Downtowns are back
 

2020 arrived and the US Census (and Brazilian as I'm based) will confirm the surge of Downtowns all across the globe, specially in Americas, where the urban decline hit the hardest.

We can use this thread to post numbers, forecasts, developments and general discussions about the renaissance of the hearts of our cities.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...8fd2f6d0_z.jpg

I'll start with São Paulo, where I live. Downtown São Paulo has a loosen definition which is common in massive metropolises. I'll use as the definition the 9 most central districts, that counted 477,670 inh. (2010 Census) in 33 km² (12.7 sq miles) for a 14,400 inh./km² (37,300 inh./sqm).

It's still a rough area, where probably the largest "Crackland" (Cracolândia in Portuguese) in the world is located, all banks and big companies have migrated to new financial districts. However, on the past years new restaurants, bars, nightclubs, creative shops are popping all over the area. I wouldn't call gentrification yet, but it's definitely the coolest place to be. A bit like Kreuzberg and Neukölln in Berlin.

Let's get to the numbers:

------------------------------- 2010 --------- 2000 -------- 1991
In the 1990's, Downtown São Paulo was in Rust Belt kind of free fall. Crime rates in São Paulo were much higher back then and the region felt the impact as the middle-class left the region in droves.

The 2000's, even though the urban decay was and still very present, we saw a completely change on the trend, with Downtown São Paulo growing faster than the city, the metro area and even the macrometropolitan area.

However, the comeback started to be felt for good only in the early 2010's, with the southern edge (Bela Vista district, bordering Paulista Avenue) recovering first and growing northwards into the core direction (Sé and República districts).

That's why the 2020 Census will be very interesting. I wouldn't be surprised, even with the crisis and weaker Brazilian general demographics, to see the region growing close to 20% between Census, reaching 570,000 inh. and a 17,000 inh./km² (44,000 inh./sqm) density.

And as most forumers are from US and Canada, let's expand the discussion there as well.

I brought São Paulo as the opening example, but I'm aware Chicago, Los Angeles, Toronto central areas are undergoing explosive growth as well. Even Detroit, in a much small scale and a much lower base, will probably see its Downtown population to double between 2010-2020.

are trains back?

Amen brother

I came across with this very interesting article from BBC, to give us an perspective across the Atlantic:

The UK's rapid return to city centre living

For England and Wales, the figures are between 2002 and 2015, and it was more intense on northern England, where urban decay hit the hardest: Liverpool city centre jumped from 9,100 to 25,600 inh. (+181%), Birmingham 9,800 to 25,800 (+163%), Leeds 12,900 to 32,300 (+150%), Manchester 14,300 to 35,600 (+149%) and Bradford 1,300 to 3,200 (+146%).

London, more modest on relative terms, but still impressive on absolute terms: 268,700 to 327,200 (+22%). Cardiff, from 6,700 to 12,600 (+88%).

For Scotland and Northern Ireland, the comparison is between 2001 and 2011 Census. Glasgow 19,700 to 28,300 (+44%), Edinburgh 10,100 to 12,600 (+25%) and Belfast 3,500 to 4,600 (+31%).

According to data, the growth is fueled by young people. On Sheffield, the number of students living in the city centre grew by 300% between 2001-2011. Overall, the 20-29 y/o population grew threefold in city centres across the country.

Downtown Toronto (17 sqkm)

1971: 115,070
1981: 106,498
1991: 133,836
2001: 154,149
2011: 199,330
2016: 250,000
2021 estimate: 295,000
2041 estimate: 475,000

https://i.imgur.com/61Ntm1g.jpg

here's data for two US Cities in the Midwest:

Minneapolis:
2006: 31,904
2018: 49,781
2019: 51,000, with 2500 units under construction as of Feb 2020

(Data from StarTribune & Downtown Council of Mpls)


Columbus, Ohio:
2002: 3,619
2010: 5,991
2014: 7,080
2019: 9,270
2020P: 10,700
2021P: 11,900
2022P: 14,000
https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus..._news_headline

Downtown Cleveland

2012: 10,499
2013: 11,789
2014: 12,502
2015: 13,336
2016: 13,886
2017: 15,100
2018: 17,500
2019: 19,000 est (waiting for 2019 numbers due in March)
2020: 20,000+ est from units under construction

edit: For comparison, downtown Cleveland is about 3 square miles (~8 km2). About a third to half is vacant and underused land like surface parking and industrial.

