The Largest Cores (better, places, America, Boston)

[the resident09]

Originally Posted by nephi215

Largest core as in continously built heart of a metro area regardless if its a classic urban city or new urban style with more autocentric development.

1. NYC
2. LA
3. Chicago
4. Philadelphia
5. San Francisco
6. DC
7. Boston
8. Miami
9. Seattle
10. Houston

There's a lot of subjectivity going around already early in this thread, but based on the OP's description I gather this would be the answer to the correct order. Although could Seattle and Miami be flipped?

[atadytic19]

Yeah, it looks like he left it open for you to define what the core is in your city, and in that core he is asking for the population.

He gave Manhattan as an example, although I personally refer to the entire city as the core.well not so much Long Island.

But it is subjective, and I do think it is interesting to hear from locals what they consider the core in their metro. For his city he gave the inner loop. That's a 90 sq mile area. Pretty big but I would have also included the Uptown area with that

[NigerianNightmare]

I think my question got misinterpreted.

I do not mean the most urban or dense part of the city. Although their is massive overlap. I’m talking about the part of the city that people living in the metro area consider the “core”. Nearly everywhere win Houston the core is defined as “The Inner Loop”, which is 97 square miles and massive, theirs lots of industrial stuff there, lots of single family homes, but the entire area is either gentrified or will be soon (10-20+ years) While in NYC the core is considered Manhattan which isn’t that big land area wise.

When I said Physically biggest core I mean by definition of square miles. As we have already talked about core size when it talks to urbanity/density ad nauseum. We already know the densest core neighborhoods. But I mean what do people call the core colloquially.

For example Center City is basically a bigger Downtown, but when people say their going to the core or center of Philly do they mean, just Center City? In Houston Downtown is just one neighborhood that makes up the much larger core area. The only area that people question whether it’s the core or not is Uptown, which is just outside the inner loop.


I’m not trying to get a list of the largest cities in the country that are urban. But the largest cores in the city by size and how they relate to their surrounding city/metro.

The core in small cities can be the entirety of the city, Miami is only 36 square miles so I can see people considering Miami+Miami Beach as the core, I know to some extent some people consider all of Miami-Dade the “center” or “core” of the Miami area but that’s a really expansive definition.

[the resident09]

Well I'd say there's two discussions for "core" regarding DC at least.

First. The urban city core from Columbia Heights southward to the Potomac River, and anything West of the Anacostia. I'd also say that expands across the river to Rosslyn-Ballston corridor, Columbia Pike, and Crystal City, and possibly Alexandria. Anacostia just East of the river would be included too. Across this area you find building heights of at least 4-5 stories, with the average being about 9-11 stories, across the Potomac buildings top 30 stories. You can make out this from simply landing at DCA airport, and tell what's the true "urbanity" of DC and the scale of it. This would be the definition most people living in the city itself would tell you.


Second. The metro area defined "core" in which many people who don't live in the core would consider either "the city" or "the urban core". This would essentially include much of, if not all the original "District Diamond" that includes Arlington and all of Alexandria city, as well as some outer edges of MD immediate burbs that border DC as you cross the street like Silver Spring, Chevy Chase/Bethesda, and even a place like National Harbor or a couple of border areas along the PG/DC line.

^^^ looking at Census tracts and density around the area that "urban city core" probably would have to be expanded some. There are Census tracts East of the Anancostia river above 26,000 ppsm, and numerous around 12-16k per square mile.

[TheTimidBlueBars]

Originally Posted by NigerianNightmare

Which core is the most different from the rest of the metro/city/ which core is the most similar?

Most different is probably the Rust Belt cities that have seen massive urban decay/white flight. Detroit, Cleveland, St. Louis, Buffalo, etc.

Most similar is probably newer, suburban cities that have never had a large minority population or a high poverty rate. Boise, Fargo, Sioux Falls, Madison WI come to mind

[Joakim3]

Originally Posted by austiNati

This almost seems perfect. If there were another tier, I would say:

1) Seattle
2) The Twin Cities (Downtown Saint Paul to Downtown Minneapolis)
3) The Las Vegas Strip to Downtown
4) New Orleans
5) Baltimore Inner Harbor and surrounding areas to John Hopkins
6) Detroit (Downtown to New Center, and north to Grosse Point)
7) Denver
8) San Diego
9) Kansas City (Country Club Plaza to the River)
10) Pittsburgh (Triangle to Oakland)

Shout out to Saint Louis and San Antonio

While New Orleans core is very vibrant, size wise (geographically/urbanely speaking) it’s arguably the smallest of these cities listed.

Apart from that… its pretty spot on

[mhays25]

What is the "core" is a purely personal definition, even if many people share a convenient set of boundaries.


For that matter, "core" can mean anything.

[Boston Shudra]

Originally Posted by NigerianNightmare

I do not mean the most urban or dense part of the city. Although their is massive overlap. I’m talking about the part of the city that people living in the metro area consider the “core”. Nearly everywhere win Houston the core is defined as “The Inner Loop”,

The Boston area’s “Inner Loop” is Route 128. It is a semi-circle that stretches roughly from Beverly in the north to Quincy in the south about 32 miles. It centers on Boston in the east and reaches Waltham in the west about 12 miles. The area within is give-or-take about 300 square miles.

[NigerianNightmare]

Originally Posted by Boston Shudra

The Boston area’s “Inner Loop” is Route 128. It is a semi-circle that stretches roughly from Beverly in the north to Quincy in the south about 32 miles. It centers on Boston in the east and reaches Waltham in the west about 12 miles. The area within is give-or-take about 300 square miles.

But don’t the majority of Bostonians in the MSA live inside Route 128. Or am, I mistaken? I always thought the core for Boston was the Northern half of the city+Cambridge and Somerville, but if it’s that much bigger area that’s interesting.

[Boston Shudra]

Originally Posted by NigerianNightmare

But don’t the majority of Bostonians in the MSA live inside Route 128. Or am, I mistaken? I always thought the core for Boston was the Northern half of the city+Cambridge and Somerville, but if it’s that much bigger area that’s interesting.

A majority? Maybe. The towns between 128 and I-495 (the Outer Ring) are pretty sparsely populated, and 495 skirts the edges of the Worcester and Providence MSAs.

Breaking it down by town is a bit trickier. If Cambridge and Somerville are “core”, then so are others like Chelsea, Everett, and Dorchester (neighborhood, but Cambridge’s twin in terms of size and population). If I look at the area on Google maps, I’d kind of draw it out like this:



So the entire city of Boston as well as Somerville, Cambridge, Watertown, Dedham, Waltham, Quincy, Winthrop, Revere, Chelsea, Everett, Malden. Maybe Arlington, Belmont, and Norwood. The line leaves out Newton, Brookline, and Milton which may be controversial. That’s the real core of the area. Salem and Lynn to the north are kind of their own things. Same with Woburn, Stoneham, and Wakefield.