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.
Houston has at least 6 or 7 and one of the first city to have this concept
Not even close imo. 2 most likely but maybe 3 at max. A few buildings in an office park doesn’t make a downtown. An area has got to have tons of retail, be a major center of commerce, and have the amenities a CBD would have to act like CBD. Really only downtown and uptown achieve this.
Seattle has one urban core and multiple urban villages, but I wouldn’t call an urban village a downtown. The most “downtown” urban village would be University District.
The Seattle metro has four downtowns: Seattle, U District, Bellevue, and Tacoma.
Downtown Bellevue is one of the tallest, most cohesive, and most transit-reliant (even pre-rail) post-war downtowns in the US, despite being half of what it'll be if most proposals are realized.
The U District had Seattle's densest census tract in 2020, and has since boomed with both housing and offices including eight highrises. Its total jobs are similar to Downtown Bellevue's if you count the UW campus. Unlike most downtowns outside the top few, and even the typical "U" district, most people walk, bike, or use transit rather than drive.
Downtown Tacoma is far quieter, but has surged with housing on its downtown fringes and a booming UW campus (4,790 students per their website). It's the government, arts, and social-service center for the southern chunk of the metro, meaning it serves a full range of "downtown" services.
No I wouldn't consider the next-level places like Downtown Ballard, Downtown Redmond, Downtown Everett, or Downtown Kirkland to be true "downtowns" except to nearby districts, despite a decent office presence and some of them building several thousand apartments in recent years.
In some ways yes, but IMO, it feels like Miami has two downtowns. Brickell being the new downtown and the CBD being the old. Locals consider it two downtowns as well, and being one myself (and living in Brickell) I also agree with that statement.
In some ways yes, but IMO, it feels like Miami has two downtowns. Brickell being the new downtown and the CBD being the old. Locals consider it two downtowns as well, and being one myself (and living in Brickell) I also agree with that statement.
I am impressed of development in Miami the density of high rise driving from airport look impressive and foreign look like Singapore or Hong Kong.
In some ways yes, but IMO, it feels like Miami has two downtowns. Brickell being the new downtown and the CBD being the old. Locals consider it two downtowns as well, and being one myself (and living in Brickell) I also agree with that statement.
I would say no because they’re adjacent. It’s not uncommon for a downtown to have a historic district and a new one. In fact, most downtowns have this. I’d this a “2 downtown” thing would be separated
I would say no because they’re adjacent. It’s not uncommon for a downtown to have a historic district and a new one. In fact, most downtowns have this. I’d this a “2 downtown” thing would be separated
For sure, but Brickell was developed as a sort of "Downtown 2.0" over there, especially when I first moved there in 1999, that was the intention the business community had. That's why locals see it as a separate downtown vs an extension to the CBD. I see the argument for both sides honestly, there's no right or wrong answer with this one.
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.