The US Census Bureau thread

[dc_denizen]

Manhattan + bronx + brooklyn denser then Paris proper and 3x the population. not too shabby. and 5x the density of London.

we should be able to compare Europe and Us weighted densities soon.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

The short answer is immigration. Hamtramck has pretty much always been an immigrant magnet. Highland Park was far more directly attached to the auto industry, first with Ford and later with Chrysler. Both eventually abandoned the town they either created (Ford) or kept alive (Chrysler) and there was nothing to fall back on.

But even knowing that it's still shocking how much they've diverged. In 1990, I think most people would've considered Highland Park to be in far better shape than Hamtramck.

Thanks for the background info. Did hamtramck do anything specific to become more of an "immigrant magnet"?

Also, looking at Google maps, I see that highland park is bisected by an east-west expressway, whereas hamtramck isn't. Could that detail have played a role in the different outcomes?

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

Thanks for the background info. Did hamtramck do anything specific to become more of an "immigrant magnet"?

I would guess that Highland Park and Hamtramck were equally immigrant at the beginning of the auto boom, but Highland Park eventually trended more white middle class, while Hamtramck remained immigrant working class. Flight hit both cities hard but in different ways. Highland Park changed over to being thoroughly black, while Hamtramck retained a more ethnically mixed population albeit poorer than HP. Once the black families that kept HP afloat started to die out / move out, there was no pipeline of immigration for population replacement so it kept sliding.

One thing that Hamtramck did deliberately that might have altered its fate is mobilize against the GM Poletown plant back in the 1980s. The plant was built partially in Hamtramck and Detroit, and it took out neighborhoods in both cities, but the opposition to the plant was much more fierce on the Hamtramck side so most of it was built in Detroit. I think historians would probably point to that as a key point in time. The Detroit neighborhoods that were destroyed were just extensions of Hamtramck. If that had not happened, they would probably flourished just like Hamtramck did in the 90s onwards.

Some of Hamtramck's recent success is just a coincidence, though. Hamtramck and Highland Park were on pretty similar downward spirals from the 1930s - 1980s. Hamtramck was even worse off for most of that time. Hamtramck was the first city in the state to have ever gone under state financial control due to insolvency, and has been in that situation more times than any other city in Michigan other than Highland Park (both 3 times). I believe the state law for financial receivership may have actually been created specifically for Hamtramck. (Michigan seems to prefer this method than actually addressing what causes so many of its cities to go financially insolvent, but that's a tangent.)

However, Hamtramck's population turnaround directly coincides with the influx of immigrants into Detroit from the Middle East in the 80s and 90s. It's similar to how Hispanic immigration has sustained southwest Detroit, and immigration from the middle east has sustained some far west Detroit neighborhoods along the Dearborn border.

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

Also, looking at Google maps, I see that highland park is bisected by an east-west expressway, whereas hamtramck isn't. Could that detail have played a role in the different outcomes?

Yeah, that's the Davison Freeway. It is one of the first urban freeways ever built. I don't think the Davison alone contributed to the demise of Highland Park, although it certainly didn't help. Hamtramck also survived the worst of I-75, which was a far more devastating freeway. If I-75 had taken a more direct route through Hamtramck it would've completely obliterated the city. I'm sure the planners were aware of that at the time.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Yeah, that's the Davison Freeway. It is one of the first urban freeways ever built. I don't think the Davison alone contributed to the demise of Highland Park, although it certainly didn't help.

oh, i didn't realize it was really old, it looks kinda like a mere connector between the Lodge and I-75, with a spur that then peters out a mile or so east of I-75. it's an odd little piece of urban expressway.

i brought it up because i thought it might have had something to do with turning HP's traditional commercial corridor along Woodward into an autocentric blackhole.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4066...7i16384!8i8192




whereas hamtramck's traditional commercial corridor along Joseph Campau has remained FAR more intact and sidewalk-oriented.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3958...7i16384!8i8192

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

oh, i didn't realize it was really old, it looks kinda like a mere connector between the Lodge and I-75, with a spur that then peters out a mile or so east of I-75. it's an odd little piece of urban expressway.

