Physical Size - Boston vs Philadelphia vs DC (live, best, state)

[the resident09]

Originally Posted by Duderino

It's the conundrum of the concentrated urban core versus multi-nodal metro areas.

Philadelphia packs it's punch, by far, in the 15 mile radius around Center City compared to DC.

Boston does this slightly less so than Philly, but much more than DC. It's also still a bit more multi-nodal than Philly.

DC has a baseline of development/urbanism that's farthest-reaching, but it feels the most sporadic compared to Philly or Boston.

They all 3 pack punch because they are 3 of the 6/7 major urban centers in the nation, and it's apparent who looking at each cities radius where the most of their punches are packed at.

Philly and Boston really only stay more densely populated than DC from a radius of the central city core up through and between a 6-9 mi radius. After that DC and it's surrounding environs take off and never look backwards.

Radius population of each:
(Boston is a little hampered by water in some of these, although not enough to change the order):

6.2mi from "downtown" center
Philadelphia, PA- 1,255,522
Boston, MA- 1,244,321
Washington DC - 1,173,954

9.32mi from "downtown" center
Philadelphia, PA City Hall- 2,110,551
Washington, DC- 2,050,460
Boston, MA Fenway- 1,713,559

12.4 mi from "downtown" center
Washington, DC- 2,787,918
Philadelphia, PA- 2,718,833
Boston, MA- 2,107,002

15.5mi from "downtown" center
Washington, DC- 3,427,319
Philadelphia, PA- 3,317,395
Boston, MA- 2,512,793

[MarketStEl]

Originally Posted by Irehdna

Tysons is much closer to DC than KOP is to Philly. But the biggest thing is the frequent metro rail connection. Not having to think about when a train is and easily hop on to Arlington or DC Proper is what makes Tysons feel much more like an extension of DC than KOP is of Philly.

The only way to KOP is by road.

SEPTA wanted to change that with a spur off the Norristown High-Speed Line — our 116-year-old light metro line, once an interurban that went from 69th Street Terminal in Upper Darby all the way to Allentown — that would have served the mall and the office park but would have stopped short of the Instant Urbanist development that was made for this sort of thing, the Village at Valley Forge/King of Prussia Town Center.

But even though the project drew criticism even from rail fans, SEPTA pressed on until the Feds said, "If you want us to pony up for this, you will need to have the money on hand to cover the cost overruns."

SEPTA then shelved the project, earlier this year.

I covered that project for Phillymag and gradually went from supporter to skeptic myself. The skepticism came from the really low projected ridership and high cost-per-new-rider figures.

Yes, that means that people taking SEPTA to KofP will still be condemned to slogging their way to it on the bus routes that go up the Schuylkill Expressway. But since most of them are workers, and the rail spur wouldn't have attracted enough other riders, I guess they don't matter in the grand scheme of things.

[MarketStEl]

Originally Posted by the resident09

They all 3 pack punch because they are 3 of the 6/7 major urban centers in the nation, and it's apparent who looking at each cities radius where the most of their punches are packed at.

Philly and Boston really only stay more densely populated than DC from a radius of the central city core up through and between a 6-9 mi radius. After that DC and it's surrounding environs take off and never look backwards.

Radius population of each:
(Boston is a little hampered by water in some of these, although not enough to change the order):

6.2mi from "downtown" center
Philadelphia, PA- 1,255,522
Boston, MA- 1,244,321
Washington DC - 1,173,954

9.32mi from "downtown" center
Philadelphia, PA City Hall- 2,110,551
Washington, DC- 2,050,460
Boston, MA Fenway- 1,713,559

12.4 mi from "downtown" center
Washington, DC- 2,787,918
Philadelphia, PA- 2,718,833
Boston, MA- 2,107,002

15.5mi from "downtown" center
Washington, DC- 3,427,319
Philadelphia, PA- 3,317,395
Boston, MA- 2,512,793

'
Those figures suggest to me that the gap between Philadelphia and DC is not as large as the phrase I boldfaced makes it out to be.

At 12.4 miles, the difference between the two is just about 70,000, and at 15.5 miles, it's about 110,000. The gap between Boston and Philadelphia at both those distances is greater than that between Philadelphia and DC.

FWIW, I would have made either the Massachusetts State House or the Old State House the "center" for Boston. i doubt, however, that would have changed the numbers all that much.

[the resident09]

Originally Posted by MarketStEl

'
Those figures suggest to me that the gap between Philadelphia and DC is not as large as the phrase I boldfaced makes it out to be.

At 12.4 miles, the difference between the two is just about 70,000, and at 15.5 miles, it's about 110,000. The gap between Boston and Philadelphia at both those distances is greater than that between Philadelphia and DC.

