Chicago has the fastest growing downtown in the country--again

[the urban politician]

Chicago’s downtown still fastest growing in country, report says
AJ LATRACE NOVEMBER 2, 2021

In the years leading up the pandemic, Chicago’s downtown was witnessing unprecedented growth — both in population and construction activity. Dozens of high-rises were being built at a time, adding thousands of rental units and hotel rooms to the city each year. And despite the downturn caused by the pandemic, Chicago’s Loop and broader central business district is still the fastest growing neighborhood in the city, and the fastest growing downtown in the nation, a report from the Chicago Loop Alliance suggests.

In terms of raw numbers, The Loop, saw an increase from 29,000 residents in the 2010 census to 42,300 residents in 2020 — its highest population yet. This is roughly a 45% gain, the report details, meaning that Chicago’s Loop remains the fastest growing community within the city. To put this in perspective however, Edgewater, one of the city’s most densely populated neighborhoods has a population of 56,300 residents while trendy Logan Square has just over 71,000 residents.

The Loop’s population growth has been significant in the last couple of decades, but the neighborhood still has a long ways to go in catching up with many other Chicago neighborhoods in total resident count.


But when we take a step back and look at the broader downtown area, which includes neighborhoods like River North, Streeterville, the West Loop, South Loop, and others, the numbers become even more significant. The report pegs the total population of Chicago’s downtown at 244,445 residents, or roughly 9% of Chicago’s total population. Double-digit growth in the Near North Side and Near South Side has helped Chicago’s downtown grow faster than any other major downtown district in the country, the Chicago Loop Alliance report proclaims.

While downtown Chicago has growth at a rapid pace in the last decade, the story is much different for the city’s far south side. Neighborhoods like Englewood, Roseland, West Pullman, and Fuller Park all witnessed double-digit population loss. The lop-sided downtown growth and far south side decline meant that the entire city of Chicago only had a 2% population gain between 2010 and 2020, bringing the city’s current population to 2,746,388.

https://rejournals.com/chicagos-down...y-report-says/

[twister244]

This just goes to show that Chicago isn't quite the city that conservative media tries to paint it as. Yes, parts of Chicago are doing pretty poorly still, but it's slowly being eclipsed by the other parts of the city that continue to thrive and succeed.

[Steely Dan]

^ the tale-iest tale of two cities ever told


and while all of that deep dark green in the 4 CA's of the greater downtown area is great to see, my favorite part of the map are all of those other shades of green running down damn near the entire south lakefront, mirroring the north lakefront.



and as i pointed out in the chicago general discussions thread, the map graphic has the wrong population figure listed for englewood.

englewood's population did decrease by 20.5% (the largest CA decrease in the city last decade), but it went from 30,654 in 2010 down to 24,369 in 2020, not down to 10,248, as erroneously listed in that graphic.

[memph]

What was the increase for that broader downtown area?

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by memph

What was the increase for that broader downtown area?

the 4 CA's of the "greater downtown area" are the loop, near north, near west, and near south.


Community Area - 2010 - 2020 - change

the loop - 29,283 - 42,298 - +13,015 (+44.5%)

near north - 80,484 - 105,481 - +24,997 (+31.1%)

near west* - 54,881 - 67,881 - +13,000 (+23.7%)

near south - 21,390 - 28,795 - +7,405 (+34.6%)
_______________________________________________

total - 186,038 - 244,445 - +58,407 (+31.4%)


source: https://gist.github.com/nmpeterson/5...348ca1903099e0




(*) at 5.7 sq. miles the near west side includes more land area than most people would generally include in the "greater downtown area". Ashland Ave is one of the city's most major N-S streets and it splits the near west side in two. most would include east of ashland into the greater downtown, but west of ashland, things fall off precipitously, as you cross over into the parking lot moonscape of the United Center area.

east of ashland contains 75% of the near west side's people (~51K of ~68K) and is roughly 3 sq. miles. west of ashland makes up the remaining 2.7 sq. miles and is home to only ~17K. it's a bit of a shame that the near west side wasn't split in two along ashland by the university of chicago a century ago when chicago's CA's first got defined.

[bnk]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

the 4 CA's of the "greater downtown area" are the loop, near north, near west, and near south.


