HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions

About The Ads  This week the ad company used in the forum will be monitoring activity and doing some tests to identify any problems which users may be experiencing. If at any time this week you get pop-ups, redirects, etc. as a result of ads please let us know by sending an email to forum@skyscraperpage.com or post in the ads complaint thread. Thank you for your participation.


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Jul 22, 2019, 7:00 PM
Sun Belt's Avatar
Sun Belt Sun Belt is offline
Love it or leave it : )
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: The Envy of the World
Posts: 4,824
Quote:
Originally Posted by eschaton View Post
This one is almost certainly untrue. Young people today are having a lot less sex than they were 20 years ago. Young people now spend a lot more time not in any relationship as opposed to in long-term relationships. And despite what might be thought, overall single people have a lot less sex than those who are committed (at least in the early phases - after 10 years of marriage it's probably about even - heh).
Maybe. This might enter a whole different discussion though -- Who actually really knows? The data all comes from questionnaires. Young people today might be lying better than the previous generation. The stigma today [from HIV schooling of the 1990s and beyond] is that no, you absolutely do not want to have multiple sexual partners before marriage.

Therefore, when asked, what do you say? -- I don't want to be a "slut", so I'll underreport.

I don't think young people have changed one bit, in America.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Jul 22, 2019, 8:03 PM
sopas ej's Avatar
sopas ej sopas ej is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: South Pasadena, California
Posts: 4,017
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sun Belt View Post
Maybe. This might enter a whole different discussion though -- Who actually really knows? The data all comes from questionnaires. Young people today might be lying better than the previous generation. The stigma today [from HIV schooling of the 1990s and beyond] is that no, you absolutely do not want to have multiple sexual partners before marriage.

Therefore, when asked, what do you say? -- I don't want to be a "slut", so I'll underreport.

I don't think young people have changed one bit, in America.
With PrEP and HPV vaccines, is this even an issue with younger people? I would think younger people wouldn't be lying about their sexual habits on anonymous questionnaires, unless they were raised conservatively/live in conservative areas where people gave a shit about others' sexual habits.
__________________
"If the climate were a bank, the U.S. would have already saved it."

---Hugo Chávez
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Jul 22, 2019, 8:15 PM
JManc's Avatar
JManc JManc is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Houston
Posts: 25,461
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sun Belt View Post
The stigma today [from HIV schooling of the 1990s and beyond] is that no, you absolutely do not want to have multiple sexual partners before marriage.
Huh? People were/are more conscious about HIV but there is no stigma about sexuality or multiple partners before marriage but as eschaton mentioned, overall interest seems to be down.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Jul 22, 2019, 8:29 PM
SHOFEAR's Avatar
SHOFEAR SHOFEAR is offline
DRINK
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: City Of Champions
Posts: 8,142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
^ i kinda feel sorry for people in cities where the only choices are downtown shoe-boxes or '70s tract homes in the burbs.

.
I always liked the late 70's - early 80's neighborhoods. Obviously the development pattern varies from region to region, but neighborhoods of that vintage are perfect for street hockey, and thus, in my opinion, the most kid friendly neighborhoods ever made.

Everybody has plenty of garage/driveway parking and streets are the least busy. Lane product of the previous eras tends to force visitors to park on the street, rather than the rear parking pad off the lane, and lot widths after the mid 80's are to narrow to allow you to park a RV/Boat/sunday driver at the side of your house thus cluttering driveways and forcing homeowners to park on the street. All this allows for the epic neighborhood street hockey battles I thoroughly enjoyed in my youth.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...ping-1.2641922

its an outdated article, but according to it, 26% of Albertans have an RV. Now, is that 26% of households, or 26% of adults.....either way that's a lot..now account for boats/sleds/quads/sunday drivers and having that sideyard space keeps streets safe for kids to do kids things.

It's moments like these.....

__________________
Lana. Lana. Lana? LANA! Danger Zone
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Jul 22, 2019, 8:37 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is offline
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 21,393
Quote:
Originally Posted by SHOFEAR View Post
I always liked the late 70's - early 80's neighborhoods.
you're totally allowed to like it.

it would not be my cup of tea, though.

my comment was more an opinion on the unfortunate reality that in many newer cities, there isn't a whole lot of that low-rise pre-war neighborhood style urbanism that is very different from both downtown condo towers and post-war suburban tract housing. it's an "in-between" style of urbanism, and my personal favorite now that i have a family of my own to raise.

quiet and shady tree-lined side streets: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9647...7i16384!8i8192

a very short walk away from ped-friendly retail districts: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9648...7i16384!8i8192

with convenient access to transit to get around: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9665...7i16384!8i8192

that's my ideal these days. when we're empty-nesters in a couple decades, it's very possible we'll end up back in a downtown highrise.
__________________
He has to go.

