Largest Downtowns/ Business Districts in the US

[Bailey]

I was wondering if anyone had a complete list of the largest downtown/ business districts in the United States. As you know many cities have more than one center or district.

The following article (link below) is quoted as saying that the Medical Center in Houston is currently the 17th largest business district in the US and is projected to be the 7th largest by 2014 by projected square feet.

Houston also has Downtown Houston and Uptown Houston as separate districts which are bigger than the Medical Center and should fit on this list somewhere above #16.

From that article I started a list but what would a complete list of the 20 largest downtowns or business districts in The United States look like?

http://www.texmedctr.tmc.edu/root/en/TMCServices/News/BreakingNews/MediaRelease.htm

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7. ? -? (appx. 40 million gross square feet)
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16. Los Angeles- Downtown District (28.5 million gross square feet)
17. Houston- Medical Center- (28.3 million gross square feet)
18.
19.
20.

[Cirrus]

Off the top of my head:

1. Midtown Manhattan
2. Downtown Chicago
3. Downtown Washington
4. Downtown Manhattan
5. Downtown San Francisco

[204]

Manhattan (south of 59th) is the largest in the US (second largest in the world), followed by Chicago. No idea what comes next.

The largest downtowns (central business districts) in the United States attract large public transit work trip market shares. For example, the Manhattan business district, the second largest in the world after Tokyo, had a nearly 75 percent transit work trip market share in 1990. Chicago’s central business district, the second largest in the United States, attracted more than 50 percent of its workers by transit. Travel by transit to central business districts such as these is competitive with the automobile. Indeed, it is often faster. This demonstrates the fact that people will ride transit when it is competitive with the automobile.

Source (http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:hbrA4yqd-E8J:ciprg.com/ul/gbt/atl-report-20040621.pdf+Brookings+Institution+%22largest+downtowns%22&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=5)

[204]

Off the top of my head:

1. Midtown Manhattan
2. Downtown Chicago
3. Downtown Washington
4. Downtown Manhattan
5. Downtown San Francisco

No offence, but... off the top of your head? What is that based on? :sly:

Well in that case... off the top of my head; Downtown (or Lower Manhattan) is third.

[204]

From Demographia:

RANKING: Central Business District EMPLOYMENT

1 New York 1,736,900
2 Chicago 541,500
3 Washington 382,400
4 San Francisco-San Jose 305,600
5 Boston 257,000
6 Philadelphia 220,100
7 Seattle 155,100
8 Houston 153,400
9 Los Angeles 143,700
10 Atlanta 129,800
11 Denver 126,000
12 Minneapolis-St. Paul 105,400
13 Cleveland 100,300
14 Baltimore 98,500
15 Miami 98,000
16 Pittsburgh 95,600
17 Columbus 88,800
18 Austin 86,000
19 New Orleans 81,400
20 Dallas-Fort Worth 79,900

Demographia, “United States Central Business Districts (Downtowns): 50 Largest Urban Areas 2000 Data on Employment & Transit Work Trips,” June 2006, at www.demographia.com/db-cbd2000.pdf.

[Cambridgite]

^ Cool. Although not in the US, Downtown Toronto would be 3rd on the list with about 400,000 workers.

[dimondpark]

Off the top of my head:

1. Midtown Manhattan
2. Downtown Chicago
3. Downtown Washington
4. Downtown Manhattan
5. Downtown San Francisco

This sounds about right.

Sometimes I think we focus too much on whose the biggest and not enough on which are the best. I mean, most cities have clusters of tall buildings in their CBD(s) but its the street action that's more interesting imHo.

[Cirrus]

off the top of your head? What is that based on?Would it help if I edited "off the top of my head" to read "IIRC" instead?

Seriously. All it means is I've seen the info but don't have a source handy.

[hudkina]

This list could never happen due to the subjective nature of defining a downtown district. Some "downtowns" are defined using areas as large as 5 sq. mi. while others are less than 1 sq. mi.

[alexjon]

Yay Seattle!

[ChrisLA]

This list could never happen due to the subjective nature of defining a downtown district. Some "downtowns" are defined using areas as large as 5 sq. mi. while others are less than 1 sq. mi.

That is so true, as in the example that downtown Los Angeles is 17th largest in the USA. If anyone has ever traveled the country, and visited many big city downtowns, you'll know for sure its one of the top 10 in size, maybe even in the top 5. For one thing, downtown LA has more than 143,000 employed in the local area. I heard it estimated from a low of about 200,000 to a high of 400,000. The 400,000 was when they included the mid-wilshire district up to about Western Avenue.

My list just at guessing would be as follow. This is also considering employment, , and warehouse, government, and overall office space, not just Class 'A'.

1. Mid-town Manhattan
2. Downtown Manhattan
3. Chicago Loop, including northside.
4. Washington
5. San Francisco
6. Los Angeles / Philadelphia*

*Not sure about these two, although it seems overall LA has more pedestrians when you combine the Fashion District, Historic District, Chinatown, Little Toyko, Fiancial District, and South Park. The Fashion District being the area that may put it over the top. Still Philly built up enviroment is very impressive, and seems to be the densest outside of Manhattan.

7. Houston
8. Boston
9. Seattle
10: Dallas

[Quixote]

Based on my research through a variety of different sources, the largest central business districts in terms of office space are:

1) Midtown Manhattan
2) Downtown Chicago
3) Downtown Washington, DC
4) Lower Manhattan
5) Downtown San Francisco
6) Downtown Boston
7) Downtown Houston
8) Downtown Philadelphia
9) Downtown Seattle
10) Downtown Los Angeles

[Austinlee]

here is a few figures for office square footage:


Manhattan - 356,983,563
Long Island - 45,491,607
Westchester - 27,721,608
Outer Boroughs - 35,946,358
NYC Metro Total - 466,143,136


Los Angeles:
CBD - 33,151,830
Suburban - 152,346,070
Total - 185,497,900
Inland Empire - 22,039,233
Orange County - 82,649,017
Metro Total - 290,186,150


Chicago:
CBD - 121,324,716
Suburban - 104,006,355
Total - 225,331,071


Washington DC:
CBD - 96,250,852
Suburban - 182,542,771
Total - 278,793,623


Houston:
CBD - 35,567,020
Suburban - 123,868,828
Total - 159,435,848

[Quixote]

Los Angeles:
CBD - 33,151,830
Suburban - 152,346,070
Total - 185,497,900
Inland Empire - 22,039,233
Orange County - 82,649,017
Metro Total - 290,186,150

Where did you get these figures?

[mhays]

There's no such thing as an accurate list. For office space, people quote brokerage statistics but apparently don't realize that brokerages: a) don't define "downtown" in any consistent way (or just include the entire central city), and b) have very different standards for the types of space they count as "office" between one city and other.

Also, any "size of downtown" discussion has to go way beyond offices. Even if you define downtowns fairly tightly, over half the space in many downtowns is residential, hotel, retail, etc.

[MNMike]

According to the downtown council, Minneaopolis has 160,000 wokers downtown. I have heard other sources say 140,000...I have never heard an estimate as low as the 105,000 listed earlier in this thread, that seems a bit off. As far as square footage...I can't find the exact number, but I know its between 25 and 30 million square feet.

I agree with mjhays though, a lot of things need to be taken into account...just thought I would share a couple rough numbers for minneapolis as long as I was here.

[IdahoMountainBoy]

I saw a source once that Denver's claim to having the 10th largest downtown was based on the amount of retail and business square footage in the CBD...I guess that's another way to attempt to quantify it..