FWIW, I would have made either the Massachusetts State House or the Old State House the "center" for Boston. i doubt, however, that would have changed the numbers all that much.

Philadelphia and DC stay "close" or remain peers for a bit longer, with DC separating a bit at every 3 mile interval. Boston's got sustained size for a bit it just doesn't shoot up or drop off much regardless of where you place the radius circle. So regardless of the water you can't really cherry pick a side and see the population zoom up.

[odurandina]

Originally Posted by the resident09

Radius population of each:
(Boston is a little hampered by water in some of these, although not enough to change the order):

6.2mi from "downtown" center
Philadelphia, PA- 1,255,522
Boston, MA- 1,244,321
Washington DC - 1,173,954

9.32mi from "downtown" center
Philadelphia, PA City Hall- 2,110,551
Washington, DC- 2,050,460
Boston, MA Fenway- 1,713,559

Thanks for this comparison. Probably about 2 radian's worth of arc to the East of Boston's Downtown center is the Mystic River Seaway, and Boston Harbor. There's only really a scant bit of land falling within that arc.... including Logan Airport. Back Bay also takes up another good chunk.
Philly has the Delaware..... and DC/ the Potomac.
They're all very dense [for North America].

[btownboss4]

Originally Posted by odurandina

Thanks for this comparison. Probably about 2 radian's worth of arc to the East of Boston's Downtown center is the Mystic River Seaway, and Boston Harbor. There's only really a scant bit of land falling within that arc.... including Logan Airport.

I would be pretty surprised if the population density on the actual land at 9.32 sq miles isn’t nearly identical between Boston and DC.

But also I think that kind of proves Philly is the answer here. Like you can argue I think all three cities have ~150sq miles of “the city”

DC has a most consistent suburban build but by the time DC passes Philly you are so clearly in the suburbs and not Cambrudge/Arlington/Camden “suburbs” but like proper suburbs

[UrbanQuest]

Originally Posted by the resident09

They all 3 pack punch because they are 3 of the 6/7 major urban centers in the nation, and it's apparent who looking at each cities radius where the most of their punches are packed at.

Philly and Boston really only stay more densely populated than DC from a radius of the central city core up through and between a 6-9 mi radius. After that DC and it's surrounding environs take off and never look backwards.

Radius population of each:
(Boston is a little hampered by water in some of these, although not enough to change the order):

6.2mi from "downtown" center
Philadelphia, PA- 1,255,522
Boston, MA- 1,244,321
Washington DC - 1,173,954

9.32mi from "downtown" center
Philadelphia, PA City Hall- 2,110,551
Washington, DC- 2,050,460
Boston, MA Fenway- 1,713,559

12.4 mi from "downtown" center
Washington, DC- 2,787,918
Philadelphia, PA- 2,718,833
Boston, MA- 2,107,002

15.5mi from "downtown" center
Washington, DC- 3,427,319
Philadelphia, PA- 3,317,395
Boston, MA- 2,512,793

Boston must get clobbered by its coastal position be these metrics.

In the case for DC, I don’t feel that built up suburbs make a city feel larger in general. LA and Chicago are good examples of this. LA should feel much larger, though it doesn’t.

[masssachoicetts]

Originally Posted by UrbanQuest

Boston must get clobbered by its coastal position be these metrics.

In the case for DC, I don’t feel that built up suburbs make a city feel larger in general. LA and Chicago are good examples of this. LA should feel much larger, though it doesn’t.

Yes to Coastal, but I think people generally don’t understand how much density falls pff a cliff ~7 miles from the CBD. It is so apparent, unless you are smacked up against the coast like Quincy (~11,000 ppsm, excluding BHR) and Lynn (16,000 ppsm, excluding Lynn Woods). But hop over the borders to Milton and Lynnfield respectively and density falls by 60-80%.

While Boston has legislation to change this, MBTA Communities, its pretty low density outside the core. They have lots of transit but no TOD. This will soon change and with the consistently high demand to move to Boston, and amount of land available to build on, there could be 200-300,000 multi family units built as a result. Almost 150,000 of those fall within 12 miles of Boston.

I think Boston, despite its high population growth, will actually see housing production trend upward from 2025-2035 by a good margin compared to 2015-2025. Especially when/if interest rates falls in 2-3 years. The zoning is now in place, the destruction of the MBTA is in the spotlight and infrastructure improvements are on the top of the list for the state to address. With money pouring into infrastructure improvements for the MBTA and MassDOT alike coupled with stark zoning changes that have been accepted by all but a few communities, there really is no reason that the region doesn’t grow fast into the next 10 years given that there is the equivalent to a Lower Manhattan of just labs being built in the core. Lol. This will help Boston bulk up and I fully expect it to see DC area level growth in the next 10 years as the state seems to be prioritizing things correctly and lining up the cards in their right place.

