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.
Perhaps too much of a generalization, but the “central” parts of our big cities developed in the 18th or 19th century and remained rather static in size over much of the 20th century. And at the time, the core was largely composed of office buildings but also large components of retail (such as the huge downtown dept. stores), hotels, restaurants and, of course, transit terminals.
What these areas had precious little of was residential buildings. One simply did not live downtown and after 5 pm, many of them became ghost towns.
During the 1950s through 1970s, the fortunes of downtowns as well as the cities where they existed trended downward as the new interstates (which ripped these cities apart) in the start of the car centered allowed for white flight to suburbia and a hollowing out of the industrial, dangerous, decaying urban areas, certainly fueled by the growth of nonwhite population.
It is hard to say when gentrification first began in a desire for an urban lifestyle, basically alien to the nation’s existence, began to rise. Certainly the 1980s could be considered that time.
Downtowns didn’t shrink in the postwar era, at least not in land area. But they did decay and a enities were lost.
If we view the eighties as the real start to the “return to the city movement”, still holding strong today, we see a time, the first time in ages that we started to see anan expanding downtown footprint, life style generated and now with a strong high rise residential component and with entertainments ootions rising, public spaces created and wealth growing
This thread is about the expanding footprint of the downtowns which didn’t see land size expand in ages.
If “downtown” meant the lowest tip of Manhattan, chicago’s Loop and Philly’s Center City, that area was seen to grow. In Chicago of the eighties, it was identified as the “Super City” for a center city spreading out to the north, west and south. This was the era that Michigan Avenue’ Magnifient Mile was seen as part of downtown.
THUS THE PURPOSE OF THIS THREAD IS...to relate how the parameters of the old downtowns exoanded outward in the new downtowns. Certainly graphics in the form of n
Maps, illustrations, etc, is most wecome
I think most major cities experienced deceleration of downtown expansion in the mid 20th century that coincided with growth in the suburbs (most cities have beltways, or suburban highways lined with office parks, malls, etc. that sprang up over the past 20th century). As that type of growth has proven to be unsustainable in large quantities, you're seeing a shift back to downtown development.
Boston's examples are pretty obvious. The Seaport district may be the best example. 15 years ago it was parking lots and railyard. Now it's one of the most prime neighborhoods in the city with tens of millions of square feet of new office, retail, and residential space open and millions more under construction. Just checkout Google Streetview in 2018 vs. 2011 (toggle the years on the left). Kendall Square has been one of the more rapidly developing areas in metro Boston for some time and is, in many ways, a new "downtown" neighborhood.
Most recently, the West End/North Station area has seen a bit of an explosion of development. This area has always been on the edge of downtown, but the new development and vastly increased density has really marked the official absorption of the area as an extension of downtown.
I think most major cities experienced deceleration of downtown expansion in the mid 20th century that coincided with growth in the suburbs (most cities have beltways, or suburban highways lined with office parks, malls, etc. that sprang up over the past 20th century). As that type of growth has proven to be unsustainable in large quantities, you're seeing a shift back to downtown development.
Boston's examples are pretty obvious. The Seaport district may be the best example. 15 years ago it was parking lots and railyard. Now it's one of the most prime neighborhoods in the city with tens of millions of square feet of new office, retail, and residential space open and millions more under construction. Just checkout Google Streetview in 2018 vs. 2011 (toggle the years on the left). Kendall Square has been one of the more rapidly developing areas in metro Boston for some time and is, in many ways, a new "downtown" neighborhood.
Most recently, the West End/North Station area has seen a bit of an explosion of development. This area has always been on the edge of downtown, but the new development and vastly increased density has really marked the official absorption of the area as an extension of downtown.
I would say the acquisition of waterfront land (previously commercial, like ports, factories, etc) that we see in Boston is also evident in Baltimore (Inner Harbor), Manhattan (BPC), and San Francisco (along the Embarcadero). Both Camden Yards and Oracle Park (SF) are ballparks on land once not considered downtown
In a life style era, that waterfront land is a real attraction, and other cities beside thes four have seen their downtowns spread to the shoreline
I think it is oversimplifying things to say central parts of our big cities developed in the 18th or 19th centuries and remained static until the post-world war II period of decline. One urban historian comes immediately to mind on this-- Sam Bass Warner Jr., who's famous for "Streetcar Suburbs" but whose "Private City" about Philadelphia in three periods of growth shows all the complexity of the city's growth from the 18th century through the 19th and into the 20th. In Phila as in NYC, the downtown of the late 18th century migrated uptown in the 19th and into the 20th--so not only did it grow, rather than remain static, it moved; in Philadelphia from the Delaware toward the Schuylkill and in New York from Wall Street to Madison Square and beyond. The pre-Civil War downtown was full of residences as well as commercial establishments and counting houses. It was the industrial city of the later 19th, early 20th century that produced the downtown of big office buildings/skyscrapers and a huge range of wholesale and retail establishments but relatively little residential. The landscape historian J. B. Jackson wrote that for Boston, the 1872 fire eliminated the downtown as a mixed residential-commercial district. The rapid rebuilding thereafter was only in commercial/office/retail uses. New York midtown is too big and complex to fit neatly into any pigeonhole--despite a huge proliferation of office buildings it has always had residences as well as hotels throughout the district. The residential component of the "downtown" has come roaring back in cities like Phila, NY and Boston since the 1980s--that much is certain. Los Angeles too-- the downtown was very residential for a long time but there was a lot of urban renewal and bulldozing of various more residential parts of it in the 1960s, like the clearing of Bunker Hill but other residential areas too. Norman Klein's "History of Forgetting" is exhaustive on that.
