Quote:
Originally Posted by yuriandrade
ChiSox, I'll leave this superb work tracking densities for you. 
I don't want to open this can of worms trying to come up with a coherent definition for completely different metro areas. |
Wise move as it is a can of worms.
Quote:
Originally Posted by yuriandrade
My approach on San Francisco is similar to New York or Chicago: cities that have a great urban fabric for ages, and the story here is how their tiny Financial Districts suddenly became residential, and as such, they have their place in ths thread.
But anyway, the highest density goes to Tenderloin. Census tracts matched rather good there and we have 29,638 people living in 0.697 km² for an astounding density of 42,500 inh./km² (multiply for 2.59 for miles).
And then Chinatown boxed up between Financial District, Telegraph Hill, Russian Hill and Nob Hill. Census tracts didn't match perfectly, but it works: 10,821 people, 0.299 km², 26,200 inh./km².
I'll make the San Francisco post soon.
|
To save you some time and effort, the corresponding figures for Toronto's financial district are a little meaningless. It was strictly an office zone up till very recently. The Financial District is Census Tract 0014.00 and 0.47 sq km.
Around 15 years ago, a decision was made to create a permanent residential population in the financial district. By 2011 there were 644 people living there which roughly equates to 1 large residential building. By the 2016 Census, the number had reached 1,242 or roughly 2 large residential buildings. There really aren't many places one can put a big condo tower as its pretty much all built out. I suspect the number has risen to about 2,000 today though.
The only residential I can think of are the following: St. Regis (formerly Trump), 1 King West, Shangri-La, INDX, Empire Plaza Apartments, and some random residential building east of Roy Thompson Hall. So it's really just a few buildings.
Threaded Mode