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.
Not joking at all. After spending time in cities like NYC, Chicago, Seattle, SF, or even Pittsburgh, Cincinnati does absolutely nothing to impress me.
Compared to Columbus, yes, Cincinnati has a great downtown. But it's not even on the list in comparison to great downtowns in the US.
Well compared to major cities like nyc and chicago that doesn't surprise me. But pittsburgh. No way. The city has a lot to offer and even more in a few years
They must have a different definition of "Downtown San Francisco" than your average SF resident then...here's a very close representation of downtown SF using census tracts (outlined in red):
^that's around 2-3 square miles, and includes the Financial District, Union Square, the Tenderloin, Civic Center, Nob Hill, parts of SOMA, and parts of Chinatown.
As you can see, the population is nearly twice what brookings counted. These stats I posted are from 2000 also, so downtown SF's population is definitely higher now.
Yeah, I like this study with the exception of SF being excluded (as Kidphilly said). Another thing that this study doesn't take into account are neighborhoods that are directly surrounding the downtown area. Although I agree that the focus should be on downtown households which drive amenities and urban health, surrounding neighborhoods definitely have an impact. Of course, the surrounding neighborhoods need to be integrated well with downtown, encouraging (or not discouraging) people from walking in after office hours.
If I were to take a stab at a current day list based on true downtown feel, here's what I would guess (changes in bold):
Fully-Developed
Boston
Chicago
Lower Manhattan
Midtown Manhattan
Philadelphia San Francisco
Emerging Downtowns
Atlanta
Baltimore
Cleveland DC
Denver
Los Angeles
Memphis
New Orleans
Portland
San Diego
Seattle
Downtowns the Edge of Takeoff Charlotte Houston
Dallas
Miami
Milwaukee Nashville Pittsburgh Norfolk
Again, this is just my perception. I moved DC up to Emerging downtowns, added Houston to Downtowns on the Edge of Takeoff. I moved Charlotte down because I feel it has a ways to go before it's in the Emerging category with cities like DC, Baltimore, NO, etc. I added Pittsburgh to Edge of Takeoff, because I think if the city starts gaining households in downtown, it could quickly move to Emerging (right now it just lacks the DT residents). I moved Norfolk down because I've been there frequently and it just didn't feel like cities such as DC, Baltimore, NO, etc. I also added Nashville, because I feel it's made large progress over the last 10 years.
Edit: I also wanted to say that these categories are pretty wide. DC would be the top of the Emerging Downtowns section, and given just some more activity after hours, it would move to fully-developed. Although Denver is a great city with lots of activity, I feel like there's a big divide between it and DC, so while these cities are in a category together, there's a lot of room there.
1. NYC
2. Chicago
3. Philadelphia
4. Washington, DC
5. San Francisco
6. Boston
Then it gets trickier...
7. Los Angeles
8. Seattle
9. Houston
10. Minneapolis
11. Dallas
12. Denver
13. St. Louis
14. Pittsburgh
15. Baltimore
16. Detroit
17. Portland (including the eastside Convention Ctr area)
18. New Orleans
19. Atlanta
then: Cleveland, Indianapolis, Milwaukee, Cincinnati, San Diego, Miami (I don't include Brickell as part of DT because it doesn't feel like a downtown area, though it has a downtown-like skyline)
Some of your list I have to question whether you have actually be there to rate them high in regards to vibrancy.... or if you are just going by the city name alone? Great cities, but not all of them have downtowns that are very vibrant...
Some of your list I have to question whether you have actually be there to rate them high in regards to vibrancy.... or if you are just going by the city name alone? Great cities, but not all of them have downtowns that are very vibrant...
Actually, I've been to all of the above listed cities. I didn't rank them strictly by vibrancy, because the OP wanted the biggest "feeling" downtowns. IMO, this is a combination of land area, number of large buildings and vibrancy. Therefore, even though I won't classify downtown LA as being a top ten vibrant downtown, it certainly feels big to me when I'm walking down Broadway and seeing these classic 1900's buildings lined up block upon block, plus passing MetroRail subway stations, as well as the number of blocks you can walk from, say City Hall to Pershing Square to Bunker Hill. The same applies to Houston and Dallas, only replace the 1900s buildings with 1960s and 1970s boxes.
I'd be curious to know which picks you disagree with.
1. New York
2. Chicago
3. San Francisco
4. Philadelphia
5. Boston
6. Washington
7. Miami
8. Seattle
9. Los Angeles
10. Minneapolis
Houston, Atlanta, Dallas, Denver, Pittsburgh, and San Diego all deserve recognition as well. The latter 3 already have good downtown areas. The former three have huge buildings and somewhat-active downtowns, but they seem to be improving quickly.
As a former resident of Minneapolis and growing up in the area, it's downtown isn't as big as everyone is suggesting. Still a lot of open space, not super dense.. I would think that Pittsburgh and Dallas have better DTs
Pittsburgh has one of my favorite downtowns of any city in the US. It's surrounded by hills and rivers, is very dense, and has a great stock of historic buildings. Not to mention there's plenty of more modern skyscrapers. I'd go so far as to rate it ahead of LA's downtown for general "feel." Definitely rate it ahead of Miami.
As a former resident of Minneapolis and growing up in the area, it's downtown isn't as big as everyone is suggesting. Still a lot of open space, not super dense.. I would think that Pittsburgh and Dallas have better DTs
Downtown Minneapolis is much more dense than most CBDs and after looking through several sites, including Cushman & Wakefield, the city ranks around 10th in total office space, which puts it right behind Dallas and ahead of Pittsburgh. BTW, what makes you think Pittsburgh and Dallas have better downtown areas?
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.
