People staying in the city to raise kids (highway, population, major)

[nighttrain55]

Originally Posted by Katiana

^^This is so true. You cannot imagine how true until you have kids of your own. You like to go to restaurants where other people take kids, too, so you won't have a room full of hipsters staring at you b/c little Suzy cries when she spills her milk. You also like places with kid's menus, and crayons. Your social activities revolve around the kids' activities, such as soccer or gymnastics or whatever. Little kids don't really give a rip about going to the Denver Art Museum, or the symphony, or the center for the performing arts. If you do those things, you have to hire a babysitter.

In re: schools, not to go too off-topic, a school system won't change overnight. It might take 5 years or so. Who wants to take that chance with their kids? Who wants to go first? I've never been one to obsess about schools, the way some do on some of the city forums, and I don't think there's ever one "best" school in a city or even metro area, but I do (did) want my kids in a decent system that isn't riddled with problems.

It happened to me. Once I had my son, i looked around and said its time to go. Me and my wife used to go into center city constantly, but since my wife became pregnant, I can count on one hand how many times I've been in center city to have fun. I cant imagine taking a chance on my kid's education. I moved to a suburb that I knew had a great public school, and was very kid friendly.

[nei]

Originally Posted by ogre

I'm not sure who on this thread, or among the regulars at this forum, is in the young, single, sowing wild oats time of life, but this point Katiana makes is something that many young single city dwellers may not understand until they start having children. Children change everything. I mean everything, including people's outlooks on basically all areas of life. Most parents will one way or another put the well-being of their children ahead of everything else. While some may genuinely believe that the chance to explore the amenities of a city neighborhood balances well against the question of school quality, or the issue of safety, many, many parents will want their kids in good schools, and playing in relatively safe neighborhoods. That's just how it is. Kids change everything. I've even occasionally encountered this observation at the state/local forums, as in a member looking for the right suburb says something like "I never thought I'd leave the city, but I want my kids in good schools," or something of the sort.

Funny thing, also, is that the plethora of urban amenities right outside the door often is not such an attraction anymore to parents, if for no other reason than the fact that their kids keep them too busy to have time for those activities. You might enjoy your daily leisurely visit to the neighborhood coffee shop, languidly sipping that cup-o'-jo as you converse with other regulars, in your younger days, but once the kids come along most parents feel lucky if they can squeeze in a single visit to a restaurant every couple of weeks or so. And, while they still enjoy a nice one-of-a-kind gourmet dining experience from time to time, in the rush most parents are in, even one of those chain restaurants city folks so love to disparage will do in a pinch, and will be enjoyed for the little bit of a break and chance to relax that any restaurant offers.

Kids change everything.

I think a high proportion of regular posters are on the younger side, or at least childless adults. While I agree (or assume you're right, as I don't have any direct experience) that kids change everything, many who do live in cities but grew up in the suburbs think they will moving back in the suburbs when they have kids. The sample on this forum is a bit more drawn out between hard-core urbanists and suburbanists. There are plenty of people that don't care as much, and will go with whatever is convenient or prefer one or the other but don't have a mantra "city or burbs are better". I know some people my age for whom living in the suburbs is off the radar: job is in the city, friends and activities are in the city, see little interest in the suburbs. But then, the same say they would choose to raise to suburbs. "I wouldn't want my kid to go on the subway when he's young", want a lawn, etc.

I've met a few people my age whose parents moved from the suburbs into the city. Two I can think of right now. One went to a magnet public high school, the other didn't. The high school of the one that didn't was rated a bit below public the average suburban high school but was comparable to some suburban high schools considered decent. And if you control for demographics (city school had some people from poor backgrounds) the quality might have been better than on paper. He was proud his high school was diverse, but when I met his friends they were all white and wouldn't have been out of place in a suburban high school. Either way, they both seemed very happy to have grown up where they did. Parents who really care about living in the city often can find a way for the city to work for their family (like HenryAlan earlier). If they can't, they can always give up and move! It's a less than ideal situation for people to live a place they prefer only because of the quality of public schools.