[borgo100]

man, Los Angeles could have a sweet downtown, after looking at that “United States Central Business Districts (Downtowns): 50 Largest Urban Areas 2000 Data on Employment & Transit Work Trips,”

5,000,000 jobs outside downtown

[dimondpark]

Q3 2007 according to Grubb Ellis
Downtown San Francisco 61,965,601 sq ft
Oakland/ East Bay 57,229,860 sq ft
San Mateo/ Peninsula 33,710, 855 sq ft
San Jose/ South Bay 60,480,956 sq ft

Total Bay Area Office Space 213,338,272 sq ft

[miketoronto]

Word of caution about the Demographia stats. While some are correct, others are not. Demographia sometimes makes downtown stats lower then they are. The LA number I know for a fact is wrong, as downtown LA has over 250,000 workers. Minneapolis is also higher.

So watch with his numbers, as it is Wendle Cox who puts those numbers together. Again some are right, other are not.

Also it does not matter how a place defines downtown. Just like cities are different, downtowns are going to be of different size in terms of land area, etc.

For NYC, the entire area of Manhattan south of Central Park could be considered one big downtown and should be clumped together. No need for midtown and then downtown stats. Its all one.

[dfane]

so San Fran gets to count its suburbs and neighboring cities as central downtown areas?

[mhays]

Q3 2007 according to Grubb Ellis
Downtown San Francisco 61,965,601 sq ft
Oakland/ East Bay 57,229,860 sq ft
San Mateo/ Peninsula 33,710, 855 sq ft
San Jose/ South Bay 60,480,956 sq ft

Total Bay Area Office Space 213,338,272 sq ft

Here's an example of my point. Either they've defined "Downtown San Francisco" as the whole city of San Francisco, or nothing outside Downtown itself got counted. That's one reason why these comparisons are usually BS.

Brokerages don't attempt to define "downtown". They simply divide the metro into pieces that they consider market segments, and call the one in the middle "downtown". The city of San Francisco is a convenient piece.

[spark317]

Yes, the Demographia list is certainly suspect. There is no CBD in Virginia Beach, unless you consider VB Town Center as the CBD. Even then, there's no way 29K people work there.

Downtown Norfolk has about 52K workers, but even that is not the largest in Hampton Roads. Though not considered by most as a CBD, the Norfolk Naval Base has about 120K.

[Cambridgite]

Since there's no exact definition or methodology for measuring what is a downtown across different cities, comparisons are vague at best. Transitions are never clear cut from CBD to inner city to inner suburbs to outer suburbs to exurbs. You can only approximate it.

Some metro areas have a polycentric urban form, so there's more than one downtown to take into account, as in the case where I live. SF-Oakland-San Jose and Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater are also classic cases of this.

Also many large cities like NYC and Toronto have slightly different, but similar cores. NYC has downtown and midtown. Toronto has downtown and Yonge/Bloor and Midtown....see, it's complicated to draw the line.

However, if you want to calculate change within a certain defined area like a downtown core, there's nothing wrong with that, as long as you stick with consistent boundaries. It's when you start comparing it to other cities that it starts getting messy.

[dimondpark]

Why does PA Pride get to post suburban tallies without nary a peep but I post outer areas and am pretty much called to task?

Here's an example of my point. Either they've defined "Downtown San Francisco" as the whole city of San Francisco, or nothing outside Downtown itself got counted..
Did I not specifically state DT San Francisco?

According to the Space Place, a very concise local company that watches this sort of thing, the City of San Francisco has 109,776,359 total sq ft of rentable office space, spread out over 2,056 existing bldgs.

http://www.thespaceplace.net/office_space/san_francisco/3hvacancy.htm

And even in Grubb Ellis' report, the areas included as Downtown San Francisco are as follows,
North Financial District
South Financial District
North Waterfront
Jackson Square
Yerba Buena
SOMA
Union Square
Civic Center/ Van Ness
The total amount of office space in the above areas, which are considered by most to be the districts that comprise Downtown San Francisco, is 61,965,601 sq ft.

[dimondpark]

so San Fran gets to count its suburbs and neighboring cities as central downtown areas?

so you didnt read this post??


here is a few figures for office square footage:


Manhattan - 356,983,563
Long Island - 45,491,607
Westchester - 27,721,608
Outer Boroughs - 35,946,358
NYC Metro Total - 466,143,136


Los Angeles:
CBD - 33,151,830
Suburban - 152,346,070
Total - 185,497,900
Inland Empire - 22,039,233
Orange County - 82,649,017
Metro Total - 290,186,150


Chicago:
CBD - 121,324,716
Suburban - 104,006,355
Total - 225,331,071


Washington DC:
CBD - 96,250,852
Suburban - 182,542,771
Total - 278,793,623


Houston:
CBD - 35,567,020
Suburban - 123,868,828
Total - 159,435,848

[mhays]

So your 213,338,272 figure was half of what the other source says, which is in the 350,000,000 range. Like I alluded, it was a good example of someone making a statement based on poor information.

[dktshb]

Los Angeles' CBD is ridiculous... I wonder what it was in the 80's? Fortunately I think the trend is changing but if one wonders why traffic is so bad it's obviously the fact that people are driving all over the F'n place to get to work.

[Trae]

From Demographia:

RANKING: Central Business District EMPLOYMENT

1 New York 1,736,900
2 Chicago 541,500
3 Washington 382,400
4 San Francisco-San Jose 305,600
5 Boston 257,000
6 Philadelphia 220,100
7 Seattle 155,100
8 Houston 153,400
9 Los Angeles 143,700
10 Atlanta 129,800
11 Denver 126,000
12 Minneapolis-St. Paul 105,400
13 Cleveland 100,300
14 Baltimore 98,500
15 Miami 98,000
16 Pittsburgh 95,600
17 Columbus 88,800
18 Austin 86,000
19 New Orleans 81,400
20 Dallas-Fort Worth 79,900

Demographia, “United States Central Business Districts (Downtowns): 50 Largest Urban Areas 2000 Data on Employment & Transit Work Trips,” June 2006, at www.demographia.com/db-cbd2000.pdf.

I think Houston has over 200,000 Downtown workers.

[babybackribs2314]

Anyone have data on Tysons Corner, VA? It's a huge edge city about 15 minutes from DC... I know it has the most retail space on the East Coast excepting Manhattan, and I'm pretty sure the office figures are impressive too?

[dimondpark]

So your 213,338,272 figure was half of what the other source says, which is in the 350,000,000 range. Like I alluded, it was a good example of someone making a statement based on poor information.
I tend to agree that the total office space for the Bay Area is probably around 350 Million-all things considered it makes sense.

However,
They seem to count every single building in the entire area, which often times is neither class A or class B, so I chose not to directly quote them initially. Also they didnt differentiate between DT and non-DT areas in The City so it would have been dishonest for me to say DT SF has 109M sq ft. It just doesnt.

On the other hand,
Grubb Ellis not only quantify Class A or B, but they clearly define the areas that comprise DT.

So I quote them confident that they are correct, for the most part. Perhaps the county governments should engage in quantifying the total office space inventory, since they are involved in assessing value?

[Matty]

For NYC, the entire area of Manhattan south of Central Park could be considered one big downtown and should be clumped together. No need for midtown and then downtown stats. Its all one.

This, for the most part is true. Once you leave Midtown, it's not suddenly devoid of businesses/offices. There aren't as many huge buildings, but there are some in clusters, plus most midrise/smaller high rise buildings are offices. There are exceptions, though, like Chinatown (which is mostly residential).

[WilliamTheArtist]

Yes, looked at that Demographia list and it didnt even show Tulsa on it. When I saw cities like Tucson and OKC I knew something was wrong. While certainly not in the top 20 Tulsa should have at least been on the list above those cities. Tulsa went through a horrible time, its downtown of about 1sq mile went from about 50,000 workers to now about 30,000, now things are turning back up. But even the low number is still good enough to have at least been on their listing.

