The Brookings Institution Metropolitan Policy Program Bruce Katz, Director

The Brookings Institution Metropolitan Policy Program Bruce Katz, Director Redefining Urban and Suburban America National Trust for Historic Preservation September 30, 2004

Redefining Urban and Suburban America I What are the general demographic trends affecting the United States? II What are the major trends affecting metropolitan areas? III What do these trends mean for urban and metropolitan policy?

I What are the general demographic trends affecting the United States? Major demographic forces are changing the United States Population Growth Immigration Aging Internal Migration

Population Growth The 1990s presented the strongest growth in four decades US population growth (millions), 1990-2000 35 33 Source: U.S. Census Bureau 30 25 24 23 22 20 15 10 5-1960-1970 1970-1980 1980-1990 1990-2000

Immigration More than 1/3 of this population growth was driven by immigration Components of population change, 1990-2000 Source: U.S. Census Bureau 34.7% Net Immigration 65.3% Natural Increase

Immigration Despite a decade of rapid immigration, the share of the U.S. population that is foreign-born is lower now than in the 1900s Immigration, 1900-2000 Population in Millions 35 30 25 20 15 10 13.6% 14.7% 13.2% 11.6% 8.8% Foreign-born Population (in Millions) Percent of total Population 7.9% 6.9% 6.2% 5.4% 4.7% 11.1% 16% 14% 12% 10% 8% 6% 4% Percent of Total Population 5 0 10.3 13.5 13.9 14.2 11.6 10.3 9.7 9.6 14.1 19.8 31.1 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000* 2% 0%

Aging At the same time, the US population is aging US Age Distribution, 1970 vs. 2020 Source: U.S. Census Bureau 1970 2020 Male 85+ Female Male 85+ Female <5 <5 6% 4% 2% - 2% 4% 6% 6% 4% 2% - 2% 4% 6%

Aging Minorities, however, have younger age structures than whites US Age Distribution, 2020 Male Whites Female Male Hispanics Female \ Source: U.S. Census Bureau Blacks API/AI Male Female Male Female

America s New Demographic Regions The New Sunbelt Migration growth states Melting Pot America The Heartland Diversity states Slow growth states

America s New Demographic Regions Source: William H. Frey New Sunbelt Melting Pot Heartland States

New Sunbelt New Sunbelt: Examples 15 15 10 12.2 8.6 10 10.0 8.1 5 1.9 5 1.6 0 0-5 -5-10 Colorado -10 Georgia -15-15 Immigration Domestic Migration Natural Increase Source: William H. Frey

Melting Pot Melting Pot: Examples 15 10 5 7.4 California 10.4 15 10 5 6.0 New York 5.3 0 0-5 -5-10 -7.2-10 -10.2-15 -15 Immigration Domestic Migration Natural Increase Source: William H. Frey

Heartland Heartland: Examples 15 Pennsylvania 10 5 0 0.9 2-5 -2.1-10 -15 Immigration Domestic Migration Natural Increase Source: William H. Frey

Hispanics are concentrated in Washington, California, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, Florida and isolated urban pockets Hispanic share of population by county, 2000 Below 12.5% 12.5% - 25.0% Above 25.0% Source: William H. Frey

Asians are concentrated in California and isolated urban pockets Asian share of population by county, 2000 Below 4.3% 4.3% - 10.0% Above 10.0% Source: William H. Frey

Blacks are concentrated in the South and industrial cities of the North African-American share of population by county, 2000 Below 12.6% 12.6% - 25.0% Above 25.0% Source: William H. Frey

Areas with high concentrations of whites are more common in the heartland White share of population by county, 2000 Below 69.1% 69.1% - 85.0% Above 85.0% Source: William H. Frey

Melting pot states include a large share of America s diversity Foreign Born 70% Asian Language at Home 68% Spanish at Home 76% Mixed Marriages 51% Native Born 37% English at Home 34% Source: William H. Frey

II What are the major trends affecting metropolitan areas? 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Cities are growing, but metros are still sprawling Cities and suburbs are becoming more diverse The economy continues to restructure The geography of work is changing The geography of poverty is changing

