Everyone's starting to get on the same page... and it's my page!

 

Sorry, my man.... but those new residential mixed use towers are still not quite here yet for the reasons stated in the article, which many of us have relayed over and over again in response to calls for such developments on spec.  Rents are really going to have to spike for any non publicly subsidized new residential construction to be done downtown.

 

Good thing we have plenty of space available for conversion and eligible for tax credits :)

 

 

Now NOT wanting to live Downtown is what sounds odd to people...disclaimers must be made :)

 

“Plus, many residents who work in and around Cleveland don’t necessarily want to live downtown, so they choose a suburb like North Royalton. It is a safe community and the price is right for the construction of a new home.”

 

http://www.cleveland.com/north-royalton/index.ssf/2012/01/north_royalton_development_dep.html

It's amazing what cheerleaders the media is for the suburbs.

Who doesn't want a Ryan home, though?

It's amazing what cheerleaders the media is for the suburbs.

 

When the article appears in the "North Royalton Community Blog" you should already be expecting the worst.

 

Not even sure I would classify this as real reporting either

Now NOT wanting to live Downtown is what sounds odd to people...disclaimers must be made :)

 

“Plus, many residents who work in and around Cleveland don’t necessarily want to live downtown, so they choose a suburb like North Royalton. It is a safe community and the price is right for the construction of a new home.”

 

http://www.cleveland.com/north-royalton/index.ssf/2012/01/north_royalton_development_dep.html

 

I laughed.  Hard.  Then I went to Google maps and looked at homes on North Royalton Streets.  Then I laughed harder.  Then I cried when I saw those tacky tract homes with their "feature" garages and trash bins on the street and why in the hell are the mailboxes on the tree lawn?

 

Why would anyone want to live in, let alone, own that crap??  What is the appeal?

^Big, cheap, "safe".

^I'd venture it has a lot more to do with the school than anything else. I lived in Broadview Heights and went to school in Royalton, and the schools are quite good. That plus the big, cheap, and safe neighborhoods equals a huge draw for suburbanites. I personally hate North Royalton as it lacks pretty much any redeeming quality other than the schools. The southern portion of town bordering Hinckley can be scenic, but that's hardly what I'd be looking for when buying a residence.

^Big, cheap, "safe".

 

I don't get it, I just don't get it.  I grew up in Shaker, and by no means am I a "Heights'" Cheerleader, but the architecture of the homes in the Heights' is hard to rival.  All those westside tract homes look the same, to me.

 

I dont understand how someone thinks a big, ugly box with an even uglier garage - as the focal point - is safe?  I guess the robbers/burglers with taste chose other communities to target.

^Big, cheap, "safe".

 

I don't get it, I just don't get it.  I grew up in Shaker, and by no means am I a "Heights'" Cheerleader, but the architecture of the homes in the Heights' is hard to rival.  All those westside tract homes look the same, to me.

 

I dont understand how someone thinks a big, ugly box with an even uglier garage - as the focal point - is safe?  I guess the robbers/burglers with taste chose other communities to target.

 

Agree MTS, but Im pretty sure safety (or sense of) has more to do with the demographic makeup than it does architecture, unfortunately. 

^Big, cheap, "safe".

 

I don't get it, I just don't get it.  I grew up in Shaker, and by no means am I a "Heights'" Cheerleader, but the architecture of the homes in the Heights' is hard to rival.  All those westside tract homes look the same, to me.

 

I dont understand how someone thinks a big, ugly box with an even uglier garage - as the focal point - is safe?  I guess the robbers/burglers with taste chose other communities to target.

 

Agree MTS, but Im pretty sure safety (or sense of) has more to do with the demographic makeup than it does architecture, unfortunately. 

 

Ding, ding, ding.  No more calls, we have a winner!

^Big, cheap, "safe".

 

I don't get it, I just don't get it.  I grew up in Shaker, and by no means am I a "Heights'" Cheerleader, but the architecture of the homes in the Heights' is hard to rival.  All those westside tract homes look the same, to me.

 

I dont understand how someone thinks a big, ugly box with an even uglier garage - as the focal point - is safe?  I guess the robbers/burglers with taste chose other communities to target.