Yeah, the Davison was there well before the Lodge or I-75. It was completely rebuilt in the late 90s, so it doesn't look that old.

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

i brought it up because i thought it might have had something to do with turning HP's traditional commercial corridor along Woodward into an autocentric blackhole.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4066...7i16384!8i8192




whereas hamtramck's traditional commercial corridor along Joseph Campau has remained FAR more intact and sidewalk-oriented.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3958...7i16384!8i8192

The strip mall on the east side of Woodward there was the site of a former factory that was demolished. On the west side was a former Sears that had a big footprint. There isn't really any room to do the same thing on Joseph Compau.

[Crawford]

Hamtramck hasn't performed better than Highland Park bc of urban planning mistakes. Honestly both have made huge urban planning mistakes. Hamtramck demolished its densest neighborhood in the 1980's for a low-slung factory and parking lot, and eviscerated its one black neighborhood in the 1960's.

The unfortunate reason Hamtramck has fared better than Highland Park is bc Hamtramck was more working class/racist and had a rep. for keeping blacks out of town, while Highland Park was more affluent/progressive and generally welcomed newcomers. Highland Park had many affluent Jews and Middle Eastern residents. Also, Hamtramck had more physical boundaries, with railroad tracks and freeways serving as a "moat" around town, while Highland Park had none. Finally, black expansion hit Highland Park in the 1960's, and didn't really hit Hamtramck till the 1980's, as Detroit's East Side had slower racial turnover than the West Side.

White flight happened in Hamtramck too, but they were replaced by Albanians/former Yugoslavians, and, later, Yemenis and Banghedeshis. Nowadays it's a poor, semi-intact immigrant enclave, while Highland Park is a bombed-out black enclave.

Also, Highland Park had much better urban form than Hamtramck till the 1990's. They had a gigantic Sears building and a pretty strong retail district until about 2000. They also had grand art deco apartment buildings, a few of which still stand. Hamtramck has an intact retail district, but it's kinda sad, and the housing, while intact, is totally forgettable.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Hamtramck hasn't performed better than Highland Park bc of urban planning mistakes. Honestly both have made huge urban planning mistakes. Hamtramck demolished its densest neighborhood in the 1980's for a low-slung factory and parking lot, and eviscerated its one black neighborhood in the 1960's.

The unfortunate reason Hamtramck has fared better than Highland Park is bc Hamtramck was more working class/racist and had a rep. for keeping blacks out of town, while Highland Park was more affluent/progressive and generally welcomed newcomers. Highland Park had many affluent Jews and Middle Eastern residents. Also, Hamtramck had more physical boundaries, with railroad tracks and freeways serving as a "moat" around town, while Highland Park had none. Finally, black expansion hit Highland Park in the 1960's, and didn't really hit Hamtramck till the 1980's, as Detroit's East Side had slower racial turnover than the West Side.

White flight happened in Hamtramck too, but they were replaced by Albanians/former Yugoslavians, and, later, Yemenis and Banghedeshis. Nowadays it's a poor, semi-intact immigrant enclave, while Highland Park is a bombed-out black enclave.

Also, Highland Park had much better urban form than Hamtramck till the 1990's. They had a gigantic Sears building and a pretty strong retail district until about 2000. They also had grand art deco apartment buildings, a few of which still stand. Hamtramck has an intact retail district, but it's kinda sad, and the housing, while intact, is totally forgettable.

Seems like in general in Detroit the most racist working-class white areas held out against white flight, and then became the immigrant enclaves later. Like Dearborn becoming Arab, or the Southwest side becoming Mexican.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by eschaton

Seems like in general in Detroit the most racist working-class white areas held out against white flight, and then became the immigrant enclaves later. Like Dearborn becoming Arab, or the Southwest side becoming Mexican.

There is an area on the far west side of Detroit called Warrendale that stayed predominantly white (non-MENA) into the late 90s, maybe even early 00s. Someone thought it would be amusing to name an elementary school in this neighborhood after Malcolm X in the early 90s, lol. It caused a HUGE amount of controversy, and the school regularly received bomb threats. Eventually the school moved to a predominantly black area of the city. Ironically, that neighborhood might be predominantly Muslim today.

