Quote:
Originally Posted by PKDickman
...
But, fine, we'll use Michigan. I get ten census tracts with a pop of 18,348 on .59 sq miles. That's a density of 31,000 per mile.
...
|
From which year are you using figures? In your original link, there were 2012 estimates. If you're using 2010 Census numbers, your numbers are even further aged.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PKDickman
I agree that realistic potential density is in the 70's but I wouldn't get my hopes up.
We have been waiting for this to happen since the first cliff dwellers moved into the Hancock.
But 45 years later, the density has barely moved past State street. West of Dearborn it's only around 21,000.
...
|
Here's the thing: 45 years ago the area was heavily populated with SROs, which on a per-building basis are pretty dense. Today I only know of one SRO south of Chicago Avenue. It's much like Near North overall - you lost nearly all of the Cabrini Green residents between 2000 and 2010, yet the area still grew somewhat. All of those low-income residents plus more were replaced by market-rate, upper-income residents. Now that nearly all of the lower-income residents are gone, there is no longer an out-flow of residents that new in-flow has to compensate for. For the 2010-2020 timeframe, very nearly 100% of new residents will add to density instead of having to first offset lost density.