Last edited by Steely Dan; Jul 22, 2019 at 9:14 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Jul 22, 2019, 9:30 PM
Sun Belt's Avatar
Sun Belt Sun Belt is offline
Love it or leave it : )
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: The Envy of the World
Posts: 4,824
Quote:
Originally Posted by JManc View Post
Huh? People were/are more conscious about HIV but there is no stigma about sexuality or multiple partners before marriage but as eschaton mentioned, overall interest seems to be down.
Wait, really?

I grew up in the hyper HIV atmosphere. I'm pretty sure that differed from the pre HIV era.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Jul 22, 2019, 10:28 PM
SHOFEAR's Avatar
SHOFEAR SHOFEAR is offline
DRINK
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: City Of Champions
Posts: 8,142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
you're totally allowed to like it.

it would not be my cup of tea, though.

my comment was more an opinion on the unfortunate reality that in many newer cities, there isn't a whole lot of that low-rise pre-war neighborhood style urbanism that is very different from both downtown condo towers and post-war suburban tract housing. it's an "in-between" style of urbanism, and my personal favorite now that i have a family of my own to raise.
fair enough. And, yes, most areas lack something like that.

rewind the clock 5 years before we had kids and that is probably the type of setting we would have imagined ourselves in when we outgrew the condo.

Over the years our vision of what type of neighborhood we would raise our kids in changed drastically. As we got out of our 20's mindset and realized all schools aren't equal...well that changed a lot and narrowed down possible neighborhoods drastically. A huge box that we needed to check off was decent schools. While some central neighborhoods are experiencing a rejuvenation, its not exactly people with toddlers lining up to overpay for some trendy narrow lot infills. Those schools are a long way (if ever) from being fixed. What we zeroed in on was neighbourhoods that have had good schools for multiple generations, with the thinking that other young couples will continue to pay a premium to move into these neighbourhoods and keep the schools desirable.

Even though we have an above average sized house and an above average sized lot....I see us moving into something larger, not smaller if we ever move again.
__________________
Lana. Lana. Lana? LANA! Danger Zone
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Jul 22, 2019, 11:53 PM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 11,205
The quicker the last breeding family moves out and they can shut down the money-pit that is the public school system, the better the city will be (certainly the less costly for the rest of us).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Jul 22, 2019, 11:58 PM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 11,205
Quote:
Originally Posted by JManc View Post
Huh? People were/are more conscious about HIV but there is no stigma about sexuality or multiple partners before marriage but as eschaton mentioned, overall interest seems to be down.
PreP and the existence of treatments that have turned AIDS into a chronic disease that does not shorten your lifespan has really changed things. I can't speak to the interest of 20-somethings but for those with an interest, there's not much deterrence from worrying about HIV any more.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Jul 23, 2019, 4:38 AM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is offline
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 21,393
Quote:
Originally Posted by SHOFEAR View Post
As we got out of our 20's mindset and realized all schools aren't equal...well that changed a lot and narrowed down possible neighborhoods drastically. A huge box that we needed to check off was decent schools. While some central neighborhoods are experiencing a rejuvenation, its not exactly people with toddlers lining up to overpay for some trendy narrow lot infills. Those schools are a long way (if ever) from being fixed. What we zeroed in on was neighbourhoods that have had good schools for multiple generations, with the thinking that other young couples will continue to pay a premium to move into these neighbourhoods and keep the schools desirable.
Schools are certainly an important part of the location equation when you have kids. That said, a TREMENDOUS amount of "school quality" is really just a measure of the socio-economic status of the students who happen to attend the school.

Our neighborhood city school garners a middling rating from the major school ratings agencies, but 30% of the students are from low-income families. When you control for that low-income student population, test results aren't all that radically different from a typical suburban elementary school.

My kids will also be provided with a far more realistic picture of the way the world really is than I was ever afforded growing up in Wilmette (wealthy upper middle class northshore burb). There is real value in socio-economic mixing, but that will never be quantified by a fucking Great Schools algorithm.




Quote:
Originally Posted by SHOFEAR View Post
Even though we have an above average sized house and an above average sized lot....I see us moving into something larger, not smaller if we ever move again.
We all have our own drumbeat to march to.

We've got a 3 bed/3 bath 2,300 SF condo spread across two floors in a bog-standard Chicago 3-flat. It feels fairly house-like, other than the fact that we have some upstairs neighbors and shared yard spaces. It's plenty adequate for our family of four.

Considering that we have absolutely no plans to expand our family any further, I can't envision any situation where I would ever live in another home substantively larger than our current one.