Philly: 7.7 sq. mile downtown area, 2018 estimated population = 193,000.
Probably topping 200,000 in 2020.

How is this sustainable without growth in transit to serve a growing population? The loss in downtown populations in the past matched the loss of streetcars and bus service in the 40s, 50s and 60s. Are we really prepared to spend to provide real transit improvements rather than just vanity projects.

Even Toronto is struggling with growing congestion. Who knows when the proposed Ontario Line will actually be built.

Austin's downtown is pretty small. Only a little more than 1 1/2 square miles. From what I could find, there are around 12,000 residents living in downtown as of 2015. There has been a considerable amount more of residential construction since then. Most of the residential properties are around the river. To be clear, Austin's downtown area officially does not include the UT Campus or the West Campus neighborhood even though those two areas are immediately adjacent to downtown and form the same skyline that downtown does. There are around 7,300 students living on campus, and another 27,000 or so living in West Campus. Including the UT Campus and West Campus neighborhoods, that's around 46,000 living in a little more than 2 square miles. West Campus is the densest neighborhood in Austin with around 27,000 people inside of a little more than a quarter of a square mile.

There are as many people living in that area as there are living in my zip code which covers around 13 square miles.

Downtown

https://i.imgur.com/fTvxPPT.jpg

UT Campus

https://i.imgur.com/tWitIkv.jpg

West Campus

https://i.imgur.com/ba8G5tl.jpg

Not specifically about Toronto, but Downtowns are usually the most better served in transit, aside having a huge chunk of the jobs on the urban area, jobs that might even be reached on foot by those new Downtown dwellers.

Aside the reversion of urban decay, that's one of the most interesting aspects of the population boom: people will live near their jobs, reducing greatly commute times, improving economic productivity.

That's one of the big things that has been fuelling the downtown boom in Toronto: commuting by transit or car is an absolutely miserable experience here - so being able to walk or bike places is a huge deal.

São Paulo still has a long way to expand its subway and railway systems (only 350 km for a 22 million metropolis), but its Downtown area is served by four subway and five railway lines, plus counting with several massive bus terminus.

Even though employment centres migrated southwest as Downtown decayed, it keeps being an important job market on its own and easy to get from anywhere in the metro area.

Downtown Los Angeles

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...a1f5b3d5d6.jpg

As the US 2020 Census numbers are available, I decided to bring some actual figures. For Los Angeles, I used a 25 census tract area, that matches with the most usual definitions for Downtown LA.


-- 2020 ---- 2010 ---- 2000 ---- 1990

74,349 ---- 52,538 ---- 40,836 ---- 32,786 ---- 41.5% ---- 28.7% ---- 24.5%


It's a 14.86 km² area, for a density of 5,003 inh./km². Lots of room to densify. The growth is nothing but impressive. Almost doubled in the past 20 years.

One interesting thing I noticed while put the numbers together is the only area dropping was the census tract where Union Station is located. And dropped big: from 10,800 in 2000 to 5,500 in 2020. It represented over 1/4 of total population back then and now it's mere 7.5%.

Downtowns are back, but not in Canada, due to the lack of freeways. Pro-transit, anti-car attitudes in Canadian cities killed their downtowns and continues to kill any hope for their revival.

I was just about to bring this up. I’m still coming back to Chicago for work, but every time I do, I’m amazed at all the construction going on. Downtown Chicago in the 80’s had a population of approximately 20,000 people. Today, the population is over 110,000 and growing. Apparently it’s the fastest growing downtown in the US.

https://i1.wp.com/www.brookings.edu/...2C9999px&ssl=1

There’s an interesting article from a few years ago about this very subject:

https://www.brookings.edu/research/b...e-coronavirus/

^ I wonder what the 2020 census says about downtown growth?