Large cities grew faster in the 1990s than they did in the 1980s and 1970s 50 largest cities, population 1970-2000 Source: U.S. Census Bureau 12% 10% 8% 6% 6.3% 9.8% 4% 2% 0% -1.6% -2% -4% 1970s 1980s 1990s Source: THE BROOKINGS Brookings calculations INSTITUTIONof U.S. Census Bureau data

Several large cities gained population during the 1990s after losing population in the 1980s Selected cities, population growth 1990-2000 20% 15% 1980s 1990s 18.6% Source: U.S. Census Bureau 10% 5% 5.7% 4.0% 6.5% 0% -5% -10% -5.1% -5.5% -7.3% -7.4% Atlanta Chicago Denver Memphis

Cities in growing metros grew, while those in slow growth metros generally declined City Category Number of Cities City Population Change MSA Population Change Rapid Growth (over 20%) 14 32% 25% Significant Growth (10 to 20%) 22 15% 22% Moderate Growth (2 to 10%) 36 7% 13% No Growth (-2 to 2%) 6 0% 11% Loss (below -2%) 20-7% 6%

Still, population is decentralizing in nearly every U.S. metropolitan area Selected cities and suburbs, population growth 1990-2000 50% 40% 44% 37% City Suburbs Source: U.S. Census Bureau 30% 22% 20% 16% 19% 18% 10% 6% 4% 7% 9% 0% Atlanta Chicago Denver Memphis Top 100

Suburbs Suburbs grew faster than cities in the 1990s Percent population growth, 100 largest cities and suburbs 1990-2000 Source: U.S. Census Bureau 20% 15% 17.0% 10% 8.8% 5% 0% Cities Suburbs

Suburbs Every household type grew at faster rates in the suburbs than in cities Population growth, 1990-2000 Source: William Frey. A Census 2000 Study of City and Suburb Household Change. Brookings, Forthcoming 35% 15% -5% All Households Married - no children Married - with children Other Family - no children Other Family - with Nonfamily Central City 8.6% -1.9% 5.5% 10.4% 19.0% 12.9% Suburbs 18.0% 10.3% 11.8% 20.1% 41.2% 26.9%

New Diversity Central City Growth in the 1990s was fueled by Asians and Hispanics Population growth, 100 largest cities 1990-2000 50% 40% 42.6% 38.3% Source: U.S. Census Bureau 30% 20% 10% 6.4% 0% -10% -20% -8.5% Hispanic Black Asian White

New Diversity If not for immigration, several of the nation s largest cities would not have grown during the 1990s Population growth with and without foreign-born, 1990-2000 Source: U.S. Census Bureau 20% 15% 10% 5% 18.1% 1.7% 9.4% Overall 4.6% Without immigration 4.0% 2.6% 0% -5% -1.4% -3.9% -1.7% -3.9% -10% Dallas New York Minneapolis- St. Paul Chicago Boston

New Diversity In aggregate, the racial makeup of the 100 largest cities has shifted. Share of population by race and ethnicity, 1990 Source: U.S. Census Bureau 17% 6% White 53% Black Hispanic 24% Other

New Diversity In 2000, the top hundred cities became majority minority Share of population by race and ethnicity, 2000 7% Source: U.S. Census Bureau 23% 44% White Black Hispanic Asian Multi-racial 24%

New Diversity The percent of each racial/ethnic group living in the suburbs increased substantially Share of population by race and ethnicity, 1990 Source: U.S. Census Bureau 60% 50% 40% 1990 2000 39% 33% 51% 55% 46% 50% 30% 20% 10% 0% Blacks Asians Hispanics

New Diversity In addition, every minority group grew at faster rates in the suburbs than in central cities 100% Population growth by race and ethnicity, 1990-2000 50% Source: U.S. Census Bureau 0% -50% Black White Hispanic Asian Central Cities 5.0% -9.3% 46.2% 37.3% Suburbs 36.1% 4.8% 71.9% 63.4%

New Diversity Now more than 1 in 4 suburban households are minority Minority share of population, 1990-2000 30% 27.0% Source: U.S. Census Bureau Percent of households 20% 10% 19.0% 0% 1990 2000