There has seemingly been a renaissance of change hitting Boston recently, for the better. There is a nightlife czar to make the city “less boring” and I am starting to see Boston is much more lively than it was in the 2010s after a lull of closing establishments. The new mayor, Michelle Wu, just approved an overhaul of the BPDA and has radically changed zoning in the city of Boston around North Station to allow higher/denser buildings to be built. The plan for Nubian Square is absolutely revolutionary. Ferris Wheel in Charlestown? Entertainment District with Casinos and Gambling and Stadiums??! What is this, LV? It seems like Boston is having a changing of the guard as the average age is 34 now and younger people (under 50) really want Boston to bigger and better than it is now. This is the most change we have seen in recent history in/around Boston, even more-so than in the mid 90s when Boston went from a backwater city with a good education /healthcare city to topping the ranks in almost everything good. It stagnated since the Big Dig in a lot of ways, but now the evolving is well underway.

[the resident09]

Originally Posted by UrbanQuest

Boston must get clobbered by its coastal position be these metrics.

In the case for DC, I don’t feel that built up suburbs make a city feel larger in general. LA and Chicago are good examples of this. LA should feel much larger, though it doesn’t.

Well as I've been explaining it's not altering the order after a certain point, and not that far out from the center. Physical size relates to how grand a place is, or broad shoulders feel. It also worth noting Boston's punch is the shortest of these three which regardless of how dense the core is, I don't think is a huge debate. Does Boston feel physically larger than LA? Not even DC would try to claim that.

You can play around with the radius tool for yourself and see, past about 11/12km (7 mi), it doesn't matter where you place the point in or around Boston, past that point you don't achieve the same populations as Philly or DC. Try selecting City Hall for Philly and the Washington Monument or White House for DC.

https://www.tomforth.co.uk/circlepopulations/

Boston's population heavily follows the water around compared to the other two, and stays dense along that stretch, it's just not "bigger" or "physically larger" across land. It can easily be called the most urban in the immediate core though.

[MarketStEl]

Originally Posted by masssachoicetts

Yes to Coastal, but I think people generally don’t understand how much density falls pff a cliff ~7 miles from the CBD. It is so apparent, unless you are smacked up against the coast like Quincy (~11,000 ppsm, excluding BHR) and Lynn (16,000 ppsm, excluding Lynn Woods). But hop over the borders to Milton and Lynnfield respectively and density falls by 60-80%.

While Boston has legislation to change this, MBTA Communities, its pretty low density outside the core. They have lots of transit but no TOD. This will soon change and with the consistently high demand to move to Boston, and amount of land available to build on, there could be 200-300,000 multi family units built as a result. Almost 150,000 of those fall within 12 miles of Boston.

I think Boston, despite its high population growth, will actually see housing production trend upward from 2025-2035 by a good margin compared to 2015-2025. Especially when/if interest rates falls in 2-3 years. The zoning is now in place, the destruction of the MBTA is in the spotlight and infrastructure improvements are on the top of the list for the state to address. With money pouring into infrastructure improvements for the MBTA and MassDOT alike coupled with stark zoning changes that have been accepted by all but a few communities, there really is no reason that the region doesn’t grow fast into the next 10 years given that there is the equivalent to a Lower Manhattan of just labs being built in the core. Lol. This will help Boston bulk up and I fully expect it to see DC area level growth in the next 10 years as the state seems to be prioritizing things correctly and lining up the cards in their right place.

There has seemingly been a renaissance of change hitting Boston recently, for the better. There is a nightlife czar to make the city “less boring” and I am starting to see Boston is much more lively than it was in the 2010s after a lull of closing establishments. The new mayor, Michelle Wu, just approved an overhaul of the BPDA and has radically changed zoning in the city of Boston around North Station to allow higher/denser buildings to be built. The plan for Nubian Square is absolutely revolutionary. Ferris Wheel in Charlestown? Entertainment District with Casinos and Gambling and Stadiums??! What is this, LV? It seems like Boston is having a changing of the guard as the average age is 34 now and younger people (under 50) really want Boston to bigger and better than it is now. This is the most change we have seen in recent history in/around Boston, even more-so than in the mid 90s when Boston went from a backwater city with a good education /healthcare city to topping the ranks in almost everything good. It stagnated since the Big Dig in a lot of ways, but now the evolving is well underway.

Wait, what?

What's going to replace it?