But I think some parents overrate the suburbs for kids. Walkable place, at least safe ones are good for kids, too. It's irritating as a kid, especially an older kid to have to be chauffeured to a movie theater, public library, school, other friend's houses and even a public park. Yes, some suburbs are walkable, but that doesn't mean all are. Many places touted as "family-friendly" aren't friendly for kids to walk around (or even unsafe for pedestrians). As Ogre said:

Originally Posted by ogre

I agree with the ideas people have expressed here about the reasons many people move to the suburbs, at least when they get past the young single stage, but I also think you make a good point here with the example of your own children. "Walkable" sometimes loses out in the balance people strike between the various features they prefer in the places they live, but many people like "walkable" when they can have it without sacrificing other important features. And you don't have to be an adult to appreciate "walkable." When I was a kid, even my grandparents' non-suburban small town, with a drugstore that still had a soda fountain, a magazine shop where I'd browse through the shelves, an old downtown movie theater, the library at the edge of downtown, and a little ballpark where we'd go watch American Legion games and the like, and little else to interest a child, held great appeal to me simply because my grandparents lived so close to downtown that I could walk to all these attractions.

Originally Posted by Katiana

^^This is so true. You cannot imagine how true until you have kids of your own. You like to go to restaurants where other people take kids, too, so you won't have a room full of hipsters staring at you b/c little Suzy cries when she spills her milk. You also like places with kid's menus, and crayons. Your social activities revolve around the kids' activities, such as soccer or gymnastics or whatever. Little kids don't really give a rip about going to the Denver Art Museum, or the symphony, or the center for the performing arts. If you do those things, you have to hire a babysitter

If a city neighborhood can attract lots of kids, then the culture mismatch you describe won't happen as much.

Also seems like some places that are considered family-friendly and attract lots of families with kids are unattractive for childless adults; places have started to segregate themselves based on family status. I wonder if this has increased in the last few decades?

[BajanYankee]

Originally Posted by Katiana

And middle class and affluent parents will never sacrifice their own children's education so the public schools can be improved.

Very true.

Originally Posted by ogre

Funny thing, also, is that the plethora of urban amenities right outside the door often is not such an attraction anymore to parents, if for no other reason than the fact that their kids keep them too busy to have time for those activities.

Spot on. I think many people get caught up in the moment too easily. They never account for the possibility that their thinking might in fact change. I've known plenty of people who have made all sorts of protestations over leaving the city only to receive a family Christmas card in the mail with a return address of Columbia, Maryland a year later. Once you have kids, as you stated, you pretty much have your hands full, and the last thing on your mind will be the number of farmer's markets and organic coffee shops within walking distance.

[BajanYankee]

Originally Posted by nei

The sample on this forum is a bit more drawn out between hard-core urbanists and suburbanists.

Actually, I'd put the ratio at about 95% urbanist and 5% suburbanist. This site is called City-Data after all.

I see at least 20 posts on this site daily that read like this: "I can walk to 14 coffee shops, 2 cleaners, 6 pizza parlors, and 9 yoga shops from my apartment"

I rarely read any posts like this: "I enjoy the tranquility of the suburbs. I have a Wal-Mart, a Hardee's and a Golden Corral all within a two minute drive of my apartment complex"

Originally Posted by nei

Parents who really care about living in the city often can find a way for the city to work for their family (like HenryAlan earlier).

I would say more often than not they can't.

Originally Posted by nei

If a city neighborhood can attract lots of kids, then the culture mismatch you describe won't happen as much.

How does a city neighborhood do that?

Originally Posted by nei

Also seems like some places that are considered family-friendly and attract lots of families with kids are unattractive for childless adults; places have started to segregate themselves based on family status. I wonder if this has increased in the last few decades?

