Population dropoff (Chicago, Naperville, Dolton: middle-class, condo, townhouses)

[lategreattex]

YOU JUST MADE A WHOLE LOT OF TEXANS VERY HAPPY. YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT...IT'S NOT FOR EVERYONE! I AM SO, SO, SO HAPPY TO HEAR THAT "CHICAGOLAND" IS GOING STRONG. SINCE I HAVE TO GO THERE EVERY WEEK, I WAS WONDERING MYSELF WHY THEY ALL FELT THE NEED TO LEAVE. (then again there are those darn stats...) DON'T GET ME WRONG, I WISH THEY WOULD ALL STAY THERE. ITS A GREAT CITY......NOW, WHEN I SEND BACK THE 3700 MIDWESTERNERS THAT ARE MOVING HERE BY THE WEEK, WILL YOU SIGN FOR THEM? PS. I NEVER SAID IT WAS "NASTY, WINTERY & GRITTY" IT SURE AS HECK BEATS THE OVER POPULATED, OVER POLLUTED, TRANSPLANT DRIVEN CITY THIS IS...AT THE VERY LEAST YOU CAN GO INTO A SPORTS BAR AND STILL HEAR PEOPLE ROOTING FOR YOU'RE OWN TEAM. UNLIKE HERE WHERE WE CAN'T WATCH A DALLAS GAME WITHOUT HEARING SOMEONE SITTING AT THE TABLE NEXT TO US YELLING FOR THE CHEESEHEADS OR DUH BEARS. I'M ON YOUR SIDE. DON'T SHOOT THE MESSANGER!

[UnderTheLiveOaks]

Aw. He got his caps lock stuck.

I'm just shocked that you found a sports bar in Dallas. I can never find anyplace open past 10 that isn't in a strip mall.

[Lookout Kid]

What stats? Every statistic I've ever seen shows the Chicago area growing. The city is losing population to the suburbs, not to the south. Sure, there is a net migration loss of midwest population to the Sun Belt, but Chicago is less affected than areas like Detroit, Milwaukee, and St. Louis. There are a lot of Chicago ex-pats everywhere because Chicago is huge. And while there may be a lot of Chicagoans moving south, there are more than enough newcomers to take their place.

[Chicago60614]

Yeah, I don't know where this is coming from either. Most people leaving the city are moving to the burbs, not down south.

Also, the city grew by 112,000 people in the 90's when the census estimated it was going to lose around 120,000 people. They were off by almost 250,000. Who's to say they aren't going to do it again this decade? I wouldn't put a lot of thought into their estimates.

The Chicago area has also grown by 1,500,000 people since 1990. It's stupid to say it's losing people...

And, I work with 3 people who have moved from Texas, and we only have 30 people in our office. The flow goes both ways...

[Steve-o]

Originally Posted by Lookout Kid

And while there may be a lot of Chicagoans moving south, there are more than enough newcomers to take their place.

I agree. Ive lost, let see.... 13 people I know to sunbelt states. We've gotten all but 4 back. The grass doesnt seem to be greener on the other side...

[Drover]

Originally Posted by Steve-o

I agree. Ive lost, let see.... 13 people I know to sunbelt states. We've gotten all but 4 back. The grass doesnt seem to be greener on the other side...

It's hard to plant grass in desert sand.

[via chicago]

Originally Posted by Drover

It's hard to plant grass in desert sand.

and yet ironically, they do it.

[Drover]

Originally Posted by via chicago

and yet ironically, they do it.

Yeah, and what a great idea too -- create even more demand for water in a place where it's in short supply.

[Steve-o]

Originally Posted by via chicago

and yet ironically, they do it.

Most places down there have bans on grass, especially in areas where its visible (residential mostly), meaning grass is relegated to backyards only. My FIL has a small 20X20 patch in his yard, it needs to be replaced yearly, its just too hot and dry to sustain grass there.

[RustbeltRocks]

Chicago, like most of the northern cities, reached it's peak in the 50's, white-flight has been a serious problem for just about every Northern city since the 50's. Even New York reached a peak of 7.8 million people in the 50's and decreased by nearly 1 million people until the 80's when the tide reversed. Many things contributed to white flight, including congestion, increased crime and racial tension. Also, the baby-boom and the advent of the interstate highway system facilitated the growth of suburbs, where people could raise children in safety and larger yards. It's worth noting that even in areas like Cleveland and Pittsburgh, where the populations of the core cities have hemorrhaged population, the metro areas have continued to grow and the cores have remained dense compared to cities with more recent growth. I don't necessarily think that a city has to have a huge population within it's political boundaries to support a prosperous central district. Chicago is very dense with about 12,000 people per square mile. That's very dense, compare that to Phoenix, where the density is about 3,000. Now imagine another 2 million people added to the density of Chicago, it's not necessary. Even an area like Pittsburgh, that has lost nearly half of it's population in the last fifty years, still has a density of over 5,500 per square mile that's higher than other major urban centers like Atlanta.