Census Report / UPD 260

Abigail Newsham

*Please excuse the poor graphics… WordPress is not playing nice.

Kansas City’s Prospect corridor has had significant changes in demographics since the 1950s. Since the 1950s, the United States has undergone a series of housing policies and initiatives, aiding in the displacement of city residents (primarily lower-class and minorities), increased incentives for sprawled development, and the changing make-up of residents in the inner-city neighborhoods. This report will cover population, gender, race, age, income, and housing data changes for the years 1950, 2000, and 2010 for census tracts 61, 62, and 63. These tracts are located along Prospect Avenue between 46^th Street and Swope Parkway. It is important to note that census tract 62 does not apply to the years 2000 and 2010, as census boundaries have changes since 1950. Tract 62 is, however, included in the report for 1950 data. To analyze the data concisely, totals have been provided for all years.

Table 1. Population Data  over Time

Unsurprisingly, population counts and densities for the areas along Prospect between 46^th Street and Swope Parkway was highest in 1950. In 2000, 50 years later, total population counts dropped by more than sixty percent. Population densities have also dropped significantly since the 1950s. These changes may be partially attributed to post-1950s FHA-backed mortgages which aided in new, sprawling housing development in the United States. From 2000 to 2010, population counts and densities appear to be continuously decreasing in this area.

 

Table 2. Gender changes over time

The composition of male and female residents has remained somewhat steady since the 1950s, with historically higher proportion of females. The proportion of females has risen slightly since the 1950s.

Table 3. Race/Ethnicity changes over time

 

The data showing changes in ethnic populations is not as transparent. Practices for collecting racial data for residents has changed since the 1950s, as the 1950s census only collected data for populations identified as “Black”, “White”, and “other”, whereas “other” can be American Indian, Asian, Hispanic, etc. Despite these incongruences, there are not very high proportions of populations identified as any other race but White and Black for the years 2000 and 2010. In the 1950s, this area was almost one-hundred percent white. By the year 2000, less than three percent of the population in this area was White, and almost ninety-five percent was Black. In 2000, there was almost two percent of the population identified as “more than one race”. Census tract 63 has a pattern of being more diverse than the other tracts (“diverse”, being used as loosely as possible), as it held the highest proportion of Black residents in the 1950s, and the highest proportion of White residents in 2000 and 2010. By 2010, the residents in these census tracts are almost completely Black, and there are low proportions of those identifying as two-or-more-races, White, Asian, or “some other race alone”.

Table 4. Age Proportions

In the 1950s, the proportion of age cohorts were relatively higher for people under 64 years of age. The proportions are relatively stable, ranging from around five to eight percent. No cohorts make up more than nine percent of the population. In 2000, there is a shift in age proportionality. There is a lower proportion of populations over 55 years of age, and populations 25-55 years of age make up more than thirty percent of the population.  Since the 1950s, population ages tend to be concentrated within cohorts between 18 to 55 years.

Table 5. Income over time

The dollar amounts for income data has been adjusted to the 2010 value. When adjusted to inflation, the data shows that median household income has decreased in the study area since 1950. Census tract 61 has contained historically higher median household incomes since the 1950s. The most significant change in income is shown in tract 63 between the 1950s and 2000s. This dramatic change may be caused by the changing geographic boundaries for which census data is collected. Tract 62 had very low relative incomes in the 1950s, and the change in census boundaries may have lowered the median income values for the year 2000 and 2010.

In 1950, it was less common for the residents in the study area to have educational attainment greater than high school. Most people had “at least some high school”, according to the census data. Only six percent of the population had 4 years of college.

In 2000, less than thirty percent had an educational attainment that did not include the completion of high school. While the proportion of (assumed) high school graduates remains consistently in the mid-thirty percentile, the proportions of residents having at least some college has risen by five percent.

Educational attainment data has not changed much since the 1950s. In 2010, the percentage of high school graduates (only) were in the high thirties, while proportions for people having completed some college remain mostly consistent.

Table 6. Educational Attainment

 

Table 7. Housing Data

 

There was almost no housing vacancy in the study area in 1950. Tract 61 had the highest rate of owner-occupied housing units, at seventy-two percent. Tract 63 showed an almost equal proportion of renter versus owner occupation, and tract 62 was only thirty-percent owner-occupied. Overall, there was a range of housing needs met in this area, possibly reflecting residents’ differing ability and interest in owning a home. This neighborhood catered to both needs. Additionally, vacancy was at its lowest.

By the year 2000, tract 61’s owner-occupancy did not change significantly. Tract 63 does have a significant drop in owner-occupation, containing data which was formally in tract 62, possibly lowering the average value. The proportions of owner versus renter occupancy for the area as a whole, in 2000 and 2010, are about 50/50. However, in 2000, vacancy in this area increased to about twelve-percent since 1950. By 2010, vacancy overall is almost thirty-percent.

 

Table 8. Housing Value

In the 1950s, tract 61 had the highest housing value. However, when values are adjusted to inflation, there is not a significant decrease in housing value shown in the data. The year 2000 appears to be a low-point for housing prices.

 

 

Citations

United States Census Bureau. (2000). MEDIAN VALUE (DOLLARS) FOR SPECIFIED OWNER-OCCUPIED HOUSING UNITS. (Census 2000 Summary File for Tracts: 61, 62, and 63). Retrieved from American Fact Finder. November 2016.

United States Census Bureau. (2010). 2005-2009 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates: Financial Characteristics for Housing Units with a Mortgage. (Census 2000 Summary File for Tracts: 61, 62, and 63). Retrieved from American Fact Finder. November 2016.