I don't think so. I think it's pretty much always been this way. The division now is sharper, imo, because there are so many Generation Y'ers equipped with six figure incomes and fancy degrees who are postponing marriage and a family to enjoy $4 cupcakes, exotic restaurants, and yoga classes well into their 30s. In our parents and grandparents' day, they would have been changing diapers and mowing lawns by now. You didn't have a whole generation of adults running the streets searching for "vibrancy" and "amenities" back then.

Or as my mom says, we're just a "bunch of big kids who refuse to grow up."

[HenryAlan]

Originally Posted by nei

But I think some parents overrate the suburbs for kids. Walkable place, at least safe ones are good for kids, too. It's irritating as a kid, especially an older kid to have to be chauffeured to a movie theater, public library, school, other friend's houses and even a public park. Yes, some suburbs are walkable, but that doesn't mean all are. Many places touted as "family-friendly" aren't friendly for kids to walk around (or even unsafe for pedestrians).

This is exactly it. My wife and I grew up in suburbs -- her in a tony, leafy, upper middle class location with the "very best" schools, me in a more mixed to working class urban but of the sprawling (ie boring) variety. We both felt that these environments were terrible for us as kids and would not put our own children in such a crushingly boring and sterile and car dependent lifestyle. There is more to raising a well rounded, thoughtful individual than just the school s/he attends. The "very best" school in an otherwise problematic environment would do harm in my opinion. As it has developed, the schools in Boston are very good anyway. They still have art and physical education and music programs, there is individualized academic plans, and an advanced work option -- my daughter's 5th grade class recently put on Hamlet. I know the choices we make are not universally correct. But I do think people should consider all options, and take a good look at the public school system in their city before opting out for the suburbs.

If a city neighborhood can attract lots of kids, then the culture mismatch you describe won't happen as much.

Exactly! My neighborhood has far more kids living nearby than the one in which I grew up. And there are lots of community activities geared specifically for families.

[nighttrain55]

Originally Posted by nei

I think a high proportion of regular posters are on the younger side, or at least childless adults. While I agree (or assume you're right, as I don't have any direct experience) that kids change everything, many who do live in cities but grew up in the suburbs think they will moving back in the suburbs when they have kids. The sample on this forum is a bit more drawn out between hard-core urbanists and suburbanists. There are plenty of people that don't care as much, and will go with whatever is convenient or prefer one or the other but don't have a mantra "city or burbs are better". I know some people my age for whom living in the suburbs is off the radar: job is in the city, friends and activities are in the city, see little interest in the suburbs. But then, the same say they would choose to raise to suburbs. "I wouldn't want my kid to go on the subway when he's young", want a lawn, etc.

I've met a few people my age whose parents moved from the suburbs into the city. Two I can think of right now. One went to a magnet public high school, the other didn't. The high school of the one that didn't was rated a bit below public the average suburban high school but was comparable to some suburban high schools considered decent. And if you control for demographics (city school had some people from poor backgrounds) the quality might have been better than on paper. He was proud his high school was diverse, but when I met his friends they were all white and wouldn't have been out of place in a suburban high school. Either way, they both seemed very happy to have grown up where they did. Parents who really care about living in the city often can find a way for the city to work for their family (like HenryAlan earlier). If they can't, they can always give up and move! It's a less than ideal situation for people to live a place they prefer only because of the quality of public schools.

But I think some parents overrate the suburbs for kids. Walkable place, at least safe ones are good for kids, too. It's irritating as a kid, especially an older kid to have to be chauffeured to a movie theater, public library, school, other friend's houses and even a public park. Yes, some suburbs are walkable, but that doesn't mean all are. Many places touted as "family-friendly" aren't friendly for kids to walk around (or even unsafe for pedestrians). As Ogre said:







If a city neighborhood can attract lots of kids, then the culture mismatch you describe won't happen as much.

Also seems like some places that are considered family-friendly and attract lots of families with kids are unattractive for childless adults; places have started to segregate themselves based on family status. I wonder if this has increased in the last few decades?

how would you say its overrated? If the suburb offers a safe enviroment and better public schools, I think that suburb is pretty worth it.