[Steely Dan]

chicago's southside has, for many decades, carried a bad rep as "chicago's anchor", so i decided to look a little more in depth into the numbers from census 2020 to see how it's doing.

the southside of chicago, at its broadest definition (not including the near south side community area which is really part of "greater downtown"), is quite big at ~119 sq. miles, making it nearly as large in land area as major cities like atlanta, philadelphia, and detroit. i broke the southside down into 4 main areas:


area ------------------------ 2010 ------ 2020 ----- (growth)

inner southeast side ---- 226,241 --- 239,282 --- (+5.8%)

inner southwest side --- 355,247 --- 359,941 --- (+1.3%)

far southeast side ------ 224,793 --- 208,941 --- (-7.1%)

far southwest side ------ 244,147 --- 224,898 --- (-7.9%)

TOTAL ------------- 1,050,428 --- 1,033,062 --- (-1.7%)


so overall, the southside was down a little bit for the decade, but the VAST majority of that loss was from the far southside. the inner southeast side along the lake actually showed pretty decent growth, and the inner southwest side held steady with very modest growth, but the deep south side is still seeing a lot of flight. thankfully not nearly as much flight as 2000 - 2010, but still enough to keep the southside negative overall.

the southside of chicago is a HUGE and diverse part of the city, and it is most definitely not just one big hopeless area of blight and flight as it is so often portrayed/seen as being by outsiders.

[Klippenstein]

@Steely_Dan - Where did you draw the line between inner and far South Side?

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by eschaton

Seems like in general in Detroit the most racist working-class white areas held out against white flight, and then became the immigrant enclaves later. Like Dearborn becoming Arab, or the Southwest side becoming Mexican.

Yeah, pretty much. The Mexican and Arab ethnic enclaves were established where working class whites held out the longest against black expansion. Basically they held out long enough that once their walls were breached, blacks were no longer in expansion mode.

And, yeah, Warrendale, a lower working class enclave in Detroit proper, adjacent to Dearborn, is another example. Warrendale was considered a no-go zone for blacks into the 1990's. It had a very hostile rep, to really any outsiders. Now it's mostly Arab with some blacks and a handful of whites.

I know a middle school teacher in Warrendale and her classes have gone from really rough kids of Appalachian ancestry to hijabs everywhere.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Klippenstein

@Steely_Dan - Where did you draw the line between inner and far South Side?

sorry for not posting it, here's the breakdown i used:



inner southeast side

- armor sqaure
- douglas
- oakland
- kenwood
- grand boulevard
- fuller park
- washington park
- hyde park
- woodlawn
- south shore
- greater grand crossing



inner southwest side

- bridgeport
- mckinley park
- new city
- brighton park
- gage park
- archer heights
- west elsdon
- garfield ridge
- clearing
- west lawn
- chicago lawn



far southeast side

- chatham
- avalon park
- south chicago
- calumet heights
- burnside
- roseland
- pullman
- south deering
- east side
- hegewisch
- riverdale
- west pullman



far southwest side

- englewood
- west englewood
- auburn gresham
- ashburn
- washington heights
- beverly
- morgan park
- mount greenwood

[DCReid]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

sorry for not posting it, here's the breakdown i used:



inner southeast side

- armor sqaure
- douglas
- oakland
- kenwood
- grand boulevard
- fuller park
- washington park
- hyde park
- woodlawn
- south shore
- greater grand crossing



inner southwest side

- bridgeport
- mckinley park
- new city
- brighton park
- gage park
- archer heights
- west elsdon
- garfield ridge
- clearing
- west lawn
- chicago lawn



far southeast side

- chatham
- avalon park
- south chicago
- calumet heights
- burnside
- roseland
- pullman
- south deering
- east side
- hegewisch
- riverdale
- west pullman



far southwest side

- englewood
- west englewood
- auburn gresham
- ashburn
- washington heights
- beverly
- morgan park
- mount greenwood

Interesting that the far south side has the loss, as much of it is quite nice and sort of suburban. Some of those residents must have decided that they wanted to leave the city for the actual suburbs in IL and IN, perhaps for cheaper taxes. I wonder if this is also a trend on the north side.