[Austinlee]

The numbers I posted are from Grubb & Ellis which has pdf's of every major cities square footage. http://www.grubb-ellis.com

We all know that no one's list is gonna be exact or perfect but at least these numbers give a BALLPARK idea of how much space each city has.

[urban_encounter]

From Demographia:

RANKING: Central Business District EMPLOYMENT

1 New York 1,736,900
2 Chicago 541,500
3 Washington 382,400
4 San Francisco-San Jose 305,600
5 Boston 257,000
6 Philadelphia 220,100
7 Seattle 155,100
8 Houston 153,400
9 Los Angeles 143,700
10 Atlanta 129,800
11 Denver 126,000
12 Minneapolis-St. Paul 105,400
13 Cleveland 100,300
14 Baltimore 98,500
15 Miami 98,000
16 Pittsburgh 95,600
17 Columbus 88,800
18 Austin 86,000
19 New Orleans 81,400
20 Dallas-Fort Worth 79,900

Demographia, “United States Central Business Districts (Downtowns): 50 Largest Urban Areas 2000 Data on Employment & Transit Work Trips,” June 2006, at www.demographia.com/db-cbd2000.pdf.

Not that it really matters much because everyone has a list of some sort; but Sacramento has over 100,000 people working downtown Monday through Friday and has since prior to 2001 (and not the 64,800 this list claims.)

DT Sacramento has a large state workforce, along with lobbyists, legal firms and banking making up the bulk of the labor DT.


But it sounds as if this list went south simply by claimiing that DT Los Angeles only has 143,700 workers. (I mean come on.....)

[villelumiere]

Since there's no exact definition or methodology for measuring what is a downtown across different cities, comparisons are vague at best. Transitions are never clear cut from CBD to inner city to inner suburbs to outer suburbs to exurbs. You can only approximate it.

Some metro areas have a polycentric urban form, so there's more than one downtown to take into account, as in the case where I live. SF-Oakland-San Jose and Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater are also classic cases of this.

Also many large cities like NYC and Toronto have slightly different, but similar cores. NYC has downtown and midtown. Toronto has downtown and Yonge/Bloor and Midtown....see, it's complicated to draw the line.

However, if you want to calculate change within a certain defined area like a downtown core, there's nothing wrong with that, as long as you stick with consistent boundaries. It's when you start comparing it to other cities that it starts getting messy.


This is entirely correct. Where I live, in Paris, the largest purpose build business area in Europe, La Defense, is not even within the city proper. Is it Paris "downtown"? Is it separate? Who caqn say with definitive authority?

As you say there are many similarly polycentric cities and the same applies in them.

[JivecitySTL]

The ranking leaves some cities out. Downtown St. Louis has a workforce of over 90,000.

[pj3000]

Also, any "size of downtown" discussion has to go way beyond offices. Even if you define downtowns fairly tightly, over half the space in many downtowns is residential, hotel, retail, etc.

Exactly. A "downtown" is not strictly defined by its total square footage devoted to office space, nor is it accurately measured by the number of workers.

All of Manhattan is a "downtown".

[alleystreetindustry]

the ranks are still inefficient. if manhattan were to be included as a whole, other cities' business districts would have to be combined (such as adding up atlanta's buckhead, midtown, and downtown areas).

[mhays]

I tend to agree that the total office space for the Bay Area is probably around 350 Million-all things considered it makes sense.

However,
They seem to count every single building in the entire area, which often times is neither class A or class B, so I chose not to directly quote them initially. Also they didnt differentiate between DT and non-DT areas in The City so it would have been dishonest for me to say DT SF has 109M sq ft. It just doesnt.

On the other hand,
Grubb Ellis not only quantify Class A or B, but they clearly define the areas that comprise DT.

So I quote them confident that they are correct, for the most part. Perhaps the county governments should engage in quantifying the total office space inventory, since they are involved in assessing value?

Grubb & Ellis can be used accurately if you know in great detail what they're counting and what they're not. For example, there's a ton of gray area about which government offices to include or not include, which owner-occupied offices to include or not include, and what counts as "office". What are their standards? What about their cutoff point for small buildings?

Once you get those answers, it's helpful for understanding that one city. But it tells you nothing about what Grubb & Ellis does in other cities. Those decisions are based on local efforts, and brokerages tend to have wildly different standards and methods from one city to another.

But all that pales next to geography, the biggest variable. Sometimes "downtown" is 50 square miles, while another broker in the same city might draw a 1 square mile "downtown" statistical district. In these discussions we invariably get some people who know what geography their source was counting and others who don't have the slightest idea.

[Trae]

the ranks are still inefficient. if manhattan were to be included as a whole, other cities' business districts would have to be combined (such as adding up atlanta's buckhead, midtown, and downtown areas).

I agree. Other cities should have to combine their own areas.

[cabasse]

different firms can report wildly different listings for the same areas, based on different boundaries as well as the gaps left from unrecorded space, i assume.

for example:

atlanta

grubb & ellis 3q2007 (http://www.grubb-ellis.com/pdf/metro_off_mkttrnd/atlanta.pdf) downtown/midtown: 17.4m+14.2m=31.6m cbd (+buckhead 13m)
cbre 4q2006 (http://gkc2.cbrichardellis.com/LocalReports350.asp) dt/mt: 17.1+12.8=29.9m cbd(+bh 11.8)
colliers 3q2007 (http://www.colliers.com/Content/Repositories/Base/Markets/Atlanta/English/Market_Report/PDFs/3Q07OfficeMarketReport.pdf) dt/mt: 22.3+16.9=39.2m cbd (+bh 15.1)


detroit

grubb & ellis 3q2007 (http://www.grubb-ellis.com/pdf/metro_off_mkttrnd/Detroit.pdf): dt: 12.6m
cbre 4q2006 (http://gkc2.cbrichardellis.com/LocalReports350.asp):dt: 15m
colliers 4q2006 (http://www.colliersmn.com/prod/ccgrd.nsf/publish/224090A4F5E19A0A8525728F0066AE10/$File/Q4+06+Detroit+Office.pdf): dt+new center: 27.5m

as best i can tell, all three firms are listing all types of space. does anyone else have any idea why the disparity for colliers is so much larger for these two cities? with most others, the listings seem to be much closer.

[WilliamTheArtist]

Well at least your city exists lol. Tulsa wasnt on any of those lists either. I have mentioned that before how Tulsa seems to be persona non grata. Even though its larger than many of the cities that are listed, on many different topics we talk about. Its no ones fault but Tulsas of course. But do cities like Tucson, Boisie, Omaha, Wichita, etc. really promote themselves that much? Can Tulsas promotion, name recognition, image, out there be that lame? I keep having this sneaking suspicion that many out there dont even consider Tulsa because they dont know anything about it and think it may be a small dusty cow town?

[mhays]

Brokerage stats include the cities where the brokerages have active operations. They're usually active in the bigger cities plus other cities where they think they have opportunity to grow.

Maybe Tulsa has strong local brokerages, and the out-of-towers haven't gotten their feet in the door.

[Cambridgite]

Well at least your city exists lol. Tulsa wasnt on any of those lists either. I have mentioned that before how Tulsa seems to be persona non grata. Even though its larger than many of the cities that are listed, on many different topics we talk about. Its no ones fault but Tulsas of course. But do cities like Tucson, Boisie, Omaha, Wichita, etc. really promote themselves that much? Can Tulsas promotion, name recognition, image, out there be that lame? I keep having this sneaking suspicion that many out there dont even consider Tulsa because they dont know anything about it and think it may be a small dusty cow town?