 

You're a single male with no intention of ever having kids.  You're not going to get it, nor are the suburbs desgned for you.  Aesthtics don't mean a whole lot when factoring in other things.

I do have the intention of having kids and would never consider something like that or that far out. 

^Big, cheap, "safe".

 

I don't get it, I just don't get it.  I grew up in Shaker, and by no means am I a "Heights'" Cheerleader, but the architecture of the homes in the Heights' is hard to rival.  All those westside tract homes look the same, to me.

 

I dont understand how someone thinks a big, ugly box with an even uglier garage - as the focal point - is safe?  I guess the robbers/burglers with taste chose other communities to target.

 

You're a single male with no intention of ever having kids.  You're not going to get it, nor are the suburbs desgned for you.  Aesthtics don't mean a whole lot when factoring in other things.

 

I agree with shs96. For me, the newer homes that all look alike are not my thing, but they are much closer to my thing than houses in cleveland heights. Old drafty homes that need thousands of dollars to update, that cost a gazillion dollars a month to heat with cold, hardwood floors, old wiring/pipes, old everything that has to be replaced, it's just not my thing. I know a lot of people who live on both sides of cleveland and those homes are just not my style, just like the suburban homes are not yours. For me, I just feel like when a home gets to be a certain number of decades old, you are buying a huge set of problems that are very expensive to fix and I don't want to deal with those things as a homeowner. Neither do I want a cookie-cutter home in a bland development, but there is some inbetween. I would be more likely to move into a cookie cutter development if I thought it was a safe place for my kid to ride their bike around or they had good schools and low crime. Life isn't all about living in your fabulous dream home when you become a parent, it's about doing what you think is best for your family.

^Big, cheap, "safe".

 

I don't get it, I just don't get it.  I grew up in Shaker, and by no means am I a "Heights'" Cheerleader, but the architecture of the homes in the Heights' is hard to rival.  All those westside tract homes look the same, to me.

 

I dont understand how someone thinks a big, ugly box with an even uglier garage - as the focal point - is safe?  I guess the robbers/burglers with taste chose other communities to target.

 

You're a single male with no intention of ever having kids.  You're not going to get it, nor are the suburbs desgned for you.  Aesthtics don't mean a whole lot when factoring in other things.

 

Really?  I do want kids!  I could live in the Heights, where I grew up, but not in Beachwood, Mayfield, Richmond Hts., strongsville, Middleburg, Broadview, Brecksville, Independence, the Olmsteds, etc.

 

There are burbs or sections of burbs that have beautiful housing.  Examples would be portions of Lakewood and East Cleveland, Bratenahl, Bentleyville, etc.

Life isn't all about living in your fabulous dream home when you become a parent, it's about doing what you think is best for your family.

 

I agree with you partially, but your wording tends to suggest that "doing what you think is best for your family = living in the burbs."  You'd be very surprised to see how many young middle class to upper middle class families are choosing to stay in the inner city. 

Sure, there are some families doing that, that's not surprising to me at all. Maybe they have money for private schools too, which is great and I'm glad for them. The existence I want for my child happens to overlap quite a bit with what the suburbs have to offer, because you can travel fairly easily to the city and the things it has to offer, but not have to deal with what I feel are the negative parts of city living. And the existence I want for my child is very similar to what the majority (not all, of course) want for their children as well, and I don't think that they should be bashed for that just because they have different tastes, style preferences, neighborhood preferences, etc. Even if someone COULD plop down a 60s/70s built brick split level with a fireplace and at least 2 full baths somewhere in the city, and handed me the money to pay for private school, I still wouldn't choose to live there with my family. I spend a lot of time, and have, for over 20 years, in and around the streets and neighborhoods in the city of cleveland and in close surrounding environs (OC, Tremont, Gordon Square) and that is not where I want my child to wander around on his own. It doesn't look like what I want a neighborhood to look like. There are no parks. There's very little grass or trees. There is a lot of traffic that would be scary, dangerous and discourteous for a youth bike rider. I don't see kids in fields playing soccer or baseball on saturday mornings, or men out playing a game of weekend football or softball. I've covered all this in other threads. I just don't see why we need to stereotype people who don't have the same taste in housing as all being lame-o cookie cutters who are afraid of their own shadow.

