Raising a family in the city??? (Chicago, Naperville: condos, crime, daycares)

[Lookout Kid]

Originally Posted by chet everett

Anyhow, the schedule that the guy with the 5 year old laid out was not encouraging. Lots of driving, lots of schedule conflicts. Way too few volunteers. Way more challenging than anything that people in the 'burbs are dealing with. Far more suburban parents seem to have both a less convoluted schedule and more other people to count on. The people with older kids brought up the City worker factor, some that I really did not think about.

I completely disagree with this. My suburban sister-in-law is constantly driving incredible distances to keep up with her nine-year-old's schedule. She is 100% in a suburban sprawl type of suburb, and the driving is a difficult time drain that can be avoided in more compact neighborhoods.

I have a few co-workers that live in Lincoln Square with kids from the age of Kindergarten to High School, and they are involved in all of the traditional soccer games, little league, music class at the Old Town School of Folk Music, etc. As I mentioned, there are a few city neighborhoods that offer suburban-style ammenities for kids. And there are many other ways to enrich kids in the city that are completely lost in the suburbs. Things have changed quite a bit in the last ten years, and many city neighborhoods are now very kid friendly (and conditions are only improving). In another ten years, Lincoln Square and North Center will only have better organization.

[chet everett]

I swear I am not making this up! The poor guy with the 5 yr old has ONE kid. He works and so does his wife. He was laying out for us how he has to leave early some days to get to the kids practices and his wife other days. They are good "networking" types and have gotten some other families interested but as he laid it out nobody is at the same day care, there are kids coming from vastly different parts of the City, some with nannies instead of parents and a whole convoluted web of appointments.

Pretty much everybody who had kids in any suburb shook their head. If there are working moms often the kids in the same town are at the same daycare. Lots of moms or dads can pickup multiple kids. It easy to have people coming from houses next door take the kids to a game / practice. The suburban parks cater to the people who want to be able to turn on the light for a game that goes late and that sort of thing.

Sure, if the kids are older and in a traveling league maybe they will be heading to tournaments that involve an outing, but even then it is easy to get your kid to head out with a another family from your suburban block. Compare a place like Brookfield , La Grange Park, Elmhurst, or the older core of Downers Grove to the City and you get very similar distances in general with a far greater liklihood of greater kid density. My sister has no kids in Lincoln Square, there are some old hold outs next door to her that probably never had kids. Up the street there is six unit apartment that does not appear to have kids. This is basic stuff -- larger percentages of kids are found in the burbs. If you are in a really large sprawly 'burb you have to expect that you are going to have to drive, but even then show me such a town that does not have huge amounts of parks dedicated to these kinds of activities...

Shear economics are a factor. How can anybody afford a house in a desirable area without some pretty high paying positions? Do you think those highly paid jobs are just going say "no problem head to your kids game while our Most Valued Client is raising hell"?

[Lookout Kid]

Originally Posted by chet everett

I swear I am not making this up! The poor guy with the 5 yr old has ONE kid. He works and so does his wife. He was laying out for us how he has to leave early some days to get to the kids practices and his wife other days. They are good "networking" types and have gotten some other families interested but as he laid it out nobody is at the same day care, there are kids coming from vastly different parts of the City, some with nannies instead of parents and a whole convoluted web of appointments.

How would increasing your commute time to the suburbs improve this situation? How would city appointments be any more convoluted than suburban ones? I guess it all depends on how you set up your life. For instance, we have a pediatrician with valet parking, a daycare along our commuting route, and free parking downtown. Yes, there is more demand for daycare spots in the city. Yes, it is more expensive. But assuming you can actually afford a daycare near your home and work, can afford a home large enough for your family, and can afford one of the city's excellent private schools, the city can be very child friendly. Which brings me back to my two advantages of the suburbs: good public schools, and affordability of real estate. I'll concede the parking issue, and add that to the equation (since it's hard to be car-free with young children). If I leave the city for the burbs, these will be the factors involved in that decision. Finding activities for my kids? Not a problem. Appointments and schedule? Not a problem.

