Author Topic: WHERE DOES JACKSONVILLE STAND, POPULATION WISE, WITHOUT CONSOLIDATION (OLD CITY)  (Read 7104 times)

Zac T

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 65
Pretty cool analysis. Have you done any other tracts from the old city?

Yes, I have the statistics for just about every neighborhood in the urban core and some surrounding areas if you're interested.

Very cool, thanks for sharing. We should do an article based on this when the new census figures are out.

It's an interesting phenomenon where gentrification can cause a decline in population even though more houses are filled. This happened in my area in north San Marco. Houses that were formerly empty have been renovated but most people moving in have been single folks or childless couples. A house that had been an informal boarding house now has a lot less people than it did 8 years ago. The number of people on my block is the same if not lower.

Springfield and Brentwood are good examples of this. Vacancy rates in both have fallen almost 10% but their populations are relatively stagnant.

thelakelander

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32657
    • Modern Cities
^Yes, I'd love to see them.
"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life.” - Muhammad Ali

Zac T

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 65
^Yes, I'd love to see them.

Here's the 8 other neighborhoods immediately around Downtown.

San Marco                                 
Population                                   
2000 - 4,149     
2010 - 4,201     
2019 - 4,451  (3,648/mi2)   

Housing Units
2010 - 1,752
2019 - 1,746

The Southbank numbers tend to fluctuate yearly due to its housing stock being almost exclusively apartments.

Southbank
2000 - 1,907
2010 - 2,611
2019 - 2,786  (3,618/mi2)

Housing Units
2010 - 1,372
2019 - 1,699

Springfield
2000 - 4,798
2010 - 3,726
2019 - 3,672  (3,906/mi2)

Housing Units
2010 - 1,473
2019 - 1,575

Brentwood
2000 - 4,756
2010 - 3,840
2019 - 3,846  (4,370/mi2)

Housing Units
2010 - 1,377
2019 - 1,598

Murray Hill
2000 - 8,075
2010 - 7,127
2019 - 7,643  (5,271/mi2)

Housing Units
2010 - 3,205
2019 - 3,333

New Town is the densest traditional neighborhood in Jacksonville. The densest tract is a weird one that includes the senior apartments in the Cathedral District, the jail, and tiny parts of the Eastside and Springfield. It has almost 10k people per square mile although I'm almost certain it includes the inmate population.

New Town
2000 - 4,983
2010 - 4,147
2019 - 4,652 (5,347/mi2)

Housing Units
2010 - 1,689
2019 - 1,860

Riverside + Brooklyn
2000 - 5,477
2010 - 5,217
2019 - 6,275  (4,754/mi2)

Housing Units
2010 - 2,551
2019 - 3,454

The 2000 population figure for Downtown does not include LaVilla although I don't believe it would have greatly affected the numbers.

Downtown (Northbank + LaVilla)
2000 - 766
2010 - 2,284
2019 - 2,165  (1,705/mi2)

Housing Units
2010 - 915
2019 - 1,190

The Eastside's density numbers are so low because the port at Tallyrand and the sports complex are included in its boundaries.

Eastside
2000 - 3,576
2010 - 2,877
2019 - 2,643  (1,253/mi2)

Housing Units
2010 - 994
2019 - 863

thelakelander

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32657
    • Modern Cities
Thanks for posting! It is interesting to see that the Northbank actually declined in population between 2010 and 2019. That was an epic boom period for traditional downtowns across the country. Pretty amazing to not have seen population growth and that small of an increase in housing units. It is also intriguing to see New Town turn the corner and start growing in population, while Springfield continues to decline in population. However, there's definite growth and redevelopment, suggesting that gentrification is in full effect there.
"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life.” - Muhammad Ali

Steve

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3779
Do you attribute Springfield's decline with the fact that with a lot of renovations, they're taking a house that was in some cases built as a single family, converted to multi-family over the years, then recently being converted back to single family?