[Crawford]

I wouldn't call the Far South Side of Chicago "quite nice". The Wild 100's are one of the more notorious sections of Chicagoland, and adjacent suburbs generally suck. Yeah, it's suburbanish, but so is much of Detroit, or Watts, or really any hood in the Sunbelt.

[Chisouthside]

Originally Posted by DCReid

Interesting that the far south side has the loss, as much of it is quite nice and sort of suburban. Some of those residents must have decided that they wanted to leave the city for the actual suburbs in IL and IN, perhaps for cheaper taxes. I wonder if this is also a trend on the north side.

I think from a previous post I saw that the furthest neighborhoods south on the city border like riverdale actually gained population. I believe chatham and avalon park had a population loss.

[iheartthed]

Some of those south side suburbs look as bad as the worst areas on the South Side of Chicago.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by DCReid

Interesting that the far south side has the loss, as much of it is quite nice and sort of suburban.

some observers blame the demolition of chicago's notorious inner city housing projects in the 90s/00s for destabilizing neighborhoods further out from the urban core as former residents of the projects sought new homes, and the gangs/crime followed them. as new poorer people (and their generally higher levels of social dysfunction) moved in, original more middle class residents moved out. that's at least one of the theories i've heard.

Originally Posted by DCReid

Some of those residents must have decided that they wanted to leave the city for the actual suburbs in IL and IN, perhaps for cheaper taxes.

chicagoans jumping the border over to indiana for lower taxes was a big story hyped up by the local media for the past decade, but in actuality, the migration wasn't terribly large. overall, the 5 counties of northwest indiana in chicago's CSA only saw an increase of +11,543 people (+1.4%), very similar to metro chicago's overall growth %. hardly indicative of some giant border-hopping mass migration in a region approaching 10M people.

but yes, the majority of the people who left the far southside ended up in the burbs. of course, there was also some black flight out of the metro area altogether with the reverse migration of some black people back down to the south.

Originally Posted by DCReid

I wonder if this is also a trend on the north side.

not really for the lakefront northside.

going west from the lakefront on the northside, there are several community areas in the central zone that saw gentrification-induced population loss (logan square, avondale, irving park, albany park, portage park, etc.), but that's a very different dynamic than what's happening on the far southside.


here's a map of chicago's population gain/loss by community area:

christian friendship poems

[Chisouthside]

Yeah from the far southeast side batch only Chatham, Hegewisch and Riverdale saw population gains from 2010. Every other community area lost.
Also i went to a magnet school in the city, andalot of my classmates were from places like roseland and avalon park and how i heard it from them, alot of former public housing residents moved down to those areas and it triggered a period of decline.,

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Chisouthside

Yeah from the far southeast side batch only Chatham, Hegewisch and Riverdale saw population gains from 2010.

Chatham's modest 2% growth is the most curious to me, as it's surrounded on all sides by purple. how did it buck the overall trend?

Hegewisch and Riverdale are very peripheral, but Chatham is right there smack dab in the middle of it all on the far southside.

[ChiSoxRox]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

Chatham's modest 2% growth is the most curious to me, as it's surrounded on all sides by purple. how did it buck the overall trend?

Hegewisch and Riverdale are very peripheral, but Chatham is right there smack dab in the middle of it all on the far southside.

Here is a screenshot of the Chicago tract change map zoomed in on Chatham. (It uses Steely's favorite red=gain, green=flat, blue=drop palette.)



The eastern half of Chatham posted 10%-16% gains over the decade, in the area bounded by 79th, 87th, MLK, and the Metra Electric line. On Streetview it looks pretty intact.

So East Chatham is doing something right.

From the Encyclopedia of Chicago:

Since the mid-1950s, Chatham has been a stronghold of Chicago's African American middle class. Defined by a jagged boundary lying within 79th and 95th Streets, the Illinois Central Railroad and the Dan Ryan Expressway, Chatham contains one of the most solidly middle-class African American populations in the city, and is home to several of the most successful black businesses in the country.