Growing Up in the City


Having kids is supposed to mean moving out to the suburbs. Even our TV shows tell us this: singles romp in Manhattan in “Friends” and “Sex and the City,” while families rule the burbs in “King of Queens” and “Simpsons.” (Sorry, I haven’t watched TV in about a decade, otherwise I’d offer more contemporary examples.) In the real world, parents usually offer the following reasons for trading in urban for suburban: better schools, public safety, and more room. Fair enough: it’s a free country, and I’m all for people making choices in their best interest and for the benefit of their children. However, before you put your suburban realtor on speed dial, let me offer the case for raising kids in the city. My perspective is admittedly narrowly focused on Philadelphia, but I’m guessing our situation is not too different from that of others.

To begin with, the alleged advantages of the suburbs may not be so stark. As for schools, there has been a proliferation of charter school options of late, and cities usually have the preponderance of good religious and private schools. We are unusually fortunate, in that we bought in at a low price into a catchment area for a very good public school, but if we had to pay for private schooling, we’d still be paying far less per year than if we moved to a nicer suburban neighborhood and had to pay a higher mortgage and property taxes. As for crime and space, I suppose that cities are more dangerous and it’s nice to have a front lawn; but higher-density areas also have their safety advantages, and substituting the park or playground down the street for your own yard has the nice perk of helping you know your neighbors (and cutting down on the cost and headache of maintenance).

Which speaks to one of the main advantages of living in a city: close proximity to lots of other people with whom you can have casual acquaintance. For example, I caught a Facebook status update earlier this month of the teenage son of one of my friends who, after the Phillies had won a crucial playoff game, reveled not only in the win but also in the ability to gather in the street with other Phillies fans; he even made a direct dig at his suburban friends, who would have no such opportunity to celebrate with others.

Whether it is spontaneous celebrations in the streets or other such gatherings, mingling with people different from you tends to be much easier in urban settings than in suburban settings, as well. Suburban communities, for example, tend to set zoning regulations in ways that homogenize neighborhoods, whereas urban communities can more easily consist of people of different means. Racial diversity seems easier to achieve, as well; for instance, my daughter’s pre-school class consists of six black kids, six white kids, and two Asian kids.

City life also means easy access to world-class institutions. Zoos, children’s museums, art galleries, farmer’s markets, science institutes, ballparks – you name it, and we can get to it with a short drive or easy subway ride. Some day in the near future, our kids will be able to get to these places on their own with their friends, rather than being beholden to somebody’s parent chauffeuring them around. One has to imagine that this kind of mobility and exposure is good for kids.

Again, city living isn’t for everyone. If I thought long enough, I could make just as many compelling cases for raising kids in the suburbs. What I do want to convey is that raising kids in the city shouldn’t be summarily dismissed as left to only those who have fewer choices; rather, there’s a lot to like about being a parent in an urban setting.

Comments

Eric Orozco said…
Thanks LH. We need more parents like you in the city. Figuring out that schooling stuff should be a top priority for bright city leaders like you.

At our Center City Vision Plan meeting last night in Charlotte, one of the presenters was a parent in the lowest performing school district in our state. Talk about a burden. He said that hearing talk about good downtown schools gave him "goosebumps". We've done way too much to cater our downtown development to 20-30 singles and DINKs, and we are ultimately undervaluing and undermining vibrant city life doing this. We need more children and elderly people hanging out in our squares and parks. We need more diverse businesses than the bars and clubs in downtown.

One inspiring district I observed was Portland's Pearl District, whose parks and services specifically cater to the presence of children.
Avril said…
I agree with you 100%! I wish more people would at least be open to raising a city in the family. I don't have any kids but growing up we used to live in an urban area and then when I went to Jr. high my family moved to the burbs and it was the WORST!! I never grew into it, I hated it for as long as I could remember. I had to be driven everywhere, whereas in my old neighborhood me and my friends could walk to lots of cool places. Living in the city also exposed me to different people and it also helped me be a little more independent and street-savvy. If I ever do have kids, I'd love to raise them in the city.
LH said…
Avril, thanks for sharing. Yeah, walking to stuff with friends would seem to not only make for happier kids but also safer and more well-adjusted ones.
LH said…
Eric, thanks for sharing. It's a natural evolution for up-and-coming cities: once places have successfully attracted the young singles, the challenge is to figure out the value proposition for keeping them once they get married and have kids. Easier said than done, and school choice is not a panacea, but I have to think that allowing for some innovation in the delivery of educational services has to be a good thing.

Popular Posts