PHILADELPHIA | Highrise Development Thread IX

[1487]

Originally Posted by PhiLaw

The Center City District's "State of the City" was released this morning. The empirical evidence all points toward continued improvement of all social, economic and cultural outputs in Center City.

On a side note: I have to say the idea we are the 2nd most populated center city is a farce. Extended Center City is defined as Tasker to Girard, River to River. I think aesthetically, structurally, demographically and economically we should agree on Pine to Vine. If anything, with U-City's rise extended Center City should be defined as Pine to Vine, Delaware to 48th. It's a horizontal rectangle, not vertical.

http://centercityphila.org/docs/SOCC2015.pdf

The CCD's new boundary is BS. No way they should include all that territory. They are all about using the numbers and charts to push their agenda. I preferred it when they focused more on cleaning and promoting CC- now everything they put it is simply a new spin on the same argument "CC cant make real progress without lower taxes". In fact, they sort of gloss over some of the recent news about companies moving into the city. I think theres a lot of evidence out there that local taxes are just one factor business consider when they choose a location but according to CCD its the only thing that matters. They also spend a lot of time comparing rents here to other cities without any context. One thing they dont offer is any actual comparison of tax burdens- I suspect that is omitted because it would be hard to heap so much praise on NYC's impressive office rents and occupany rates if you showed their tax burden is comparable to ours.

[br323206]

Originally Posted by PHL10

Well, Center City has been historically defined as the original borders of the City of Philadelphia before the consolidation of the county. Those borders are Vine to South, river to river but otherwise I agree with your point.

From a planning and management standpoint, I understand leveraging the outgrowth of the core into the adjacent neighborhoods. And if one wants to call that greater Center City, then fine. But then taking those very liberal borders of what is basically standard row home neighborhoods, not unlike the dozens of others and calling it the “downtown” is a stretch. And further, taking that “downtown” and saying it’s bigger than Chicago’s downtown seems rather silly.

They use a pretty expansive area for Chicago too. Something like North Avenue down to the Stevenson Expressway, and west to I-90. That whole area has 144,000 residents according the Defining Downtown report that they put out a couple of years ago using 2010 data. At that time we had 170,000 in our "downtown." They use Tasker to Girard because it's about a 1 mile radius around City Hall. If you limit it to our historic core downtown the 2010 population figure was 57,000 compared to Chicago's core of 54,000 (Chicago Ave south to Harrison and west to I-90). They actually count University City and the University Village area of Chicago as separate "commercial cores"--like second downtowns basically.

So either way you cut it we're bigger than Chicago's downtown. That's not new info. The claim they are making in the latest State of Center City report is about passing Lower Manhattan, not Chicago. Center City District always counted Lower Manhattan and Midtown as two different downtowns--just like they do Center City and University City.

[br323206]

Originally Posted by 1487

The CCD's new boundary is BS. No way they should include all that territory. They are all about using the numbers and charts to push their agenda. I preferred it when they focused more on cleaning and promoting CC- now everything they put it is simply a new spin on the same argument "CC cant make real progress without lower taxes". In fact, they sort of gloss over some of the recent news about companies moving into the city. I think theres a lot of evidence out there that local taxes are just one factor business consider when they choose a location but according to CCD its the only thing that matters. They also spend a lot of time comparing rents here to other cities without any context. One thing they dont offer is any actual comparison of tax burdens- I suspect that is omitted because it would be hard to heap so much praise on NYC's impressive office rents and occupany rates if you showed their tax burden is comparable to ours.

Not saying they don't deserve criticism, but these aren't new boundaries. They've been using the same boundaries for years. They have "core" Center City" as Vine to Pine and "extended" Center City as Tasker to Girard.

[PhiLaw]

Originally Posted by br323206

Not saying they don't deserve criticism, but these aren't new boundaries. They've been using the same boundaries for years. They have "core" Center City" as Vine to Pine and "extended" Center City as Tasker to Girard.

I lived on 1520 S. Beulah St. from the age of 9 through 13. It's between Tasker and Dickinson, 7th and 8th. There is nothing "central" nor "extended central" about this area. It's a row-home laden residential neighborhood that seems miles from any commercial corridor. The Acme on Passyunk is the hotbed of commercial activity.

