How come capital cities grow faster than the suburbs here?June 20th, 2011 at 1:22 pm by Ted Nesi under Nesi's Notes
Did you know Providence is one of only three large cities in America that grew faster than its surrounding suburbs over the past decade? And Boston is another?
So reports The New York Times (emphasis mine):
[F]or all the buzzy talk of knowledge industry synergy and urban appeal, census figures show that UBS’s return [to New York City from Stamford, Conn.] would be bucking the demographic trends rather than reflecting them and that the suburbs, however unloved by tastemakers and academics, remain where the growth is. …
Joel Kotkin, a writer who specializes in demographic issues, says that the 2010 census figures show that during the past decade just 8.6 percent of the population growth in metropolitan areas with more than a million people took place in city cores. The rest took place in the suburbs, which are home to more than 6 in 10 Americans.
The 8.6 percent is even lower than in the 1990s when the figure was 15.1 percent. … Of the 51 metropolitan areas with more than 1 million residents, only three — Boston, Providence, and Oklahoma City — saw their core cities grow faster than their suburbs.
Interesting. What’s up with that?
(h/t: Doug Lane)