Census Note 3: Downtown ReboundFannie Mae Foundation and Brookings Institution Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy Census Note 03 (May 2001)* Downtown Rebound
Overview "[Houston's] downtown business area is made up almost entirely of high-rise office buildings and large department stores, with a few smaller restaurants to refuel the denizens of both, but nobody lives there..." (Sale 1975, p. 52). Kirkpatrick Sale's 1975 description of downtown Houston aptly described what was happening to most American downtowns in the 1970s and 1980s. But downtown Houston 2000 is a different story. Houston's downtown population rose 69 percent in the 1990s-the most for any city in our sample. "Downtown is Back" seemed to be a common observation throughout the 1990s. It turns out that this was more than wishful thinking. Among this sample of 24 cities, 18 downtowns saw increases in their downtown populations. In a lot of ways, the story of downtown is a counter trend of what is happening in the rest of urban America. While most central cities are losing population relative to their metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs), most downtowns are gaining a larger share of MSA population. While cities such as Charlotte and Phoenix are booming, their downtowns are getting weaker. Race and immigration play a different role in downtowns as well. Compared to cities' overall population changes, the downtown population gain is less weighted toward blacks and Hispanics. Increases in white residents led the resurgence in downtown living-in stark contrast to the general decline in city white population. The actual numbers of downtown growth are relatively small. The trend of downtown living is still more of a trickle than a rush. Nevertheless, the downtown population gain is important because it may be the harbinger of future central-city growth. If people continue to move downtown, neighboring areas may experience spillover effects. The stronger downtown gets, the more likely it is that the surrounding central-city neighborhoods will strengthen as well. . Methods Because the U.S. Bureau of the Census does not officially define "downtown," a standardized definition was unavailable. What constitutes "downtown" varies from city to city. Depending on the city, a downtown can be several square miles, or it can be several square blocks. But downtowns do have some things in common. They contain the 100 percent corner (place of maximum rent for commercial office space) and are their city's central business district. The downtown is often the oldest, most established part of a city. Building on research conducted by Fannie Mae Foundation and The Brookings Institution, researchers at the University of Pennsylvania are in the process of trying to define downtown boundaries in cities throughout the country. The researchers determined downtown census tracts through interviews with city organizations and municipal government leaders and by examining historic maps of each city's downtown. The downtowns surveyed vary by region and size. The University of Pennsylvania mapped boundaries for more than 30 downtowns using 1990 census numbers. The 24 downtowns in this study are derived from that list. The list was reduced from 34 to 24 because some cities (such as Dallas, Minneapolis, and Pittsburgh) changed their 2000 census tracts, making it impossible to accurately track population. Other cities were eliminated to round out the regional representation of these downtowns. Findings Downtowns Vary Like census tracts themselves, downtowns vary widely in population size and geographic area (table 1). San Antonio is the geographically largest downtown at 5.5 square miles, while the downtowns in Norfolk, Cincinnati, and Lexington are each just 0.8 square miles. Boston had the largest downtown population in 2000, with almost 80,000, while Norfolk had just under 3,000. Most downtowns are getting denser, while a few are losing density (table 2). The most densely populated downtowns are Baltimore and Philadelphia, but the downtowns that had the highest density percentage gains are Seattle, Chicago, and Houston.   More Winners than Losers Three-fourths of the downtowns gained population. Only six downtowns were smaller in 2000. Overall, downtowns are winners in the population game. Each downtown falls into one of four scenarios (table 3):
