Table for Local Growth Coalitions

Table for Local Growth Coalitions - Minneapolis weak strong...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Table 1.1 Social Characteristics of Cities Building New Publicly Financed Stadiums (1) Denver’s local growth coalition was temporarily strong in the late 1980s (2) Neighboring counties grew at a far higher rate. Sources: U.S. Census Bureau; authors’ research City Local Growth Coalition 2000 Local Growth Coalition 1980 Population Growth 1990-2000 (%) Population Growth 1950-2000 (%) Downtown residences Cincinnati very strong very strong -8 -33 few Cleveland strong weak -5 -46 few Hartford weak strong -11 -30 few
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Background image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: Minneapolis weak strong +4-27 many Denver moderate moderate (1) +19 (2) +33 (2) some Phoenix weak weak +34 +1030 few San Diego weak moderate +10 +266 some Pittsburgh very strong very strong-9-45 few Philadelphia weak moderate-4-27 many Table 6.1. Percentage of Population, > 60 Years Source: U.S. Census Bureau State, County % Colorado 9.7 Denver 11.3 Adams 7.8 Douglas 4.2 Arapahoe 8.6 Jefferson 9.6 Arizona 13.0 Maricopa 16.0 California 10.6 San Diego 13.0 U.S. 12.0...
View Full Document

Page1 / 2

Table for Local Growth Coalitions - Minneapolis weak strong...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online