One Mile Radius Residential Populations for Major Downtowns

[badrunner]

Originally Posted by lio45

In science, checking the validity of an assumption by comparing it to an independent process that should, if the assumption is valid, yield the same result, is a perfectly logical and very common method.

If they are that different, then it tells us that the numbers mhays is seeking are almost certainly in reality a hybrid of the two values - which is perfectly attainable, for the record.

But we can already deduce that it won't yield the same result since we are measuring a density gradient. We would get two completely different results with one being more accurate than the other (accurate with respect to the 1 mile radius measurement). In this case we just want to get the conversion factor as low as possible for the most accurate comparison, which is probably why mhays went with the 2km radius measurement in the first place. I would have done the same thing - get the numbers for the 2km radius and multiply by 0.65 to get the 1mile radius equivalent.

Now if I was being really sneaky and wanted to produce inflated numbers for certain cities I would use the 1km radius numbers, and I could be more selective in where I center the circle, and multiply those numbers by 2.59 to get the desired result. All of this is covered in my course "How to lie with stats and math 101."

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by mhays

I guessed about locations where each downtown would have the highest number -- avoiding water/industry, including the dense fringes, but staying within the CBD.

--Chicago, 222 W Erie: 134,653

Just an FYI, but I don't think many people in Chicago would consider rivernorth to be "within the CBD". The real CBD is the loop proper and the westward push across the the river where the two main commuter rail stations are (union station and ogilvie).

[mhays]

No doubt, I took some liberties with "CBD" with the goal of higher numbers. A lot of these are questionable.

[Shawn]

mhays, just out of curiosity, what happens to the Boston numbers if you treat Back Bay Station as Boston's CBD center? As you pointed out, using anywhere in the Financial District as the circle's center results in I'm guessing 35-40% of the area being water.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by badrunner

But we can already deduce that it won't yield the same result since we are measuring a density gradient.

I wouldn’t go that far. You’d be correct if the radius variation was at suburb range or at exurb range, but between the CBD core (plenty of office towers) and the inner-most residential areas (residential towers), all are plausible: core is less dense, or core is more dense, or core is approximately equally dense.

BTW, funny you’d say it the way you did, because if you genuinely think the 1 km radius and the 2 km radius are different enough, then you have to agree with me that it’s a hybrid of the two that’s the best estimate of the 1.609 km radius, and that using the 2 km only is a bit flawed (given that the 1 km is accessible too).

Me, conversely, I think it’s quite possible that the 1 km and the 2 km circles won’t show a marked difference in density, which would mean that mhays’ extrapolations are decent, and that my suggestion (comparing the downsized extrapolation from the 2 km to the upsized extrapolation from the 1 km) is merely a validation rather than an improvement.

[craigs]

Originally Posted by mhays

--Los Angeles, 601 Figueroa: 101,773

So there's a 601 Figueroa and a 601 South Figueroa in LA's CBD, the latter of which would likely capture a larger residential population. Do you know which address was used?

[mhays]

Originally Posted by Shawn

mhays, just out of curiosity, what happens to the Boston numbers if you treat Back Bay Station as Boston's CBD center? As you pointed out, using anywhere in the Financial District as the circle's center results in I'm guessing 35-40% of the area being water.

Ah, a winner! At 100 Clarendon, it's 108,915.

Here's that update plus some others. Some I'd noted before and just separated as line items. Not just downtowns now!

