Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Unfortunately, it's likely African Americans are still leaving the city at a fast clip. Like what happened in the 2000s. I'm not really sure what can be done to stop it though. It's almost certain that whites are the largest population group now.
Yeah - it's sad this has been happening but I don't blame some people at all.
Location: East Central Pennsylvania/ Chicago for 6yrs.
2,535 posts, read 3,278,040 times
Reputation: 1483
You can hear other cities threads? Mention politics and corruption too. Heck... even small town America and Counties. Including mine in PA and others in the state that make the news in arrest of Political officials to Judges. Even Pension issues are not just Chicago. But its is more indebted and huge.
But I believe overall the City in its earlier history, and more recent. Made some Great... and right Choices. I will list some... realize it is merely by my impressions in comparing other cities and my opinion. Not Science. Huge Budget Over-runs and Political pay-offs and Bribes. Are NOT unique to Chicago. I'm sticking to the end results....
Earlier History post Great Fire.
Chose a wider street grid then Eastern cities.
Made sure neighborhoods had some frontage for green and not housing to the street with only the sidewalk.
Basically Banned NYC-style Tenements and did not want a New City after the Great Fire. A Row home City like Eastern Cities.
Protected the Lakefront from Industry and for Public use.
Then over the decades created Parkland, Harbors and Beaches.
Reversing the Chicago River to save the Lake of direct waste.
Spared the City Proper from Steel Mills and the Huge Storage Tanks that other cities did not, Like Philly by me.(As some say the City does not look good, driving from their Airport to their Downtown).
The City has some of the Lowest Expressways Systems in the Nation. Unlike higher elevated and double layered ones, that can be ugly with some cities ripping theirs down.
Chicago does not look bad driving from the Airports driving not through vast industrial areas. Though exiting the Expressway downtown, could have been Grander.
Lake Shore Dr. Is one of the best Urban Drives, though it would be in a perfect scene.... not have a Drive so close to the shoreline beaches.
More Resent Good Choices
.Rebuilding of the Expressways Dan Ryan 1000% better.
Navy Pier Redevelopment was great decision given its success.
Taking care of its Parks, even in not the better neighborhoods and Upkeep continues to the shoreline.
Restoring aspects of Grant Park and Statues.
Millennium Park was all a Huge success and asset. That other cities take from now.
For a Big City streets are clean and generally maintained (potholes are a yearly unending problem everywhere) even in poorer Southside neighborhoods.
Downtown streets kept pretty spotless. Tourist note it in feedback sights and on C-D threads.
Flowers along Michigan Ave though bring back the lavish Tropical plants. Also the hanging planters on Street lights.
I am optimistic the new Riverfront walk and lighting will be a good decision ongoing now.
Ripping down ALL the notorious Failed High-Rise Housing-Projects of the 60s. Their Locations was the WORST Choices too.
You can hear other cities threads? Mention politics and corruption too. Heck... even small town America and Counties. Including mine in PA and others in the state that make the news in arrest of Political officials to Judges. Even Pension issues are not just Chicago. But its is more indebted and huge.
But I believe overall the City in its earlier history, and more recent. Made some Great... and right Choices. I will list some... realize it is merely by my impressions in comparing other cities and my opinion. Not Science. Huge Budget Over-runs and Political pay-offs and Bribes. Are NOT unique to Chicago. I'm sticking to the end results....
Earlier History post Great Fire.
Chose a wider street grid then Eastern cities.
Made sure neighborhoods had some frontage for green and not housing to the street with only the sidewalk.
Basically Banned NYC-style Tenements and did not want a New City after the Great Fire. A Row home City like Eastern Cities.
Some people feel that Chicago feels slightly less urban than east coast cities (and San Fran) because of this. However, I can see this is a good thing.
[/quote]
Protected the Lakefront from Industry and for Public use.
Then over the decades created Parkland, Harbors and Beaches.
Reversing the Chicago River to save the Lake of direct waste. [/quote]
This did help to keep the lake from being polluted to save drinking water, however, I'm not sure why this is seen as a positive thing, while building aquaducts to direct mountain snowmelt rivers to cities in California and the southwest is seen as a crime. Both are manipulations of the environment that have their impacts.