Here is a list of the US's largest metropolitan statistical areas in 2005.

http://www.answers.com/topic/list-of-united-states-metropolitan-areas

As you can see, Tulsa ranks 55th in population size. There are only 20 MSAs listed in the report. Tulsa may not be a small dusty cow town, but it's not up there with Austin and Columbus, much less NYC and LA. Even the much larger city of Phoenix didn't make the list, so I don't see what you're complaining about.

[WilliamTheArtist]

Here is a list of the US's largest metropolitan statistical areas in 2005.

http://www.answers.com/topic/list-of-united-states-metropolitan-areas

As you can see, Tulsa ranks 55th in population size. There are only 20 MSAs listed in the report. Tulsa may not be a small dusty cow town, but it's not up there with Austin and Columbus, much less NYC and LA. Even the much larger city of Phoenix didn't make the list, so I don't see what you're complaining about.

Aaah, I went back to the first posts and saw...."Demographia, “United States Central Business Districts (Downtowns): 50 Largest Urban Areas ", which it appeared was what many of the posts afterward were referring to.

I was just hitting on the "Central Business Districts" part and not the in "Largest Urban Areas".

So though Tulsa may have a larger downtown/central business district, more workers, more square feet, etc. than some of those 50 cities listed in the Demographica report, it isnt located in one of the 50 largest urban Areas. Though some cities may have larger urban areas, like Tucson, and or be larger cities, like Fort Worth or OKC it doesnt mean they have larger downtowns and business districts. And as for the stats derived from the brokerage companies that again listed cities with downtowns and CBDs much smaller than Tulsa, as someone else said, they simply may not have operations in Tulsa. I was just looking at all those lists, including the Demographica 50, noting we were talking about downtowns, and then seeing many downtowns listed that I knew were smaller than Tulsas, though their cities and urban areas may be much larger.

[Top Of The Park]

....how boundaries can be clarified for measuring downtown workers and people living downtown. Some cities have natural boundaries and its easy, but others have nearby neighborhoods feeding into downtowns and there is no clear boundary. Another for instance: a city might have a sports arena or stadium which is built just beyond the border of downtown and this facility brings people downtown. The arena employes 700 people, but its not really in downtown proper, so the employment doesn't count.

[Cirrus]

Anyone have data on Tysons Corner, VA?Somewhere between 25-35 million square feet office, depending how you count it.

[Minato Ku]

This is entirely correct. Where I live, in Paris, the largest purpose build business area in Europe, La Defense, is not even within the city proper. Is it Paris "downtown"? Is it separate? Who caqn say with definitive authority?

As you say there are many similarly polycentric cities and the same applies in them.

La Defense is not the CBD of Paris it is QCA (Central Paris : Saint Lazare Opera, Champs Elysee) with 400 000 employement and over 8 million m² (About 90 million sq ft) of office (more than la Defense) but nowaday La Defense and Pars QCA are linked by other offices districts.
So I can say that La Defense and Paris are just a part of a very big office district.
La Defense (EPAD) is just the largest bussiness district authority in Europe because the biggest have not (Paris QCA, London City).

Sorry my message is not about USA, but it is a good exemple for show how it is very difficult to know the real size of a BD. :)
Is there edge city in the largest business district in USA ?

[zimfar]

^Minato, after Central Paris and La Defense, what is the largest concentration of office space in greater Paris?

(par example, Issy-les-Moulineaux, Montparnasse?)

[Minato Ku]

For difficult to know, There is over 520 million sq ft + over 20 million sq ft U/c in Greater Paris. Maybe Val de Seine Business district ( Paris 15e, Issy-Les Moulineaux, Boulogne-Billancourt) or Gare de Lyon-Bercy-Paris rive gauche.

Anyway it is not the subject of this thread Please PM me for question about Paris :)

From Demographia:

RANKING: Central Business District EMPLOYMENT

1 New York 1,736,900
2 Chicago 541,500
3 Washington 382,400
4 San Francisco-San Jose 305,600
5 Boston 257,000
6 Philadelphia 220,100
7 Seattle 155,100
8 Houston 153,400
9 Los Angeles 143,700
10 Atlanta 129,800
11 Denver 126,000
12 Minneapolis-St. Paul 105,400
13 Cleveland 100,300
14 Baltimore 98,500
15 Miami 98,000
16 Pittsburgh 95,600
17 Columbus 88,800
18 Austin 86,000
19 New Orleans 81,400
20 Dallas-Fort Worth 79,900

Demographia, “United States Central Business Districts (Downtowns): 50 Largest Urban Areas 2000 Data on Employment & Transit Work Trips,” June 2006, at www.demographia.com/db-cbd2000.pdf.

It does not include Edge cities, Is there bigger Edge city Fort Worth downtown ?
In L.A per exemple

[zimfar]

^as per "edge cities" with significant biz districts of course NYC has many. Jersey City, Newark Nj, Stanford Ct, Metropark Nj, White Plains Ny, Yonkers Ny, New Rochelle Ny, Dobbs Ferry Ny, Princeton/Cranbury, Nj- etc.

There are more in the NYC region, but these are the ones I can think of which might rival or exceed a Fort Worth for example.

*btw, I ask about Issy-Les Moulineaux because I've been to the Canal+ studios several times, and there is much biz activity in that small area.;)

[Don B.]

No matter how you slice it, downtown Phoenix has pathetic numbers for a city this size.

Of course our CBD is bigger than half a square mile.

--don

[travelinmiles]

Fort Worth is not an edge city. It is the historic center of its own region and now anchors the western end of the D/FW area as Dallas anchors the east.

[Cambridgite]

^as per "edge cities" with significant biz districts of course NYC has many. Jersey City, Newark Nj, Stanford Ct, Metropark Nj, White Plains Ny, Yonkers Ny, New Rochelle Ny, Dobbs Ferry Ny, Princeton/Cranbury, Nj- etc.

There are more in the NYC region, but these are the ones I can think of which might rival or exceed a Fort Worth for example.

*btw, I ask about Issy-Les Moulineaux because I've been to the Canal+ studios several times, and there is much biz activity in that small area.;)

Is Newark not a real city within the NYC region, as opposed to a suburb? Edge cities are suburban in nature. They are not historic downtowns. Mississauga City Centre and North York Centre would be examples of edge cities within the Greater Toronto Area.

[austin242]

I remember just 10years ago downtown austin was nothing it was just buisiness now its a destination for shoping and stuff ever since soco started everyone started to go downtown more and want to live their and stuff and that is what i think caused the huge condo boom we are having now.

[zimfar]

Is Newark not a real city(?)

The original edge city, wouldn't exist if NYC hadn't preceded it.;)

[donybrx]

^^^^You sure about that?

Even Brooklyn was an independent city before merging with the other boros that now form NYC....

[zimfar]

Yes, but without the NY harbor and trade made available via Manhattan would there be a Newark? And without the resulting Brooklyn bridges, would it be the thriving borough it is today?
I suppose I'm arguing oranges to apples with the Tom Wolfe coining of the term in the 60's- but even so....

[SLO]

Fort Worth is notan edge city. It is the historic center of its own region and now anchors the western end of the D/FW area as Dallas anchors the east.

Exactly. The employment list has something wrong, there is no way Austin has more dt employment than Dallas let alone Dallas & Fort Worth.

[Trae]

^as per "edge cities" with significant biz districts of course NYC has many. Jersey City, Newark Nj, Stanford Ct, Metropark Nj, White Plains Ny, Yonkers Ny, New Rochelle Ny, Dobbs Ferry Ny, Princeton/Cranbury, Nj- etc.

There are more in the NYC region, but these are the ones I can think of which might rival or exceed a Fort Worth for example.