^^That's true.  My wife and I are talking more and more about where we will eventually purchase a home and raise a family.  We've pretty much decided that when we do buy a home we'd like that to be the one.  None of that starter home BS for me.  We'd love to stay in the city in Ohio City, Tremont, Detroit Shoreway, Edgewater, Little Italy, etc, but my wife needs convincing that these places are good areas to raise a family.  When looking into it more it's obvious that there's a very strong family community on the near West side and that has made her more optimistic.

 

Safety is important, but so is quality of life.  I wouldn't be able to sleep at night in my comfy Avon home knowing that I could have been part of the solution in Cleveland, because part of the solution is simply gathering a critical mass of quality middle to upper middle class households within a neighborhood.  Just my opinion...

Yeah, I think we can all agree that deciding where to live is highly personal and for many people involves a bunch of trade-offs.  Outside of the UO community, what I think frustrates city dwellers, especially young families, is that their lifestyle is still seen by many as some kind of bizarre novelty, rather than another "normal" option.

Yeah, I think we can all agree that deciding where to live is highly personal and for many people involves a bunch of trade-offs.  Outside of the UO community, what I think frustrates city dwellers, especially young families, is that their lifestyle is still seen by many as some kind of bizarre novelty, rather than another "normal" option.

 

I think that's changing among the younger set. I think my age (mid 40s) is the dividing line. People older than me generally don't "get it." I'm always surprised at how many think it's weird. Meanwhile people younger than me "get it" even if some prefer suburban living. They may not think it's weird even if they believe it's not for them.

I agree with KJP to some extent. I think the big thing is that a lot of the 20-30somethings right now are children who grew up in suburbs, of parents who are of KJP and my generation and the one above, who brought them up thinking that downtown is scary and bad. I just posted something on the WSM's FB page today saying how great their vendor video series is and some dumb f*ck who looked to be a white male in his early 50s by his FB photo had some dumb comment about "yeah but can you go there and not have your car broken into?" This is what they've taught many of the 20somethigns I know who are "scared" to come downtown or only see it as a destination to go to a major sporting event. It's really the young people who are either from the generation BELOW that one, the teenagers and young adults NOW, and the 20 and 30somethings who have come in from ELSEWHERE who are out there saying no, that's not weird, that's hip and it's what we want. And I do think it's great.

 

Hoot, I feel you, I really do as I am an activist in many areas of my life, and no doubt crime can and does happen everywhere and anywhere. Kids get hit on bikes, get kidnapped, assaulted, women get grabbed and forced into cars and raped and assaulted even at suburban shopping malls. However, I am not in a place in my life where the risk is worth "proving the point." Now with that, you may call me chicken or whatever, but having been through and seen and experienced what I have, it's just the judgment I have to make. I am not making it having grown up in some white bread suburban neighborhood, or as someone who only comes downtown to go to a Cavs game.

^^That is absolutely true.  When I tell my coworkers (mostly all over 45) that we're looking to buy a home in Ohio City or Tremont I just get funny and sometimes disgusted looks.  It's very frustrating to have to constantly justify where I choose to live.  So, in a sense I know how rockandroller probably feels on UrbanOhio some days!

 

"However, I am not in a place in my life where the risk is worth "proving the point.""

 

That's a very good point and something that I've been asking myself a lot as we look at homes in the city.  Am I staying in the city to prove a point or do I really think this house in this neighborhood will provide me and my family a high quality of life in an environment that I am comfortable with?  Doing anything simply to prove a point is obviously short sighted and is a trap we're certainly trying to not fall in to.

I look hard at this myself when I visit people in other locations. A couple of weeks ago, I went to a friend's house I hadn't been to before for a sort of cooking party, he lives in OC. I had to drive around for 10 minutes to find a place to park my car (unlike when I went to visit another friend in the burbs the week before). When I was getting settled in, I was about to ask who the lady was who was cooking in the other room when I realized it wasn't a mirror looking down the hall of his house, but the WINDOW, and his next door neighbor, who was so close by she looked like she was in the house with us. A couple of us had to run out to Dave's while we were there and I had my friend just park her car and wait for me outside while I ran in to get what we needed. Upon exiting, there were a couple of black youths waiting in the vestibule between where you exit and where you actually go outside and honestly they looked at me like I was fresh meat, I did not care for it at all. They followed me outside when I went outside and I hopped into my friend's car and left. This is not the type of quick trip to the store I would like to have on a regular basis. Life as a woman is just a different thing than most of you realize. You are constantly a potential victim and have to always be on your guard.