 The downtowns on this list are gaining a bigger share of their MSAs' population, while their respective cities are losing. Although the raw number of people moving into downtown is relatively small, those numbers are registering a percent increase in the downtowns' share of MSA population (tables 4 and 5). All but three downtowns either improved or maintained their standing in the MSA. Seattle again tops the list-it increased its share of the overall MSA population by 0.3 percent. Meanwhile, only two cities as a whole increased their share of MSA population: Charlotte and San Antonio (both of which lost downtown population during the 1990s). The rest of the cities fared poorly. Downtown's relative importance is growing despite the weakening importance of the cities they are in.   Downtown's Racial Composition Comparing 1990's downtowns with 2000's is complicated by the fact that the U. S. Census Bureau adjusted race categories for the 2000 census-separating Asian and Hawaiian or Pacific Islander and adding a category for two or more races (table 6). Grouping the 24 downtowns together, there are 7.5 percent more whites living downtown than there were in 1990. There are 4.8 percent more Hispanics living downtown, and 6 percent more blacks. This contrasts sharply with city data. There are 10.5 percent fewer whites living in those 24 cities in 2000 than in 1990. Meanwhile, 43 percent more Hispanics and 2.4 percent more blacks lived in the same 24 cities.  In 2000, the group of 24 downtowns was 54.9 percent white; 21.2 percent black; 13.4 percent Hispanic; 8 percent Asian; 0.6 American Indian, Hawaiian, or Other; and 1.8 percent was of more than one race. Compared with 1990, there were small percentage increases in the Asian and Hispanic populations and small decreases in the white and black populations (white, 57.2 percent; black, 22.1 percent; Hispanic, 14.4 percent; Asians and Pacific Islanders, 5.4 percent; and American Indians or other, 0.6 percent). In individual downtowns, whites gained more of a percentage share of the population in 7 of 24 downtowns in 2000. Eighteen downtowns have a greater percentage of Hispanics, and 11 downtowns have a higher percentage of blacks. Why Is Downtown on the Rebound? Several trends are helping downtown's new period of growth. The population of empty nesters will continue to grow as baby boomers age. Without children, empty nesters often change their lifestyles in a way that favors downtown. Besides having more leisure time to dine out and take part in cultural activities (museums, concerts), empty nesters often choose to downsize their housing-trading in the lawn care and upkeep of a large home for the convenience of living in a downtown condominium. If even a modest portion of empty-nester households trades suburban homes for urban ones, downtown populations will continue to grow. The other emerging population that is probably aiding downtown's comeback are young professionals in their 20s and 30s who have yet to start families. This group-often consumers of downtown-friendly amenities such as coffeehouses and nightclubs-are frequently in the market for low-maintenance, urbane housing convenient to work and amenities. Downtowns throughout the country are capitalizing on their historic character. Downtowns offer a niche market for those seeking a "sense of place" (Sohmer and Lang 1999; Sohmer 1999). For example, downtown San Diego gained residents in part because it offers an alternative to rapidly expanding (and often monotonous) suburban developments that dominate the region. Perhaps Charlotte and Phoenix lost downtown population in part because their downtowns do not offer enough to distinguish themselves from their suburbs. The unique history of downtown areas in combination with their central location and proximity to mass transit, work, and amenities offers potential for the growth of the 1990s to continue into the next decade. *About the Census Notes Series The Fannie Mae Foundation's Census Notes series provides timely analyses of Census 2000 data to stimulate discussion and further research. Although Census Notes are reviewed internally and on an informal basis externally, they have not been subject to the formal process of external peer review that is used for the Foundation's research publications. Therefore, they should be viewed as works in progress and their findings should be considered preliminary. References Birch, Eugenie L. 2000. The Rise in Downtown Living: A Deeper Look,Part II. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the Association of Collegiate Schools of Planning, November 4, 2000, Atlanta, GA. Sale, Kirkpatrick. 1975. Power Shift: The Rise of the Sourthern Rim and Its Challenge to the Eastern Establishment. New York: Random House. Sohmer, Rebecca. 1999. Downtown Housing as an Urban Redevelopment Tool: Hype or Hope? Housing Policy Debate 10(2):477-505. Sohmer, Rebecca, and Robert E. Lang. 1999. Life at the Center: The Rise of Downtown Housing. Housing Facts and Findings 1(1):3-5. U.S. Bureau of the Census. 2001. Accessed at http://www.census.gov in March 2001. |
| All Content © 2007 Fannie Mae Foundation. All rights reserved. |