*btw, I ask about Issy-Les Moulineaux because I've been to the Canal+ studios several times, and there is much biz activity in that small area.;)

Fort Worth isn't an edge city. It had its own metro until its metro and Dallas' metro grew together. Think of Fort Worth as a St. Paul (with Minneapolis).

[totheskies]

Fort Worth is notan edge city. It is the historic center of its own region and now anchors the western end of the D/FW area as Dallas anchors the east.

correct... it is the western end of the D/FW clusterfuck

[donybrx]

Yes, but without the NY harbor and trade made available via Manhattan would there be a Newark? And without the resulting Brooklyn bridges, would it be the thriving borough it is today?
I suppose I'm arguing oranges to apples with the Tom Wolfe coining of the term in the 60's- but even so....

I take the position that at the time of their founding Newark, Yonkers, White Plains, Elizabeth and so on and so forth, even JerseyCity were independent settlements established and growing based upon various circumstances and situations. For example, Paterson evoloved independently during the Industrial Revolution around its mills and the hyrdro power derived from local waterways.

I'd say most of these cities started and grew independently, eventually knitting into the fabric of what is today metro NYC. Even Manhattan was a little squirty hamlet at its start in the 17th C. at the same time that similar hamlets were soon to be springing up on LongIsland and elsewhere......

Obviously some interdependency played a part in the evolution of the region, contributing to the mutuality, the success & growth of all communities involved.

Think back. Newark was founded in the late 17th century. Can you imagine how much time it took to travel by horse/boat from Newark to Manhattan (or from Yonkers, White Plains, etc., as well)? Newark would have had to have been reasonably self sufficient up to the development of the railroads that gave impetus to its evolution as a major industrial center.

PS: I'm not clear on which phrase you are attributing to Tom Wolfe in the '60's.......comparing 'apples to oranges' predates the '60s as a point of information.....

[Cirrus]

Edge cities are suburban in nature. They are not historic downtowns. Historic downtowns can ABSOLUTELY qualify as Edge Cities. Specifically, they qualify as the "Uptown" variety.

It's all fully explained in the seminal text on the subject, Edge City by Joel Garreau (http://www.amazon.com/Edge-City-Life-New-Frontier/dp/0385424345/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1196049330&sr=1-1).

[Cambridgite]

Historic downtowns can ABSOLUTELY qualify as Edge Cities. Specifically, they qualify as the "Uptown" variety.

It's all fully explained in the seminal text on the subject, Edge City by Joel Garreau (http://www.amazon.com/Edge-City-Life-New-Frontier/dp/0385424345/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1196049330&sr=1-1).

I actually have the book. I haven't had time to read the whole thing yet, but I've read bits and pieces. From what I've read, he explains edge cities as a suburban phenomenon. Historic downtowns that have been absorbed by urban sprawl are something different altogether. You should read his description for what qualifies as an edge city. One of those qualifications was that it existed 30 years ago as either farmland or a primative bedroom community. I urge you to look at his map of the New York region as well. He lists edge cities as circles and historic downtowns as triangles. Downtown Newark was labelled as a triangle. :)

[Crawford]

Fort Worth and Newark are absolutely edge cities. It is true that they have different historical narratives than the Tysons Corners and Costa Mesas of the world, but they currently function alike.

If Fort Worth or Newark aren't edge cities, then what about Stanford, White Plains, New Rochelle and New Brunswick for NYC, or Arlington, Alexandria and Bethesda for DC? All are older cities that were established independent of the core city, yet developed into secondary urban business and transit hubs. Their current role is 100% dependent on the vitality of the center city.

Should these cities not "count" because they happen to be located in a part of the country where many (most?) suburbs were established as independent cities?

[cabasse]

newark perhaps, but isn't fort worth sort of like dallas' smaller twin? fort worth's economy and corresponding sub-metro make up a big chunk of the entire d/fw economy, but fort worth has functioned on it's own as a major city for pretty much just as long as dallas.

[Trae]

Fort Worth and Newark are absolutely edge cities. It is true that they have different historical narratives than the Tysons Corners and Costa Mesas of the world, but they currently function alike.

If Fort Worth or Newark aren't edge cities, then what about Stanford, White Plains, New Rochelle and New Brunswick for NYC, or Arlington, Alexandria and Bethesda for DC? All are older cities that were established independent of the core city, yet developed into secondary urban business and transit hubs. Their current role is 100% dependent on the vitality of the center city.

Should these cities not "count" because they happen to be located in a part of the country where many (most?) suburbs were established as independent cities?

Fort Worth is not close to being an edge city. I don't know how you see that. Fort Worth was its own bustling town, while Dallas thirty miles away was the same. They both grew together. It isn't like Newark which grew because of NYC. Fort Worth has its own zoo, arts, etc. It is a little more than half the size of Dallas also.

[kingsdl76]

Manhattan (south of 59th) is the largest in the US (second largest in the world)


What is the largest in the world??

[Minato Ku]

Downtown Tokyo (Chuo ku, Chiyoda ku and Minato ku) 32.4 million m² / 348 million sq. ft

By metro area, the largest office cities in the world.

1-Tokyo metro area:more than 100 million m² / 1 billion sq. ft (Central Tokyo: ca. 55 million m² / 600 million sq. ft)
2-New York metro area:61.6 million m² / 662.8 million sq. ft
3-Paris metro area: 49 million m² / 527 million sq. ft
4-Greater London: 28.5 million m² / 307 million sq. ft, Most offices in London metro area are in GL, so the office space in the whole metro area is a bit higher

[Cirrus]

One of those qualifications was that it existed 30 years ago as either farmland or a primative bedroom community.He contradicts that qualification later on. For example, 30 years ago Silver Spring, MD (which is on his list) was the second largest shopping district between New York and Washington after downtown Philadelphia. It looks different now than it did then, but it's been a major activity center for decades. So have lots of the places on his list. Garreau's list and bullet-point qualifications are less important than the concepts they're attempting to describe. Garreau understands that something is going on and is trying to describe the ingredients, but he doesn't quite manage to be all-inclusive.

Ultimately Edge Cities are major mixed-use activity centers of regional importance that are outside the central business district. Their physical form and history are less important than their role in the regional economy and social scene.

Now, that having been said, the concept is different than that of a “twin city”. Whether Fort Worth and Saint Paul qualify as Edge Cities or as twin downtowns depends on whether they are as regionally important as Dallas and Minneapolis. If so, they are twins. If they’re clearly subordinate, then they’re Edge Cities.

Personally I prefer the term Activity Center because it has less baggage than Edge City, as illustrated by this thread. It can also be inclusive to describe Edge Cities of all variety (including the likes of Tysons Corner and Newark), plus twin cities and even central business districts.

[totheskies]

Fort Worth and Newark are absolutely edge cities. It is true that they have different historical narratives than the Tysons Corners and Costa Mesas of the world, but they currently function alike.

If Fort Worth or Newark aren't edge cities, then what about Stanford, White Plains, New Rochelle and New Brunswick for NYC, or Arlington, Alexandria and Bethesda for DC? All are older cities that were established independent of the core city, yet developed into secondary urban business and transit hubs. Their current role is 100% dependent on the vitality of the center city.

Should these cities not "count" because they happen to be located in a part of the country where many (most?) suburbs were established as independent cities?

Fort Worth is no more an edge city than Philadelphia. There are points when the Dallas metropolitan area peters out and the Fort Worth area begins (this is especially evident if you travel on I-30 between the two cities). The two metros also have some cultural differences. The fact that the cities have separate transit systems is also a good indicator of this. On a US scale, 650,000 residents seems a bit large to be a mere "edge city".

Now you guys can argue that it is an edge city all you want, but if you come down to Texas and say that to real living residents of either town, be ready to get ran over by the TRE tracks!!