Residents in one-mile radius, 2022:
--New York (Manhattan), 135 Crosby: 271,114
--New York (Manhattan), 102 W 116th: 225,468
--New York (Manhattan), 50 W 34th: 208,104
--New York (Manhattan), 1008 Ave of the Americas: 205,284
--New York (Manhattan), 50 Central Park S: 203,678
--New York (Brooklyn), 276 Livingston: 167,238
--San Francisco (north Tenderloin), 605 Ellis: 150,401
--Los Angeles (Koreatown), 3324 Wilshire: 147,470
--San Francisco (Civic Center, S Tenderloin), 350 Ellis: 141,826
--Chicago (River North), 222 W Erie: 134,653
--Chicago (Loop), 348 Lake, 112,275
--Boston, 100 Clarendon (Back Bay Station): 108,915
--Seattle (Downtown), 906 Pine: 108,515
--Los Angeles (Downtown), 601 S Figueroa: 101,773
--Philadelphia, 1300 Locust: 98,852 (similar a few blocks south)
--Miami, 33 SW 2nd: 89,926 (dense area is relatively narrow)
--DC, 1030 15th St NW: 80,858
--Long Beach, CA, 640 Long Beach Blvd: 78,583
--Hollywood, CA, 1300 Vine: 66,189
--Honolulu, 550 S Beretania: 61,784
--Oakland, 2029 Broadway: 55,917
--Newark, 580 MLK: 55,210
--Portland, 1331 SW Washington: 54,059
--Denver, 1570 Tremont: 53,422
--Arlington, VA, 3401 Fairfax: 53,166
--San Diego, 1130 7th: 51,218
--Seattle (U District), 1300 NE 45th: 48,792
--Minneapolis, 910 Lasalle: 46,539
--San Jose, 315 E San Fernando: 45,070
--Atlanta (Midtown), 675 Peachtree: 42,176
--Baltimore, 250 N Calvert: 39,370
--Dallas, 1801 N Pearl: 35,348
--Providence, 115 W Exchange: 33,448
--Austin, 920 Colorado: 33,242
--Atlanta (CBD), 384 Peachtree: 32,678
--Milwaukee, 929 N Water: 31,831
--Sacramento, 1325 15th: 30,807
--Pittsburgh (Oakland), 3805 Forbes: 30,315
--Bellevue, WA, 550 106th Ave NE: 29,861
--Houston, 601 Jefferson: 29,101
--Charlotte, 400 E Stonewall: 27,454
--Tacoma, 615 S 9th: 25,526
--Phoenix, 702 N Central: 25,014
--Buffalo, 707 Washington: 24,579
--Cincinnati, 44 E Court: 23,583
--Kansas City (Plaza), 4312 JC Nichols: 23,405
--New Orleans, 600 Loyola Ct.: 22,615
--St. Louis (West End), 4440 Lindell: 22,560
--Tampa, 921 N Morgan: 21,880
--St. Paul, 600 N Robert: 21,818
--Columbus, 456 E Cherry: 20,722
--Pittsburgh (Downtown), 717 Grant: 19,523
--Las Vegas, 501 E 8th: 19,496
--San Antonio, 300 Convent: 17,633
--St. Louis (Downtown), 1531 Pine: 17,404
--Cleveland, 1802 Chester: 17,297
--Kansas City (Downtown), 601 E 12th: 15,880
--Jacksonville, 330 State: 15,052
--Detroit, 2301 Woodward: 14,325
--Memphis: 336 Monroe: 14,090
--Fort Worth, 501 W Lancaster: 13,462
--Oklahoma City, 701 Couch: 11,181

They have Canada but only in kilometers. A two-kilo radius would be 12.56 square kilos if I'm doing it right, or 1.54x the one-mile radius.
--Toronto, 336 Yonge: 246,014 (159,749 for the average square mile)
--Vancouver, 1088 Homer: 158,022 (102,611 for the average square mile; lots of water)
--Montreal, 475 Av du President-Kennedy: 124,713 (80,982 average; dense area is fairly narrow)

[mhays]

Originally Posted by craigs

So there's a 601 Figueroa and a 601 South Figueroa in LA's CBD, the latter of which would likely capture a larger residential population. Do you know which address was used?

South...I've corrected the list. Thanks.

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by mhays

I found one-mile-radius resident populations for US downtowns via CoStar property data. I guessed about locations where each downtown would have the highest number -- avoiding water/industry, including the dense fringes, but staying within the CBD.

I would suggest using the address of each city’s municipal government except for state capitals, where I would suggest using the address of that capitol building: 1100 Congress Avenue for Austin.

Alternatively, county courthouses tend to be a fairly neutral location almost universally located at the center of the historic core.

As to the water question: a GIS program could craft the circle around each center point that includes x land area, so that water is excluded.

[mhays]

City halls and capitals aren't consistently located, and don't necessarily align with higher populations. I'm going for the biggest numbers.