[chet everett]

The other assumption you are making, and I believe it is not supported by data, is that commute times are higher in the burbs. The census data is consistent -- avergage commute among DuPage Co residents is LOWER than Cook Co, Will Co orMcHenry Co.

If the numbers hold up Chicago commuters have HIGHER average commute times than any of these:
As the Population Grows, So Do Commute Times : NPR
ACS: Ranking Table -- Average Travel Time to Work of Workers 16 Years and Over Who Did Not Work at Home (Minutes)

Whole lot of stats to feel good about here:
Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission

[Lookout Kid]

Originally Posted by chet everett

The other assumption you are making, and I believe it is not supported by data, is that commute times are higher in the burbs. The census data is consistent -- avergage commute among DuPage Co residents is LOWER than Cook Co, Will Co orMcHenry Co.

If the numbers hold up Chicago commuters have HIGHER average commute times than any of these:
As the Population Grows, So Do Commute Times : NPR
ACS: Ranking Table -- Average Travel Time to Work of Workers 16 Years and Over Who Did Not Work at Home (Minutes)

Whole lot of stats to feel good about here:
Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission

I guarantee you I get home faster than my co-workers who live in Highland Park or Naperville. They'll often say "it's only 25 minutes on the Metra", but neglect to mention the time it takes to get to the station, wait for a train that only comes every half hour, etc. There is much less flexibility in that type of commute. But yeah, if you live on 110th and Cicero, your commute is going to stink.

[chet everett]

Right -- the average is higher. I am not going to claim that there is some time and space warping Metra line. If you live way out it anywhere ittakes a long to get there from the Loop.

The DuPage average is low due to both the excellent Metra service and the large number of folks that work in DuPage or suburban Cook.

The City average is high mostly due to the crappiness of public transit and clogged streets of every kind.

I am not alone in pointing out that TOTAL commute is not just the freeway drive, or Metra ride, or CTA jaunt. If you are in a nice compact burb where you can walk to a well served Metra line it is equal or better than Chicago. If that town also has better prices for similar sized houses then a City neighborhood what is not to love?

[Attrill]

Originally Posted by chet everett

The one are that ought not be over looked is that it is SO much easier to be a regular family and take part in stuff like Indian Guides, scouting, little league, soccer, gymnastics, hockey, youth football, la crosse, cross country, swim team and dozens of other indoor and outdoor activities all year round.

First off - Chicago has all the sports you've mentioned for kids of all ages. The Park District has some great programs, but they are not the only way that kids get involved in sports in the city. There is also a large number of non profit and for profit groups that run leagues and training camps for a wide variety of sports. I have a friend whose 10 year old daughter is taking sailing lessons this summer - how many suburbs offer that? The only problem I've ever had with the Park District is times when I've tried to reserve fields for softball or soccer and they were already reserved by youth groups.

Second - Why does that make a "regular" family? I think you're taking an out of date ideal of a suburban family (that never truly existed) and considering that to be "regular". If your child is more more interested in dance, music, art, architecture, computers, etc. than sports - what do they do in they 'burbs? In the city there are SO MANY options to fit every kid's needs. If a kid in the city is interested in any sport, the option to do it is there. If they are interested in something else, those options are there as well.

Originally Posted by chet everett

I swear I am not making this up! The poor guy with the 5 yr old has ONE kid. He works and so does his wife. He was laying out for us how he has to leave early some days to get to the kids practices and his wife other days. They are good "networking" types and have gotten some other families interested but as he laid it out nobody is at the same day care, there are kids coming from vastly different parts of the City, some with nannies instead of parents and a whole convoluted web of appointments.

I'm sorry your friend is having such a hard time with things, but based upon personal experience - as well as the experiences of dozens of friends and relatives raising kids - juggling schedules goes with having kids. He and his wife have to figure out who is going to leave work early to deal with picking up the kids? The horror, THE HORROR! I'm certain that never happens in the suburbs (oh, and cue the world's smallest violin - tell your friend 'welcome to being a parent'). Seriously tho', I have friends who live in urban and suburban areas around the country and we always talk about how tough it is to create a balanced schedule between work and raising a kid. My wife and I (as well as a couple dozen friends and relatives) are able to handle it in the city without any problems or complaints.

I think Lookout Kid hit the nail on the head with identifying what is tougher in the city - navigating CPS (or private schools) and having less space. Other than that, I don't see the suburbs having any advantage.

[chet everett]

Originally Posted by Attrill

First off - Chicago has all the sports you've mentioned for kids of all ages. The Park District has some great programs, but they are not the only way that kids get involved in sports in the city. There is also a large number of non profit and for profit groups that run leagues and training camps for a wide variety of sports. I have a friend whose 10 year old daughter is taking sailing lessons this summer - how many suburbs offer that? The only problem I've ever had with the Park District is times when I've tried to reserve fields for softball or soccer and they were already reserved by youth groups.

Second - Why does that make a "regular" family? I think you're taking an out of date ideal of a suburban family (that never truly existed) and considering that to be "regular". If your child is more more interested in dance, music, art, architecture, computers, etc. than sports - what do they do in they 'burbs? In the city there are SO MANY options to fit every kid's needs. If a kid in the city is interested in any sport, the option to do it is there. If they are interested in something else, those options are there as well.



I'm sorry your friend is having such a hard time with things, but based upon personal experience - as well as the experiences of dozens of friends and relatives raising kids - juggling schedules goes with having kids. He and his wife have to figure out who is going to leave work early to deal with picking up the kids? The horror, THE HORROR! I'm certain that never happens in the suburbs (oh, and cue the world's smallest violin - tell your friend 'welcome to being a parent'). Seriously tho', I have friends who live in urban and suburban areas around the country and we always talk about how tough it is to create a balanced schedule between work and raising a kid. My wife and I (as well as a couple dozen friends and relatives) are able to handle it in the city without any problems or complaints.

I think Lookout Kid hit the nail on the head with identifying what is tougher in the city - navigating CPS (or private schools) and having less space. Other than that, I don't see the suburbs having any advantage.

I have to tell you that the guy I mentioned is only the LATEST person to voice this sort of frustration, it is not unique. I fully agree that having kids in general means you have more things to schedule. This is not about having kids and being busier, it is about how the City screws things up.

When I say that it is MORE DIFFICULT in the City I mean just that. Even you admit that the getting a field at the Chicago Park District is tough. That is my point. There is less space devoted to the kinds of activies associated with kid type activities. I did not say it was not possible, but definately the 'burbs make this easier and the options are greater. Every "for profit" type endeavor in the City is going to be running ON TOP of suburban Park DIstrict, not to fill in where there is none. When you mention participation in organizations that are either non-profit or for profit these are all going to have fees and I am quite sure that that takes a lot of "regular families" out of the running cost wise. Open up a real estate flyer and look what you get dollar for dollar in a close in suburb, the City comes up short for regular families. Heck even look at the high priced stuff and unless you are REALLY connected the suburbs win out.

If you want to latch onto all sorts of "enrichment" programs I can find ample suburban Park Districts that have facilities for dance, music, art, and computers. I suspect that those things in the City are available but through the organizations which again probably makes them out of reach for regular families. The burbs have all that stuff , many have it in the schools not just the Park District and private offerings. I don't know that I'd put something like architecture in even a kid enrichment category, though I am sure that if one was in Oak Park the FLW studio has something. I would imagine that anything of seriousness / quality would be geared to kids at least in high school, and from the close in 'burbs that would probably be no problem to take Metra in at least as quickly as CTA...

I know that pretty much ALL the lake front suburbs have youth sailing, though the cost of living in most of exceeds the City, so that is a limiter. On the other hand I think that the Forest Preseve Districts in Lake Co and maybe even DuPage have sailing on their programs so it ain't impossible. If you would have cited crew I don't know of any 'burbs that have as much youth club participation as Chicago, but again that is mostly for older kids.

I would never be one to say that it is not possible to raise kids in the City. What I am argueing is that too much of the stuff that the City ought to be doing to improve things for regular families just is NOT happening. The attitude that the City is pretty much all about the things that do nothing for regular families. Today's paper had yet another a story of how Walsh Construction was the "lowest qualified bidder" on a project to link several hunderd feet of the Riverwalk under the Michigan Ave bridge. The City's orginal estimate was off by almost HALF before they even accepted the multi-million dollar bid. Wanna bet there are going to be massive cost overuns? Wanna bet that no one will raise 4e77 over this? This kind of thing is just a drain on the City and for vanity's sake. I mean is there any way this helps any Chicago resident who is not participating in the "connected circle of contracts"?

I am happy for you and your decision to live in the City. No one should be forced to live in the suburbs if it does not work for their situation but I fear that people who are blind to the very real consequences of how the City makes things difficult for regular people will only lead to more of the kind of disparity that exists.

Wrapping everything in a politically correct cloak serves the less honorable purposes of those that prey about the shear scale of Chicago government to mask their corruption. Sure, those powers want people to belive that no suburb is welcoming of anything other than the lilly white nuclear family. That makes it easy to ply them with parades while the corruption is ignored. What hooey! In plenty of burbs regular people of all races and persuasion DO get involved in running the Park Districts and beleive me they are a whole bunch more effecient in delivering programs that people want. HUGE advantage. One that will only begin to be matched when City residents demand that government be run in a open and honest manner. Not much chance of that happening when people accept the scraps and the spoils go to the connected. And not much chance of even "activist" type parents to sneak into the Park District Board Room if they are too busy running around trying to reserve a field. The smaller less bueracratic style of suburban Park Districts cannot be beat...

[Paige65]

Originally Posted by Lookout Kid

I guarantee you I get home faster than my co-workers who live in Highland Park or Naperville. They'll often say "it's only 25 minutes on the Metra", but neglect to mention the time it takes to get to the station, wait for a train that only comes every half hour, etc. There is much less flexibility in that type of commute. But yeah, if you live on 110th and Cicero, your commute is going to stink.

That may be true in Naperville, where there are long waits for close parking spots, and the vast majority of people are car to train station/train station to car commuters. However, the majority of people in Highland Park are able (and do) walk from the train station to their home. We can walk to the train station in under three minutes. Most people (living on the east side of HP) have less than a ten minute walk, very comparable to a walk to public transportation in the city. In most communities, during rush hour, trains run more frequently than every thirty minutes - more like every 15 to 20 minutes. When I lived in the city, many times I waited longer for a bus or the El. However, I will concede that my husband's commute by train is 50-55 minutes door to door, probably much longer than yours.

Also, Highland Park and Naperville are not close in suburbs. I'm sure there are people in Wilmette and LaGrange who have much shorter commutes, comparable to city dwellers (including walking to and from the train).

[Paige65]

Originally Posted by Lookout Kid

Yeah, Nysee's way off the mark there. There are only two advantages in the suburbs, as far as I'm concerned:

1. Public schools
2. The cost of space

People may also want to add safety to the list, but we've been over that before.

I'll add to that, on the whole, ease of getting out of the metropolitan area altogether.

The cost of space isn't all that different than the city in several suburbs, though.

I love the city. I lived there and I'd raise kids there (though I chose the suburbs). I know you are a strong proponent of city living, which I admire, but don't always agree with because I believe there are many misconceptions about suburban living. What do you believe the advantages of city living over suburban living are?