[Okstate]

Hong Kong metro has less office space than Paris France? ^

[Crawford]

Hong Kong metro has less office space than Paris France? ^

Definitely. Paris is much bigger.

[pj3000]

the ranks are still inefficient. if manhattan were to be included as a whole, other cities' business districts would have to be combined (such as adding up atlanta's buckhead, midtown, and downtown areas).

No... all of Manhattan is basically a "downtown" when one compares it with any other American city. The entire island is a completely urban mix of commercial, residential, and industrial development with unrivaled density. This type of urban density is only found in other US cities' "CBDs", "downtowns", or whatever else you want to call urban clusters. True, cities like Atlanta and Houston may have multiple "downtowns". But there are large breaks of suburban development between them. Obviously, this is not the case in Manhattan... any "breaks" in the Manhattan skyline are areas that are far more urban (and more like a true downtown) than any existing business district area of Atlanta, Houston, LA, etc. If you still think that other cities' business districts should be combined if Manhattan is considered as a whole for a more accurate comparison, then I guess we should also combine downtown Brooklyn (actually much of Brooklyn), portions of Queens, the Bronx, and maybe even Jersey City as well. Bottom line is, there is no comparison.

The original edge city, wouldn't exist if NYC hadn't preceded it.;)

Totally false. You're just making stuff up. Newark was founded in 1666, completely independent of New York. Five miles was a hell of a long way away back in those days, and was still a large distance throughout the 1800s, when Newark rapidly developed as an independent industrial and shipping center.

[Minato Ku]

Hong Kong metro has less office space than Paris France? ^

Hong Kong doesn't have a large office space compared the high number of skyscrapers, it is less than big american and european cities, it suprised many people (me include) but not the Hongkongers.

Hong Kong: 9.8 million m² / 105 million sq. ft

[miketoronto]

That would make sense. Hong Kong is full of buildings and looks huge, but the population is only 3 million if not just under 3 million. Not that big a city pop wise :)

[alleystreetindustry]

and i have taken such listings this way. you feel that if your city doesn't have the most people, the most office space, the most etc., it isn't considered anything significant. but then i thought of how much i love atlanta, and i don't care what people think of it, what people have to say about it, blah blah blah. a city the size of tulsa can be just as important and fun as a city the size of new york.

[spark317]

and i have taken such listings this way. you feel that if your city doesn't have the most people, the most office space, the most etc., it isn't considered anything significant. but then i thought of how much i love atlanta, and i don't care what people think of it, what people have to say about it, blah blah blah. a city the size of tulsa can be just as important and fun as a city the size of new york.

Well said!!! :tup:

[mhays]

That would make sense. Hong Kong is full of buildings and looks huge, but the population is only 3 million if not just under 3 million. Not that big a city pop wise :)

I suspect they also cram in a lot of workers per square foot. Sort of like they do with residents.

[SLO]

Fort Worth and Newark are absolutely edge cities. It is true that they have different historical narratives than the Tysons Corners and Costa Mesas of the world, but they currently function alike.

If Fort Worth or Newark aren't edge cities, then what about Stanford, White Plains, New Rochelle and New Brunswick for NYC, or Arlington, Alexandria and Bethesda for DC? All are older cities that were established independent of the core city, yet developed into secondary urban business and transit hubs. Their current role is 100% dependent on the vitality of the center city.

Should these cities not "count" because they happen to be located in a part of the country where many (most?) suburbs were established as independent cities?


I know this has been responded to, but the Fort Worth situation is very unique, perhaps more so than St Paul. FW has its own edge cities, and has as little to do with Dallas as possible. I dont say that to slight Dallas, but to portray the situation and sentiments of the residents of the city. FW refuses to take a back seat, and competes w/Dallas in every way. It is entirely possible that in the next 20 to 30 years Fort Worth passes Dallas in population. Then what, is Dallas an edge city?
And what of the San Francisco bay area? SF, Oakland, San Jose? San Jose is now the largest city of the three.....

[krudmonk]

And what of the San Francisco bay area? SF, Oakland, San Jose? San Jose is now the largest city of the three.....
Edge cities around here are Santa Rosa, Vacaville, Stockton, Salinas and cities along those lines. I don't think there absolutely must be only one core city and the rest defining the boundaries.

[relnahe]

It seems from what I'm reading here in these last posts is FT W & Dallas are in more of a DC/Baltimore relationship then a Minneapolis/ST P one.

[antinimby]

Fort Worth is not close to being an edge city. I don't know how you see that. Fort Worth was its own bustling town, while Dallas thirty miles away was the same. They both grew together. It isn't like Newark which grew because of NYC. Fort Worth has its own zoo, arts, etc. It is a little more than half the size of Dallas also.Agreed. Two separate places 30 miles apart cannot be considered interrelated. That's too vast of a distance.

[Minato Ku]

Fort Worth is not an edge city because Dallas and Fort Worth are two cities wich merged into a sole one.
It is the same for Bay area with San Francisco Oakland and San Jose, or in Europe with Ramdstam metro area formed by Amsterdam, Rotterdam and the Haye.

In N.Y metro area, Newark (even if it was an independent city before) was absorbed by N.Y, it is Newark and N.Y wich merged into one metropolitan area. We vcan say that Newark is an edge city.
It is like Saint Denis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Denis) in France, wich was before an pretty important city and was absorbed by Paris, it could become a district of this city in 2008.

[Marv95]

How can a city be an edge city of NYC when:
It has a pop of nearly 300,000
Basically has its own transit network(NJ Transit's headquarters are located in downtown)
It's 10 miles away in a different state
3rd oldest city in the nation, founded in 1666
Grew inspite of NYC and was one of the largest industrial centers in the nation not too long ago
Has its own entertainment/leisure centers(Prudential Center, minor-league baseball stadium, NJ Performing Arts Center, own museum(s)), own international airport(and seaport)?

If anything, White Plains, Yonkers and maybe JC(which some people confuse for NYC whenever tourists are at the waterfront or Liberty State Park) are edge cities.

[Crawford]

How can a city be an edge city of NYC when:
It has a pop of nearly 300,000
Basically has its own transit network(NJ Transit's headquarters are located in downtown)
It's 10 miles away in a different state
3rd oldest city in the nation, founded in 1666
Grew inspite of NYC and was one of the largest industrial centers in the nation not too long ago
Has its own entertainment/leisure centers(Prudential Center, minor-league baseball stadium, NJ Performing Arts Center, own museum(s)), own international airport(and seaport)?

If anything, White Plains, Yonkers and maybe JC(which some people confuse for NYC whenever tourists are at the waterfront or Liberty State Park) are edge cities.

I'm not sure why any of those points (some of which are wrong) mean it can't qualify as an Edge City.

NJ Transit is centered around Manhattan, not Newark. Manhattan is easily the biggest rail and bus destination in the NJ Transit network. Newark isn't even #2, it's the #3 destination after Manhattan. Penn Station Manhattan gets almost 10 times the Newark Penn Station numbers (same goes for the bus), and that's not counting the fact that half the people going to Newark are just transferring to the PATH trains to Manhattan.

Newark is seven miles from Midtown Manhattan. If anything, it isn't an Edge City but more of a Sixth Borough.

It didn't grow in spite of NYC, it grew because of NYC. Newark grew as a huge transportation and shipping center, based on it's location just to the west of the nation's (historically) largest seaport. It's vitality today is tied to it's share of what is now the nation's second largest seaport and Newark Airport, which are obviously attributable to NYC.

The seaport is only partially in Newark (it's also in NYC, Elizabeth and Bayonne) and has nothing to do with the city of Newark itself. The airport also has nothing to do with Newark. It's older than LGA or JFK and closer to Manhattan than JFK and was historically NYC's #1 airport.