[/quote]
Spared the City Proper from Steel Mills and the Huge Storage Tanks that other cities did not, Like Philly by me.(As some say the City does not look good, driving from their Airport to their Downtown).[/quote]
[/quote]
Are you sure?? Have you ever been to the far South side?? Thats one of the largest industrial complexes in the country. The site of the former south shore works is a vacant patch larger than the loop itself. You drive through industrial land use on all three South and west side expressways (290/Ike, 55/Stevenson, and 94/Dan Ryan). There are a lot of reasons to love Chicago, but to suggest it doesn't have massive industrial complexes . . . How long have you seen Chicago?? The whole reason why there are largest big box stores and parking lots in places like the South Loop (which was largely a decaying railyard before high rises were built) and the Clybourn corridor is because there was large industrial/rail facilities. One of the reason Chicago is less expensive than coastal cities is because of former industrial sites so close to the urban core, where housing can be built and redeveloped.
[/quote]
The City has some of the Lowest Expressways Systems in the Nation. Unlike higher elevated and double layered ones, that can be ugly with some cities ripping theirs down.[/quote]
You do get a good view of a city from high elevated expressways/freeways.
[/quote]
Chicago does not look bad driving from the Airports driving not through vast industrial areas. Though exiting the Expressway downtown, could have been Grander.[/quote]
Are you sure?? Maybe not coming from O'Hare, but Midway?? The landscape between Midway and downtown is very industrial along the Stevenson/55.
[/quote]
Lake Shore Dr. Is one of the best Urban Drives, though it would be in a perfect scene.... not have a Drive so close to the shoreline beaches.[/quote]
[/quote]
More Resent Good Choices
.Rebuilding of the Expressways Dan Ryan 1000% better.
Navy Pier Redevelopment was great decision given its success.
Taking care of its Parks, even in not the better neighborhoods and Upkeep continues to the shoreline.
Restoring aspects of Grant Park and Statues.
Millennium Park was all a Huge success and asset. That other cities take from now.
For a Big City streets are clean and generally maintained (potholes are a yearly unending problem everywhere) even in poorer Southside neighborhoods.
Downtown streets kept pretty spotless. Tourist note it in feedback sights and on C-D threads.
Flowers along Michigan Ave though bring back the lavish Tropical plants. Also the hanging planters on Street lights.
I am optimistic the new Riverfront walk and lighting will be a good decision ongoing now.
Ripping down ALL the notorious Failed High-Rise Housing-Projects of the 60s. Their Locations was the WORST Choices too.
[/quote]
I won't debate any of these, except the last one. Ripping down all the notorious failed high rise housing projects of the 60s, is according to some sources, the reason why Chicago has some recent spikes in violent crime, even in neighborhoods that are nice and desirable. Displaced tenants did not leave the city nearly as much as people think they have.
Location: Schaumburg, please don't hate me for it.
955 posts, read 1,831,138 times
Reputation: 1235
Immigration is a big factor here too. Newcomers from other countries are now often bypassing the city and moving directly to the suburbs. Chicago's Poles have been lamenting this for years.
Well almost 60% of Chicago's loss was one demographic in the 2000's, it was African Americans ages 0-19. The other big loss was elderly white people.
Everything else grew some, shrank some or stayed the same.
Fairly random group to be such a huge % of the change, black children. You have to look at the dynamics of the population change before just being like "Chicago is bleeding population"....
Don't forget the city's Hispanic population went from growing by 25,000 a year during the 1990's to 2500 a year in the last decade. I'm willing to bet that in 2020, the city's Hispanic population will be either the same as it was in 2010, or there will be a population loss. The outer suburbs (Elgin, Aurora, Waukegan, Joliet, West Chicago, and Northwesr Indiana) are too attractive for working families, and most Hispanic immigrants today bypass the traditional ports of entry found in the city.
My prediction again is that Chicago will finally bottom out at around 2.2 million by 2030.... That's one million LESS then the Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission had forecast about 10 years ago. Their latest revised forecast after the 2010 census data came out is 3,054,000 by 2040... Cockeyed optimists I guess
My prediction again is that Chicago will finally bottom out at around 2.2 million by 2030.... That's one million LESS then the Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission had forecast about 10 years ago. Their latest revised forecast after the 2010 census data came out is 3,054,000 by 2040... Cockeyed optimists I guess
Considering none of the current estimates show Chicago posting a loss since 2010, I don't know why you think the city is going to bleed another 500,000 people in the next 15 years, but alright.
