http://www.brookings.

edu/research/opinions/2012/06/29-cities-suburbs-frey
SERIES: State of Metropolitan America | Number 56 of 62 Previous | Next

Opinion | June 29, 2012

Demographic Reversal: Cities

Thrive, Suburbs Sputter
By: William H. Frey

Email

inShare

Share

o
o

StumbleUpon

Print

Last year, for the first time in more than nine decades the major cities of the nations
largest metropolitan areas grew faster than their combined suburbs. At least
temporarily, this puts the brakes on a longstanding staple of American lifethe
pervasive suburbanization of its populationwhich began with widespread
automobile use in the 1920s to the present day when more than half the U.S.
population lives in the suburbs.
This reversal is identified in an analysis of newly released Census Bureau data for 20102011 and can be attributed to a number of forces. Some are short- term and related to the
post 2007 slowdown of the suburban housing market, coupled with continued high
unemployment which has curtailed population mobility, now at a historic low.
However, at least some cities may be seeing a population renaissance based on efforts
to attract and retain young people, families and professionals.
While these forces have led to lower suburban growth and increased city retention toward
the end of the 2000s, the new data show a notable tipping point. Using the
Brookingsdefinition, core primary cities of the nations 51 metropolitan areas with
populations exceeding one million, grew faster than the suburbs of those areas between
July 2010-2011. Cities grew at 1.1 percent while suburbs grew at 0.9 percent. This
contrasts with suburban dominated growth in the 2000s, extending the pattern previous
decades.

Among the 51 largest metro areas, primary city growth exceeded suburban growth in 27
over the last year, compared with just five in the 2000s decade (see table). Moreover,
compared with annual average rates in the 2000-2010, 43 metropolitan areas showed faster
primary city growth in 2010-11 while 43 registered slower growth in their suburbs.
Among the metropolitan areas with sharp sharpest city growth advantages are Washington
D.C., Denver and Atlanta, where annual city growth ramped up for 2010-2011 and
exceeded suburb growth by about 1 percent. This contrasts with the 2000s decade when
suburbs grew substantially faster than the suburbs in all three. As in most of the country,
their suburbs disproportionately bore the brunt of the late 2000s housing collapse.
However, all three have important urban amenities and economic bases that are attractive
to young people and other households now clustering in their cities.

While these are extreme examples of the recent reversal, city gains and suburban
downturns are evident in all parts of the country, including the Northeast and Midwest
This is the case for New York, Philadelphia, Kansas City, and Columbus. In Chicago,
Pittsburgh, Milwaukee, Rochester, and Minneapolis-St Paul, city declines in the 2000s
turned to gains in 2010-2011. At the same time, the city declines of the 2000s lost
momentum in 2010-2011 in Detroit, Cleveland, Buffalo, St Louis, and Cincinnati.
Beyond the aforementioned city gainers over the last decade, other Sun Belt and Western
examples are Austin, Seattle, Salt Lake City, Houston, Tampa-St Petersburg, Dallas,
Memphis, and Birmingham. In New Orleans, Miami, San Francisco, and San Jose both city
and suburbs showed higher growth in 2010-2011 compared to their annual average in
2000-2010.
In fact, the only Sun Belt city growth slowdowns occurred where entire metropolitan areas
were hard hit by last decades housing slowdown. Among these are Las Vegas,
Sacramento, Orlando, Jacksonville, Raleigh, and Charlotte. In each case, both cities and
suburbs registered lower growth in 2010-2011 than their annual average of the 2000s, with
suburbs taking the greatest hit.
This new tipping point clearly has its origins in the downturns in the national housing and
labor markets of the past five years. Young people, retirees, and other householders who
might have moved to the suburbs in better times are unable to obtain mortgages or
employment. Many remain stuck in rented or shared homes that are more often located in
cities. Yet what may look like a temporary lull in the broad sweep of suburban development
may turn out to be an opportunity for some cities to showcase their oft cited lifestyle and

cultural amenities to a new generation of residents and developers, so that in some regions
a new version of the American Dream could take root.
SERIES: State of Metropolitan America | Number 56