U.S. Census Bureau. (2000). ACS 2000/Comprehensive Report. (Census Tracts 61, 62, and 63). Prepared by Social Explorer. November 2016.

U.S. Census Bureau. (2010). ACS 2010/Comprehensive Report. (Census Tracts 61, 62, and 63). Prepared by Social Explorer. November 2016.

U.S. Census Bureau. (1950). Census 1950/Comprehensive Report. (Census Tracts 61, 62, and 63). Prepared by Social Explorer. November 2016.

U.S. Census Bureau. (2000). Census 2000/Comprehensive Report. (Census Tracts 61, 62, and 63). Prepared by Social Explorer. November 2016.

U.S. Census Bureau. (2010). Census 2010/Comprehensive Report. (Census Tracts 61, 62, and 63). Prepared by Social Explorer. November 2016.

U.S. Department of Commerce. (1950). 1950 United States Census of Housing. (Vol V, Part 91. Census Tracts: 61, 62, 63). Kansas City, MO Block Statistics. November 2016.

 

 

 

 

 

 

INTRODUCTION
Prospect Avenue is a major arterial road in Kansas City, Missouri, most known for the
devastated condition of its adjacent neighborhoods. The corridor runs north to south from about 12th Street to 75th Street. The development of adjacent neighborhoods largely began at Kansas City’s core, and graduated southward. This project intends to use maps and photographs to analyze the bordering Prospect blocks between E 46th Street and Swope Parkway in order to draw conclusions about historical development along the corridor.

 

 

Many of these blocks contain architecture that is emblematic of the Kansas City region. Since Kansas City’s development timeline generally runs north to south, there is a gradient in housing typology. The single-family homes in the study area are quite similar to much of the residential architecture in Kansas City’s midtown region. The figures above illustrate a home that is located on the corner of Prospect and Emanuel Cleaver Boulevard that existed in 1940, during which the Kansas City’s Tax Assessment photographs were taken. Many of the homes along the prospect corridor are historic and are expressive of the 20th century, as many residencies are in the prairie (above), bungalow, or foursquare architectural style.

Figure Ground Study

Unsurprisingly, the lots along this region of Prospect Avenue has increased in vacancy. The residential blocks along the corridor have suffered from disinvestment and mass-demolitions, and these blocks are expressive of that. However, the lots along Swope Parkway have established reverse patterns, as the block has become denser over time. This may be due to commercial and institutional land-use patterns along Swope, as well as higherdemands for property owners to be located on Brush Creek, located in-between Swope and Emanuel Cleaver II.

The east-side of Wabash Avenue shows a difference in density patterns. By referencing the figure-ground diagrams, we can see that the buildings on the southern part of Wabash have not been constructed yet. The homes along the north-part of Wabash Avenue have existed since the 1940s and are demonstrative in their architectural style. However, on the same street, we can see that newer development patterns are not only less dense, but contrast with the historic character of the neighborhood. It is a speculation that this type of development pattern may appear often along the corridor, as infill efforts in the blighted neighborhoods are financially challenged when constructing new homes.

 

Time Periods
First Record of Development (1917)

Volume 6 of the 1917 Sanborn collection
shows first signs of development on the
featured blocks. During this time, most of
the residential development was
happening along the adjacent streets,
rather than directly on Prospect. The
building footprints along Prospect show
some residential homes, but most of the
buildings are industrial land-uses centered
on intersections. The development near
Brush Creek (to the south) is very
limited, possibly due to flood hazards.
This era is characteristic of the early 1900s
during post-street car build-outs, but
pre-mail-order age.

1925 Atlas

By 1925, residencial density along
Prospect has increased. The the adjacent
blocks in this area seem to increase as well.
Although this era may be the peak of
residencial density in the zone, many of
the blocks that border Brush Creek
continue to go unused. The Country Club
Plaza opened two years prior to 1925 and
Brush Creek today acts as a major
predestrian connection to the district.
However, at this time, the creek was
unpaved and parcels along the Brush
Creek near Prospect probably faced the
threat of flood.
Figure 5. Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps. (1917).
Figure

 

Mid Century (1950s)

By mid-century, many of the lots adjacent to
Prospect Avenue began to fill up. Residential lots along Montgall, east of Prospect, are dense, while the western block of Wabash sees little growth. This is contrary to present-day trends, where development interests tend to shift
westward. These patterns may be explained by flooding hazards along the creek.
However, there is evidence from the Jackson County 1940s Tax Assessment photos that there was institutional development trends along the south-side of Brush Creek, just south of the study-area. This development may have been motivated by the recent paving of Brush Creek, which occured during the 1930s. Mary’s
Catholic Church (figure), which no longer
exists, was located at 2322 Swope Parkway during the 1940s.

 

Present Day (2016)

Today, the stretch on Prospect Avenue
between 46th and Swope contains some of the only vibrant green spaces on the corridor. The trails along Brush Creek provides apedestrian connection to the West-side of town, and can be seen as a landmark on the corridor. However, the creek may indicate an edge that partners with 71-Highway individing the corridor. The neighborhoods north of the creek are dense and highly residential on both sides of the corridor. Looking south, 71-Highway abruptly crosses Prospect and runs along it, dividing the neighborhoods.The study area between 46th and Swope is not highly representative of the Prospect corridor. Emanuel Cleaver II Blvd and Swope Parkway are two major arterial roads that act as east-west connectors and run along Brush Creek, a staple of Kansas City. The east-west roads that run along Brush Creek seem to get more attention from the city in an attempt to preserve scenic views.However, many of the lots in this area remain vacant, or not taken care of well. There is also a small commercial strip that containsbuildings whose structural integrity seems to have been neglected.