daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Continental Forums > North American Skyscrapers Forum > United States > Midwest and Plains > Local Forums > Chicago

Chicago » Projects and Construction | Infrastructure & Transportation



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old November 3rd, 2006, 03:36 AM   #1
gocity1979
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Chicago Rogers Park
Posts: 72
Likes (Received): 0

Population Question

Chicago population went from 2,701,705 in 1920 to its max of 3,620,962 in 1950 then it started to decline after that from 1980 t0 1990 chicago's population went from 3,005,072 to 2,783,726. So 1980 was the last time that we saw 3 mil. That was 26 years ago. Now that the city's population is back on the upswing, how long until we see 3mil again? The city's population jumped by almost a million between that 30 year stretch from 1920 to 1950, How long until we see 3.6mil again. Will the olympics serve as a catylst to both development and population?
gocity1979 no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old November 3rd, 2006, 03:52 AM   #2
chicagogeorge
Registered User
 
chicagogeorge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: South suburban Chicago
Posts: 5,278
Likes (Received): 894

Good question. It really depends on how affordable most parts of Chicago remain, and especially property taxes. Generally, immigrants have been the driving force for a metropolitan area's population growth. Especially the city proper itself. A trend that has been occuring is that many immigrants now pass up the city proper, and head to new "gateway" suburbs. Will this effect Chicago's population? Maybe. The Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission, predicts that the city of Chicago will have about 3.2 million people by 2030. On the other hand, it is entirely possible that Chicago may be already in a population decline as predicted by recent census estimate (some 50,000 less than the 2000 official count). Personally, I don't hold the census estimates with a high value. Lets wait until the 2010 census to see.
__________________

for the Pelasgians, too, were a Greek nation originally from the Peloponnesus
The Roman Antiquities of Dionysius of Halicarnassus
http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/...assus/1B*.html

Macedonia, of course, is a part of Greece". Strabo, VII, Frg. 9
http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/...ragments*.html

But north of the gulf, the first inhabitants are Greeks called Epirotes....
Procopius
http://books.google.com/books?id=9m6...page&q&f=false
chicagogeorge no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 3rd, 2006, 04:01 AM   #3
DeMaFrost
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Too North for Lakeview, too east for Roscoe Village
Posts: 478
Likes (Received): 1

When the schools get better
DeMaFrost no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 3rd, 2006, 05:06 AM   #4
spyguy
Expert
 
spyguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 6,916
Likes (Received): 97

When we're finally able to control sprawl in the suburbs.
spyguy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 3rd, 2006, 05:31 AM   #5
Frumie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 717
Likes (Received): 0

For over a century American cities have borne the responsibility and expense for settling immigrant populations as well as the welfare poor. It's a welcome shift in sharing this important undertaking with our surrounding suburbs. Bottom line on population size seems to me to be its impact for better or worse on that city's quality of life; e.g., large doesn't translate automatically or even necessarily into a better urban experience. NYC as a collection of boroughs decentralizes its overall population numbers into more workable units, while providing the country's largest marketplace for goods, services, and cultural fare. As Chicago's demographics shift, as they are now doing, its quality of life is also transitioning. As our city becomes evermore attractive, its future population numbers are anybody's guess. Personally, I find all this along with its rapid physical transformation quite exhilirating.
__________________
You truly want peace? Be righteous.
Frumie no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 3rd, 2006, 05:39 AM   #6
The Urban Politician
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 5,934
Likes (Received): 21

It's interesting to note that both Boston AND Cincinatti, both 'older' cities whose populations have traditionally been in a state of decline, have recently challenged census estimates that found that they were continuing to bleed people, and actually found that they had both GAINED people.

Now I don't want to put any cities down, but Chicago's current building boom completely dwarfs both of theirs, and Chicago gets a hell of a lot more immigration.

