Population of your city's central core?

[PhilliesPhan]

"Downtown Philadelphia" (we call it Center City) has likely surpassed 200,000 residents, depending on how one defines it. The strictest definition is Vine to South, river (Delaware) to river (Schuylkill). The latest, most expansive definition is Girard to Tasker, river to river, though portions of University City--say, everything between Powelton, 40th, and the Schuylkill River--should arguably be included in the definition of Center City.

[ilcapo]

Stockholm, Sweden

Stockholm Inner-City
18 Square miles (46 square km).
13 is land the rest is water.

Population: 346,538
About 40% of the city population and 15% of the greater/metro-population.

Consists of Gamla Stan (Old Town), Kungsholmen, Långholmen, Norrmalm,Riddarholmen, Skeppsholmen, Södermalm, Vasastaden, Östermalm and Djurgårdsstaden.

Its basically the continous city-blocks that are visible on google maps. You can see a distinction between the innercity (inre staden) and the outer boroughs (ytterstaden) by the density and the way its built. It started with the old town in the middle and then stretches up to the northernmost part of Norrmalm, and the southern most part of Södermalm. At both of these edges are what we call the "Tolls" which works as the borders in to the actual inner-city.



Example of architecture:

[isaidso]

Originally Posted by Northern Light

A quick note about the pace of growth in Toronto's core.

From a recent City Planning document:

By 2041, the population is projected to nearly double to a potential population of 475,000. In this same time frame, Downtown, together with the two ‘shoulder’ areas of South of Eastern and Liberty Village, has the potential to reach between 850,000 and 915,000 jobs.

Living downtown it's not hard to see the population almost doubling in that time frame. At the scale they're currently building (80-320m) downtown will likely max out around 700,000 people. If they want to cram more people in they'll have to go taller.

Regarding shoulder areas, it's entirely possible that the boundaries of downtown will expand over time. I could certainly see Liberty Village being considered downtown in the medium future; same goes for the Portlands.

[The Chemist]

If you consider the central core of Shanghai to encompass the 7 core districts of Huangpu, Xuhui, Jing'an, Changning, Putuo, Hongkou, and Yangpu, that would make the population about 6.9 million over an area of 289 square kilometres. This gives a density of 23876 people per square kilometre or 61,122 people per square mile.

Personally, I'd say anything inside the Inner Elevated Ring Road would be better considered the core city, which would have a lower population but a higher density (though I can't find figures for that).

[isaidso]

How much of that would be 'downtown'?

[muppet]

Yep I think we need to differentiate between an Inner City, (for example in London pop 3.6 million, 320 sq km) and the Core City (350,000, 30 sq km) which should be dominated by retail and business rather than residential.

The core of Shanghai (aka Inner Core covers the main shopping districts of Nanjing Rd, the Old Town and the Bund area) is 926,100 (20 sq km) but it also bleeds into neighbouring Hongkou and Xuhui skyscraper business districts.

If you count these bleed subdistricts: (Sichuan North Rd subdistrict + Tilanqiao in Hongkou) 202,000 4.7 sq km + (Xujiahui district in Xuhui) 110,000 4 sq km


Then Lujiazui (the Pudong skyscraper area across the river where all SH's skyline shots are of )- 32 sq km 470,000...

gives a total of 1,710,000 over 61 sq km or 28,033 per sq km/ 72,605 per sq mile. That's a smidgeon bigger than Manhattan island but 8.5% denser for comparison.


That's actually a reduction - the Inner Core alone was 1.21 million in 2000, or 2.33 denser than Manhattan.

[JAYNYC]

Originally Posted by muppet

I would maybe stop north of Central Park, but then Id take in a bit of Brooklyn.

I'd be curious to know your rationale for these arbitrary borders.

[muppet]

^skyscrapers, business districts, wall-to-wall retail areas, entertainment zones, visitor sites, general commerce

This:



rather than this, dominated by residential:


https://upload.wikimedia.org

[Pedestrian]

This what you're interested in?

San Francisco


Image is from this other thread that covers the territory: http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...=204523&page=5

This photo shows much of the same ground:


https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...sco_aerial.jpg

[kool maudit]

Originally Posted by ilcapo

You can see a distinction between the innercity (inre staden) and the outer boroughs (ytterstaden) by the density and the way its built.

Nice! A Stockholm guy. I have a question about this place...


...how did it come to be that there is such a sudden change in planning style outside of the centre? You literally cannot find a 19th-century main street or houses built in rows/blocks outside of Vasastan/Norrmalm/Södermalm/Östermalm/Kungsholmen.

Not even the smaller towns swallowed up by Stockholm have these areas, although you can see they have some older houses. Everything outside of the central districts seems to have post-1950s planning norms with towers-in-the-park, curving streets, strict residential/commercial separation etc. The "outer-inner" areas can be very dense but commerce seems to be located in large malls or complexes, with little regular street life.

[ilcapo]

Originally Posted by kool maudit

Nice! A Stockholm guy. I have a question about this place...


...how did it come to be that there is such a sudden change in planning style outside of the centre? You literally cannot find a 19th-century main street or houses built in rows/blocks outside of Vasastan/Norrmalm/Södermalm/Östermalm/Kungsholmen.