 

My original point was that I always visit other people's homes and think, hmm, maybe we should live here, what would it be like?

New discussion

thanks KJP!

I just don't see why we need to stereotype people who don't have the same taste in housing as all being lame-o cookie cutters who are afraid of their own shadow.

 

That comment is the only thing that really drives me nuts about raising kids in the city versus the burbs as I am in the burbs with my family.  I do not strive for a cookie cutter house with no trees and a brand new driveway with a sprinkler system.  We do not have any of that. 

 

One needs to realize that when you start a family and bring kids into the world, you need to think what is best for your kids, and stop thinking about yourself so much.  The "yourself days" are over for the time being.  Your kids future relys on your choices, and that's what is important.  If we did not have kids, would we be living out in Medina County, heck no.  I could say for sure we would be in a much more urban setting.  As RnR said, you give me and extra 15k a year for private school, maybe we would consider Cleveland.   

 

In any event, with 4 kids, we are way to busy to benefit being close to bars and restarants downtown.  We don't even go to the ones by our house.  Cleveland, at this stage of my life, needs to give me a much better reason to raise my family in the city versus the suburbs.  And don't get me wrong, I love Cleveland.  I am a life long Clevelander.  Just not for me at this stage of our lives. 

New discussion

 

Oops, sorry guys.  Don't reply to my post, or delete it if you wish

I just don't see why we need to stereotype people who don't have the same taste in housing as all being lame-o cookie cutters who are afraid of their own shadow.

 

That comment is the only thing that really drives me nuts about raising kids in the city versus the burbs as I am in the burbs with my family.  I do not strive for a cookie cutter house with no trees and a brand new driveway with a sprinkler system.  We do not have any of that. 

 

One needs to realize that when you start a family and bring kids into the world, you need to think what is best for your kids, and stop thinking about yourself so much.  The "yourself days" are over for the time being.  Your kids future relys on your choices, and that's what is important.  If we did not have kids, would we be living out in Medina County, heck no.  I could say for sure we would be in a much more urban setting.  As RnR said, you give me and extra 15k a year for private school, maybe we would consider Cleveland.   

 

In any event, with 4 kids, we are way to busy to benefit being close to bars and restarants downtown.  We don't even go to the ones by our house.  Cleveland, at this stage of my life, needs to give me a much better reason to raise my family in the city versus the suburbs.  And don't get me wrong, I love Cleveland.  I am a life long Clevelander.  Just not for me at this stage of our lives. 

 

100% agree.

I don't get many of the posts on this site because I thought it was more for people who understand completely what the risks are all about living in Cleveland or any urban environment but figure out what they need to do to stay and make it better versus giving into their fears and living in the burbs and only taking advantage of the city when they feel like it. Fear is the core of what started the flight out of Cleveland and obviously it's still raging to many. It amazes me to hear people on here describe some of their experiences of the city like they are completely shocked it happened. Like yes sometimes you can experience groups of black youth or be able to see your neighbor close up through your window and yes crime happens??? I understand the thought process of people using their children as the reason they just can't live in the city and that's the reason you should live in the burbs but I have way too many friends and family, and most with basic monetary resources, who have children and they make living in the city work and are happier for it. If you think living in Ohio City or any of the Cleveland hoods discussed on here are sketchy you should bring your children and try living in the middle of the Mission neighborhood in San Francisco. There is no comparison and absolute craziness abounds but my family and friends make it happen completely aware of the risks and they are what make this city great.

"experiencing groups of black youth" is not what I described. I descibed being leered at and then followed out of a store. Or are you saying that is the typical, average experience that everyone has when they encounter black youths and it never amounts to anything, so I shouldn't have been in the least unnerved by it?

 

We are all on this site because we want to see Cleveland improve and be a better, safer place to live both in reality and perception, if not for us, then for our children and their children and so on. Just because I don't think it's a safe place to raise my child doesn't mean I don't have interest in the region and hope for it to change and that I don't work on that in ways other than putting my own self and my own child at risk just to prove a point.

