Where are the folks that are leaving the Far South Side moving too? That's quite a change in population. Are folks relocating to the suburbs?

I wonder what caused folks to leave the North Side, I always thought that was a safe part of Chicago. Maybe prices. :shrug:

Hopefully Chi Town can grow in other areas. Some of that loss of folks is alarming.

I don't follow Chicago as much as I should so I genuinely have no idea when it comes to neighborhood dynamics.

See e.g.https://www.chicagobusiness.com/arti...all-of-chicago

The explanation we are given is nearby suburbs and out of State, particularly down South.

Not sure I get this concern. Every city is dynamic and has people coming and going. Why would it surprise you that there are people leaving the north side of Chicago (which still gained population)?

Nearly the entire population loss in the North Side is due to smaller family sizes as well as deconversions.

As far as the safety of Chicago, there are only really around 6-7 neighborhoods where the vast majority of violent crime occurs in. Best way to avoid being a victim of violence? Don't be a gang member, don't be a drug dealer, don't become involved in domestic disputes. Perhaps stay away from those 6-7 neighborhoods at night if walking alone. ;) Use some common sense and don't make yourself a victim, you'll be just fine.

Back to population. The South Side population loss continuing is quite alarming, but the fringes of the South Side seeming to come back are a huge deal. Gentrification is slowly pushing into some of the worst areas of the city crime-wise, which might either finally help to resolve some of the serious issues or, hopefully not, just cause them to move to new areas and continue unabated.

Aaron (Glowrock)

that's a great article.

due to a combination of aldermanic prerogative, a zoning code that generally prohibits anything over 4 stories in 90% of the city, the awful legacy of highrise public housing, and a general cultural aversion to highrise structures anywhere outside of downtown/lakefront, chicago has some rather schizophrenic attitudes towards building density.

"you wanna build an 8 million story tower to the moon in downtown? that sounds awfully ambitious, but what the hell, go for it!"

"you wanna build an 8 story apartment building in avondale? are you mad? this is OUR neighborhood, not fucking manhattan!"

Yea, I get why people don't want hi-rises in the neighborhoods, but more stuff around 6 stories would be nice along commercial streets. And being able to build 4 story apartment buildings on residential streets should be allowed. I quite like the scale of the new stuff in Wrigleyville. It's quite similar to new stuff going up in large European cities, where it's very dense but it doesn't have to be 20+ stories.

Hey now, Avondale is the last bastion of new construction on the NW side. We might not have any 8 floor towers going up, but 4 story infill is cranking hard West of Central Park where DSA territory ends and old school Reboyras reigns supreme.

this seems pretty accurate to me.. just south of Hyde Park and the midway is really cranking. Just had a friend move from wrigleyville to there and the whole area is filling with young white couples with kids.. talking like straight up north woodlawn

houses that would be 750k to 1 million in roscoe village.. he takes metra electric to work from there

and yeah, the central area is obviously still exploding

^ It should be interesting to see how plans for increased service on the Metra Electric will affect Woodlawn and other areas down there

he lands at millennium park and his new commute is faster..

funny that the "pioneers" were U Chicago employees and professors. And now the Obama center should pop it further

This area is called Woodlawn or Jackson Park Highlands. JP Highlands is filled with mansions that sell for like $350k.

The central core +94,000 in 17 years. That's +460 people per month in a city that was 2.9 million in the year 2000. Pretty solid growth, not sure I would categorize that as booming. I guess it's booming in respect to other parts of the city that lost significant population.

it is booming when you consider the fact that the 11 sq. miles of chicago's central area were home to ~150,000 people in 2000, and are now home to ~250,000 people, a 67% increase in just under 2 decades.

we also say that downtown chicago is "booming" because it has built 50 towers over 500' since 2000. that's more 500+ footers than any other US city not named new york or miami even has in the first place.

if you took all of the new towers chicago has built over the past 2 decades and put 'em in a cornfield in central illinois, that new cornfield skyline would be bigger and taller than the existing skylines of houston, LA, atlanta, dallas, philly, SF, seattle, etc.

in an american context, that can't be categorized as anything other than "booming".

You do realize that that is roughly 94k people in 17 years in a 2 mile radius (of which a large portion is Lake Michigan), right?

That kind of growth would be considered nothing in a sunbelt boomtown over typically a much, much larger geographic area.

But growth of that degree over such a tight geographic footprint (once again, about 40% of that geography is water) is pure urban awesomeness.

Its disingenuous to look at the city population as a whole, we're talking about a single district in a city that is 220 square miles. That's an amazing increase in density to an already dense area.

This. Absolutely this.

Aaron (Glowrock)

I know there are a few projects along Milwaukee, but nothing along Pulaski that I'm aware of. Belmont near Milwaukee has one or two 3-4 story buildings going up, but nothing spectacular. Honestly, Belmont from the Kennedy to Pulaski could use some serious clean-up, minus the awesomeness that is Avondale Tap, of course. ;)

Aaron (Glowrock)

How about Chicago split into 5 boroughs?

https://scontent-sjc3-1.cdninstagram...Njc3Nw%3D%3D.2
https://www.picluck.com/media/210053...777_7415959545

^ Wow, that's not even very accurate

yeah citi field is nothing like wrigley