It certainly isn't the third oldest city. Off the top of my head, NYC, Boston, Providence, New Haven and many others are older.

Newark no longer has 300,000 residents. Not sure why this would disqualify it as an edge city. Jersey City will be larger than Newark in a few years, yet you think that it qualifies as an edge city.

Not sure what minor league baseball teams and a museum have to do with edge city status. Edge Cities don't have sports or other diversions? Suburbs can't have sports? Better not tell half the sports franchises in the U.S. The Dallas Cowboys aren't really in Dallas? The Stade de France isn't in Paris? I think most would differ.

Also not sure why the fact it's in another state matters. There are more people living in the suburban NJ portion of the NY MSA than the suburban NY and CT portions combined. If anything, suburban NY and CT matter less, as they are further from Manhattan and have smaller populations. According to you, MD and VA aren't part of metro DC because they are in different states? Arlington and Tysons Corner aren't Edge Cities of DC because they are not officially in the District? The Northeast has small states so these situations are typical.

[Cambridgite]

Agreed. Two separate places 30 miles apart cannot be considered interrelated. That's too vast of a distance.

I dunno. They can be pretty interrelated if they are well connected by highways and suburban development fills up most points in between. I don't think it makes the smaller city a suburb though.

[Cambridgite]

Breaking this down bit by bit, I will address why so many of these points are flawed, and I can use the example of one suburb alone to explain how, for some of your examples, this isn't only a Newark scenario.

How can a city be an edge city of NYC when:
It has a pop of nearly 300,000

Suburbs that are completely dependent on the growth of a central city can grow quite large. Take for example, Mississauga, an edge city and very large suburb of Toronto. Note the population and skyline. Its "suburban downtown" was farmland merely a couple of decades ago and was built around a shopping mall.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mississauga,_Ontario

Basically has its own transit network(NJ Transit's headquarters are located in downtown)
It's 10 miles away in a different state

Check the link for Mississauga. You will also see that it has its very own Mississauga transit, but is also connected to the commuter rail network that serves Toronto. Kind of similar to Newark in this regard, but rail replaces subways. Although in the same province, parts of Mississauga can be about 25-30 miles from downtown Toronto. There are plenty of examples of multi-state/province metros across this continent and around the world. East St. Louis is in Illinois. The Gatineau area, part of Ottawa's metro, is in Quebec while Ottawa itself is in Ontario. Parts of suburban Cincinnati are in Northern Kentucky, etc etc.

3rd oldest city in the nation, founded in 1666
Grew inspite of NYC and was one of the largest industrial centers in the nation not too long ago

Perhaps your only valid point. And it did achieve some critical mass before being absorbed by the NY region. This is why I consider it to be it's own city, heavily integrated with the NYC region, not just a suburban edge city.

Has its own entertainment/leisure centers(Prudential Center, minor-league baseball stadium, NJ Performing Arts Center, own museum(s)), own international airport(and seaport)?


Ummm, can't most of these things be found in the suburbs? (especially airports)

[Cirrus]

San Jose is now the largest city of the three.....Only because of meaningless lines on maps. In the real world, San Francisco is still the center of the Bay Area.

Two separate places 30 miles apart cannot be considered interrelated. That's too vast of a distance.
Nonsense. Los Angeles and San Bernardino are 60 miles apart, but if you think the latter would exist in anything resembling its current form without the former then I've got a bridge to sell you.

Dallas and Fort Worth may well be separate. I'm not famliar enough with the region to know. But there's way more to the equation than distance alone.

Fort Worth is not an edge city because Dallas and Fort Worth are two cities wich merged into a sole one.Small towns and medium-sized cities are merged into larger ones all the time. Alexandria, VA is older than Washington, DC and was itself a major city decades before anyone ever dreamed of the District of Columbia, and yet TODAY Alexandria functions as an uptown-variety Edge City.

A history of independence is meaningless in the context of CURRENT regional interdependence.

How can a city be an edge city of NYC when:
It has a pop of nearly 300,000…
See above regarding historical independence versus contemporary interdependence.

If anything, White Plains, Yonkers and maybe JC(which some people confuse for NYC whenever tourists are at the waterfront or Liberty State Park) are edge cities.Who said they’re not?

[L41A]

No... all of Manhattan is basically a "downtown" when one compares it with any other American city. The entire island is a completely urban mix of commercial, residential, and industrial development with unrivaled density. This type of urban density is only found in other US cities' "CBDs", "downtowns", or whatever else you want to call urban clusters. True, cities like Atlanta and Houston may have multiple "downtowns". But there are large breaks of suburban development between them. Obviously, this is not the case in Manhattan... any "breaks" in the Manhattan skyline are areas that are far more urban (and more like a true downtown) than any existing business district area of Atlanta, Houston, LA, etc. If you still think that other cities' business districts should be combined if Manhattan is considered as a whole for a more accurate comparison, then I guess we should also combine downtown Brooklyn (actually much of Brooklyn), portions of Queens, the Bronx, and maybe even Jersey City as well. Bottom line is, there is no comparison.



Totally false. You're just making stuff up. Newark was founded in 1666, completely independent of New York. Five miles was a hell of a long way away back in those days, and was still a large distance throughout the 1800s, when Newark rapidly developed as an independent industrial and shipping center.


I agree with the general context of what you are saying.

However, in defense of the previous comments concerning Atlanta, Alleystreet only mentioned three areas (Downtown, Midtown and Buckhead) which are all in the city of Atlanta. There are no large breaks of suburban development between Downtown Atlanta and Midtown Atlanta as you imply. Due to the large homes and mansions in the residential section of Buckhead, I see your point between Buckhead and the Downtown/Midtown areas.

However, Alleystreet didn’t named two other prominent business districts in metro Atlanta namely Perimeter Center and Cumberland which are truly surrounded by suburban environments. I know we all love our own city. But some of us do get a little picky in trying to be greater, bigger, more dense, etc than the next place. NYC is great. I absolutely love it and it is amazing place. It does ignite your senses (good and bad) like no other place. It is like the church steeple to all American cities imo. But to say, that another place does not compare when in fact that’s what you are doing is disingenuous if not also arrogant.

[travelinmiles]

Only because of meaningless lines on maps. In the real world, San Francisco is still the center of the Bay Area.




Dallas and Fort Worth may well be separate. I'm not famliar enough with the region to know. But there's way more to the equation than distance alone.

Small towns and medium-sized cities are merged into larger ones all the time. Alexandria, VA is older than Washington, DC and was itself a major city decades before anyone ever dreamed of the District of Columbia, and yet TODAY Alexandria functions as an uptown-variety Edge City.

A history of independence is meaningless in the context of CURRENT regional interdependence.


Historically, Fort Worth and Dallas were much closer in population, some of this is why there is a split in Interstate 35. FW was already a major city. It wasn't until the 60s and 70s that Dallas boomed and Fort Worth had a harder time adjusting to a service economy. There was even a point in time when the two had separate media markets. The two have grown together however, they both have their own suburbs, transit systems, even looking at a highway map they both have separate wheel and spokes networks connected by east-west highways.

[krudmonk]

Only because of meaningless lines on maps. In the real world, San Francisco is still the center of the Bay Area.
The real world, huh? I don't think the argument was made that SJ (or Oakland) was the center of the region, just distinguishing between it and an edge city. I hope that quells your monstrous rage.

[Jersey Mentality]

I'm not sure why any of those points (some of which are wrong) mean it can't qualify as an Edge City.