For 2010 the data showed that, within a 2 mile radius of city hall, downtown Chicago was by a huge margin the fastest growing downtown in the US. Not sure if that is still true for the 2020 census though

is there an official definition of "downtown" that can be used to compare cities?

The Union Station might be the jail related lol.
I can't think of another reason why it would drop. There isn't much housing in that tract...yet.
I wonder if you counted the tracts west of downtown and around USC?

Depending on how one defines downtown, then you might not even need much transit.

If Toronto’s downtown area is 17 sq km, then that’s a pretty walkable area really. If it was a circle the radius would be about 2.3km, which is like a 25 min walk. Just get some bikes and scooters and you’re good. You certainly don’t need heavy rail.

As you guys mentioned Chicago, I decided to put its numbers together:

Downtown Chicago

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...b18dfb86_z.jpg

---------------------- 2020 ------ 2010 ------ 2000 ------ 1990

Near North Side --- 105,481 ---- 80,484 ---- 72,811 ---- 62,842 ----- 31.1% ----- 10.5% ----- 15.9%

Loop ----------------- 42,298 ---- 29,283 ---- 16,388 ---- 11,954 ----- 44.4% ----- 78.7% ----- 37.1%

Near North Side has 6.8 km² for a density of 15,500 inh./km² and Loop 2.9 km² and 10,800 inh./km². 20 and 6 census tracts, respectively.

Loop, from a CBD, turned into a very dense residential area. Ditto for the southern tracts of Near North Side, which are the ones growing like crazy. The other areas are more stable as they've always been residential.

No. There are barely local definitions, depending on the place.


I used a 25 census-tract definition. I'd go with 20 at first, to respect freeway limits and Alameda St., but I'd left out areas that it's usually regarded as Downtown, like the Union Station and the west bank of Los Angeles River. So, nothing west or south the freeway loop. Just three ones north of the loop (because Union Station), but leaving Chinatown out.

And I'm using City Population as source, because it's much easier to navigate on it.

I don’t believe there is. So, we should probably take some of these numbers with a grain of salt.

:stunned: That’s a really big downtown- land wise.

there is almost no downside to intensifying downtowns

just wait until you have nimbys complaining about tall buildings downtown.

No, there is no official definition of a given city's "downtown", so this exercise is always open to lots of interpretation, and makes direct comparisons quite challenging, and usually meaningless.

The closest thing you can get to a somewhat direct apples-to-apples comparison is the census bureau's calculations of "x" number of people living withing "y" miles of a city's city hall, though that is also quite imperfect as most downtowns don't spread out from their city's city hall in perfect concentric rings. Water, topography, industrial zones/corridors, non-CBD city halls, and many other factors can greatly complicate that particular measure.

In earthquake country, there is at least a reason to oppose tall buildings having to do with the inability of fire departments and other "first responders" to really cope with disasters involving them.

I mean "The Towering Inferno" is a real issue as was 9/11.

I'm not saying I think this issue is enough reason to keep downtowns short and stubby. I don't. I'm a real skyscraper fan. But in San Francisco, at least, the issue always comes up when a new building, especially one taller than 400 or 500 ft, is proposed. And the Fire Dept. is usually asked to weigh in.

My purpose in this thread was to compare Downtown with the rest of the city/metro area than comparing Downtown X to Downtown Y, so the lack of an universal definition doesn't matter much.

What really stands out here is Downtowns, are booming pretty much everywhere. Some starting in the late 1990's, others in the late 2000's, but the trend is very clear.

Downtown Miami

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...62348156_z.jpg


Downtown Miami growth is nothing short of spectacular:

---------------------- 2020 ------ 2010 ------ 2000 ------ 1990

Downtown Miami ------- 58,439 ---- 31,697 ----- 12,885 ----- 9,218 ----- 84,4% --- 146,0% ---- 39,8%

Miami-Miami Beach --- 525,131 --- 486,880 --- 449,743 --- 451,533 ------ 7,9% ----- 8,3% ---- -0,4%


Almost 2/3 of the absolute growth of Miami-Miami Beach in the past 20 years took place there. It has a 4.34 km² area for a 13,500 inh./km² density.

