Why is Chicago losing population? (Detroit: quality of life, to live in, dangerous)

[emathias]

Originally Posted by CHICAGOLAND92

In 2000, the population was 2,896,016.
The 2006 estimate (according to City-Data) was 2,833,321.

Does anyone else find this suprising, since there is a lot of gentrification happening around the city, as well as many condos being built downtown?

Except for areas where a large number of lots are actually completely vacant, gentrification nearly always lowers population density in the near-to-mid term, and often even in the long term. And in areas where a lot of lots are empty, I don't think "gentrification" is an appropriate term for what happens - it's more like "re-population." For the most part, the parts of Chicago with a lot of empty lots haven't really been the areas getting the investment and rebuilding, it's been conversions of houses with 10 people living in them with a combined income of maybe $150,000 to houses with maybe 4 people living in them and a combined income of $300,000. Obviously that helps the building, but it doesn't do much for the population numbers.

[Drover]

Well, according to the 2008 census estimate, Chicago is picking up population again. Link to Excel spreadsheet here.

What I don't get is they have notable losses from 2002 through 2005. Which is odd because that was right at the height of the residential construction boom. But then when the boom goes bust, suddenly we're gaining population again?

On a side note, looks like Houston's gonna pass us up for #3 by the 2020 census.

[oakparkdude]

Originally Posted by Drover

Well, according to the 2008 census estimate, Chicago is picking up population again. Link to Excel spreadsheet here.

What I don't get is they have notable losses from 2002 through 2005. Which is odd because that was right at the height of the residential construction boom. But then when the boom goes bust, suddenly we're gaining population again?

I think the standard explanation is that the booming RE market (ie high prices) enabled/forced many Chicagoans to move out of the city. Now that prices are depressed, people can't afford to sell/leave.

Maybe now all those section 8 residents in Elmwood Park will be able to move into all those brand new, unsold South Loop condos.

[oakparkdude]

Population numbers bounce back in cities - USATODAY.com

Population numbers bounce back in cities.

By Haya El Nasser and Paul Overberg, USA TODAY
The housing crisis and economic downturn that have forced many Americans to stay put are boosting older cities where population had been shrinking or was stagnant, according to Census estimates out Wednesday.

Last year, Los Angeles recorded its biggest annual increase since 2002 and New York its second largest this decade. Chicago, where population had declined for five years this decade, grew by 0.73%.

Cities' rebound may be a result of people not being able to sell their homes or condos or not having jobs to allow them to leave cities.
.
.
.
"It's not temporary," says Carol Coletta, head of CEOs for Cities, a national network of urban leaders. Research shows that homes in neighborhoods that encourage walking instead of driving to work and stores retain their values better.

"The other thing … is that people are calculating the cost of transportation when they're thinking of housing," Coletta says. "That changes the equation."

[Lookout Kid]

The truth is that the Census Bureau has no ****ing clue about what the population numbers are, but they still insist on issuing these bogus estimates each year. And in 2010 they will still undercount Chicago's population by quite a bit because they are incapable of counting the thousands of city residents who are afraid of the government (i.e. people with questionable immigration status).

[Milwaukee City]

Originally Posted by Lookout Kid

The truth is that the Census Bureau has no ****ing clue about what the population numbers are, but they still insist on issuing these bogus estimates each year. And in 2010 they will still undercount Chicago's population by quite a bit because they are incapable of counting the thousands of city residents who are afraid of the government (i.e. people with questionable immigration status).

Agreed, I remember when I had some one come to my home which had 4 units and the person just rang the doorbell and without saying Hi or what he was doing he asked "How many people live here?" I was worried about residency limits so I said 3 the guy walked away and later I found out he was doing a count of people for the census.

Here is a new census report:

[waltlantz]

As a DC area resident, I say it's good that cities are very slowly inching up as opposed to EXPLODING in population, a lot easier to deal with

[mikey jam]

Originally Posted by CHICAGOLAND92

In 2000, the population was 2,896,016.
The 2006 estimate (according to City-Data) was 2,833,321.

Does anyone else find this suprising, since there is a lot of gentrification happening around the city, as well as many condos being built downtown?

It was just anounced the Baltimore last year declined about 3400. That's a far cry from its peak in 1970 of about a million, now it is around 690,000. I think with most major cities loss of large employers and public school systems that are increasingly having problems are key factors. Population is Southwest USA is increasing rapidly.

[pirate_lafitte]

Originally Posted by mikey jam

It was just anounced the Baltimore last year declined about 3400. That's a far cry from its peak in 1970 of about a million, now it is around 690,000. I think with most major cities loss of large employers and public school systems that are increasingly having problems are key factors. Population is Southwest USA is increasing rapidly.

The population in the Southwest might have been increasing, but lack of water, real estate crisis, and just a quality of life issue might put a stop to that. At least in Chicago there is plenty of water, and a huge lake to go to when it's hot, not to mention better transit options and many things to do.

[KevK]

Originally Posted by CHICAGOLAND92

In 2000, the population was 2,896,016.
The 2006 estimate (according to City-Data) was 2,833,321.

Does anyone else find this suprising, since there is a lot of gentrification happening around the city, as well as many condos being built downtown?

The city is too expensive to live in. You have to be a billionaire to have a 312 number and a millionaire to have a 773 number unless you live in a neighbourhood where you might be dead tomorrow. The suburbs are a better value. While the city might lose some people, the metro is pretty steady.