CCD needs to stop reaching and creating arbitrary eye-raising statistics through boundary inflation, and just focus on what they truly need to focus on - improving Center City.

[summersm343]

Originally Posted by PhiLaw

The Center City District's "State of the City" was released this morning. The empirical evidence all points toward continued improvement of all social, economic and cultural outputs in Center City.

On a side note: I have to say the idea we are the 2nd most populated center city is a farce. Extended Center City is defined as Tasker to Girard, River to River. I think aesthetically, structurally, demographically and economically we should agree on Pine to Vine. If anything, with U-City's rise extended Center City should be defined as Pine to Vine, Delaware to 48th. It's a horizontal rectangle, not vertical.

http://centercityphila.org/docs/SOCC2015.pdf

I think Center City should be defined as Spring Garden to South Street. Why cut it off as Vine and Pine?

And I definitely think University City should be included as the "Downtown" area, at least until 40th Street and to Powelton Ave to the North.

Most cities use an extended area when explaining "Downtown" populations, but I wouldn't necessarily say it's a farce. Center City is a very densely populated area, and when looking at all cities, and accounting for 1 mile and 2 miles, even 3 miles from the Center of the City outwards, Philadelphia is the third most populous core after Manhattan and San Francisco. Philadelphia's core is even more populous than Chicago believe it or not.

[br323206]

Originally Posted by PhiLaw

I lived on 1520 S. Beulah St. from the age of 9 through 13. It's between Tasker and Dickinson, 7th and 8th. There is nothing "central" nor "extended central" about this area. It's a row-home laden residential neighborhood that seems miles from any commercial corridor. The Acme on Passyunk is the hotbed of commercial activity.

CCD needs to stop reaching and creating arbitrary eye-raising statistics through boundary inflation, and just focus on what they truly need to focus on - improving Center City.

My point wasn't about whether 8th and Tasker feels like "downtown." It's that they have consistently used the same boundaries for years. So there is no "boundary inflation." Furthermore, they are using the same definition for every single city in their comparison--which is based on distance, not on how the block "feels." Even furthermore, if you limit it to smaller distances (Pine to Vine for example) you still get the same result--Philly has the second largest downtown.

[PhiLaw]

Originally Posted by br323206

My point wasn't about whether 8th and Tasker feels like "downtown." It's that they have consistently used the same boundaries for years. So there is no "boundary inflation." Furthermore, they are using the same definition for every single city in their comparison--which is based on distance, not on how the block "feels." Even furthermore, if you limit it to smaller distances (Pine to Vine for example) you still get the same result--Philly has the second largest downtown.

There is no boundary inflation relative to the population statistics they put out, of course. Those statistics are based on boundaries that have remained the same. The "boundary inflation" arises in the mind by having at the outset included arbitrary boundary lines.

Distance from the center is not a good measure of "downtown." If you take a protractor to the downtowns of Detroit and Cleveland, for example, you would be in Lakes Michigan and Erie, respectively, if all was symmetrical. Why does a boundary have to be defined by distance from a single point? And why must the distances north and south be equal? Hopefully you can see the absurdity of boundaries based solely by distance.

To me, downtown means those contiguous areas within relative close proximity to the central business district that retain the requisite zoning, economic and cultural underpinnings necessary to sustain a critical mass of urban ecosystem.

[br323206]

Originally Posted by PhiLaw

There is no boundary inflation relative to the population statistics they put out, of course. Those statistics are based on boundaries that have remained the same. The "boundary inflation" arises in the mind by having at the outset included arbitrary boundary lines.

Distance from the center is not a good measure of "downtown." If you take a protractor to the downtowns of Detroit and Cleveland, for example, you would be in Lakes Michigan and Erie, respectively, if all was symmetrical. Why does a boundary have to be defined by distance from a single point? And why must the distances north and south be equal? Hopefully you can see the absurdity of boundaries based solely by distance.

To me, downtown means those contiguous areas within relative close proximity to the central business district that retain the requisite zoning, economic and cultural underpinnings necessary to sustain a critical mass of urban ecosystem.