New Diversity In many metro areas, the locus of immigration is shifting from the central city to the suburbs Washington region, share foreign-born by census tract, 2000 Source: Singer, At Home in the Nation s Capital, June 2003 O N I 270 MONTGOMERY I 95 ARLINGTON ALEXAN DRIA DISTRICT OF CO LU M B IA O UDOUN Route 50 FAIRFAX I 495 Percent Foreign Born (by Census Tract) Less than 5% I 66 PRINCE GEORG 5% - 15% 16% - 25% UQUIER 26%- 35% Greater than 35% PRINCE W ILLIAM I 95 C A CHARLES

New Diversity Despite growing suburban diversity, racial separation persists In metros like Chicago Percent Black or African-American, 2000 Source: U.S. Census Bureau < 5% Kane County, IL tu 90 tu 355 Du Page County, IL tu 294 tu 290 tu 94 tu tu 41 90 Chicago Lake Michigan 5.01-10% 10.01-20% tu 55 Cook County, IL 20.01-30% > 30% Kendall County, IL Will County, IL tu 80

The nation s economy has shifted away from manufacturing and toward the service sector Share of Total Employment by sector, US, 1969-2000 Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% Service Manufacturing 15% 10% 5% 0% 1969 1971 1973 1975 1977 1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999

The result is a markedly different industrial composition Employment by sector, US, 1970-2000 Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis Manufacturing Services Retail Government 100% 75% 22% 19% 11% 32% FIRE 50% 15% 16% Wholesale Transportation/Utilities 25% Construction Agriculture/Mining 0% 1970 2000

The shift in the economy corresponds with an increased premium on educated workers which correlates with higher earnings Work-Life Earnings Doctoral degree $3.4 Estimates (millions), 1997-1999 Source: The Big Payoff: Educational Attainment and Estimates of Work- Life Earnings, US Census Professional degree Master's degree Bachelor's degree Associate's degree $1.6 $2.1 $2.5 $4.4 Some college $1.5 High school graduate $1.2 Not high school graduate $1.0

Educational attainment varies widely across cities Share of adults w/ bachelor s degree, 1990-2000 40% 30% 1990 2000 Source: U.S. Census Bureau 20% 10% 0% Minneapolis-St. Paul Atlanta Kansas City Newark

And there are significant disparities between race/ethnic groups Share of adults w/ bachelor s degree, 100% 88% 100 Largest Cities 1990-2000 80% 72% 75% Source: U.S. Census Bureau 60% 49% 40% 37% 39% 20% 10% 14% 0% Hispanic Black White Asian % Bachelor's % HS

Nationally, one-third of jobs are located outside a 10-mile radius of the central business district Share of jobs within 3-, 10-, and greater- than-10- mile radius of center, 1996 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 3-mile radius 10-mile radius Outside 10-mile radius 0% Nation

Employment decentralization In many metros, an exit ramp economy dominates office development. Share of metropolitan office space (SQ FT), 1999 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 66% In Central Business District In Edgeless Locations 57% 41% 35% 32% 30% 29% 24% 21% 13% 0% New York Washington Dallas Atlanta Miami

Employment decentralization But the level of employment decentralization varies widely across metropolitan areas. Share of metropolitan employment, 1999 70% 3-mile radius 10-mile radius Outside 10-mile radius 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% National Boston Dallas

In the Philadelphia region, job sprawl has been radical Private Sector Jobs, 2000 Source: U.S. Census Bureau Zip Code Business Patterns. = 50 jobs

Poverty rates in central cities have declined over the 1990s, while poverty rates in the suburbs have increased slightly Poverty rates for central cities and suburbs, 1990-2001 20% 15% 19% 17% 1990 2002 Source: Current Population Survey, 2002 10% 9% 9% 5% 0% Central City Suburbs

Overall, the number of people living in high poverty neighborhoods has declined during the 1990s Population of high-poverty neighborhoods by location, 1990-2000 Non Metropolitan Suburbs Source: Paul Jargowsky, Stunning Progress, Hidden Problems: The Dramatic Decline of Concentrated Poverty in the 1990s 2003 Central City Total US 2000 1990 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000 11,000 Population (in thousands)

