This is from 2000 and im not sure if this has been posted before.

 

RANKING: CBD EMPLOYMENT

1 New York 1,736,900

2 Chicago 541,500

3 Washington 382,400

4 San Francisco-San Jose 305,600

5 Boston 257,000

6 Philadelphia 220,100

7 Seattle 155,100

8 Houston 153,400

9 Los Angeles 143,700

10 Atlanta 129,800

11 Denver 126,000

12 Minneapolis-St. Paul 105,400

13 Cleveland 100,300

14 Baltimore 98,500

15 Miami 98,000

16 Pittsburgh 95,600

17 Columbus 88,800

18 Austin 86,000

19 New Orleans 81,400

20 Dallas-Fort Worth 79,900

-

-

23 Cincinnati 73,900

45 Dayton 26,200

 

 

 

RANKING: CBD TRANSIT MARKET SHARE

01. New York City: 1,283,400 (73.9%)

02. Chicago: 299,600 (55.3%)

03. Boston: 133,600 (52.0%)

04. Bay Area: 151,400 (49.5%)

05. Philadelphia: 102,000 (46.4%)

06. Washington DC: 145,700 (38.1%)

07. Seattle: 54,100 (34.9%)

08. Pittsburgh: 31,300 (32.8%)

09. Minneapolis-Saint Paul: 31,700 (30.0%)

10. Portland: 23,700 (29.8%)

11. Denver: 26,800 (21.3%)

12. Baltimore: 19,500 (19.8%)

13. Los Angeles: 28,100 (19.6%)

14. Cleveland: 19,100 (19.0%)

15. Houston: 25,700 (16.8%)

16. Cincinnati: 12,300 (16.6%)

17. Honolulu: 8,100 (15.9%)

18. Atlanta: 18,600 (14.4%)

19. Dallas-Fort Worth: 11,400 (14.3%)

20. New Orleans: 10,200 (12.6%)

-

-

32 Columbus 7,000 (7.8%)

 

 

 

http://www.demographia.com/db-cbd2000.pdf

Does this include the 12,000 or so OSU employees as "working downtown" for Columbus? If not, it is hard to imagine how that many people could be working there.

Does this include the 12,000 or so OSU employees as "working downtown" for Columbus? If not, it is hard to imagine how that many people could be working there.

 

State government would account for a lot I would think.

^ Im not sure. But since they add Minneapolis and St Paul together and San Francisco and San Jose together, I think they should include University Circles numbers for Cleveland.

CBD and downtown are two different things. No way Columbus or Cleveland has more CBD workers than Dallas.

^Heavin forbid.  But seriously, it depends on the City whether CBD and Downtown are the same thing.  For Dallas, it would include "uptown" and downtown, for Cleveland it is just downtown.  But, if you add in our "uptown" (University Circle) then its workforce population still has Dallas' CBD beat, sorry to say...

Im sure that if you added University Circle into our numbers we would be in the top 10.

Cleveland has ranked high on this list for decades. That's kicks ass and is a sign that Cleveland is still the real deal, though I could have sworn it used to be something like 150k.

 

Also, Toledo might still be top 50 in CBD employment (I think it was as recently as 2004), but doesn't rank here since it's no longer a top 50 urban area.

 

What I'm most shocked about is that Columbus has overtaken Cincinnati. I'm aware of the geographic difference (Columbus CBD covers a huge area), but Cincinnati used to have more workers downtown, maybe over 100k.

I thought Cleveland used to have a little over 130K. That would have both Cleveland and Cincinnati at a 30k loss over time

Does anyone know if any 2010 numbers have been released?

CBD and downtown are two different things. No way Columbus or Cleveland has more CBD workers than Dallas.

 

Why would you say that?

I thought Cleveland used to have a little over 130K. That would have both Cleveland and Cincinnati at a 30k loss over time

 

At one point we were number 6 on the list.  The loss of BP, LTV etc., stings today.

Some CBD 's covers a few blocks while Downtown's cover a more broad range.

 

Cincinnati CBD.

 

http://www.3cdc.org

I'd love a stat on what percentage of the region's workforce works in their respective CBDs.

^ Im not sure. But since they add Minneapolis and St Paul together and San Francisco and San Jose together, I think they should include University Circles numbers for Cleveland.

 

If they are adding San Francisco and San Jose, they should just add Akron to Cleveland's.

I'd love a stat on what percentage of the region's workforce works in their respective CBDs.

 

It's dated now, but you might enjoy this 2001 Ed Glaeser paper that compares metro areas by geographic concentration of employment.  The best part is that he doesn't rely on any slippery definition of "downtown" bust instead draws standard rings around city centers to normalize across metro areas.  Though that of course means a lot less land area for coastal CBDs within those rings.

http://www.brookings.edu/es/urban/publications/glaeserjobsprawl.pdf

 

Even this report has to be taken with a grain of salt though, because of the idiosyncratic nature of MSAs, many of which contain multiple historic downtowns.  The Twin Cities, for instance, show a very low "3-mile" share for obvious reasons.

 

^ That's excellent.  Thanks!

The most recent list I could find. I believe it is from 2009.

 

1. New York 1,193,233

2. Chicago 355,194

3. Washington, DC 306,106

4. Boston 265,109

5. Philadelphia 263,939

6. Los Angeles 187,464

7. Seattle 183,216

8. San Francisco 166,058

9. Houston 150,328

10. Minneapolis 144,952

11. Denver 132,276

12. Atlanta 131,089

<b>13. Cleveland 128,731</b>

14. Pittsburgh 118,367

<b>15. Cincinnati 114,169</b>

16. Baltimore 106,678

17. Dallas 97,698

18. Kansas City 88,487

19. Detroit 80,840

20. San Diego 77,763