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.
It sounds like you’re describing downtown versus urban core. The urban core usually does include residential only neighborhoods. I would say the urban core stops when neighborhoods become mostly single family homes whether attached or detached. Maybe a neighborhood here or there of rowhouses can be included if it also has multifamily apartments or condos. With this definition, the only neighborhood that would have to be removed is Capitol Hill. All of the others have an even mix of both.
How do you create an apples to apples definition for all cities though?
Definitions of "core" are subjective but I believe core boundaries for the majority of cities track very well with their late 19th/early 20th century development patterns. For example, the core you described for DC is substantially the same as what you see in this map from 1900.
Areas developed after this period never seem as walkable. Navy Yard, for example, will never feel as "tight" or "urban" as Logan Circle no matter how many 11 story boxes they build there.
Definitions of "core" are subjective but I believe core boundaries for the majority of cities track very well with their late 19th/early 20th century development patterns. For example, the core you described for DC is substantially the same as what you see in this map from 1900.
Areas developed after this period never seem as walkable. Navy Yard, for example, will never feel as "tight" or "urban" as Logan Circle no matter how many 11 story boxes they build there.
Navy Yard is part of the map from 1900 you posted. I think the biggest difference when comparing Navy Yard to Logan Circle is the blank canvas and upzoning that took place in Navy Yard. The grid is still there.
What has been removed from Navy Yard/Buzzard Point/SW Waterfront, is the rear yards and low density alleys. Similar to many parts of DC and Philly, they have yards or alley's in the back of their rowhouses. Now, it’s just a building with zero lot development and no setback with walls right up against alleys like any other downtown CBD across America.
Areas like this in Center City are what has changed in Navy Yard: Center City Philly
Or Areas like this in Logan Circle are what has changed in Navy Yard: Logan Circle
That's probably the biggest difference between the development styles. Now those areas look like this in Navy Yard:
Using Joakim3's population tool, here are the densest 3km radiuses I could find. I'm sure you can squeak out numbers a bit higher by using a different point on the map but I doubt the numbers will be much higher. Boston seems to be hurt here by its small size and proximity to water.
Uptown/South Bronx - 782,299 (97,787 ppsm)
Brooklyn - 632,272 (79,034 ppsm)
Los Angeles - 359,203 (44,900 ppsm)
San Francisco - 329,036 (41,129 ppsm)
Philadelphia - 252,704 (31,588 ppsm)
Chicago - 248,235 (31,029 ppsm)
Washington - 233,682 (29,210 ppsm)
Boston - 213,469 (26,683 ppsm)
Baltimore - 154,946 (19,368 ppsm)
Using Joakim3's population tool, here are the densest 3km radiuses I could find. I'm sure you can squeak out numbers a bit higher by using a different point on the map but I doubt the numbers will be much higher. Boston seems to be hurt here by its small size and proximity to water.
Uptown/South Bronx - 782,299 (97,787 ppsm)
Brooklyn - 632,272 (79,034 ppsm)
Los Angeles - 359,203 (44,900 ppsm)
San Francisco - 329,036 (41,129 ppsm)
Philadelphia - 252,704 (31,588 ppsm)
Chicago - 248,235 (31,029 ppsm) Washington - 233,682 (29,210 ppsm)
Boston - 213,469 (26,683 ppsm)
Baltimore - 154,946 (19,368 ppsm)
Nice work! Did the 3K radius in DC include the Downtown DC BID area and Golden Triangle BID area? Specifically the areas north of the National Mall and south of Massachusetts Avenue NW?
Nice work! Did the 3K radius in DC include the Downtown DC BID area and Golden Triangle BID area? Specifically the areas north of the National Mall and south of Massachusetts Avenue NW?
I believe so. But you could look here and see if you can find a higher number.
I played around with it and the highest number I could get that includes the Downtown DC BID, Golden Triangle BID, Northwest One, Mt. Vernon Triangle, NOMA, and Union Market is 224,443 in DC. To the north of that, I got to 234,460, but the southern border was Downtown DC so it didn't include any of the areas I just mentioned. The neighborhoods I just mentioned still have a lot of growing to do from a development standpoint. Even though this area is about 10,000 people lower than the area to the north, that area is going to add about 150,000 people between them when the dust settles. That puts that area at 374,443 in the future just from new development. That's without any of Navy Yard/Buzzard Point/SW Waterfront which would not fit in the radius.
Another significant set of data to study with the population totals you provided is how each city achieves their population. Which cities have high household sizes versus higher density of units? I would think South Bronx and LA definitely achieve their density through lower income families with larger household sizes that include a lot of children.
Last edited by MDAllstar; 08-14-2023 at 08:31 AM..
