If St. Louis Had the Density of Other Cities
Many think population density is all bad or all good. To me it depends up0n how the population uses the land.
Much is said about St. Louis’ peak of 856,796 in 1950 and how over the last 50 years we lost over half a million people out of our small 61.9 square mile city. We will never again be at that level but how we use our land with our current population level is important. I think we can do better with the population we have.
For grins I thought it would be interesting to what the population of the City of St. Louis would be if we had the recent density of other major cities. I picked 13 cities that came into my head and used density figures available from Wikipedia. The results were both surprising and intriguing:
Portland OR has lower density than St. Louis? Interesting. I think they have a different mix — a very high density center transitioning to a very low density edge. Oklahoma City is massive in total land area but with only a few rare exceptions it is uniformly low-density. St. Louis of 1950 had greater population density of current day Chicago? Yes, St. Louis, in 1950, was more densely populated than Chicago today!
I’d like to think that with good planning (form-based zoning) we could aspire to a Seattle or Baltimore level of population density – at least 7,000 persons per square mile.
What this looks like is increasing the density along our major corridors such as Olive, Jefferson, Kingshighway, Natural Bridge, etc.
Goal posts should be something like:
- 6,000/sq. mile (371,400) by 2020
- 6,500/sq. mile (402,350) by 2030
- 7,000/sq. mile (433,300) by 2040
- 7,500/sq. mile (464,250) by 2050
- 8,000/sq. mile (495,200) by 2060
This growth will not happen organically like it did a century ago. Our current zoning and other policies prevents such growth. It will require hard work to create the plan & zoning for dense corridors. These will need, and will support, excellent mass transit. Our tidy streets of single family, 2-family and 4-family buildings need not change from their current density levels. The growth will occur along the corridors that last century changed into to-centric. Hell, basically.
I doubt I’ll be around for the 2060 Census but I want to steer us in the right direction so by that time we can reach this goal. Plus the US population is expected to grow some 45% by 2050. If we grew at the expected national rate we’d have 514,000 by 2050. So to have 464,250 by 2050 (31% growth) seems like a reasonable expectation.
We have the vacant buildings ready for new occupants. We have the vacant land for in-fill construction. Still need to work on the schools to educate the youngsters.
– Steve Patterson