When did the idea of moving to the suburbs to raise children start happening in Cleveland, and did it follow the trend of other cities?  Did the availability of cars to the common family expedite this process?  Is this attitude prevalent today in other cities like NYC or Boston?

 

What happens to your children when you raise them in downtown Cleveland?  Do they turn into black youths that look at women like they are fresh meat?  I guess I don't understand the flee first ask later mentality.  Isn't how your children turn out dependent on how you raise them as parents, and not where you raise them?  Is there a map at the hospital when your kids are born that shows an ever growing salary that your child will earn in successive concentric rings surrounding the city core?  Or a percentage chance that your child will be murdered/drug-addicted rising in the reverse direction?  I understand not wanting to raise your child in a high crime or drug-infested area of town, but there are plenty of stable areas in the city (with houses with yards and neighbors).  I think many people believe that the IQ and character of their children is at stake when choosing city life vs inner ring vs outer ring life.

 

Perhaps they are right; it'd be interesting to do a longitudinal study on children raised in Cleveland, inner ring neighborhoods, and suburbs over the course of 25 years.

 

 

No I'm saying things like being leered at happen and shouldn't be a shock and someone familiar with city living should be able to deal with it. And your take of yeah I want Cleveland to be better but it's just too dangerous and risky for me and my family to live their is a big part of the problem, sorry but it just is IMHO.

You didn't read any of my posts in their entirety then, either. I never said safety issues were the only reason I don't want to raise my kid in the city. Nor are schools the only issue. I cited lack of green space, trees, parks, styles of houses and plots of land and a number of other aspects that I see as lacking in living in the city. It's the COMBINATION of all these things that make it unattractive for the majority of families in the area, and those are problems I'd like to see solutions happen for.

And I'm honestly appalled that you think that it's just routine and to be expected that a woman should be leered at just because she goes into a city. In all the time I've spent in Chicago, Los Angeles and NYC I've never been leered at, followed, commented to/on as I walk by, asked for my number, harrased and what have you like I have here in Cleveland. I think it's a problem and it needs to be fixed.

No I'm saying things like being leered at happen and shouldn't be a shock and someone familiar with city living should be able to deal with it. And your take of yeah I want Cleveland to be better but it's just too dangerous and risky for me and my family to live their is a big part of the problem, sorry but it just is IMHO.

 

But "should be able to deal with it" and "not dealing with it at all" are 2 different things.  Again, back to what was previously said about proving a point.  You're "dealing with it" just so you can say you live in the city?  Support an urban movement?  Or do you just live where you live because you don't want to deal with certain things?  Why is it up to me to be some noble urban trend setter, to "deal with" the pitfalls of urban living?  Why am I required to deal with those types of things if I don't want to?  Everyone acts like you're "part of the problem" because you've decided "hey, I have enough stuff going on with my life, dealing with people leering at my wife or making her feel uncomfortable is one of the things I'd like to take off my plate.  Oh?  there's a place you can live that you don't have to put up with that stuff?  OK."  Blasphemy!

 

What happens to your kids raising them anywhere?  Who knows.  Is it possible to raise a kid and have them turn out great living in Tremont?  Yes.  But why?  What's the benefit of living in Tremont compared to North Royalton when you have kids?  Your life revolves around your kids.  You're not going to trendy restaurants or hipster art galleries.  You're going to the little gym, dance classes, swim lessons, concert receitals, soccer games, or whatever activities or interests your kids have.  And this is where suburbs offer vastly superior programs for kids of all ages and interest levels compared to Cleveland proper, or in general urban settings.

 

So, you as a parent have a choice.  Do you 1) live in a urban area where you may have to "deal" with things from time to time like petty theft or getting leered at?  Do you want to work a little harder at finding a youth program for your kid to get involved?  How many high school kids are living in Tremont who are looking to pick up a few extra bucks babysitting on a Saturday night are there?  Oh, but you like the architecture of your house.  Or do you 2) live in a suburb where your kids have lots of people their age in the neighborhood, have every possible activity available via the community rec center, and have this high shool girl across the street who doesn't mind babysitting from time to time?  Oh, but you may not be thrilled with aluminum siding.

shs thank you. Exactly what I am trying to say. And it doesn't mean that we aren't interested in changing things in the city, just because we don't want to be the squatters getting their cars/homes broken into or getting leered at or what have you.