That makes sense. But I think if you counted city west, it would be closer to 100k. It sounds like you left out the Arts District,
which is becoming a part of downtown for office and residential.
North of USC (south of the freeway) has probably added 5k, if not more.

Imo, USC is part of the greater downtown area, as it has the museum campus and several light rail stops.

Arts District is in. Freeways bordering South and West, Los Angeles River at East and Chinatown/Alpine St. at North.

Could it be homeless related? I visited Los Angeles on vacation last week (on a 3-day layover before Honolulu) and Hollywood is mobbed with homeless as is most of Downtown east of Grand Central. I couldn't even walk from the metro to the Last Bookstore because there were dozens of homeless and ghetto all over the street eyeing valuables.

I could definitely see the west side of LA's downtown booming since that area seemed very safe. But maybe there's some homeless/Skid Row counting effect? I walked from LA City Hall to Union Station on a previous trip and there are tent encampments all around there too.

Downtown Philadephia

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...3d5b4255_z.jpg

Philadelphia is often discussed here in this section, but not its City Center specifically. I used a 29 census tract definition, roughky the area between South St., Spring Garden St. and the two rivers.


-------------------- 2020 ------ 2010 ------ 2000 ------ 1990

City Center --------- 91,510 ----- 68,836 ----- 57,552 ----- 51,302 ----- 32.9% --- 19.6% --- 12.2%

Philadelphia ----- 1,603,797 -- 1,526,006 -- 1,517,550 -- 1,585,577 ---- 5.1% ---- 0.6% --- -4.3%


The area has 8.92 km² and a density of 10,300 inh./km². Growth has been insane, with population almost doubling in the past 20 years. It's even more impressive as the area is pretty much built up for ages.

For comparison, Chicago Loop & Near North Side (posted above), with a much higher profile, is not so far ahead, with 148k inh. in a 10.7 km² area. Or Downtown LA, often discussed, with 74k inh. in a 14.9 km² area.

P.S. Guys, to convert the area and density to sq miles, just multiply by 2.59

Thanks for posting these. What this shows is that the near north side’s growth accelerated—big time—from 2010-2020. Wow.

However you are only getting half the picture here. We also need to see data from the near south and near west sides, as those are also considered a part of what is now described as Chicago’s “central area”

Can someone please help me find the census tract data from the 2010 census? Thank you!

Yes, most Chicagoans would probably now agree that "Downtown Chicago", at its most generous, has expanded west and south of the loop into the near west and near south community areas.

The problem with using community areas though is that they can be awfully large. The near west side, for example, stretches west all the way past western avenue! I don't think many urban observers here here would consider an intersection like Madison/Western to be "downtown". At most you can probably make an argument for going west to Ashland, but once you get out to the moonscape parking lots of the united center, "downtown" is definitely over.

It's an exercise probably better executed with census tracts, but that's tedious and time consuming to add up.

Since downtown T.O was posted, I'll do the same for Montreal (although data is lacking compared to other cities)

Downtown Montreal: 17km^2

Population

1966: 136,600
1990: 82,700
2006: ~94,000
2011: 100,000
2016: Estimated 120,000


https://i2.wp.com/ocpm.qc.ca/sites/o...ille_carte.jpg


Source: https://ocpm.qc.ca/sites/ocpm.qc.ca/...ille_final.pdf

Here you are:

---------------------- 2020 ------ 2010 ------ 2000 ------ 1990

Near North Side ------ 105,481 ----- 80,484 ---- 72,811 ---- 62,842 ----- 31.1% ----- 10.5% ----- 15.9% ------ 6.8 km²

Loop -------------------- 42,298 ----- 29,283 ---- 16,388 ---- 11,954 ----- 44.4% ----- 78.7% ----- 37.1% ------ 3.9 km²