Our current plan is to camp down here for the next couple decades while we raise our kids, plant some serious roots, become part of the woodwork of the neighborhood, and give our kids a strong sense of "rootedness" in their city. After that, it can only be smaller, not bigger.
__________________
He has to go.

Last edited by Steely Dan; Jul 23, 2019 at 2:39 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Jul 23, 2019, 4:46 AM
SIGSEGV's Avatar
SIGSEGV SIGSEGV is online now
>~< , QED!
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: South Loop, Chicago
Posts: 1,445
Yeah, my parents didn't move into a place with a yard until I was in 7th grade (by then, I had no need for one...). Apparently there are these places called parks where you can take kids to play .
__________________
And here the air that I breathe isn't dead. Trump delenda est.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Jul 23, 2019, 1:42 PM
eschaton eschaton is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 2,868
This is a bit old, but this 2014 post dealing with the demographic decline of Lower Fairfield County shows the decline in children is not just an issue unique to cities. Very wealthy towns - well known for top-notch school districts, saw declines in the number of small children of up to a third in the 2000s alone:



The author attributes this in part due to the sort of "snob zoning" common in established suburbs in the NYC metro. High housing costs coupled with this snob zoning mean there simply aren't many starter homes to go around. As a result the average age in these towns continues to climb, with many towns well known for "excellent public schools" having median ages of over 45.

There's a reckoning coming in these areas in the 2020s and 2030s, when the boomers who have aged in place die off en masse

Last edited by eschaton; Jul 23, 2019 at 2:03 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Jul 23, 2019, 1:50 PM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 19,127
Quote:
Originally Posted by eschaton View Post
The author attributes this in part due to the sort of "snob zoning" common in established suburbs in the NYC metro. High housing costs coupled with "snob zoning" mean there simply aren't many "starter homes" to go around. As a result the average age in these towns continues to climb, with many towns well known for "excellent public schools" having median ages of over 45.

There's a reckoning coming in these areas in the 2020s and 2030s, when the boomers who have aged in place die off en masse
If you look at the FFC map you'll see the backcountry towns have the worst student declines, because they the most stringent zoning, and are least popular among those of child-bearing age. The professional families that used to move to (say) Wilton or Weston are staying in Manhattan/Brooklyn, choosing closer-in railroad suburbs like Larchmont or Bronxville, or have left the region for the Sunbelt.

You're right, of course. Unless demographic/housing preference trends undergo radical changes, there will be a huge reckoning in exurban America in the near future.

My parents live in a sort-of-Connecticut in Michigan (Bloomfield Hills), with giant homes in the woods, and I've had the same discussion with them. I have no idea who would buy their home. They have neighbors with 10,000 square foot homes with outrageous taxes/upkeep on dirt roads with well water and septic, and the power goes out five times a year. Any busy young couples up for that?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Jul 23, 2019, 3:02 PM
eschaton eschaton is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 2,868
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
You're right, of course. Unless demographic/housing preference trends undergo radical changes, there will be a huge reckoning in exurban America in the near future.
I mean, these areas just aren't really desirable any longer at all, meaning prices need to come down considerably to attract those of a lower SES. However, because so many people in these communities are choosing to age in place rather than downsize once the kids are out of the house, the housing supply is still relatively low - meaning we're not seeing as much of a price collapse as there ultimately has to be.

The real issue though is potential residents don't vote, meaning undoing the snob zoning will be hard. I mean, it's in the economic interests of the town as a whole - as well as individual sellers - if the multi-acre estates are broken up with more modest detached single-family homes and townhomes built instead. However, none of the people who aren't looking to sell yet have a financial interest in allowing these exiting neighbors to subdivide, and for whatever reason people either have outdated ideas about what builds property values or don't consider their actual self-interest when it comes to zoning. Meaning you could easily end up with a scenario in some of these towns where a lot of the properties are just straight-up vacant (or used as rentals) before anyone in the town gets it in their head to try something different.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Jul 23, 2019, 4:43 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is offline
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 21,393
Quote:
Originally Posted by SIGSEGV View Post
Yeah, my parents didn't move into a place with a yard until I was in 7th grade (by then, I had no need for one...). Apparently there are these places called parks where you can take kids to play .
parks are great, but sometimes you just want to tell your kids to "go outside and play?", so you can do whatever shit you're trying to get done.

for older kids, a neighborhood park/playground can fulfill that role, but for younger kids, they can't really go to a park unsupervised. that's where the magic of a "yard" really shines.

now, some people take that too far and erroneously believe that, at an absolute minimum, kids need at least 1/4 acre of private outdoor space. our kids get along just fine with much less than that. between our deck, the back staircase, the shared patio in back, our building's small yard in front, and the long narrow gangway that connects them, they have fenced-in outside space to run around in. if we want to do something more sporting that requires more open space, we take them to the field at the school one block over.
__________________
He has to go.