Community Area - 2010 - 2020 - change

the loop - 29,283 - 42,298 - +13,015 (+44.5%)

near north - 80,484 - 105,481 - +24,997 (+31.1%)

near west* - 54,881 - 67,881 - +13,000 (+23.7%)

near south - 21,390 - 28,795 - +7,405 (+34.6%)
_______________________________________________

total - 186,038 - 244,445 - +58,407 (+31.4%)




(*) at 5.7 sq. miles the near west side includes more land area than most people would generally include in the "greater downtown area". Ashland Ave is one of the city's most major N-S streets and it splits the near west side in two. most would include east of ashland into the greater downtown, but west of ashland, things fall off precipitously, as you cross over into the parking lot moonscape of the United Center area.

east of ashland contains 75% of the near west side's people (~51K of ~68K) and is roughly 3 sq. miles. west of ashland makes up the remaining 2.7 sq. miles and is home to only ~17K. it's a bit of a shame that the near west side wasn't split in two along ashland by the university of chicago a century ago when chicago's CA's first got defined.

Im not super local to downtown news but do visit a lot. Some interesting notes. I thought that the south loop had more residents than that over the last decade. I also thought that the West loop would have been higher in percentage vs being the lowest in % growth. I think the next 10 years the west look will have a larger percent growth because it seems like the west loop only gained real traction in the last years vs the total of ten year measures. Without a doubt the west loop is for sure a going for it place.

So much business growth there esp with all of the proposed new high rises including business and vertical housing. The Old Post office is really going to keep the rate going and all of the other projects.

ESP converting former industrial cold storage meat packing into lofts and offices.


I think it was just the last to join the party and in the future will be a leader in growth. Plus Fulton market is now a huge resturant destination by its self its creating its own center of gravity.

[ChiSoxRox]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

(*) at 5.7 sq. miles the near west side includes more land area than most people would generally include in the "greater downtown area". Ashland Ave is one of the city's most major N-S streets and it splits the near west side in two. most would include east of ashland into the greater downtown, but west of ashland, things fall off precipitously, as you cross over into the parking lot moonscape of the United Center area.

east of ashland contains 75% of the near west side's people (~51K of ~68K) and is roughly 3 sq. miles. west of ashland makes up the remaining 2.7 sq. miles and is home to only ~17K. it's a bit of a shame that the near west side wasn't split in two along ashland by the university of chicago a century ago when chicago's CA's first got defined.

Indeed, the Near West Side is a tale of two areas in the growth rates (note that this map has red=growth, blue=decline):


Source

Ashland is the dividing line right through the "Near West Side" label.

[sentinel]

Interestingly, there are still population gains (even modest ones) in many Southside neighborhoods, even with high losses in other parts of that region.

[galleyfox]

Originally Posted by sentinel

Interestingly, there are still population gains (even modest ones) in many Southside neighborhoods, even with high losses in other parts of that region.

The simple reason is because most of Chicago’s population loss is from smaller households. Neighborhoods where families were already small reflected the true increase in the city’s housing.

Almost all neighborhoods in Chicago (except for Englewood and the far South by Roseland) are seeing more demand in the housing market.

Between new construction and vacant homes becoming occupied, Chicago households increased at a faster rate than LA, SF, and NYC and was only slightly behind Philadelphia.

[JManc]

What I want to know is how O'Hare grew by 10-20%.

[bilbao58]

Originally Posted by JManc

What I want to know is how O'Hare grew by 10-20%.

REEEEEAAAAAAAALLLLLLYYYYYYYY long flight delays.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by bilbao58

REEEEEAAAAAAAALLLLLLYYYYYYYY long flight delays.

but now with 6 parallel runways, instead of the old labyrinth of numerous criss-crossing runways that caused nothing but headaches for ATC, ORD's legendary delays of yesteryear are now thankfully not nearly as common (barring inclement weather, which you can't really engineer your way out of).

ORD can now theoretically move more aircraft than any other airport on the planet, so of course the main issue has become limited gate/terminal availability, which will be addressed in the next huge multi-billion dollar exapnsion just getting started.



as for the O'hare Community Area's growth over the past decade, the O'hare CA includes a small region of residential neighborhoods east of the airport that were annexed into the city of chicago at the same time the airport land was, and to make things easier, it was all lumped together as a brand new CA for the city simply called "O'hare".

over the past decade that area grew from 12,755 residents to 13,418 residents for a change of +663 (+5.2%), which is why it is colored medium green on the map (5-10% growth).