We have yet to find out what is really happening to the city's population.
The Urban Politician no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 3rd, 2006, 06:10 AM   #7
Mr Downtown
Urbane observer
 
Mr Downtown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,547
Likes (Received): 10

The part that's hard to see is the decrease in household size. Downtown condos have only 1.7 persons per household on average. That's a much more visible trend than the emptying of households in South Shore or Hamilton Park or West Lawn, but numerically less important.

Larger Hispanic families have made a huge difference in the total numbers, but not enough.
Mr Downtown no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 3rd, 2006, 07:30 AM   #8
qwerty1324
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 898
Likes (Received): 33

Every city that is challenging the census estimates is winning. After decades of losing populations all these northern rust belts are now gaining people? I doubt it. Maybe the census is not bothering to challenge these city's rosy estimates.
qwerty1324 está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old November 3rd, 2006, 04:11 PM   #9
harvesterofsorrows
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 642
Likes (Received): 113

When gentrification stops
harvesterofsorrows no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 3rd, 2006, 06:23 PM   #10
The Urban Politician
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 5,934
Likes (Received): 21

Quote:
Originally Posted by qwerty1324 View Post
Every city that is challenging the census estimates is winning. After decades of losing populations all these northern rust belts are now gaining people? I doubt it. Maybe the census is not bothering to challenge these city's rosy estimates.
^ Except that these cities weren't revitalizing in previous decades the way they are today. Plus, one has to imagine that a recalibrating of local economies away from manufacturing is finally making a difference, ie we're no longer in a state of constantly shedding jobs and losing the people who go with them
The Urban Politician no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 4th, 2006, 04:35 PM   #11
chicagogeorge
Registered User
 
chicagogeorge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: South suburban Chicago
Posts: 5,278
Likes (Received): 894

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Downtown View Post
The part that's hard to see is the decrease in household size. Downtown condos have only 1.7 persons per household on average. That's a much more visible trend than the emptying of households in South Shore or Hamilton Park or West Lawn, but numerically less important.

Larger Hispanic families have made a huge difference in the total numbers, but not enough.
Very true. While Chicago's Hispanic population continues to explode, whites and now blacks flee the city proper in search for lower property takes, better schools, and for some safer communities.
__________________

for the Pelasgians, too, were a Greek nation originally from the Peloponnesus
The Roman Antiquities of Dionysius of Halicarnassus
http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/...assus/1B*.html

Macedonia, of course, is a part of Greece". Strabo, VII, Frg. 9
http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/...ragments*.html

But north of the gulf, the first inhabitants are Greeks called Epirotes....
Procopius
http://books.google.com/books?id=9m6...page&q&f=false
chicagogeorge no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 5th, 2006, 05:40 AM   #12
gocity1979
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Chicago Rogers Park
Posts: 72
Likes (Received): 0

I'm 27. In 1980, the last time we as a city saw 3 mil, I was 1. For those that can remember 3 mil plus, was it really that much different? I mean could you feel the difference in density? The reason I ask is because we all know its not if but when we get back to 3.5.

Was the south side denser back then?

On a seperate note, what where the outer ring suburbs like when Chi-town's population was greater? My mother was raised in Morgan Park, my father moved all over the city but spent the bulk of his time in the Taylor's housing project. He says when they were kids they considered Morgan Park a suburb.
gocity1979 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 5th, 2006, 06:58 PM   #13
The Urban Politician
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 5,934
Likes (Received): 21

We also must not forget that while the press emphasizes how immigrants are bypassing the city for the suburbs, the city still continues to receive a large amount of immigration
The Urban Politician no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 5th, 2006, 11:30 PM   #14
McDude
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Chicago (Old Town)
Posts: 55
Likes (Received): 4

hispanic population in chicago is actually declining and they're moving to the suburbs because it is cheaper for them. I don't know where you people have heard it is still on the rise, but it's not.
McDude no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 5th, 2006, 11:53 PM   #15
The Urban Politician
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 5,934
Likes (Received): 21

Quote:
Originally Posted by McDude View Post
hispanic population in chicago is actually declining and they're moving to the suburbs because it is cheaper for them. I don't know where you people have heard it is still on the rise, but it's not.
^ I'd like to see your source for this info
The Urban Politician no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 6th, 2006, 01:19 AM   #16
simulcra
Cynical post-collegiate
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Seattle
Posts: 937
Likes (Received): 1

The main obstacle that stands in the way of a good population surge is the quality of schooling, as that is probably the main reason why middle class families start leaving the city in the first place when they start raising kids.

