Why is Louisville more "family friendly?"

[Brain Drain]

Boulder does have a lot to offer people who are raising families. Some might conclude that Louisville and Superior are more family friendly because there is a greater percentage of people there who are raising families compared to Boulder.

I remember looking looking at statistics for public primary and secondary school enrollment in Boulder city from the 60s onward. One startling fact is that Boulder public schools had about twice as many students in around 1970 then they do today (and with larger overall population today as well). This is primarily due, in my opinion, to the high expense of raising a child in Boulder -- specifically the high price of homes here. There seems to be a Boulder "premium" once you get into town. Babysitters charge more. So do dentists, veterinarians, hair stylists, day camps, trash pickup, pool admission, and many other things. This is a decidedly unscientific observation, but I genuinely feel that almost everything is more expensive here. Maybe others could chime in whether or not they feel the same. Boulder has a high number of DINKs, recent grads and retirees as well, which all tend to keep the children levels down.

Some may not want to raise children around some of the more unsavory elements found on the Pearl Street Mall or by the Creek, although you should realize that many families rarely visit these places, but it may be harder for some families to frequent the downtown library with its often liberal population of vagrants. We have an accepting general population here along with a wonderful homeless shelter north of town, but it does contribute to a presence felt downtown that some with families do not care for. Others families may not care about this at all and say live and let live.

Great things about Boulder for kids: a wide choice of some of the best schools in the state, generally safe (although more petty crime than in Louisville and Superior -- our cars got broken into a couple of weeks ago in a rare occurence) , lots of recreational opportunities with the outdoors and well-equipped indoor centers, good choice of restaurants, more economic diversity (from rather poor to very rich compared to solidly upper middle class for Superior and Louisville) and easy to get around town by bike and bus.

Tough things: lousy housing value and bad natural housing stock with most of the homes constructed in the 60s and 70s, less community feel because people are mostly pursuing their own interests (trail running, mountain biking, yoga, pilates, etc.), and for those who are religious, Boulder has a very low, San Francisco-type level of religious participation.

[5thIndian]

I remember looking looking at statistics for public primary and secondary school enrollment in Boulder city from the 60s onward. One startling fact is that Boulder public schools had about twice as many students in around 1970 then they do today (and with larger overall population today as well). This is primarily due, in my opinion, to the high expense of raising a child in Boulder -- specifically the high price of homes here.

Baby Boom is prob the reason for this and larger families back then.

[Katiana]

Originally Posted by alvanos

Also, what is the older part of Louisville called?
Old Louisville.
Does Louisville old neighborhoods like downtown boulder?
Just old Louisville. Louisville was pretty much the same size for years, till the 1970s, when Boulder started putting up all sorts of building restrictions, so people had to move out of town if they wanted to buy a house.
I grew up in Evanston, a VERY old suburb of Chicago, and have an affection for old homes ... never cared much for the newly built neighborhoods with the cookie-cutter homes.


Tx!

You're welcome! As to why Louisville is more family-friendly, I think Boulder's building restrictions kept many young adults from moving there from the late 70s on, that is why there aren't as many kids there any more.