Near South Side ------- 28,795 ----- 21,390 ----- 9,509 ----- 6,828 ----- 34.6% ---- 124.9% ----- 39.3% ------ 4.6 km²

Near West Side -------- 48,719 ----- 36,789 ---- 21,689 ---- 17,978 ----- 32.4% ----- 69.6% ----- 20.6% ------ 7.4 km²

Central Chicago ---- 225,293 --- 167,946 --- 120,397 ---- 99,602 ----- 34.1% ----- 39.5% ----- 20.9% ------ 22.8 km²

Chicago MSA ----- 9,618,502 - 9,461,105 - 9,098,314 - 8,182,076 ------ 1.7% ------ 4.0% ----- 11.2% -- 18,634 km²


For Near West Side, as it's way too big, I considered only the eastern half of it, using 10 censos tracts.

As it happens in Near North Side, it's the census tracts near Loop the ones booming, in both NSS an NWS. In fact, the southernmost census tract in NSS, majority Black, is actually collapsing. In 1990, it made up 40% of NSS population. Today, it represents mere 4%.

Another thing: Chicago city proper minus Central Chicago declined by 7,000 people.



Go to City Population.

Downtown LA's rental occupancy rate INCREASED during covid.
Wow.

And the apartments are only more expensive.

Thank you, Yuriandrade, for your work on this. This is very helpful info.

You're welcome, urban! It's time consuming, but it's quite enjoyable to see the results. I'm already on the 25th Downtown and counting. :)

Pretty much every US Downtown is booming, even from cities you almost don't mention here. Obviously circumstances and the scale are distinct, but it seems millions of Americans of all regions realized the urban life is amazing.

That's likely because https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_L._Ickes_Homes were demolished about 10 years ago (unless the souternmost census track you're considering is south of I-55?). The replacement project is just now getting built (https://www.mccafferyinc.com/portfolio/southbridge ), with 877 units.

I guess that puts the density at just under 13 thousand ppsm making it higher than the overall density of LA but not nearly as dense as the densest neighborhoods. Not sure if you included City West Census tracts just to the West Northwest of the 110 Freeway. Typically included with Downtown.

Are you planning on posting more downtown data? Thanks for working on this, it's very interesting!!

Not to nitpick but if you are going to count some Near West Side then you should count all of it. The population in 2020 of NWS was 67,881. The Central Area which is Near West/South/North + The Loop grew by 58,417 people or 31.4%. Total population of those 4 areas today is 244,455.


It is more nuanced than that and does not tell the complete story really. Besides the core (NNS, NWS, NSS, and The Loop) growing by a ton .

* The north lakefront (Lincoln Park, Lake View, North Center, Lincoln Square, Rogers Park, Edgewater, Uptown, West Ridge) grew by 25,718 people or a modest +5.48%.

* The south lakefront (Douglas, Oakland, Grand Boulevard, Washington Park, Hyde Park, Woodlawn, Kenwood, and South Shore) grew by 14,280 people or +8.06%.


Putting all of this together, the entire lakefront area from South Shore all the way north 20+ miles to the edge of the city in Rogers Park counting the greater downtown area including all of Near West Side gained 98,415 people compared to 2010. This is a growth rate of 11.82%.

To put that into further perspective, that area had a population of 832,772 in 2010 and 931,187 in 2020. That was larger than San Francisco and Boston both in 2010 and still is, and that area had a higher population growth than both of those cities from 2010 to 2020. To put it into further perspective, the city of Dallas outgained that area in the same time period by "only" 8000 people and some change.


Now for some more insights:
* The area of the city along I-55 going down to Midway (Armour Square, Garfield Ridge, Archer Heights, McKinley Park, Bridgeport, Brighton Park, West Elsdon, West Lawn, and Clearing) gained 5705 people or a modest +2.49%. Areas like Bridgeport, McKinley Park, and Brighton Park got a bit more Asian than 2010, and Archer Heights went from very little Asian population to an increasingly sizable one. The areas closest to Midway Airport like West Elsdon, West Lawn, Clearing, etc got more Hispanic and less white.