^ NP.  I, like you, love the city.  I also take offense to people who label me as part of the problem when I've never caused problems in the city, committed crimes, made people uncomfortable, or caused someone to think "hmm, not sure if this place is for me."

I understand not wanting to raise your child in a high crime or drug-infested area of town, but there are plenty of stable areas in the city (with houses with yards and neighbors).  I think many people believe that the IQ and character of their children is at stake when choosing city life vs inner ring vs outer ring life.

I understand that, but I have a house, a yard and neighbors in Medina County.  Why would I live in Cleveland for more money and have to deal with Cleveland Schools then live in Medina County for less money.  The last thing I would move into Cleveland for is to live in a neighborhood like I do now in the suburbs.  Maybe when were older, and the kids are grown, we will move downtown, but definately not Westpark or South Hills.  Theres no point. 

 

 

At the moment, the suburbs do still have the advantages on size, safety, and schools.  They'll likely keep that advantage on size.

 

However, the other advantages may not last forever.  Many recent articles have highlighted <a href="http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2011/12/27/Americas-Best-Kept-Secret-Rising-Suburban-Poverty.aspx#page1">rising levels</a> of <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/25/us/suburban-poverty-surge-challenges-communities.html?pagewanted=all">suburban poverty</a>.  As noted in the second of those articles, suburbs are also going to have to deal with these problems using physical infrastructure that makes it harder to deliver services to large numbers of people (i.e., no public transportation, etc.).  That infrastructure itself is likewise getting more expensive to maintain (let alone expand).

 

The implications of rising suburban poverty for safety and schools should be fairly obvious.

 

On an even more speculative note, I actually think that public education in this country will look radically different in the next 10-20 years.  My basis for this is nothing more than a few TED presentations over the past few years and a few books on the likely trajectory of technology (including learning technology) over the next generation or so, but I think there's a real possibility that most learning that currently takes place in school buildings will take place in the home and around the community, but not in centralized locations, in 10-20 years.  At that point, location (at least vis-a-vis school districts) will matter a lot less, though of course you'll want to have at least enough other parents nearby to provide a good peer group for a young citizen.

These conversations go nowhere, because they just make people defensive or slightly self-righteous, on either side.  Everyone weighs the different attributes of living options differently, and that's totally cool. 

 

But since people asked, if you work downtown, there are, in fact, some good reasons to raise young children in or near downtown. Chief among them is the ability to spend an extra hour of awake time with them every day.  RnR, this is a significant cost of your decision to live where you do, which you are, at least implicitly, sacrificing in favor of all the benefits you list.  That's totally cool, but someone else might trade those things off differently, even in the city's current state of...disrepair. 

 

Also, the idea that everything adults do is for their children, which implies that living in the city is selfish, is applying an extreme double standard, unless you also throw out your TV, stop drinking completely, and eat only skinless chicken and green vegetables when gathered around your dinner table.  Even parents have to live for themselves to some extent, and they all do so differently, which is cool.  And while fear of urban violence is totally normal, people tend to grossly underestimate the risk of auto-fatalities, which is greatly increased, especially for teens, by suburban and exurban life.  That in no way makes suburban life objectively "bad", but there is certainly room for everyone to make their own internal cost-benefit analyses, which, because we're human, are inevitably just post-hoc rationalizations for acting on our gut.

I agree that to some extent, we 'should' have thick skin when dealing with the challenges of moving into an area that may have been depressed for awhile or is not racially integrated, but that doesn't mean we 'should' accept unacceptable behavior. In fact, rejecting it assertively and effectively is one way we change places. Block clubs and other neighborhood organizations can and should fight threatening and illegal behavior and make it clear to perpetrators that they will not be welcomed and that the law will go after them if they make trouble there.