Philadelphia's Center City or downtown. Was ALWAYS residential. Chicago's Loop as its original downtown had virtually none. Today is much different in the Loop gaining skyscraper living and old Skyscrapers to loft living. But Chicago's greatest explosion of residence in its downtown was as North of the Loop grew to be included as part f downtown officially and CBD.
Retail to its Top hotels became key to its inclusion. That too goes for other cities. If other components warrants a expanded downtown. Hotels, retail and offices play a roll. Not merely residential expansion and gentrified neighborhoods.
Some cities want to add gentrified neighborhoods into THIER growing downtowns. But other components need to warrant it. In Philly, there may be growing warrant to include part of University City next door to Center City. But officially it has not happened. Use of a Greater Center City though is common. But not sure if merely hot gentrified neighborhoods warrant their inclusion.
I think most major cites had early street-car suburbs too mentioned. Many got absorbed by the major city as it grew and today most do not know the difference that thier neighborhood was once a suburb. Especially in Chicago's case.
DC especially seems to have had the most argument for a larger downtown claimed. I'm sure other cities do too.
Few if any street-car suburbs became a part of many sunbelt cities downtown. Some my have become another CBD within the major city today. But too far to be downtown. A city can have multiple CBD's. But generally just one is called its downtown. Some just have adjoining areas that warranted inclusion, or are growing to be eventually included. A city like Atlanta be having a faster growing Midtown next to its downtown and is a candidate to have both included in the future as part of one downtown.
I think it is oversimplifying things to say central parts of our big cities developed in the 18th or 19th centuries and remained static until the post-world war II period of decline. One urban historian comes immediately to mind on this-- Sam Bass Warner Jr., who's famous for "Streetcar Suburbs" but whose "Private City" about Philadelphia in three periods of growth shows all the complexity of the city's growth from the 18th century through the 19th and into the 20th. In Phila as in NYC, the downtown of the late 18th century migrated uptown in the 19th and into the 20th--so not only did it grow, rather than remain static, it moved; in Philadelphia from the Delaware toward the Schuylkill and in New York from Wall Street to Madison Square and beyond. The pre-Civil War downtown was full of residences as well as commercial establishments and counting houses. It was the industrial city of the later 19th, early 20th century that produced the downtown of big office buildings/skyscrapers and a huge range of wholesale and retail establishments but relatively little residential. The landscape historian J. B. Jackson wrote that for Boston, the 1872 fire eliminated the downtown as a mixed residential-commercial district. The rapid rebuilding thereafter was only in commercial/office/retail uses. New York midtown is too big and complex to fit neatly into any pigeonhole--despite a huge proliferation of office buildings it has always had residences as well as hotels throughout the district. The residential component of the "downtown" has come roaring back in cities like Phila, NY and Boston since the 1980s--that much is certain. Los Angeles too-- the downtown was very residential for a long time but there was a lot of urban renewal and bulldozing of various more residential parts of it in the 1960s, like the clearing of Bunker Hill but other residential areas too. Norman Klein's "History of Forgetting" is exhaustive on that.
If we look at "downtown" as being one in every city except New York (which gets two......downtown and midtown; I suppose three if you include DT Brooklyn), then Midtown Manhattan would be an excellent example of how a "downtown" grew and changed its footprint.
Midtown, of course, is just plain different from any of the other downtown districts across the nation. The start with it is easily the largest CBD on the entire planet. And secondly, it is far removed from being the original core of the city. It is a strange CBD that carries street names like 34th, 42nd, and 57th. Thus, I think, more than any other downtown area, we tend to look at Midtown as having defined, long set boundaries, commensurate with being a neighborhood for such a long time.
What I am getting at is this: Midtown georgraphically goes from the East River arguably to around 8th Ave which is the western border of Central Park. But if we look at Midtown as a concept as a CBD, as a core, one could argue that with Hudson Yards, Midtown pretty much goes from the East to the Hudson River.
I'm surprised the West End of London is not on this list.
(1) The City – London
(2) Midtown – New York
(3) Marunouchi – Tokyo
(4) La Défense – Paris
(5) Canary Wharf – London
(6) Financial District – New York
(7) The Loop – Chicago
(8) Downtown Core – Singapore
(9) Chaoyang - Beijing
(10) Bankenviertel - Frankfurt
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.