[nei]

Originally Posted by BajanYankee

How does a city neighborhood do that?

See: Park Slope, and various "stroller mom" jokes. The downside it's now too pricey for most to raise a family. One of the two people I mentioned earlier whose parents moved into the city before having kids (and didn't go to a magnet school) and stayed grew up in Park Slope pre-gentrification (at least at the very beginning). His parents bought a brownstone in the 80s. They probably can't afford to buy in the same neighborhood anymore, but by net worth from owning a home they're millionaires, maybe multimillionaires. But part of the reason Park Slope is expensive is it's one of the few neighborhoods with good public schools. And also, rich white people will pay extra to live next to other rich white people.

I don't think so. I think it's pretty much always been this way. The division now is sharper, imo, because there are so many Generation Y'ers equipped with six figure incomes and fancy degrees who are postponing marriage and a family to enjoy $4 cupcakes, exotic restaurants, and yoga classes well into their 30s. In our parents and grandparents' day, they would have been changing diapers and mowing lawns by now. You didn't have a whole generation of adults running the streets searching for "vibrancy" and "amenities" back then.

Or as my mom says, we're just a "bunch of big kids who refuse to grow up."

My interest in cities is partially a dislike of unwalkable, auto centric development then a desperate search for vibrancy and amenities, though I do like the last two. See this post for what I mean. I also don't think this is so great:

Originally Posted by nei

But I think some parents overrate the suburbs for kids. Walkable place, at least safe ones are good for kids, too. It's irritating as a kid, especially an older kid to have to be chauffeured to a movie theater, public library, school, other friend's houses and even a public park. Yes, some suburbs are walkable, but that doesn't mean all are. Many places touted as "family-friendly" aren't friendly for kids to walk around (or even unsafe for pedestrians).

Makes sense that the difference is more from singles being childless for longer, though I've met many more people my parent's age who grew up in the city and graduated from (then better) city schools. But the middle class left due to a crime wave and a desire for new houses with lawns. But what made having lawns become a must for a family? For example, this does not seem to be true in France according to this French poster:

Originally Posted by Rozenn

It's roughly the same pattern as the one you describe here, though a lot of families will stay in the city or inner suburbs because of the more accessible cultural and leisure activities and have no interest whatsoever in moving to the outer suburbs. It also depends on the city. In Paris, land is expensive compared to a city like Toulouse, which is much more "suburban".
As for the yard thing, most people are fine if they have a nearby park. Some absolutely want a little garden of their own to invite friends for a BBQ or watch their kids play without worrying about their security, but overall people seem to need less space than Americans to be happy. And that's fine, because there is less.

What explains this difference in cultural preference?

[BajanYankee]

I think a lot of people say they want to raise families in the city because it would be fun for them. They would still be able to walk to coffee shops, they would still be able to go to the theater, they would still be able to eat at their favorite Thai restaurant once a week. And not only that, their kids will be able to enjoy all of the same "amenities" they currently enjoy as single people.

[nei]

Originally Posted by nighttrain55

how would you say its overrated? If the suburb offers a safe enviroment and better public schools, I think that suburb is pretty worth it.

I'm not saying your choice is wrong nor wrong for most parents, just that there are downsides that parents sometimes ignore, as I described. And I grew up in the suburbs, and I assume you didn't.

[nei]

Originally Posted by BajanYankee

I think a lot of people say they want to raise families in the city because it would be fun for them. They would still be able to walk to coffee shops, they would still be able to go to the theater, they would still be able to eat at their favorite Thai restaurant once a week. And not only that, their kids will be able to enjoy all of the same "amenities" they currently enjoy as single people.

I don't think so. For parents who grew up in the suburbs and moved, I think it's more they didn't care for growing up in the suburbs as kids, and would rather have their kids grow up elsewhere (HenryAlan, for example).

Some people I know who grew up in the city would prefer to stay there and raise kids there. The city feels normal and like home for them, they liked growing up in the city and would like the same for their kids.