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 municipal government of Montreal announced a $1.8B 10-year revitalization plan of downtown (the plan is horrible, btw). However, in the plan, they modified the boundaries of what downtown is. East Papineau has been removed from the primary downtown boundaries (ironic, since this is the worst part of downtown). Griffintown + parts of Little Burgundy are now officially part of downtown and it has been extended South to the river, where a planned community of ~9K units is currently being planned. The "influence zone" is essentially the same thing as a "greater downtown", which would make Montreal's one of the largest downtown's on the continent.
The most current estimate of population downtown is 118,000, up 14% between 2022-23, however, StatsCan, Quebec Institute of Statistics and the city all use different definitions of downtown, so the population growth is most likely higher.
But this makes me wonder, I know other cities in the U.S and Canada have introduced revitalization plans, have they also modified downtown boundaries? It would be awesome to share and compare plans.
Philadelphia hasn't changed the boundaries of its downtown or its zone of influence.
The downtown boundaries are uniformly agreed upon: they are the borders of the 1682 Town/1701 City of Philadelphia, commonly called "Center City" here.
The Central Philadelphia Development Corporation/Center City District sets the northern boundary of the zone of influence ("Greater Center City") at Girard Avenue and the southern one at Tasker Street; the rivers remain the east and west boundaries. (East of Front Street, the boundary turns off Girard and onto Frankford Avenue south to the Delaware River.)
The centers of commercial and office activity in Center City and West Philadelphia have been growing towards each other, especially since the two universities that are West Philly's largest employers lie just across the Schuylkill from Center City. But no one has yet moved to define eastern West Philly ("University City") as an extension of Center City, largely because the universities are anchor institutions whose zone of influence also doesn't cross the river.
Even if core organizations use similiar definitions for Philly (for their specific purposes), any guy on the street can have a different opinion. People on this board sure do, often for good reasons.
Philadelphia hasn't changed the boundaries of its downtown or its zone of influence.
The downtown boundaries are uniformly agreed upon: they are the borders of the 1682 Town/1701 City of Philadelphia, commonly called "Center City" here.
The Central Philadelphia Development Corporation/Center City District sets the northern boundary of the zone of influence ("Greater Center City") at Girard Avenue and the southern one at Tasker Street; the rivers remain the east and west boundaries. (East of Front Street, the boundary turns off Girard and onto Frankford Avenue south to the Delaware River.)
The centers of commercial and office activity in Center City and West Philadelphia have been growing towards each other, especially since the two universities that are West Philly's largest employers lie just across the Schuylkill from Center City. But no one has yet moved to define eastern West Philly ("University City") as an extension of Center City, largely because the universities are anchor institutions whose zone of influence also doesn't cross the river.
Is there any reason Tasker Street was selected as the border? Does the difference in zoning between Tasker Street change to downtown zoning? The streets seem to be completely rowhouses headed toward the center of Center City from Tasker Street.
Even if core organizations use similiar definitions for Philly (for their specific purposes), any guy on the street can have a different opinion. People on this board sure do, often for good reasons.
I agree, but I also think there'd be considerable overlap among the definitions offered by people familiar with a given city's downtown. For example, in my own city, the western boundary of downtown Buffalo would be unanimously agreed upon due to geography (Lake Erie and the Niagara River border Buffalo to the west). The eastern boundary would be the easiest of the remaining three on which to reach a strong consensus--Michigan Ave is generally considered the boundary between downtown Buffalo and the city's East Side. For the northern and southern boundaries, there'd be more disagreement, but that disagreement would be largely confined to a couple blocks' worth of difference on either side. There are established neighborhoods located to both the north and south of downtown Buffalo, and neither of these neighborhoods are truly considered part of downtown by longtime residents or educated expats/visitors. That said, I myself question which specific streets should be chosen as the boundary in either case. An argument could be made for two or three different streets in both cases.
I think a similar pattern would hold for other cities if the effort to define downtown were to be 'crowdsourced'
Even if core organizations use similiar definitions for Philly (for their specific purposes), any guy on the street can have a different opinion. People on this board sure do, often for good reasons.
Maybe on what constitutes the "zone of influence," and I wiill allow that there are some who put Center City's northern border at Spring Garden Street (which would make things symmetrical according to the house numbering system: Vine Street is only 300 N while South Street is 600 S; Spring Garden is 550 N), but those are very few in number: the core downtown is very highly defined thanks to William Penn.
Wait: there are some who include the triangle formed by Pennsylvania Avenue (parallel to the Ben Franklin Parkway west of 21st), the Schuylkill and Vine Street into Center City as well. But I see much less quibbling over the boundaries here than elsewhere: most accept the ones Thomas Holme drew for William Penn.
I agree that some boundaries would be very popular. And if you have a major body of water that side may be universal.
But even then...does Downtown Seattle end at Alaskan Way or the piers across the street? I'd include all of it but a case could be made. Some purists might think of the piers as outside the CBD.
Seattle is among the harder ones to judge. Some would say Denny Way on the north, and others would add South Lake Union, Lower Queen Anne (with Space Needle), and some tendrils north of those. Some wouldn't go even as far as Denny, though their positions might have changed as development moved that way. The south has similar options. And the east would be a million variations, most probably going far beyond I-5.
As for stats, they're often for different areas than any agency or organization uses. Census tract boundaries, brokerage reports, etc., often play in.
Re: last sentence, half the top ten could be NYC 'downtowns' if midtown and lower Manhattan are considered separately and Jersey City is included as the de facto 'sixth borough'
I buy that depending on what criteria is being used and how they are being weighted. They do quite well on the residential bit, but maybe a little less solidly on the employment side of things overall. There were at times some controversy over building so much towards residential rather than commercial and office which I was especially familiar with in regards to downtown Brooklyn, but with the pandemic and the large shift towards work from home, that seems to have played out rather favorably.
"Downtown" is so subjective and varied in its factors that it's literally impossible to create a fair all-purpose comparison. This is true regardless of effort.
Lists like these are fun and have some use, and people like me get paid to create/analyze such things (I do market analysis for construction firms), but their usefulness is limited to the specific questions they address and even that requires detailed context.
Agreed. Population/amenities within a certain radius around a central point is arguably going to be the most accurate apples to apples comparison.
I concur with your observation that comparing the boundaries of Downtown areas can be akin to comparing apples to watermelons. The assertion that Downtown St. Louis has been slower to experience a resurgence aligns with my perspective as well. It's crucial to note that this evaluation might not encapsulate key areas like Downtown West, where significant development has taken place, or the thriving Riverfront. The nuances in these distinct zones contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of the city's revitalization efforts.
Interesting observations, I noticed with Montreal, they've had multiple revisions and keep changing the boundaries every 5-7 years or so, probably more than most cities. In the past, they have shrunk the size and now they have increased the size.
I know Miami has done the same, but not as many revisions. I know they have about 3 definitions of downtown, one of them being "Greater Downtown"
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.