I'm not sure why they would stay. The poor African American sections of Chicago have become stagnant traps of very limited opportunity, and we still have a significant white population that seems determined to keep them there. The Great Migration occurred because Chicago seemed like a better alternative to conditions in the Jim Crow south, but after eight decades or so of stagnation it is not such a better alternative.
Considering none of the current estimates show Chicago posting a loss since 2010, I don't know why you think the city is going to bleed another 500,000 people in the next 15 years, but alright.
For The very same reason the census estimates were not showing losses during the 2000's. If not 15 years then 20 years
Location: East Central Pennsylvania/ Chicago for 6yrs.
2,535 posts, read 3,278,040 times
Reputation: 1483
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tex?Il?
Some people feel that Chicago feels slightly less urban than east coast cities (and San Fran) because of this. However, I can see this is a good thing.
The thing is.... Chicago still maintained overall density vs. All but NYC. Philly....for example; is the tight Row Home Capital of the nation. With over 300,000 Row homes. Chicago's Bungalow Belt is technically counted as homes built between 1910 and 1940 numbering 80,000. All with front lawns. Many blocks of Philly are on Alley size streets and no frontage. Yet Chicago with even cleared blocks returning to Prairie, by the previous Mayor.... from past decades of urban decay, on the Southside. Held competing density. Like this ....... https://www.google.com/maps/@41.882798,-87.704985,3a,75y,33.07h,96.15t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sBexXnIESwFcai6-sdsoGaA!2e0
Protected the Lakefront from Industry and for Public use.[*]Then over the decades created Parkland, Harbors and Beaches.[*]Reversing the Chicago River to save the Lake of direct waste.
This did help to keep the lake from being polluted to save drinking water, however, I'm not sure why this is seen as a positive thing, while building aquaducts to direct mountain snowmelt rivers to cities in California and the southwest is seen as a crime. Both are manipulations of the environment that have their impacts.
Well it WAS a previous era and Spared the city residents from their drinking water intake from Lake Michigan, from what was a dead River from Sewer waste to industrial waste. The River was already dead. But ended up polluting the Illinois River and to the Mississippi River. Causing Lawsuits. But it did SPARE THE LAKE and Chicago drinking water and possibly more Cholera epidemics from polluted drinking water.
Spared the City Proper from Steel Mills and the Huge Storage Tanks that other cities did not, Like Philly by me.(As some say the City does not look good, driving from their Airport to their Downtown).
Are you sure?? Have you ever been to the far South side?? Thats one of the largest industrial complexes in the country. The site of the former south shore works is a vacant patch larger than the loop itself. You drive through industrial land use on all three South and west side expressways (290/Ike, 55/Stevenson, and 94/Dan Ryan). There are a lot of reasons to love Chicago, but to suggest it doesn't have massive industrial complexes . . . How long have you seen Chicago?? The whole reason why there are largest big box stores and parking lots in places like the South Loop (which was largely a decaying railyard before high rises were built) and the Clybourn corridor is because there was large industrial/rail facilities. One of the reason Chicago is less expensive than coastal cities is because of former industrial sites so close to the urban core, where housing can be built and redeveloped.
That's it.... FAR. But the majority is in Indiana... Philly again has the majority of theirs, in the city. You drive by theirs on the way to Central City(downtown) Philly, from the Airport.
The City has some of the Lowest Expressways Systems in the Nation. Unlike higher elevated and double layered ones, that can be ugly with some cities ripping theirs down.
You do get a good view of a city from high elevated expressways/freeways.
But some cities like Seattle removed their High coastal one. San Francisco's was ugly and the earthquake gave them no choice, but to rip it down. Lowest level possible WAS the Better Choice. Or submerged below normal street level as parts of Chicago's are.
Chicago does not look bad driving from the Airports driving not through vast industrial areas. Though exiting the Expressway downtown, could have been Grander.
Are you sure?? Maybe not coming from O'Hare, but Midway?? The landscape between Midway and downtown is very industrial along the Stevenson/55.
Again NOT from O'Hare on the Kennedy expressway. I don't think the Stevenson is anything like Philly's airport drive . The Taxi Diver I had to Midway, my last trip back to that Airport, Drove by where the Old Stock Yards were. But exited the Expressway to a neighborhood street then. Also what you probably drive by in Texas Big Cities.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
