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.
Virginia Beach/Norfolk: they are, for all intents and purposes, one city just like MSP, functionally speaking. Downtown Norfolk is obviously the traditional and historic center:
Pharrell finally adding that skate park entertainment district on The Oceanfront could eventually turn that area into a third downtown; as it is, Oceanfront is definitely an entertainment destination in the area...
Is this cities or regions? If regions, then Tysons absolutely qualifies as a second downtown to DC. If I'm not mistaken, it's still in the top 10 employment centers in the country.
Rosslyn also feels like a separate downtown. Actually, Crystal City-Pentagon City is on the cusp of being one. Lots of new high-rise construction and, of course, Amazon HQ2.
Thats city proper... regarding DC those are more satellite cities so something like Navy Yards would more so be considered it's own "downtown"
I think in Los Angeles, Hollywood is more of LA's second downtown more than Century City. Century City is more of an office park with tall buildings.
More recently, yes. And historically, yes. But for a while, Hollywood was a dumpy tourist trap with not a ton of business or full-time long-term residents. Yes, the studios were there, but many of the offices were in WeHo, Beverly Hills, and CC. More are moving back to Hwood now and tons of residential units are popping up in Hwood. Significantly, they are not just SROs and for transients anymore lol. So yes, in 2019, Hollywood is arguably the #2 downtown in LA city over Century City now. But for a while, Century City was a major office hub for entertainment. I've even heard recently that the mall is struggling? Not sure how accurate.
By the definitions of what some people here consider to be "downtowns," virtually every single major city in NA has multiple downtowns. Seems like anything with multiple office buildings, or a cluster of bars and restaurants, is being considered "downtown.
Without reading 24 pages, I would say Boston, with Downtown Crossing (old Filene's , Macy's, etc), with Copley Square/Prudential forming the 2nd downtown, with the latter being a bit more luxurious..
Without reading 24 pages, I would say Boston, with Downtown Crossing (old Filene's , Macy's, etc), with Copley Square/Prudential forming the 2nd downtown, with the latter being a bit more luxurious..
Quote:
Originally Posted by rowhomecity
Philadelphia has two downtown's.
Center City and University City.
I struggle to see how these are two entirely separate downtown zones.
Downtown Crossing to Copley Square is 1 mile apart. The entire 1 mile between them is dense development and an urban park. Sounds like a natural extension of business/entertainment/dining/shopping/nightlife to me--from the original center and moving out as the city grows and prospers and requires/sustains more businesses/activities.
Center City to University City is literally over the narrow Schuylkill River. I think it's pretty easy to argue that UC is the natural extension of CC as the city prospers and can sustain more development. West into UC makes sense, too, because there is/was land for high rises there, a major train station, and numerous subway/trolley stops.
Neither of these, to me, are downtowns than seemingly organically sprouted up as a secondary downtown within the same city. They are more extensions of the original downtown zone. I.e. I don't think anyone would say that River North/Near North Side and Near South Side are secondary downtowns of Chicago since The Loop is really the original. No. They're just natural extensions of The Loop. The extensions simply complement the original downtown zone by potentially having more residential units since the original was more office-focused. One may have more dining/nightlife than the other neighborhood. But they function together as one extended "downtown" in the sense of where the heart of the city lies.
There are other metros that have secondary downtowns outside the city limits. But, AFAIK, LA is really the only city with a secondary downtown. DTLA is the natural original. Hollywood did not grow as an extension from DTLA. They are separate and distinct from each other. It can even be argued that Century City is an actual downtown in a certain way, and it is definitely not just an urban extension of DTLA.
It can be argued that Downtown Brooklyn is separate, but it's really not. Maybe if it was down by Coney, yes. But being literally across the East River from FiDi, it's basically an urban extension of Manhattan. I think it's also disingenuous to classify FiDi and Midtown as separate downtowns, because IMO, that would require one to view the area from like 23rd to Canal as non-city-enough-landscape to maintain the extension. I think everything below Central Park until Atlantic Terminal in Brooklyn should be considered the "downtown" of NYC.
Meanwhile, Hollywood and DTLA are separated by some non-city-esque neighborhoods like Hancock Park, Silverlake, and Echo Park. I guess it can be argued that the urban cityscape extends from DTLA through Ktown to Hollywood, but that's not how Hollywood developed--as an extension of DTLA to Ktwon. They don't serve to complement each other. DTLA is its own entity. Ktown is pretty much an entity. Hollywood is an entity. Hollywood definitely isn't a basic extension of urbanity that all blends into one urban core.
For Seattle, the U District and DT Bellevue are both candidates.
Downtown Bellevue is the second white collar job center and second retail center (or top center for mall-type retail), and has some residential density too. It'll have two grade-separated light rail stations in 2023. It's about to explode with offices...future Amazon HQ1 growth appears to be focused there, with several million square feet planned. The skyline is a 450' flat top, but will soon be a 600' flat top, with the first of those appearing to be close to a start. Its growth has been truly urban since the mid-80s in particular -- up to the sidewalk, mix of uses, parking mostly below-grade and in less quantity, but the streets are too wide.
The University District's daily population might be on a similar scale, between the main mixed-use district (what "U District" refers to) and the UW. It'll have grade-separated rail in 2021 but already transit is the largest commute mode. The District had a 40-year ban on new highrises, but that's gone, and a flood of new ones has just started. The UW and U District both have new master plans include a growing focus on tech offices and UW collaborations in the neighborhood. This is on top of the campus building many buildings in recent years, typically centered around research or student housing, as well as a private-sector housing boom, both generally with little or no parking.
Downtown Ballard, West Seattle Junction, Downtown Kirkland, and Downtown Redmond are the next tier within King County, in my opinion. They're all lowrise districts (generally up to about eight stories, or more like six previously), but each has thousands of walkable urban-format multifamily units, good retail, and some other business aspects.
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.
