York, NY - Google Maps

Not quite "downtown" in the business sense but belongs geographically:

New York, NY - Google Maps

Love the cast iron and cobblestone.

[NewToCA]

Downtown New York, Chicago and Toronto clearly are the most impressive in North America.

Regarding the rather extensive discussion about Philly and San Francisco, as someone born and raised in Philly and having spent the past six years in NorCal I've seen a LOT of both cities. From my own personal viewpoint, downtown SF isn't nearly as big, nor impressive, as downtown Philly.

I like SF quite a bit, and we go down there at least a few times a year to stay a few nights right in the heart of downtown. So I don't state this to put it down at all, we really like it a lot. But...it isn't nearly as big as downtown Philly. I'm not going by stats, a lot of that stuff is "how you use it", but rather from actually being in both places quite often.

By the way, if what we are looking for here is urban feel, being vibrant and dense, I'd go with Seattle as having a pretty impressive downtown area too.

[FAReastcoast]

Originally Posted by nei

The Chicago Loop is somewhat larger than Downtown New York (Manhattan)

If your using the Chicago Loop by it's official boundaries, it is actually quite a bit smaller than lower Manhattan, but if your definition of The Loop is the entire "downtown" of Chicago (Loop + Rivernorth/Near North Side, etc) that area is indeed larger than Lower Manhattan.

[rainrock]

Originally Posted by rah

Downtown SF has more towers, more office space, and more residents within an equivalent area, when compared to Philly.

Dude I was replying to the DC jackals. I never mentioned SF.

Downtown San Francisco is also about 1.6 square miles, coincidentally, but it packs 80,000 residents into that area, as well as 40 million more square feet of office space than in Philly.

I wont believe this without reputable sources.Need legitimate links in regards to both population and office space. Personal research and guesstimates will not suffice.

I'd guess that maybe 5,000 to 10,000 extra residents are counted for SF when measuring with tracts, because some tracts that include downtown areas happen to extend beyond downtown as well...but with a lead of over 20,000 residents within an equivalent area to center city, DT SF would undoubtedly still come out ahead

very amusing. Sure it would.

National educated link on downtown population please?

Just as I take the Philly CCD info with slight trepidation so shall I take your above very personal unscientific data.

I have seen research with SF having a small lead over Center City Philly in regards to office space. I have Never seen a legitimate link saying downtown SF is more populated than Center City Philadelphia.

[SirGreenDown]

Originally Posted by rainrock

Dude I was replying to the DC jackals. I never mentioned SF.






I wont believe this without reputable sources.Need legitimate links in regards to both population and office space. Personal research and guesstimates will not suffice.





very amusing. Sure it would.

National educated link on downtown population please?

Just as I take the Philly CCD info with slight trepidation so shall I take your above very personal unscientific data.

I have seen research with SF having a small lead over Center City Philly in regards to office space. I have Never seen a legitimate link saying downtown SF is more populated than Center City Philadelphia.

And you probably wont. He/she did a long rant boo'hooing without giving any links backing up his/her claims. Like most of his/her post. This poster should change their name to 'Meh..' to reflect their post's.

[nei]

Originally Posted by FAReastcoast

If your using the Chicago Loop by it's official boundaries, it is actually quite a bit smaller than lower Manhattan, but if your definition of The Loop is the entire "downtown" of Chicago (Loop + Rivernorth/Near North Side, etc) that area is indeed larger than Lower Manhattan.

True. I should have just said "Downtown Chicago".

I was thinking more in terms of Downtown Chicago being bigger than Downtown Manhattan in terms of number of workers, office square footage, etc.

[Java Jolt]

Originally Posted by munchitup

Downtown LA is quite large, and comparable to EC cities, in both physical size and population.

(Not to mention it is not a city built on sprawl - like say, Phoenix )

I wrote that downtown Los Angeles is large but I would dispute your claim how it's comparable to eastern cities.

For ranking number two in the nation for total city population, Los Angeles still has a rather limited downtown. Smaller-populated eastern cities and San Francisco have larger downtowns.

Los Angeles was built on sprawl, I don't know how you can claim otherwise. The whole city spreads out over 400 square miles.

Phoenix and other western cities copied the sprawled-out nature of Los Angeles. The good thing is Los Angeles is now more urban than it used to be.