Last edited by Steely Dan; Jul 23, 2019 at 5:54 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Jul 23, 2019, 5:01 PM
JManc's Avatar
JManc JManc is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Houston
Posts: 25,461
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sun Belt View Post
Wait, really?

I grew up in the hyper HIV atmosphere. I'm pretty sure that differed from the pre HIV era.
So did I. But unless you were religious, there was no stigma on multiple partners. There was a awareness on safety.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Jul 23, 2019, 5:47 PM
Don't Be That Guy Don't Be That Guy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by eschaton View Post
The author attributes this in part due to the sort of "snob zoning" common in established suburbs in the NYC metro. High housing costs coupled with this snob zoning mean there simply aren't many starter homes to go around. As a result the average age in these towns continues to climb, with many towns well known for "excellent public schools" having median ages of over 45.

There's a reckoning coming in these areas in the 2020s and 2030s, when the boomers who have aged in place die off en masse
This is happening in slow motion in Pittsburgh as well. Estate listings in in Fox Chapel are sitting on the market and selling at a much slower pace than adjacent Aspinwall, or in East End city neighborhoods. For those not familiar with Pittsburgh, this is a beautiful suburban area with easy access to the city in one of the most desirable school districts in the state. And while the homes are big, they are downright modest compared the ex-urban McMansions in the South and North Hills. But they are expensive, on large park-like parcels, in a community that is not walkable, and are 30-50 years old or older and in need of updating.

How many affluent young families with two working parents can afford to buy and update a 6,000 sf house and then have the time to maintain it and a two-acre yard?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Jul 23, 2019, 5:53 PM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 19,127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don't Be That Guy View Post
How many affluent young families with two working parents can afford to buy and update a 6,000 sf house and then have the time to maintain it and a two-acre yard?
That's the issue. And, for those who can afford it, who wants to live like this? It costs $250 just to clean the damn place. You'll have two furnaces and a $500 energy bill. You could spend six figures on a landscape rebuild. You practically need a part-time staff.

The suburbs won't die, but I don't know too many people would want a living space bigger than, say, 3,500 ft, or a multiacre lawn. Too much work, too much money, wrong location.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted Jul 23, 2019, 9:16 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is offline
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 21,393
informative read on the topic from citylab:

Quote:
Which U.S. Cities Have the Most Families With Kids?
Spoiler alert: It’s simply not the case that families with kids have disappeared from urban America.



Across the U.S., just 28.5 percent of households have their own children under 18. The first table below shows the 10 principal cities with the highest levels of childlessness. To be blunt, only a small number of cities can be said to be anywhere near childless.

Of the 47 cities with more than 350,000 people, just seven are far off the national average. San Francisco, Seattle, and Washington, D.C. are the only three where less than a fifth of families have kids under 18. Add New Orleans (likely a result of depopulation after Hurricane Katrina), Miami (a retirement destination), Minneapolis, and Philadelphia to the list. The remainder of the top 10 is within five percentage points or so of the national average.

And some cities we commonly think of as childless are not so childless at all. In New York City, for example, 26.2 percent of families have children under 18; in Los Angeles, the share is 27 percent.





What it boils down to is that childlessness is a product of a very limited number of cities, like San Francisco, Seattle, and Washington D.C. And even in those places, the broader metro area is not so far off from the rest of the country. Actually, childlessness is only a phenomenon of a few uber-expensive neighborhoods in a few super-expensive cities.

This reflects how certain neighborhoods come to specialize in certain kinds of residents by income and stage of life. The childless city is less than it seems—more a myth than a reality of contemporary urban life.
full article: https://www.citylab.com/life/2019/01...ldfree/580372/
__________________
He has to go.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted Jul 23, 2019, 10:35 PM
llamaorama llamaorama is offline
Unicorn Wizard!
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 3,462
Something I've noticed about Houston is that I don't think school quality correlates much with what passes as the closest thing to "urbanism" around here.

The poorest, sketchiest parts of the city with the worst schools are either 1) low density old neighborhoods comprised of small, single story homes with a high proportion of empty lots or 2) very high density but not functionally urban clusters of 1970s era apartment complexes. Meanwhile the best urban schools, like Lamar and Memorial HS and their feeders, are in the handful of neighborhoods which are sort of urban-like(pre-war suburban mixed with more recent infill), meaning inside the loop west of downtown.

I imagine the bigger trend is money. Rich areas probably have fewer kids. I think that's the big picture trend, the correlation with the built environment is a weak one and probably just a spurious claim.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 6:32 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.