Inherent Attractiveness of Place:
Urban Core and First Suburbs
As a region develops, its new areas tend to attract higher income residents. However, inherently attractive regions also have strong cores and thriving first suburbs.
Median Household Incomes
The relative strength of core and first suburb areas in a metro can be measured by comparing median incomes of their residents to those in the developing suburbs. Although a significant disparity exists, real growth in median incomes in both the region's core and first suburbs has occurred in recent years.
Urban Core and First Suburbs Median Household Income
as a Percent of Developing Suburbs, 2000
View
data in .xls format
Rate the KC region | Comment on this indicator
Compared to its peers, the disparity in incomes between developing suburbs and urban cores is highest in the Kansas City region, and the disparity with respect to first suburbs is second highest.
This disparity not only shows that the region's core and first suburbs are generally less healthy than in other regions — it may also indicate a negative impact on the fortunes of developing suburbs. Research suggests (Ledebur and Barnes, 1992) that metropolitan areas with less disparity between the core and developing suburbs experience stronger overall employment growth.
Regional Income Disparities
Real Median Income by Census Tract, 2000
Difference from Metro Median
Rate the KC region | Comment on this indicator
The income disparity between urban core and developing suburbs is apparent when examined at the census tract level. On the map above, tracts with red circles have incomes below the metro median, while those with blue circles have income above the median. The bigger the circle, the greater the deviation.
Change in Real Median Household Income by Area Type, 1990-2000
View data in .xls format
Rate the KC region | Comment on this indicator
Most of the region’s high income households are concentrated near the edge of its urbanized area, while most of its poorer households are concentrated in the center. While some older suburbs or parts of the city's core retain significant strength — mostly in northeast Johnson County and in the Country Club/Brookside area of Kansas City, Mo. — many first suburbs are also poorer than average.
Developing suburbs are also hurt by geographic income disparities. In the 1990s, regions with the biggest income disparities between neighborhoods generally saw the lowest real growth in median incomes, even in their developing suburbs. The exception is St. Louis, which had relatively low disparities but still performed poorly on this measure.
Change in Real Median Income, 1990-2000
Rate the KC region | Comment on this indicator
Compared to its peers, incomes in the Kansas City area's developing suburbs and first suburbs grew at a slower rate than all but two other cities, Indianapolis and St. Louis, while incomes in the urban core grew less that all but St. Louis.
Real median incomes in metropolitan Kansas City's urban core and first suburbs grew only about 40 percent and 12 percent as fast, respectively, as incomes in our developing suburbs.
While real median incomes in the urban core and first suburbs grew more slowly than in developing suburbs, emphasizing geographic disparities, it is significant that median incomes did grow, especially in the region's urban core. In decades past, most parts of the core saw a decline in real median incomes. While the picture is still mixed, there are now more ups than downs.
Previous: Mobility | Next: Section
Summary and Implications
"Inherent Attractiveness of Place" main page | Indicators
main page
*Ledebur, Larry C. and Barnes, William R., City Distress, Metropolitan Disparities and Economic Growth, National League of Cities, Sept. 1992