 

I'm not going to go into who 'should' and shouldn't feel threatened and when, because it's all subjective and not something we can really debate. But what we do know is that it's possible to make it work, but that we cannot force anyone to do it. It has to be based on self-interest and be beneficial. Cities aren't going to be changed by masochists who secretly want to live in the suburbs but torture themselves - they're going to be changed by people enthusiastic for urban environments. If people from the suburbs eventually move in too, hey, great.

 

The abandonment of the city was white flight, and later wealth flight, and now it's changing to just general flight of the poor and, interestingly, african-americans (see: http://www.crainscleveland.com/article/20120131/BLOGS03/120139954). It's likely, I think, that Cleveland in 2020 will be more diverse, but have lower overall proportions of people who identify as 'white' or 'black'. More Asians, Latinos, Indians, and Middle Eastern people are likely based on immigration patterns. And I think that's a sign of a maturing city - historical barriers fall, and new neighborhoods emerge where there is economic opportunity. Cleveland is a bargain right now, and isn't a bad job market - so there's reason for optimism, if people are willing to move in and take a stake in the community. Doesn't have to be much - not everyone can volunteer or donate to charity, but just living in the city is a contribution of its own kind.

 

None of this really requires making up or exaggerating bad things about the suburbs. I grew up in a stereotypical white bread suburb and I still like the place. I would consider living there - schools and safety are huge reasons. But I think I can make a bigger difference in Cleveland itself, and I think raising kids in the city is doable, but to each their own.

Excellent post SH, and I agree. I actually looked hard for a daycare that would be downtown when I was PG because of the concern about being far away from him with the commute as you point out, but there was no good option. In fact, despite all other frustrations with service, overhead announcement noise and longer commute, the #1 reason I quit taking the rapid and went back to driving was because I wanted to be able to quickly leave and drive to my child's location in a hurry if need be, since I couldn't find a daycare situation downtown that was workable.

 

there are many households where, in fact, EVERYTHING is for the children. The meals are planned around them, all activities are child-related, and all TV watching is child related. My department supervisor is case in point. She has not seen an adult movie in the theater since her children were born, and they are 10 and 13. They only eat out at places the kids want to eat, and mostly the drive through because she does not cook since there is no time, since all she does is shuttle them from one sporting practice/game to another, and now that they are older usually one parent has to go one location with one kid while the other goes to the other location for the next age group's practice with the other kid. She travels all over the tri-state area and into canada to take them to various hockey tournaments, and has told me about the thousands of dollars each year she has to spend on gear. She upgraded her car to be an extra long/large size to accommodate the hockey equipment. She has no knowledge of current events, does not watch any TV shows of her own and has no hobbies other than shopping at the mall, her life is her kids and her husband's is not that far off. Other than a few concerts she goes to a year, I never hear of her doing anything that's just for her and is not kid-related, and now that the kids are older she is takign them to some concerts with her - they all went to see Drake recently, for example. She is not atypical of many people I know. I just wanted to piont out that these people exist and are prevalant in some of the circles I run in online.

 

We try to achieve a balance but it is hard. We worked very hard to get our son into our lives and we had a lot of years of partying and fun before he came along, as older parents, so we don't have a lot of other stuff going on because he is our #1 priority. I have not, for example, returned to doing any full-time theater shows because of the time committment it would involve to be away from him. We have argued about how many nights are reasonable to go to the gym while the kid is still awake because your'e missing seeing him. With 2 full time working parents, the time is so precious with the child that it's easy to give into the whim to make that time special and exciting and fun whenever you have a weekend together. Thus I have found myself at places I thougth I never would, including Chuck E Cheese and Amazone on a Sunday morning at 8:30am, or at the playground at the mall or in a train at Lodi outlets or vacationing in Amish country because it's too expensive for us all to fly somewhere and at least here we can see farm animals and stuff. You do structure your life around the kid(s) somewhat, it's inevitable.

Also, the idea that everything adults do is for their children, which implies that living in the city is selfish

 

No, it implies you aren't going to experience the benefits of what you get while living in a city because you won't be doing them.  Why live downtown to be close to the theater, sporting venues, restaurants, etc if you are unable to take advantage of these things?  You're left with dealing with all the negatives without reaping any of the benefits.  And if you don't work downtown, it really doesn't make sense.

^So...why are there restaurants & movie theaters in the suburbs?