NJ Transit is centered around Manhattan, not Newark. Manhattan is easily the biggest rail and bus destination in the NJ Transit network. Newark isn't even #2, it's the #3 destination after Manhattan. Penn Station Manhattan gets almost 10 times the Newark Penn Station numbers (same goes for the bus), and that's not counting the fact that half the people going to Newark are just transferring to the PATH trains to Manhattan.

Newark is seven miles from Midtown Manhattan. If anything, it isn't an Edge City but more of a Sixth Borough.

It didn't grow in spite of NYC, it grew because of NYC. Newark grew as a huge transportation and shipping center, based on it's location just to the west of the nation's (historically) largest seaport. It's vitality today is tied to it's share of what is now the nation's second largest seaport and Newark Airport, which are obviously attributable to NYC.

The seaport is only partially in Newark (it's also in NYC, Elizabeth and Bayonne) and has nothing to do with the city of Newark itself. The airport also has nothing to do with Newark. It's older than LGA or JFK and closer to Manhattan than JFK and was historically NYC's #1 airport.

It certainly isn't the third oldest city. Off the top of my head, NYC, Boston, Providence, New Haven and many others are older.

Newark no longer has 300,000 residents. Not sure why this would disqualify it as an edge city. Jersey City will be larger than Newark in a few years, yet you think that it qualifies as an edge city.

Not sure what minor league baseball teams and a museum have to do with edge city status. Edge Cities don't have sports or other diversions? Suburbs can't have sports? Better not tell half the sports franchises in the U.S. The Dallas Cowboys aren't really in Dallas? The Stade de France isn't in Paris? I think most would differ.

Also not sure why the fact it's in another state matters. There are more people living in the suburban NJ portion of the NY MSA than the suburban NY and CT portions combined. If anything, suburban NY and CT matter less, as they are further from Manhattan and have smaller populations. According to you, MD and VA aren't part of metro DC because they are in different states? Arlington and Tysons Corner aren't Edge Cities of DC because they are not officially in the District? The Northeast has small states so these situations are typical.

NJ Transit is not centered around Manhattan, that sounds ridiculous, NJ Transit shares a couple station in Manhattan thats about it. If anything its centered around New Jersey. It is not made for the people of Manhattan, it is made of the use of New Jersey residents. And beside from that Newark does have a separate subway system aside from NJ Transit and PATH.

Also Newark didn't not grow because of New York, it did grow in spite of it. If NYC was not there, then Newark would be the dominate city in that region, if not that nation. Also Newark's ports handle more cargo then those in NYC, we have the airport and the Turnpike here for easier access for transport. Newark was really a city on its own long ago before there was a PATH or a Holland or Lincoln Tunnel. From 1666 till the mid to late 1800s Newark was just a large city near New York, it has never been and may never be a bedroom community of New York City. Some of the towns around it have been turned into bedroom communities. But if anything its location near New York have hurt it. Companies locate to New York, dont you think Newark has a tough time attracting and retaining business that would otherwise re-locate to Manhattan or over look Newark all together? You cannot sit up there and say if NYC wasnt there then Newark would be less significant. It would still have an airport, and a seaport, it would have still been the center of New Jersey's intense industry, and the regional center of North Jersey.

[Segun]

^ man that that quote by Cirrus had so much anger, I could see steam erupting from it. Look at the venemous use of "in the real world" and the strategic comma seperating the two volatile attacks.

[totheskies]

Like other threads, the term "edge city" can be looked upon as quite vast, and (in my view) it's just dependent on the history of the town, and what other functions the city has. Form-wise, many people would mistake a place like San Jose to be an edge city because of its looks, and how spread out it is.

A place like Arlington is in my mind the definitive edge blob. It just sucks up the space between Dallas and Fort Worth and sprawls between each cities' suburbs. Yet due to city boundaries, it's population is over 300,000 people. But it doesn't have the economic or government importance of even a place like Little Rock (which has 100,000 fewer in its city population). Even Houston's largest suburb of Pasadena has at least the lion's share of the industrial workforce, and therefore warrants a necessity for someone to want to live there. Not meaning to just hate on Arlington exclusively, but it's not my kind of town.

[totheskies]

Historically, Fort Worth and Dallas were much closer in population, some of this is why there is a split in Interstate 35. FW was already a major city. It wasn't until the 60s and 70s that Dallas boomed and Fort Worth had a harder time adjusting to a service economy. There was even a point in time when the two had separate media markets. The two have grown together however, they both have their own suburbs, transit systems, even looking at a highway map they both have separate wheel and spokes networks connected by east-west highways.

Exactly. This is also why D/FW is owned equally by the two cities, but they also retain their own airports. It's unique though that Meacham still has the status of "International airport" but way more commercial flights are out of Dallas Love Field.

[Cirrus]

The real world, huh? I don't think the argument was made that SJ (or Oakland) was the center of the region, just distinguishing between it and an edge city. I hope that quells your monstrous rage.
Lines on a map and the population of surrounding sprawl are meaningless to the edge city discussion. In this context the City of San Jose should be thought of more like a county. Downtown San Jose is certainly an edge city, and it's likely other activity centers in San Jose qualify as well.

We can talk about that, or you can continue to take sarcastic jabs at me in response to your homer pride and failure to understand the concept. Your choice.

Historically, Fort Worth and Dallas were much closer in population, some of this is why there is a split in Interstate 35. FW was already a major city. It wasn't until the 60s and 70s that Dallas boomed and Fort Worth had a harder time adjusting to a service economy. There was even a point in time when the two had separate media markets. The two have grown together however, they both have their own suburbs, transit systems, even looking at a highway map they both have separate wheel and spokes networks connected by east-west highways.None of that proves that Fort Worth doesn't function as an edge city to Dallas. Leesburg, VA has a historic downtown, its own transit system, its own circumferential highway, surrounding bedroom communities that you could call Leesburg suburbs, its own newspaper, yadda yadda yadda, yet there’s not a soul in Leesburg who would ever claim it would look like it does without Washington and the rest of Northern Virginia near by.

I don’t know how you tell the difference between a twin city and an edge city, but I don’t think any of the reasons you listed are valid.

Here’s another complication to add to the equation: Downtowns Los Angeles and (especially) Phoenix aren’t particularly distinguishable from regional edge cities in LA or Phoenix. Does that mean those downtowns qualify? What do you call it when there’s NOT a dominant primary district, and even the largest is simply one among many?

Yet another reason why I prefer the term Activity Center.

[totheskies]

Lines on a map and the population of surrounding sprawl are meaningless to the edge city discussion. In this context the City of San Jose should be thought of more like a county. Downtown San Jose is certainly an edge city, and it's likely other activity centers in San Jose qualify as well.

We can talk about that, or you can continue to take sarcastic jabs at me in response to your homer pride and failure to understand the concept. Your choice.

None of that proves that Fort Worth doesn't function as an edge city to Dallas. Leesburg, VA has a historic downtown, its own transit system, its own circumferential highway, surrounding bedroom communities that you could call Leesburg suburbs, its own newspaper, yadda yadda yadda, yet there’s not a soul in Leesburg who would ever claim it would look like it does without Washington and the rest of Northern Virginia near by.

I don’t know how you tell the difference between a twin city and an edge city, but I don’t think any of the reasons you listed are valid.

Here’s another complication to add to the equation: Downtowns Los Angeles and (especially) Phoenix aren’t particularly distinguishable from regional edge cities in LA or Phoenix. Does that mean those downtowns qualify? What do you call it when there’s NOT a dominant primary district, and even the largest is simply one among many?

Yet another reason why I prefer the term Activity Center.

Have you been to both Dallas and Fort Worth???

[cabasse]

...well, i'm headed down to detroit's activity center. (ha ha)

i was actually replying with the same thing segun said above, but he said it for me.