Not even the smaller towns swallowed up by Stockholm have these areas, although you can see they have some older houses. Everything outside of the central districts seems to have post-1950s planning norms with towers-in-the-park, curving streets, strict residential/commercial separation etc. The "outer-inner" areas can be very dense but commerce seems to be located in large malls or complexes, with little regular street life.

Hi,

Honestly i have no idea. I dont know my history to be honest but i agree.
Obviously the inner city is for the most part is older than the outskirts (outer city). During the mid-1900's the architecture changed to functionalism and then you have the ABC-style with towers-in-parks and shopping malls, followed by the million programme which at the time was considered new and modern but later turned out to be eyesores and problematic areas and less desirable.

Why they suddently stopped to build the dense innercity blocks i have no idea, but it was really stupid.

I suppose there was a time when living in dense quarters was considered less desirable because of nature and sunlight etc.

You can find some blocks in Sundbyberg and Solna that are built like the inner city but thats about it.

And now you have clusters here and there in the outskirts with similar planning style (block-to-block) but obviously with newer (boring) architecture for the most part.

[kool maudit]

Originally Posted by ilcapo

You can find some blocks in Sundbyberg and Solna that are built like the inner city but thats about it.

Thanks to this comment, I just became aware of Råsunda and now it's a possible real estate option

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by liat91

No, the relative feeling of “intensity” of being in NYC’s central core begins to wane around 86th actually.

I would put it at 100th Street on the East Side and 125th Street on the West Side. 110th & Broadway isn't notably less intense than 80th and Broadway.

Originally Posted by liat91

Being in DT Brooklyn doesn’t feel like it either.

DT Brooklyn is much denser/busier than significant geographies in Manhattan, but I think for simplicity's sake, it's easier to say the City is the core, and everything else isn't.

[dc_denizen]

Originally Posted by kool maudit

Thanks to this comment, I just became aware of Råsunda and now it's a possible real estate option

Helsinki is the same way ( as Stockholm). After the war it was all garden cities and no extension of the grid .

But this seems more logical since Helsinki is a far younger city and was never the capital of a superpower like Sweden . Plus it was much more impoverished. There seem to be more 19th century towns in suburban Boston than in suburban Helsinki

Not sure about Oslo

Copenhagen is a completely different animal with it’s European style blocks

[Crawford]

Weren't the Nordics poor and rural, with huge outmigration, relative to the Continent until fairly recently? Those new towns probably didn't replace substantial settlements.

The famed welfare state and energy boom prosperity has postwar roots, I think, so in conjunction with Corbusian ideas about city-building. I don't think you'll see Hamburg/Copenhagen type midrise intensity.

[kool maudit]

Originally Posted by dc_denizen

Helsinki is the same way ( as Stockholm). After the war it was all garden cities and no extension of the grid .

But this seems more logical since Helsinki is a far younger city and was never the capital of a superpower like Sweden . Plus it was much more impoverished. There seem to be more 19th century towns in suburban Boston than in suburban Helsinki

Not sure about Oslo

Copenhagen is a completely different animal with it’s European style blocks

Yeah, Stockholm is an interesting one in that it kind of "pays for" the scale and grandeur of its city centre with an abrupt dropoff.

I guess this could be due to the dramatic terrain in that it developed very densely where it was initially most favourable to build and not at all in adjacent areas. Copenhagen's core is a noticeable step down in terms of scale but its transition to streetcar suburbs and the like is far more gradual.

It's still a little odd how many of the old towns in Stockholm's orbit seem to lack their centres but maybe this just comes down to extensive TOD in the postwar period?

[kool maudit]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Weren't the Nordics poor and rural, with huge outmigration, relative to the Continent until fairly recently? Those new towns probably didn't replace substantial settlements.

The famed welfare state and energy boom prosperity has postwar roots, I think, so in conjunction with Corbusian ideas about city-building. I don't think you'll see Hamburg/Copenhagen type intensity.

Yes, but Stockholm and Copenhagen still have been about the same size for a long time but have very different development patterns. It's almost like there was a bit of a Manhattan effect here on the central islands and peninsulae.

[niwell]

Interesting to hear that about Stockholm, and now that I'm looking on Google Maps is definitely confirmed. I ended up taking a few city buses in Copenhagen and found it really transitioned through built forms / densities in a way that is almost reminiscent to an older North American city. With very different cores, of course.

[mrnyc]

downtown cleveland is 3.2 square miles. the downtown cleveland alliance had it at 17,500 residents in 2018. they note 42% of downtown residents hold a 4 year or advanced degree.

you could say the city is rather obsessed with breaking the 20k mark as they feel that will spur downtown retail. they are well on the way to that mark, if not over it already. also, major transformative projects for downtown are right around the corner.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by liat91

No, the relative feeling of “intensity” of being in NYC’s central core begins to wane around 86th actually. Being in DT Brooklyn doesn’t feel like it either. Now this assessment is for NYC. Other cities cores don’t even have the intensity of Jamaica, Queens. Being relative is really the only way to answer this question with any degree of accuracy.

If we're talking about the commercial feel, that stops pretty much at 59th Street. I don't think there is a difference between 86th and 125th in intensity. It's only a difference in social class.

I think the commercial area of Manhattan definitely flows into Brooklynn now. I can't think of anything north of Lincoln Center that even remotely compares to City Point, or even Atlantic Center which is technically not downtown Brooklyn.