2000115-Strengthening-Communities-with-Neighborhood-Data

Advances in Analytic Methods for Neighborhood Data 331
Table 7.1.1. (Continued)
Type 4: Port of Entry
Dynamics
of change
Type 4 is a moderately stable type: 74 percent of these neighborhoods in
1990 remained in the same cluster by 2000. At the same time, however,
about 18 percent transitioned into type 5 (Urban Tapestry), 4 percent
transitioned into type 2 (Transient Underdeveloped), and 4 percent transitioned
into type 8 (Close, Cool, and Commercial). Different subtypes are
more likely to transition to different clusters, though, as discussed in
more detail below.
Gentrification appears to be a driving force behind the transition of
some of these neighborhoods to higher-income clusters. Features
such as the cluster’s overall proximity to downtown, lower housing
values, and retail amenities may be contributing factors. In some
instances this change is more gradual, and these neighborhoods
transition to Urban Tapestry communities; in other cases the process
is more rapid, and these communities transition to Close, Cool and
Commercial neighborhoods.
In neighborhoods that remain largely immigrant communities, an
important driver of improvement is the presence of employment
opportunities nearby, as proximity to jobs is particularly important
for this population.
Growth
trends
On average, the RSI had the third-fastest growth rate between 1990
and 2000, increasing 17 percentage points faster than the city as a
whole, and the fourth-fastest growth rate between 2000 and 2006,
increasing 5 percentage points over the citywide rate.
Growth rates in the quantity of housing units were slightly below average
between 1990 and 2000 (–3 percent), and above average between 2000
and 2005 (3 percent).
Presence
by city
(2000)
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
12%
All Cities
14%
Chicago
1%
Cleveland
14%
Dallas
5%
Seattle
(continued)