I'm surprised at the degree of the drop though.

thelakelander

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32657
    • Modern Cities
No, not really. I believe it has more to do with smaller households with higher income replacing larger households. I do wonder if that type of displacement is one of the reasons that New Town is growing again after decades of population loss.
"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life.” - Muhammad Ali

heights unknown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2093
  • HEIGHTS UNKNOWN (HOT DAMMIT!) YES...SUPER TALLS!!!
    • FRESH START SOCIAL SERVICE AGENCY
Do you attribute Springfield's decline with the fact that with a lot of renovations, they're taking a house that was in some cases built as a single family, converted to multi-family over the years, then recently being converted back to single family?

I'm surprised at the degree of the drop though.
Yeah, I thought, and had hoped that Springfield would have increased in population; I am rooting hard for a resurgence of people on the Northbank, Eastside, LaVilla, and Springfield...especially theser areas. I guess with renovation and returning many units to single family and the eradication of room rentals/boarding houses, that did add significantly to the decline.
PLEASE FEEL FREE TO ACCESS MY PERSONAL FACEBOOK PAGE AT: https://www.facebook.com/garrybernardcoston.personal/ or, access my Social Service national/world wide page if you love supporting charities/social entities at: http://www.freshstartsocialagency.com; thank you!!!

bl8jaxnative

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 867
Thank you Zach T.  Great stuff.


If you're interested in going back further, I'd love to see it.   I'd hypothesize that in most of these neighborhoods household size shrinkage has been the single biggest driving in their population declines since the 1960s.  Just a guess though.

thelakelander

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32657
    • Modern Cities
My guess would be urban renewal and destruction of dense neighborhoods like Brooklyn, LaVilla, East Jacksonville, Downtown, Hansontown, Sugar Hill and Eastside between 1950 and the 1990s would be the largest reason for the drop for the 30 square mile original city. At their height, the denser neighborhoods named would have been close to or above 10,000 people per square mile. They had large household sizes and were densely packed. After that, a reduction of household sizes is the sure fire culprit for the declines in recent decades.
"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life.” - Muhammad Ali

jaxlongtimer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1229
My guess would be urban renewal and destruction of dense neighborhoods like Brooklyn, LaVilla, East Jacksonville, Downtown, Hansontown, Sugar Hill and Eastside between 1950 and the 1990s would be the largest reason for the drop for the 30 square mile original city. At their height, the denser neighborhoods named would have been close to or above 10,000 people per square mile. They had large household sizes and were densely packed. After that, a reduction of household sizes is the sure fire culprit for the declines in recent decades.

It would be interesting to study the correlation of density with social fabric metrics.  One might expect that increased density fosters increased public space interactions out of the necessity of sharing less space with others, especially if walkability scores are increased as a result.  In contrast, it seems to me that in our less dense and auto-centric suburbs today, many don't know or socialize with their neighbors in the same way.  Importantly, I think this pattern of reduced socialization is most impactful with our youth. 

With less socialization, one would expect more isolation, compartmentalization, less understanding of others, cooler to colder interactions due to a lack of personalizaton, etc.  Extending this thought, this might lead to more divisiveness, social friction and maybe crime not to mention a breakdown of community support systems, increased mental health issues, lower quality of life and shorter life spans (as socialization has been demonstrated to be a key to living longer).  We see many of these issues in our world today.

To be clear, there are sure to be many other contributing factors to the quality of the social fabric such as the use of technology to replace personal and direct interactions, income levels, discrimination, etc.

Tacachale

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8029
My guess would be urban renewal and destruction of dense neighborhoods like Brooklyn, LaVilla, East Jacksonville, Downtown, Hansontown, Sugar Hill and Eastside between 1950 and the 1990s would be the largest reason for the drop for the 30 square mile original city. At their height, the denser neighborhoods named would have been close to or above 10,000 people per square mile. They had large household sizes and were densely packed. After that, a reduction of household sizes is the sure fire culprit for the declines in recent decades.