Using Joakim3's population tool, here are the densest 3km radiuses I could find. I'm sure you can squeak out numbers a bit higher by using a different point on the map but I doubt the numbers will be much higher. Boston seems to be hurt here by its small size and proximity to water.
Uptown/South Bronx - 782,299 (97,787 ppsm)
Brooklyn - 632,272 (79,034 ppsm)
Los Angeles - 359,203 (44,900 ppsm)
San Francisco - 329,036 (41,129 ppsm)
Philadelphia - 252,704 (31,588 ppsm)
Chicago - 248,235 (31,029 ppsm)
Washington - 233,682 (29,210 ppsm)
Boston - 213,469 (26,683 ppsm)
Baltimore - 154,946 (19,368 ppsm)
Wow at LA. I know it's certainly denser than it get's credit for but wouldn't have expected it above SF.
Location: That star on your map in the middle of the East Coast, DMV
8,128 posts, read 7,558,075 times
Reputation: 5785
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duderino
Wow at LA. I know it's certainly denser than it get's credit for but wouldn't have expected it above SF.
This goes back to the discussions I've had with numerous LA posters. The most "urban" areas like Central LA are considered that way, not on block by block urbanity compared to the Eastern cities, but on the broad scale size of the street grid, and how expansive the area is while still holding a strong population density. It's what separates LA from places like Houston or Dallas. Because the core population is so beastly. LA's still apples to oranges with East + SF, and I'm going to do another break down with the newer population radius tool Joakim posted upthread.
Last edited by the resident09; 08-14-2023 at 09:20 AM..
Another significant set of data to study with the population totals you provided is how each city achieves their population. Which cities have high household sizes versus higher density of units? I would think South Bronx and LA definitely achieve their density through lower income families with larger household sizes that include a lot of children.
Let's see.
90006 - 20,912 units (11,006 units per sq. mi.)
20009 - 31,032 units (23,870 units per sq. mi.)
10021 - 30,022 units (75,055 units per sq. mi.)
10452 - 32,745 units (29,768 units per sq. mi.)
10453 - 28,491 units (31,656 units per sq. mi.)
20001 - 25,824 units (12,912 units per sq. mi.)
20010 - 15,560 units (15,560 units per sq. mi.)
19103 - 19,171 units (31,951 units per sq. mi.)
11226 - 40,713 units (31,317 units per sq. mi.)
60654 - 16,392 units (32,784 units per sq. mi.)
Last edited by BajanYankee; 08-14-2023 at 09:32 AM..
90006 - 20,912 units (11,006 units per sq. mi.)
20009 - 31,032 units (23,870 units per sq. mi.)
10021 - 30,022 units (75,055 units per sq. mi.)
10452 - 32,745 units (29,768 units per sq. mi.)
10453 - 28,491 units (31,656 units per sq. mi.)
20001 - 25,824 units (12,912 units per sq. mi.)
20010 - 15,560 units (15,560 units per sq. mi.)
19103 - 19,171 units (31,951 units per sq. mi.)
11226 - 40,713 units (31,317 units per sq. mi.)
60654 - 16,392 units (32,784 units per sq. mi.)
Nice work again! So I was right about LA. The LA zip code has a substantially higher population density with less than half of the units DC or Philly have.
LA = 90006 - 20,912 units (11,006 units per sq. mi.)
DC = 20009 - 31,032 units (23,870 units per sq. mi.)
Manhattan = 10021 - 30,022 units (75,055 units per sq. mi.)
Bronx = 10452 - 32,745 units (29,768 units per sq. mi.)
Bronx = 10453 - 28,491 units (31,656 units per sq. mi.)
DC = 20001 - 25,824 units (12,912 units per sq. mi.)
DC = 20010 - 15,560 units (15,560 units per sq. mi.)
Philly = 19103 - 19,171 units (31,951 units per sq. mi.)
Brooklyn = 11226 - 40,713 units (31,317 units per sq. mi.)
Chicago = 60654 - 16,392 units (32,784 units per sq. mi.)
Moving forward, I could see a zip code like 20005 in DC reaching the units per sq. mile of 19103 in Philly and 60654 in Chicago with all the conversions that will take place in that area and the small land area.
DC Zip Code 20005
0.4 square miles
31,013 people per square mile
9,853 housing units (24,632 units per sq. mi.)
Philly Zip Code 19103
0.6 square miles
39,300.3 people per square mile
19,171 housing units (31,952 units per sq. mi.)
Chicago Zip Code 60654
0.5 square miles
40,345.4 people per square mile
16,392 housing units (32,784 units per sq. mi.)
Last edited by MDAllstar; 08-14-2023 at 10:26 AM..
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.