An interesting article in the New York Times, noting that some of the most "happening" and prosperous cities are surprisingly lacking in the number of young families. Living in Mililani, I feel like there are kids everywhere, but this is one suburb where "family" is central to its identity. Overall, the piece brings up some interesting statistics.
Vibrant Cities Find One Thing Missing: Children
Timothy Egan, New York Times, March 24, 2005
Vibrant Cities Find One Thing Missing: Children
Timothy Egan, New York Times, March 24, 2005
San Francisco, where the median house price is now about $700,000, had the lowest percentage of people under 18 of any large city in the nation, 14.5 percent, compared with 25.7 percent nationwide, the 2000 census reported. Seattle, where there are more dogs than children, was a close second. Boston, Honolulu, Portland, Miami, Denver, Minneapolis, Austin and Atlanta, all considered, healthy, vibrant urban areas, were not far behind. The problem is not just that American women are having fewer children, reflected in the lowest birth rate ever recorded in the country.
Officials say that the very things that attract people who revitalize a city - dense vertical housing, fashionable restaurants and shops and mass transit that makes a car unnecessary - are driving out children by making the neighborhoods too expensive for young families.
Officials say that the very things that attract people who revitalize a city - dense vertical housing, fashionable restaurants and shops and mass transit that makes a car unnecessary - are driving out children by making the neighborhoods too expensive for young families.
Comment