One other thing that doesn’t get enough attention is that across most demographic groups, people on average are having kids later. That has an impact on the number of generations of a family alive at the same time, not to mention living together.
Do you believe that when the blue jay or another bird sings and the body is trembling, that is a signal that people are coming or something important is about to happen?

heights unknown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2093
  • HEIGHTS UNKNOWN (HOT DAMMIT!) YES...SUPER TALLS!!!
    • FRESH START SOCIAL SERVICE AGENCY
I want someone, anyone to correct me if I am wrong, and/or tell me what you think, but when the city consolidated back in1968, THAT in and of itself (as selected by the voters), permanently eradicated the old city limits and city government, forever, and they no longer apply. So, we can deduce that the new city limits, which gobbles up and encompasses most of Duval County is now and forever the rule unless the city wants to go back and restructure/create "new" city limits and ask the voters to cancel consolidation and adopt new city limits for the City of Jacksonville. Just thinking...cause myself, and others (mostly me) are stuck on comparing what we were and what we now are, and bringing up the subject of Jax not being who it really should be (versus and comparing with the old city limits/core/urban areas, etc.). So I guess what we all should do is just accept the fact that Jax is a City of over 900,000 people, lacking and falling short in a lot of areas but very sparse in population, with weak and spread out density, and just hope that maybe some day before we all croak, the city overall and in general, in and of itself will "catch up" with the population; and that includes vibrancy downtown in the urban core, our skyline, and in general the whole city!
PLEASE FEEL FREE TO ACCESS MY PERSONAL FACEBOOK PAGE AT: https://www.facebook.com/garrybernardcoston.personal/ or, access my Social Service national/world wide page if you love supporting charities/social entities at: http://www.freshstartsocialagency.com; thank you!!!

thelakelander

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32657
    • Modern Cities
I look at Jax as being a county of over 900,000 people. When viewed that way, it looks pretty similar to most urban counties of similar size across the country. When viewed in the eyes of what a city of 900,000 is, if the definition of that is San Francisco which packs that number within a 47 square mile area, you'll always be disappointed. Jax was only a 30 square mile city of 200k with decent density prior to consolidation. So really it depends on what you believe a city of 900k should look like, then taking that example and seeing what the density of that city is. You'll likely find out that whatever example you use, is going to be significantly larger and denser than Jax, in terms of metropolitan and urban area population. On the other hand, do the same with the group of cities that were similar in size to Jax, prior to its countywide consolidation, and you'll discover that Jax has fared pretty well in comparison since the 1960s.
"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life.” - Muhammad Ali

bl8jaxnative

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 867
Here's how I would approach it which, in a way, it what Lakelander is saying.

Jacksonville is a young, powt-WWII sunbelt city.   

If you're eye is looking for dense jobs and dense population, you ain't gonna find it. 

And I'd argue you don't find it in most of it's peers of a similar size in 1950 --> Phoenix, Oklahoma City, Tampa, Tulsa, Nashville, Austin, Charlotte, Salt Lake City, Norfolk, et al.


BTW, As much as Jacksonville has grown, keep in mind it wasn't much smaller than Miami at that point.  Tampa and Nashville werew a little smaller.  Phoenix half it's size.

heights unknown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2093
  • HEIGHTS UNKNOWN (HOT DAMMIT!) YES...SUPER TALLS!!!
    • FRESH START SOCIAL SERVICE AGENCY
I look at Jax as being a county of over 900,000 people. When viewed that way, it looks pretty similar to most urban counties of similar size across the country. When viewed in the eyes of what a city of 900,000 is, if the definition of that is San Francisco which packs that number within a 47 square mile area, you'll always be disappointed. Jax was only a 30 square mile city of 200k with decent density prior to consolidation. So really it depends on what you believe a city of 900k should look like, then taking that example and seeing what the density of that city is. You'll likely find out that whatever example you use, is going to be significantly larger and denser than Jax, in terms of metropolitan and urban area population. On the other hand, do the same with the group of cities that were similar in size to Jax, prior to its countywide consolidation, and you'll discover that Jax has fared pretty well in comparison since the 1960s.
Thank you Lakelander...well said; and...we do get disappointed if we look at Jax as a City of over 900,000 because it does not and probably never will live up to those expectations. It is a County of over 900,000; however, a lot of people don't know Jax and when they see that it is listed as a city of 900,000 people, and they visit or move there, they are sorely disappointed. Thanks Lake.
PLEASE FEEL FREE TO ACCESS MY PERSONAL FACEBOOK PAGE AT: https://www.facebook.com/garrybernardcoston.personal/ or, access my Social Service national/world wide page if you love supporting charities/social entities at: http://www.freshstartsocialagency.com; thank you!!!