* The area of the far NW side of the city plus some others in the NW side kind of adjacent - Edison Park, Norwood Park, Forest Glen, Dunning, Montclare, and Jefferson Park gained 5661 people or a modest +3.84%. These areas gained 10,724 Hispanic people while losing 10,988 white people.

however...

* The area nearby in Portage Park, Irving Park, Belmont Cragin, Albany Park, Hermosa, and Avondale lost 10,249 people - some of this area is definitely gentrifying. Other areas of the city which lost population from 2000 to 2010 had some of the same activity happening so it'll be interesting to see if any of these areas actually turn around and gain population by 2030.


Where the city got slammed in population loss was really part of the south side and also west side:
The area of Englewood, West Englewood, Auburn Gresham, Washington Heights, Greater Grand Crossing, Roseland, West Pullman, and Pullman lost 28,486 people. That almost offsets the gains of the north lakefront and part of the NW side. Part of this area went through some big demographic shifts with areas like West Englewood going from only about 2% Hispanic in 2010 to nearly 20% Hispanic in 2020.



Then the area on the west side of Austin, North and South Lawndale, East and West Garfield Park, and Humboldt Park lost another 16,005 people. Yet again, some of these areas became a bit more Hispanic. Austin for example went from under 9% Hispanic in 2020 to nearly 20% Hispanic in 2020. We don't have the 2020 ACS data yet, but I can tell you that the loss in Austin was actually a few thousand people better than expected. My guess is in part due to an influx in Hispanic population.

In fact, Austin recorded the largest Hispanic population gain of any community area in the city with +9868 Hispanic people.
1. Austin: +9868 Hispanic people
2. Chicago Lawn: +7808
3. Garfield Ridge: +5573
4. West Englewood: +5058
5. Dunning: +5043
6. New City: +4066
7. Ashburn: +4025
8. Clearing: +3984
9. West Lawn: +2709
10. Near North Side: +2612


The city is becoming even more Hispanic, and more Asian now. The Hispanic population in the city is now greater than the Black population, and thus will be interesting to see the political battle play out. It will also be interesting to see if there can be some Asian representation now that the SW side is increasingly Asian. Bridgeport is now over 42% Asian and McKinley Park is approaching 30% now. Nearby in downtown, Near South Side and the Loop are both over 20% Asian now. Near West Side is almost 19% Asian now. Brighton Park is now nearly 11% Asian and Archer Heights went from 1% Asian in 2010 to 4.3% in 2020.

I believe that's the one. For Near South Side, the 5 tracts match perfectly with the official definition. And between 2010-2020 it grew a bit.


No, I didn't. It's the traditional definition. West and South bordered by the freeways. Some blocks north of the freeway to include Union Station and to the east, Los Angeles River. 25 census tracts. It was one of the most challenging ones.

I intend to add more central neighbourhoods, but it's complicate as census tracts not always match with the districts definitions.

Anyway, Downtown LA has plenty of room to densify.

Thank you! Well, as long as you guys are interested, I'll be posting.

It's more than 30 downtowns now, ready to be posted, and a couple dozen of adjacent central neighbourhoods.



Not really. The thread is about Downtowns, CBDs, and strictly speaking, only the Loop and southern half of Near North Side are traditionally seen as such.

I added the NSS and the eastern half of NWS as @the urban politician and @Steely Dan noticed there are plenty of infill adjacent to Downtown is those areas. Moreover, NWS is disproportionally large and part of the it looks like a regular neighbourhood and not "Downtown".

Just saying - consistency wise. If you are going to do that then you should be counting some of River West as part of downtown, which is part of West Town. The Grand and Chicago Blue Line stops there for example are very close to parts that anyone would count as downtown and the core. I do agree that core wise maybe you shouldn't count over where the United Center is but not counting some of the areas above in West Town doesn't make much sense.

What you also mention as The Loop + southern part of NNS is a pretty old definition as well. The core definitely now in some parts goes south of Roosevelt and also it's now pretty seamless for about 2/3 of the NNS going north through around Division St.