I think we've hit on the two reasons why families choose to live in the outer-ring suburbs: schools and safety.  Thing like architecture, downtown access, etc. all take a back seat to these two things.  In all honesty, I do think some of that is based in reality, but a lot is also definitely based on faulty perception. 

I know what you're getting at, but if you're suggesting there's the equivalent of things to do in the suburbs as there is the city, then you've only enhancing the argument of why you should live in the suburbs.  Next time you're out on E 4th or in Tremont, look around for a high chair or a kids menu and get back to me.

All I can say is UNBELIEVABLE! The only thing that makes me feel good about the future of Cleveland is that I know many people that don't think, or act, in any way shape or form like people here on this forum and who "get it" and if you take offense to that as being self-righteous, oh well.  What I'm offended at is the Cleveland bashing from people as to why they won't, can't, shouldn't live in the city or who want all the problems eliminated before they would even consider it. There is an answer for all of you and it's called THE SUBURBS!

^^I'm not arguing either way.  I'm just suggesting that people shouldn't project their own lifestyle preferences and habits into something more absolute.  There are many parents who still eat regularly at restaurants, with or without their kids, and even go to bars.  And at least some of them probably like the offerings in the city more.  Other cities are full of young families paying a premium to live near adult-oriented amenities (not the naked lady kind), and it's not because their masochists; they're obviously liking something about it.

 

I can't emphasize enough how fine I think it is for people to live however they want.  My hope for Cleveland is simply that it offer a full range of lifestyle options, so those people who like city life for any reason can find what they're looking for without feeling like they're sacrificing safety, school quality and other things that aren't inherently tied to built form and proximity to amenities.

All I can say is UNBELIEVABLE! The only thing that makes me feel good about the future of Cleveland is that I know many people that don't think, or act, in any way shape or form like people here on this forum and who "get it" and if you take offense to that as being self-righteous, oh well.  What I'm offended at is the Cleveland bashing from people as to why they won't, can't, shouldn't live in the city or who want all the problems eliminated before they would even consider it. There is an answer for all of you and it's called THE SUBURBS!

 

So far I haven't seen any Cleveland bashing. Just honest dialogue on a touchy subject. If you don't mind sacrificing your kids to the Cleveland "school" system for some vague principle, then that's your prerogative but you shouldn't challenge people who want better for their kids. Some things in their current and realistically near future incarnations are just broken.

When did the idea of moving to the suburbs to raise children start happening in Cleveland, and did it follow the trend of other cities?  Did the availability of cars to the common family expedite this process?  Is this attitude prevalent today in other cities like NYC or Boston?

 

It's the same deal in other cites like NYC, Boston, Chicago, or any older urban area in the USA. It's not just a Cleveland thing, although talking to a lot of Clevelanders you would think that was the case. I live in Chicago and can tell you the public city schools are no better. Like Cleveland, the city schools are made up of mostly minority kids who are likely lower class as well. White people and middle class minorities move to the suburbs when it's time to put their kids in school. I bet Chicago's city schools are maybe 10% white, which is telling.

 

There are some differences though. Chicago does have a few elite public schools that are racially mixed and considered good, but they're really tough to get into. Chicago also has a much larger proportion of higher income people who choose to live in the city, and of those there are some with families who put their kids in private schools. That being said, there is not a whole lot of difference and you will not see a lot of families in Chicago's trendier neighborhoods near downtown or on the north side.

 

One difference between Cleveland and Chicago where there is a big difference is the prevailing attitude among people about city life in general. Nobody in Chicago is going to question your sanity about choosing to live or raise a family in the city (I should say a good neighborhood within the city), even the 45+ staunchly suburbanite types. Although they might question how you could afford to raise a family there, given that space and private schools are very expensive in Chicago.

 

I think we've hit on the two reasons why families choose to live in the outer-ring suburbs: schools and safety.  Thing like architecture, downtown access, etc. all take a back seat to these two things.  In all honesty, I do think some of that is based in reality, but a lot is also definitely based on faulty perception.

 

True, but space is another reason. Americans like big houses and yards more than good architecture or walkable neighborhoods. Also, there are also a good amount of people who avoid some inner suburbs like Lakewood or Shaker Heights simply due to high property taxes.