Swathes of development outside central cities have grown to the point where now almost two out of every three U.S. metropolitan residents live in suburbs. What has evolved from this increasing development is a complex array of suburban areas. This diversity among suburbs has been explored most recently in various suburban typologies. Recognition of suburban heterogeneity has emerged in a number of important studies beginning in the 1960s and in 1970s. The identification of working class suburbs and the rise of black suburbanization contributed to the sense that the suburbs were not merely comprised of the white,middle class families. These early studies emphasized racial differences ,ethnic variety and class distinctions. More recent studies have continued in this vein as suburbs have witnessed more pronounced out-migration of middle class blacks from central cities,the development of “ethnoburbs”as a result of large scale immigration and the emergence of new pockets of suburban distress. Some examinations of suburban distress or crisis suggest reasons why this crisis itself occurs. The primary theoretical interpretations of why some suburbs collapsed over others can be categorized into the following two topics areas : a) dynamics of neighborhood change and b) labor market restructuring . In the past fifty years ,the United States economy has witnessed a shift away from traditional manufacturing to highly specialized service and information-producing industries.This has resulted in the crisis of many long-established, industrial areas, particularly in the Northeast and Midwest of the United States. Population and economic growth has dispersed from these older regions to newer, growth areas in the South and West of the country. Just as industrialization encouraged the growth of suburbs, deindustrialization has surely contributed to suburban crisis. These areas suffered from the loss of stable jobs and, as a result, a loss of income.