Murders in Chicago. (Chatham, Hammond: real estate, crimes, taxes)

[Humboldt1]

Anyone ever seen a neighborhood in decline like Chatham improve without significant gentrification or displacement of its existing population? Even if CHA vouchers only represent 1 percent I suspect the cousins and friends who don't live there but hang out there could be the source of many of the problems.

[seth p.]

I was right, guys. The statistics are out and they show a significant demographic difference between Chatham east and west of King.
Mapping America — Census Bureau 2005-9 American Community Survey - NYTimes.com
While both sides still look nice, east of King has basically become the 'hood.
First of all, east of King is almost twice as dense in population. I assume this is not a change from before 2000, but renters are less stable and this could (or could not) mean places for an influx of people with CHA vouchers. Whether or not this last hypothesis is true, as the last poster pointed out, it only takes a few bad apples to bring in hangers-on. The bad apples don't of course, have to be from the CHA, and I would bet most people from the projects are just trying to live their lives.
But let me get away from caveats and hypotheses about former project residents, and get back to the facts that this map presents to us. What we know is that east of King the population is almost twice as dense, which means a greater proportion of renters, which always means less stability and more potential for negative change. In this case, the change must have come, as east of King has become one of the city's worst murder zones, particularly as you get north towards 79th.
Here are the key facts: 1) Both sides experienced declines in income since 2000, but east of King it was precipitous, while west of King it wasn't as steep. 2) Most people east of King now are struggling (52% making less than $30,000 a year) while west of King the income ranges are spread out more evenly. 3) East of king there is a significantly lower percentage of people with college degrees, another little piece of the puzzle showing that Chatham east of King may not be Englewood, but it's no longer the heart of Chicago's black middle class, whereas west of King there are more middle-class holdouts and less serious violence.
On the bright side, though, as you go south and west of 87th and King, the West Chesterfield community seems to be solidifying as the heart of Chicago's black upper middle class (those that haven't moved to the Beverly or North Kenwood or the suburbs or wherever, and it is entirely black.
Check out the interactive map and then send me your shout-outs and your cuss-outs. Any opinions on what is going on out east in Pill Hill?

[urza216]

Originally Posted by Lookout Kid

Yes, all of these. Many of the south suburbs have solidly black middle class neighborhoods now--from Park Forest to Hammond. And of course, there are the "integrated" suburbs like Oak Park that have some very successful black families in significant concentrations.

Park Forest? Hammond? Not only are both of these poor examples, Hammond is in Indiana! There are middle class parts of Hammond but I'm not sure how black they are. Most of Hammond is broke as hell! Lots of blue collar white people in Hammond not middle class black people..

I've lived most of my life in Park Forest, Po Fo, the PF, Dark Forest or whatever the hell you want to call it. It's majority black but still fairly mixed. In the early 1990s, I'd play outside with the neighborhood kids and I was the only white guy. Middle class? There's some very real poverty. There always seems to be a customer at that PayDay Loan store on Western Avenue. When I worked at Orchard Fresh Market in Park Forest two years ago, a very large portion of our sales were from Link cards. When my mother was raising me alone in Park Forest, she had a professional job earning less than 40k/year. We had more money than many of my peers did.

Matteson and South Holland are better examples of of south suburbs with "solidly black middle class neighborhoods".

[Chicago South Sider]

Originally Posted by seth p.

Hm, good point. Any opinions on where the bulk of Chicago's solid black middle class, which used to be concentrated in Chatham, now lives?

I'm thinking dispersed, some in Homewood/Flossmoor, some mixed in with the Irish in Beverly, some in the nicer parts of Ashburn, buppie children in North Kenwood/Oakland/Bronzeville...

Other opinions?

There is a large concentration of middle class blacks in Calumet Heights which includes Pill Hill. Calumet Heights is definately a better area than Chatham even if it does have rough spots.

[Manigault]

Originally Posted by Humboldt1

Anyone ever seen a neighborhood in decline like Chatham improve without significant gentrification or displacement of its existing population?

Yes. North Kenwood.

I don't grant that Chatham is in decline, however.

[tonythetuna]

Originally Posted by urza216

Hammond? Not only are both of these poor examples, Hammond is in Indiana! T

It is also right next to the city.

[urza216]

Originally Posted by tonythetuna

It is also right next to the city.

Yep. It's a suburb but not a south suburb. It's a suburb in Indiana.

[Drover]

It's not like there's some magic that happens when you cross the state line that makes the Indiana suburbs any different than the Illinois suburbs they border.

[tonythetuna]

Originally Posted by urza216

Yep. It's a suburb but not a south suburb. It's a suburb in Indiana.

Suburb in Indiana or not it is still a suburb of Chicago. It is closer to the city than where you live.

[urza216]

Originally Posted by tonythetuna

Suburb in Indiana or not it is still a suburb of Chicago. It is closer to the city than where you live.

Hammond is a suburb of Chicago in Indiana, yes. Hammond is not a south suburb though. It's Indiana.

One of the benefits of living in a south suburb east of I-57 is close proximity to Northwest Indiana.