Jman just misread the colors when he thought it showed the CA growing by 10-20%.

[TWAK]

Originally Posted by JManc

What I want to know is how O'Hare grew by 10-20%.

Hotels or the airport leased out some space for an apartment complex?
I have always used Midway anyway, so I can't even remember if there are hotels @ O'Hare for the times I have been there.

[bilbao58]

Originally Posted by TWAK

Hotels or the airport leased out some space for an apartment complex?
I have always used Midway anyway, so I can't even remember if there are hotels @ O'Hare for the times I have been there.

I believe this is the correct answer:

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

as for the O'hare Community Area's growth over the past decade, the O'hare CA includes a small region of residential neighborhoods east of the airport that were annexed into the city of chicago at the same time the airport land was, and to make things easier, it was all lumped together as a brand new CA for the city simply called "O'hare".

over the past decade that area grew from 12,755 residents to 13,418 residents for a change of +663 (+5.2%), which is why it is colored medium green on the map (5-10% growth).

[TWAK]

Originally Posted by bilbao58

I believe this is the correct answer:

Ah ok, as soon as he said runways I had to pull up google maps since that's.....hella runways. It's a bit easier to annex things out in Illinois than it is in CA, I take it? It's convoluted AF and cities are at a disadvantage.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by TWAK

It's a bit easier to annex things out in Illinois than it is in CA, I take it?

Maybe it was easier. Chicago hasn't annexed any land since it annexed O'hare back in the 60s. It was all unincorporated land back then, so the process was much simpler.

Chicago is now 100% surrounded by incorporated suburban municipalities, and they're not gonna ever agree to city annexation, so things are now more or less set.

[galleyfox]

Originally Posted by TWAK

Ah ok, as soon as he said runways I had to pull up google maps since that's.....hella runways. It's a bit easier to annex things out in Illinois than it is in CA, I take it? It's convoluted AF and cities are at a disadvantage.

Annexation as a legal process is fairly easy in Illinois. It’s mostly just a referendum that requires a majority vote as long as the cities share a border.

Cahokia, Alorton, and Centreville in Metro East merged earlier this year in May to found the city of Cahokia Heights.

Of course, obtaining the majority vote in established suburbs is the tricky part, but it has happened. In the past it was usually to access Chicago’s water and sewer system. Nowadays Chicago doesn’t actually want most of the suburbs that would agree to an annexation.

In 1899, the suburb of Cicero was appalled that the other half of town approved an elevated train extension into their neighborhood, so they forced that neighborhood (Austin current pop ~96K) to be annexed to Chicago.

https://www2.illinois.gov/sites/ltg/...n-Illinois.pdf

[bnk]

Originally Posted by JManc

What I want to know is how O'Hare grew by 10-20%.

If you look at the map O'hare has that road that connects to an east area. People do live outside of the Airport bounderies. Im not sure there is any housing in the big circle of the O'hare part on that Chicago map other than non residental hotels

sorry for the spelling errors im dictating into my phone

[3rd&Brown]

Semantics.

Fastest in this term must mean rate. Not absolute number. An increase of 13,200 on top of a base of 29,000 is for sure truly impressive. But there are for sure other downtowns that added more people in absolute number's than did Chicago.

Philadelphia's Center City (Philadelphia's 'downtown') added for more than 13,300 people in the last decade.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by 3rd&Brown

Fastest in this term must mean rate.

when most people talk about the speed of population growth, they almost always speak in terms of growth rates.

that is the norm.

Originally Posted by 3rd&Brown

Philadelphia's Center City (Philadelphia's 'downtown') added for more than 13,300 people in the last decade.

it would be very surprising if it didn't. Center city is roughly 3x bigger than The Loop in land area.

Center City Philly is ~3.0 square miles of developed land, whereas chicago's loop is only 1.0 square mile of developed land*.

so not really an apples-to apples-comparison of "downtowns".



(*) Chicago's Loop CA is technically 1.5 sq. miles of land, but 0.5 sq. miles of that is Grant Park (1/3 of it), so.........