Background Report

In this section:

 

Population and Housing
Growth Trends: the sector’s population has steadily declined, falling from 78,724 to 48,162 between 1960 and 2000.(1) Many older, central cities have experienced similar population declines as household sizes decreased and residents moved to the suburbs. The significant loss of residents in the past few years, mainly from College Homes, is being greatly offset with infill housing and the Mechanicsville Commons development.(2)

Population characteristics (a more complete overview can be found in the 2000 Census section of the MPC website): The Central Sector is the most densely populated city sector, averaging nearly 4.5 persons per acre. The highest densities are concentrated in Fort Sanders, the University of Tennessee campus, and areas where public housing is located. Seven of the city’s 12 public housing developments are in the sector. The median age is 31, lower than other sectors mainly due to the large number of college students. That student population also contributes to the sector’s large proportion of Knoxville’s adult population (persons 18 years and older); 28 percent of Knoxville’s adults reside in the Central Sector. There are nearly 4,800 elderly persons (those 65 and over), comprising almost 10 percent of the sector’s population in 2000.

A large percentage of the city’s low-income families and minorities live in the sector. Over the last 20 years, the sector’s minority population remained stable while the white population decreased by 27 percent. According to the 2000 Census, 45 percent of Knoxville’s African American population lives in the Central Sector. The average household income was $25,128 (1999). As of 2000, the proportion of the sector’s one-parent households was considerably greater (almost 63 percent) than that of the county’s population (27 percent).

Renaisssance II Condos

With its many apartments and condominiums, Fort Sanders is one of the most densely populated portions of the sector.

 

Of the 19 census tracts in this sector, 15 are in the Knoxville Empowerment Zone. Zone boundaries are selected based on such criteria as poverty, unemployment and crime. At 11.6 percent (2000), the unemployment rate was considerably higher than in the city (6.5 percent) and county as a whole (4.5 percent).

Western Heights

The sector contains most of the public housing projects, which are decades old and due for renovation.

Housing: Largely as a result of economic factors, sector residents are more likely to rent than own their homes. According to the 2000 Census, only 29 percent of the sector’s housing is owned by residents, compared to homeownership of 46 percent in the city and 62 percent in the county as a whole. The average value of the sector’s owner-occupied units was almost $59,000, compared to $79,000 for the city. The age of the sector’s housing stock is older than other parts of the city. Over one-fourth of the units (or 5,760 units) were constructed prior to 1940 (in comparison, 12.9 percent of Knoxville’s total housing stock is that old).

 

Housing conditions are a concern. The property assessor’s office provides a record of housing conditions. Over 12 percent of the sector’s housing units are considered to be in poor, very poor or unsound condition. Much of this housing is scattered on small lots throughout the sector, although there are more pockets of such housing west of I-275 (see Map 3).

Future Population Growth: Population projections for such relatively small areas as this sector are inherently difficult. What is known is that the rate of decline has decreased in recent decades. That general trend is expected to continue as new households are established, particularly with downtown, Mechanicsville and Fort Sanders development, and infill housing in various neighborhoods.

Sterchi Building

The creation of apartments in such historic buildings and infill development are two major factors that will likely result in population growth.

Table 1: Residential Building Conditions

Condition
Number of Units
Percent of Total
Excellent
0
0.0
Very Good
136
1.2
Good
1,074
9.8
Average
4,274
38.8
Fair
4,156
37.8
Poor
1,093
9.9
Very Poor
180
106
Unsound
95
0.9
Total
11,008
100.00