During the 1990s, number of high-poverty tracts in Chicago dropped from 187 to 114, and there were 179,000 fewer people living in high poverty areas 1990 2000

Policy Agenda The New Competitive Cities Agenda 2 Build on Assets 3 Create Quality Neighborhoods 1 FIX THE BASICS 4 Build Family Wealth 5 Influence Metropolitan Growth

Policy Agenda Fix the Basics Good schools Safe streets Competitive taxes and services 21 st century infrastructure Functioning real estate market

Fix the Basics The Philadelphia Story In 1999, Philadelphia had 30,900 vacant residential lots The city had 36 abandoned structures per 1,000 residents compared to an average of 2.6 nationally 15 different public agencies were responsibility for vacant properties Insufficient resources for demolition, site preparation, and brownfield remediation compounded problem

Fix the Basics Philadelphia Neighborhood Transformation Initiative A $1.6 billion dollar 5 year program to remove blight from Philadelphia neighborhoods. Reform of the city's delivery systems. Build 16,000 new houses and demolish 14,000 buildings. Rehabilitate 2,500 properties. Creation of a Philadelphia Land Bank. Clearing of 31,000 vacant lots in the first year. Facilitation of neighborhood planning in a citywide context

Policy Agenda Build on Assets Fixed institutions (universities and hospitals) Employment clusters Downtown Historic Properties Waterfront Cultural institutions/parks

Build on Assets Colleges and universities represent billions of dollars for urban economies $160 $140 $120 $136 $100 Billion $80 $60 $40 $20 $38 $26 Source: ICIC and CEOs for Cities $0 Urban Core Urban Fringe Nonurban

Build on Assets Leveraging Local Universities: Virginia Commonwealth University VCU created the Virginia Bio-Technology research center 27,000 square feet of state of the art laboratories ideal for biotech start-ups in downtown Richmond Center has generated 26 new companies Incubator helps university attract top faculty. And in turn, helps those faculty turn ideas into viable businesses

Policy Agenda Create Quality Neighborhoods Neighborhood markets Mixed-income communities Home-ownership Opportunities Access to capital

Create Quality Neighborhoods Vaughn Public Housing (St. Louis)

Create Quality Neighborhoods George L. Vaughn Residences at Murphy Park (St. Louis) 402 units of economically integrated public housing: - 30% at market rate - 15% tax credits - 55% public housing $ 45 million - public housing funds - first mortgage funds - tax credits - corporate donations - private equity

Policy Agenda Build Family Wealth Access to quality jobs Income and work supports Access to financial institutions Asset building

Build Family Wealth The Earned Income Tax Credit Has Increased Substantially 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Number of Families (millions) Total Amount of Credit (billions) 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

Build Family Wealth Chicago EITC Outreach Campaign Outreach partnership between Mayor Daley s office, employers, business associations, and community groups Place information on EITC in bill inserts, paychecks, grocery store bags, McDonald s tray liners Chicago-based Center for Law and Human Services coordinates free tax preparation at 20 sites throughout city $16M in EITC claimed at free tax assistance centers in 2001 South Shore Bank helps EITC claimants without bank accounts to open savings accounts with their refunds

Policy Agenda Influence Metropolitan Growth Metropolitan governance Land-use reform Transportation reform Access to metropolitan opportunity Urban reinvestment

Influence Metropolitan Growth Governance Georgia Georgia Regional Transportation Authority (1999) Land-Use Ohio The Clean Ohio Fund (2000) Transportation Maryland Smart Growth-Neighborhood Conservation Act of 1997 Metro Access California Fair Share Affordable Housing Law Urban Reinvestment New Jersey The Rehabilitation Subcode of 1998

Influence Metropolitan Growth The New Metropolitics Older Suburb Central City Housing Schools Retail Newer Suburb Quality of Life Conservation Congestion Rural Area Farm Preservation

Policy Agenda The New Competitive Cities Agenda 2 Build on Assets 3 Create Quality Neighborhoods 1 FIX THE BASICS 4 Build Family Wealth 5 Influence Metropolitan Growth