That being said, Chicago remains an important immigration center as well as one of the largest job markets in the nation - young urbane professionals and hispanic immigrants have good cause to relocate to Chicago.
__________________
Mmm... forbidden donut...
simulcra no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 6th, 2006, 01:30 AM   #17
chicagogeorge
Registered User
 
chicagogeorge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: South suburban Chicago
Posts: 5,278
Likes (Received): 894

Quote:
Originally Posted by McDude View Post
hispanic population in chicago is actually declining and they're moving to the suburbs because it is cheaper for them. I don't know where you people have heard it is still on the rise, but it's not.

Wrong. Chicago's hispanic population grew by 45,000 from 2000-2005 according to the U.S. Census. In other words it grew by 65,000. However, you are right that hispanic are exploding in the suburbs

Also according to the census: Between 2000-2005

African Americans loss of 32,000
Caucasians loss of 35,000
Asians - zero growth.

So a net growth of 45,000 Hispanics minus a combined white/black net loss of 67,000 puts Chicago's population at about 2.86 million in 2005, down a bit from 2.9 million in 2000. My guess is that 2010 will reveal, a greater numerical gain in Hispanics, and a smaller loss of blacks than what the US Census Bureau has thus far estimated. The white population will continue to decline but by less and less probably stablizing at around 700,000 (currently at about 800,000).
__________________

for the Pelasgians, too, were a Greek nation originally from the Peloponnesus
The Roman Antiquities of Dionysius of Halicarnassus
http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/...assus/1B*.html

Macedonia, of course, is a part of Greece". Strabo, VII, Frg. 9
http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/...ragments*.html

But north of the gulf, the first inhabitants are Greeks called Epirotes....
Procopius
http://books.google.com/books?id=9m6...page&q&f=false

Last edited by chicagogeorge; November 6th, 2006 at 01:46 AM.
chicagogeorge no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 6th, 2006, 05:34 AM   #18
The Urban Politician
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 5,934
Likes (Received): 21

Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagogeorge View Post
Wrong. Chicago's hispanic population grew by 45,000 from 2000-2005 according to the U.S. Census. In other words it grew by 65,000. However, you are right that hispanic are exploding in the suburbs

Also according to the census: Between 2000-2005

African Americans loss of 32,000
Caucasians loss of 35,000
Asians - zero growth.

So a net growth of 45,000 Hispanics minus a combined white/black net loss of 67,000 puts Chicago's population at about 2.86 million in 2005, down a bit from 2.9 million in 2000. My guess is that 2010 will reveal, a greater numerical gain in Hispanics, and a smaller loss of blacks than what the US Census Bureau has thus far estimated. The white population will continue to decline but by less and less probably stablizing at around 700,000 (currently at about 800,000).
^ I'm surprised Asians didn't grow. More and more, I'm beginning to believe that the census has their numbers wrong
The Urban Politician no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 6th, 2006, 06:03 AM   #19
urbanpln
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: chicago
Posts: 328
Likes (Received): 1

you certianly see more asian faces on streets of the northside and central area, plus chinatown is expanding south. I am also surprised that asian growth is zero.
urbanpln no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 6th, 2006, 06:48 PM   #20
chicago23
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 39
Likes (Received): 0

I honestly believe that chicago has more people than the cenusus has stated. I belive that chicago has had over 3 million people for awhile, I mean if you just look at the downtown area it looks like a city of maybe 4 million people. I mean LA doesnt have even close to a downtown like chicago but somehow they are at about 3.6 million people(I know they have lots of sprawl). I dont know but I always felt like chicago seems and feels like a much larger city than what the census states.
chicago23 no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 05:03 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium