U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-14-2014, 01:13 PM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,053 posts, read 29,504,059 times
Reputation: 7830

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by BajanYankee View Post
Are you saying that families feel more comfortable with less density compared to a hyper-urban environment?
I think it varies per family, I wouldn't say families fit any one mold, though I do think the small town feel is often times the most appealing to families in general.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-14-2014, 01:13 PM
 
Location: Oakland, CA
27,165 posts, read 29,650,120 times
Reputation: 26646
Quote:
Originally Posted by BajanYankee View Post
Are you saying that families feel more comfortable with less density compared to a hyper-urban environment?
I think it is mostly a supply problem.

I think the "hyper dense" environments tend to only build small units. Or forget to build schools.

The SFH advocates will always say "but kids need yards!"

Kids need play space, that's for sure. And designing a kid friendly neighborhood requires incorporating kid friendly design. Many denser neighborhoods do not bother adding that stuff. Parks, rec centers, soccer fields and the like..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-14-2014, 01:20 PM
 
Location: Oakland, CA
27,165 posts, read 29,650,120 times
Reputation: 26646
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
That is actually a good thing for a neighborhood. (I wasn't sure if you were trying to say it was a positive or negative thing.)
It is, except it constrains supply even more. There is very limited turnover for the larger places, so the prices get bid up due to pent up demand.

Now the families just come over for ice cream.

This is the local ice cream shop (it opened in 1894, but moved from the original location to a new one a few blocks away):

Fentons Creamery spotted in Disney/Pixar's "UP" - YouTube
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-14-2014, 01:20 PM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,053 posts, read 29,504,059 times
Reputation: 7830
Quote:
Originally Posted by jade408 View Post
I think it is mostly a supply problem.

I think the "hyper dense" environments tend to only build small units. Or forget to build schools.

The SFH advocates will always say "but kids need yards!"

Kids need play space, that's for sure. And designing a kid friendly neighborhood requires incorporating kid friendly design. Many denser neighborhoods do not bother adding that stuff. Parks, rec centers, soccer fields and the like..
I almost think having little parks nearby are better for kids because it gives kids and parents a way to mingle with neighbors in a more joined setting. Often times only playing in private backyards can be very isolating for the child and the parent.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-14-2014, 01:29 PM
Status: "Summer!" (set 15 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
86,985 posts, read 102,540,351 times
Reputation: 33045
I think the answer is, "we'll see". The cities I am familiar with have always had a neighborhood or two with "good" schools where families live. In Pittsburgh and Denver, these neighborhoods also have single family homes, though not exclusively so. The "Back to the City" movement of the early 70s failed b/c we hippies, counterculturalists, etc started wanting more than a little 1 BR apt. with on-street parking when the kids came along, if not sooner. Time will tell.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-14-2014, 02:12 PM
 
Location: Crooklyn, New York
28,250 posts, read 26,220,119 times
Reputation: 11706
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
I think the answer is, "we'll see". The cities I am familiar with have always had a neighborhood or two with "good" schools where families live. In Pittsburgh and Denver, these neighborhoods also have single family homes, though not exclusively so. The "Back to the City" movement of the early 70s failed b/c we hippies, counterculturalists, etc started wanting more than a little 1 BR apt. with on-street parking when the kids came along, if not sooner. Time will tell.
Check out the stats below. The first number you see is the percentage of children among the non-Hispanic White population in each city. The number in parentheses is the percentage of children between the ages of 10 and 17 among the non-Hispanic White population in each city. The last figure is the median household income of their respective non-Hispanic White populations.

Portland - 14.90% (5.68%) $55,403
Philadelphia - 13.83% (5.81%) $50,164
Denver - 12.46% (3.97%) $58,486
Seattle - 12.43% (4.33%) $71,393
Pittsburgh - 11.34% (5.00%) $45,970

Here are some higher cost cities.

New York - 16.16% (6.37%) $72,295
Washington, DC - 8.83% (2.79%) $108,629
San Francisco - 8.69% (2.79%) $95,011
Boston - 8.61% (2.97%) $71,625
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-14-2014, 02:44 PM
 
Location: Pittsburgh, PA (Morningside)
12,414 posts, read 11,913,851 times
Reputation: 10533
The New York numbers don't surprise me. I've looked into borough-by-borough population totals in New York before, and by far the largest number of white children are in Brooklyn. I daresay much of the NYC surplus of kids is due to the very large Hasidic families. Of course these are white families, but they are socially very different from the average white American family for obvious reasons. Basically these communities have very high birth rates and relatively little out-migration. No one moves to the suburbs, because the communities themselves are insular and you need to walk to your local synagogue on Sabbath. If current trends in NYC continue, they'll probably be the only "ethnic white" population left in NYC in a few generations, minus newer immigrant streams like Russians and Albanians.

Philadelphia being relatively high surprises me a bit more. It's not a city known for having a good urban public school system after all. You're from there, so maybe you can shed more light.

Using your percentages, I found that all of the cities you cited had between 31% and 45% of their white child population between 10 and 17. Pittsburgh was the highest, and DC the lowest. Philly came second, (42%) which once again surprised me).

Nationwide, white (non-Hispanic) children under 17 make up 20.18% of the white population. Those between 10 and 17 make up 10.72%, and comprise 53.11% of the total white child population.

Thus the total "child depression" of cities ranges from a low of 20% (NYC) to 57% (Boston or San Francisco). I think it's too early yet to tell if the depression of the white teen/tween population is because of the same dynamic however, given the "urban parents" trend is so relatively new that it's hard to tell where this is going to end up. Compared to the overall depression of the number of kids though, this isn't as large of a differential. DC sees a 41% dropoff, but Pittsburgh only sees a 17% (and Philly a 21%).

Another thing to consider is urban "white" parents just might have less kids in general. More only children and less 3-4 child households would certainly skew the averages. Maybe the number of white householders with children under 17 should be counted instead?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-14-2014, 03:04 PM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Long Island / NYC
45,983 posts, read 41,929,314 times
Reputation: 14804
Quote:
Originally Posted by BajanYankee View Post
Check out the stats below. The first number you see is the percentage of children among the non-Hispanic White population in each city. The number in parentheses is the percentage of children between the ages of 10 and 17 among the non-Hispanic White population in each city. The last figure is the median household income of their respective non-Hispanic White populations.

Portland - 14.90% (5.68%) $55,403
Philadelphia - 13.83% (5.81%) $50,164
Denver - 12.46% (3.97%) $58,486
Seattle - 12.43% (4.33%) $71,393
Pittsburgh - 11.34% (5.00%) $45,970

Here are some higher cost cities.

New York - 16.16% (6.37%) $72,295
Washington, DC - 8.83% (2.79%) $108,629
San Francisco - 8.69% (2.79%) $95,011
Boston - 8.61% (2.97%) $71,625
Thanks for the data, though maybe you should include median family income, since including singles could distort things a bit.

Interesting to see New York the highest in the list, even higher than Portland, which doesn't have the school or space issues. Curious to see Chicago's numbers on there, too. Of course most of the white New Yorkers families aren't gentrifiers and include Staten Islanders (which has amnenties and demographically more similar to Long Island than the rest of the city), children of eastern European immigrants (went to college with a bunch of 'em, including a group of Russians), and Hasidic Jews (unlike the first two, didn't meet them in college) and other groups. Not that it matters whether they're "gentrifiers", or not. Then again why use just non-hispanic whites? In NYC and other cities, Asians make nearly as much as whites. If well-off Asians move in and keep their families in the city, that should count just as well. Some of these threads on families and cities seem too focused on white families. And why exclude other well-off minorities? It doesn't really matter what race the residents are as long as they're middle-class.

I realize it would be harder or impossible to find the data, but numbers on % of children among household earning more than say, $50k/year (or $75k/year) could be more meaningful rather than race-based.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-14-2014, 03:06 PM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Long Island / NYC
45,983 posts, read 41,929,314 times
Reputation: 14804
Quote:
Originally Posted by eschaton View Post

Another thing to consider is urban "white" parents just might have less kids in general. More only children and less 3-4 child households would certainly skew the averages. Maybe the number of white householders with children under 17 should be counted instead?
I'm not sure if that's bad to count that effect as it could mean white families find having lots kids in the city difficult.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-14-2014, 03:14 PM
Status: "Summer!" (set 15 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
86,985 posts, read 102,540,351 times
Reputation: 33045
Quote:
Originally Posted by BajanYankee View Post
Check out the stats below. The first number you see is the percentage of children among the non-Hispanic White population in each city. The number in parentheses is the percentage of children between the ages of 10 and 17 among the non-Hispanic White population in each city. The last figure is the median household income of their respective non-Hispanic White populations.

Portland - 14.90% (5.68%) $55,403
Philadelphia - 13.83% (5.81%) $50,164
Denver - 12.46% (3.97%) $58,486
Seattle - 12.43% (4.33%) $71,393
Pittsburgh - 11.34% (5.00%) $45,970

Here are some higher cost cities.

New York - 16.16% (6.37%) $72,295
Washington, DC - 8.83% (2.79%) $108,629
San Francisco - 8.69% (2.79%) $95,011
Boston - 8.61% (2.97%) $71,625
I'd love to know where you got those figures.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top