Someone asked about a single-family district in Buffalo. Using the nearest available addresses (an apartment and a church):
--Buffalo, 605 Elmwood: 39,086
--Buffalo, 467 Richmond: 41,175

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by mhays

Ah, a winner! At 100 Clarendon, it's 108,915.

Here's that update plus some others. Some I'd noted before and just separated as line items. Not just downtowns now!

Residents in one-mile radius, 2022:
--New York (Brooklyn), 276 Livingston: 167,238

FYI- That's not going to be the most populated one-mile radius in Brooklyn, since the residential around downtown Brooklyn isn't as dense are some other parts of the borough. Looking at this density map from 2010, the most populated radius is probably going to be in Flatbush: https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/planning..._pl_p2_nta.pdf

[Crawford]

I think somewhere in Queens around Rego Park would have a higher population than anything in Brooklyn.

And Bronx around Fordham, Highbridge and the like, would also have a higher population.

Brooklyn has much more extensive, consistent density, but lower peak density. Bronx is the second densest borough. And Queens has the highest non-core density peak.

NY is a bit weird too in that the CBD is so big that the peak density is actually going to be lower from the core. Midtown is an enormous commercial core, so that will lower the density as compared to Uptown or Downtown (or probably parts of the Outer Boroughs).

[mhays]

I looked at a couple spots in Flatbush. 2215 Newkirk was 196,629.

64 Booth in Rego Park was 154,451.

[PHX31]

I think NW or NE of the CBD in Phoenix would have the highest 1 mile radius populations. Somewhere centered on the I-17 between Camelback Rd and Indian School Rd. Or somewhere centered on 36th St & Indian School Rd.

Maybe in 10 years the 702 N. Central location near the CBD will catch up. Would be interesting to see this list in the future.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by mhays

I looked at a couple spots in Flatbush. 2215 Newkirk was 196,629.

64 Booth in Rego Park was 154,451.

How about 914 Coney Island Avenue in Brooklyn?

[Crawford]

Mhays, if you wouldn't mind, could you do the following for Queens and Bronx:

Elmhurst, Queens - 42-51 Hampton Street

Concourse, Bronx - 2326 Grand Concourse

Very much appreciated!

[TempleGuy1000]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Mhays, if you wouldn't mind, could you do the following for Queens and Bronx:

Elmhurst, Queens - 42-51 Hampton Street

Concourse, Bronx - 2326 Grand Concourse

Very much appreciated!

lol not to piggyback, but I would also be curious about south and north philadelphia. Basically 1000 S. Broad St. and 1700 N. Broad St.

Very fascinating subject that touches on a topic that is often difficult to quantify properly.

[montréaliste]

Originally Posted by Crawford

I think somewhere in Queens around Rego Park would have a higher population than anything in Brooklyn.

And Bronx around Fordham, Highbridge and the like, would also have a higher population.

Brooklyn has much more extensive, consistent density, but lower peak density. Bronx is the second densest borough. And Queens has the highest non-core density peak.

NY is a bit weird too in that the CBD is so big that the peak density is actually going to be lower from the core. Midtown is an enormous commercial core, so that will lower the density as compared to Uptown or Downtown (or probably parts of the Outer Boroughs).

That’s what’s amiss with this premise for a thread. I mean, as you and Steely have noted, you could pretty much move the central cursor around to fit another part of the CBD for actual residential density. A coupla hundred yards or meters might mean office towers taking a big chunk of apartment clusters. Avenue du Président Kennedy in Montreal is a mix of office/ university and residential for all its length. If you focus a cursor instead on Avenue des Canadiens and Mountain street, the office mix is also competitive, but the residential seems much higher. You could also make the point that it is nearer the actual CBD in the city than President Kennedy is, IMO.

[montréaliste]

Dual post.

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by mhays

City halls and capitals aren't consistently located, and don't necessarily align with higher populations. I'm going for the biggest numbers.

Someone asked about a single-family district in Buffalo. Using the nearest available addresses (an apartment and a church):
--Buffalo, 605 Elmwood: 39,086
--Buffalo, 467 Richmond: 41,175

Well, in Austin’s case the state capitol building will probably generate the highest numbers.