Well to be fair, they didn't define it based on distance from a point. They found the census tracts that constitute "core" downtown by looking at employment density and other statistics and then did that for the 50 largest cities in the US. Then they added a 1-mile buffer to define an "extended" downtown. Some cities have two or three downtowns (we had two, Center City and University City). I recognize the limitation of the distance aspect of the methodology but it was the simplest way to apply the methodology on a large scale and to do so objectively. It would take a ton of time to arrive at different definitions for each "extended" downtown of each city and there would be inherent flaws in subjectively deciding on what counts. This way it is flawed, but at least it is objective.

[Philly Fan]

Here's the Inquirer article on the new Center City District report:

(Greater) Center City's population second only to Midtown Manhattan's

[cafeguy]

Greater center city is a way to measure where all the development and growth is. No matter if its row homes, apartment buildings, or skyscrapers...this area is the economic driver of our city. Greater center city is about 5.5 square miles with 183K people. Midtown manhattan is about 5.5 square miles with 289K people.

Plain and simple...greater center city is a great way to determine the urban life of a city. The idea that Philly has the second largest population outside of midtown manhattan is absolutely amazing. This is an exciting time to live in Philadelphia.

[Philly-Drew]

Originally Posted by cafeguy

Greater center city is a way to measure where all the development and growth is. No matter if its row homes, apartment buildings, or skyscrapers...this area is the economic driver of our city. Greater center city is about 5.5 square miles with 183K people. Midtown manhattan is about 5.5 square miles with 289K people.

Plain and simple...greater center city is a great way to determine the urban life of a city. The idea that Philly has the second largest population outside of midtown manhattan is absolutely amazing. This is an exciting time to live in Philadelphia.

Well said

[Jelly Roll]

Originally Posted by cafeguy

Greater center city is a way to measure where all the development and growth is. No matter if its row homes, apartment buildings, or skyscrapers...this area is the economic driver of our city. Greater center city is about 5.5 square miles with 183K people. Midtown manhattan is about 5.5 square miles with 289K people.

Plain and simple...greater center city is a great way to determine the urban life of a city. The idea that Philly has the second largest population outside of midtown manhattan is absolutely amazing. This is an exciting time to live in Philadelphia.

What is the methodology used to get to "the second largest population outside of midtown manhattan"? Brooklyn has higher densities and more contiguous dense census tracts then any corresponding area in Philadelphia as does almost all of Manhattan. Just trying to figure out how a place with less dense census tracts covering the same area would have more people. I am not trying to take away from Philadelphia as greater center city has very impressive numbers and more importantly is an awesome urban place just trying to understand how they are getting numbers larger then Lower Manhattan and Brooklyn.

[3rd&Brown]

Originally Posted by cafeguy

Greater center city is a way to measure where all the development and growth is. No matter if its row homes, apartment buildings, or skyscrapers...this area is the economic driver of our city. Greater center city is about 5.5 square miles with 183K people. Midtown manhattan is about 5.5 square miles with 289K people.

Plain and simple...greater center city is a great way to determine the urban life of a city. The idea that Philly has the second largest population outside of midtown manhattan is absolutely amazing. This is an exciting time to live in Philadelphia.

Plus what you guys are ignoring is that overtime, the CCD will aim to expand its boundaries of service and these are the areas they'll likely target...one neighborhood at a time.

I'd easily pay a couple hundred extra bucks a year in property taxes on my home in NoLibs if I had Paul Levy's team sweeping my streets and beautifying the neighborhood. They tried a few years back in the Loft District to do just that but (barely) lost in a referendum to the anti-gentrification Chinatown zealots.

[relnahe]

Originally Posted by PhiLaw

On a side note: I have to say the idea we are the 2nd most populated center city is a farce.

How so? I've been to many cities and it is a top 3 easily.

Originally Posted by PHL10

And further, taking that “downtown” and saying it’s bigger than Chicago’s downtown seems rather silly.

The loop has (or maybe had as it has been a while since I've been there) many stretches of urban sprawl with some large parking lots and not a whole lot of people.

[cafeguy]

Originally Posted by Jelly Roll

What is the methodology used to get to "the second largest population outside of midtown manhattan"? Brooklyn has higher densities and more contiguous dense census tracts then any corresponding area in Philadelphia as does almost all of Manhattan. Just trying to figure out how a place with less dense census tracts covering the same area would have more people. I am not trying to take away from Philadelphia as greater center city has very impressive numbers and more importantly is an awesome urban place just trying to understand how they are getting numbers larger then Lower Manhattan and Brooklyn.

I didn't do the analysis...but I'm guessing they are taking "geographic areas" as defined by cities and comparing total population. It's less a measure of density, but one of the population of an "area". We have two "areas" we measure, center city, and greater center city. NYC has midtown, lower manhattan, upper manhattan, probably brooklyn of some sort, and some other areas of course. They count everyone in these "self-decided areas" and can say... look! Philly is second! Is our most dense area as dense as brooklyn? I dunno...but the stat still speaks volumes about where Philly is in comparison to other cities and why we are a VERY attractive option for businesses, students, people, etc. Philly is clearly that diamond in the rough and all these stats are evidence of that. Our homes, real estate, and many other things are incredibly undervalued. That won't last long though. If any of you haven't bought a home yet, get on that. Your chances will be quickly disappearing over the next few years.

[1487]

Originally Posted by br323206

Not saying they don't deserve criticism, but these aren't new boundaries. They've been using the same boundaries for years. They have "core" Center City" as Vine to Pine and "extended" Center City as Tasker to Girard.

No I think this is the first time they are explicitly counting all of this area. Girard ave is not Center city. Thats just too far north. Just because there is redevelopment north of Spring Garden Street doesnt mean those areas automatically become part of center city. The core area has remained the same, but the CCD seems to be gradually expanded the "expanded" Cc definition.

[1487]

Originally Posted by PhiLaw

There is no boundary inflation relative to the population statistics they put out, of course. Those statistics are based on boundaries that have remained the same. The "boundary inflation" arises in the mind by having at the outset included arbitrary boundary lines.

Distance from the center is not a good measure of "downtown." If you take a protractor to the downtowns of Detroit and Cleveland, for example, you would be in Lakes Michigan and Erie, respectively, if all was symmetrical. Why does a boundary have to be defined by distance from a single point? And why must the distances north and south be equal? Hopefully you can see the absurdity of boundaries based solely by distance.

To me, downtown means those contiguous areas within relative close proximity to the central business district that retain the requisite zoning, economic and cultural underpinnings necessary to sustain a critical mass of urban ecosystem.

agreed. Drawing a circle around City hall and including whatever lies within a downtown is too arbitrary. especially when you consider various cities have all kinds of natural boundaries that affect density at some arbitrary distance from the defined center. If a city is surrounded by water or has a huge park near their CBD that can skew the numbers. It seems to me there is an issue with calling lower North Philadelphia and northern South Philadelhia what they really are for whatever reason. Because these areas are getting "better" it appears that many dont want to identify them as North and South Philadelphia anymore.

[PHL10]

Originally Posted by 1487

It seems to me there is an issue with calling lower North Philadelphia and northern South Philadelhia what they really are for whatever reason. Because these areas are getting "better" it appears that many dont want to identify them as North and South Philadelphia anymore.

Agreed. But I do have the following suggestion for the future naming convention.

Current:
Center City
South Phila
North Phila
SW Phila
NE Phila
NW Phila

New:
Center Center City
South Center City
North Center City
SW Center City
NE Center City
NW Center City

The benefit is now everyone in the City lives in Center City giving us the biggest downtown in the country.

[jsbrook]

Originally Posted by 1487

No I think this is the first time they are explicitly counting all of this area. Girard ave is not Center city. Thats just too far north. Just because there is redevelopment north of Spring Garden Street doesnt mean those areas automatically become part of center city. The core area has remained the same, but the CCD seems to be gradually expanded the "expanded" Cc definition.

I don't believe that defining GREATER Center City as Tasker to Girard is a new thing. This 7.7 square mile stretch has been defined as such for the last several years. At least. Probably longer.

[1487]

It looks like they started using this definition in 2011 with this report.

http://www.centercityphila.org/docs/CCR_Demographics2011.pdf

Either way, I dont believe you can call 10th and Girard part of "greater" CC for various reasons.