Downtown not the place to raise kids, says Toronto Deputy Mayor

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by Gerrard

KFC? It's all about Popeye's and Church's now.

I am referring to Ford's double-down moment:


toronto star

• Video Link

[llamaorama]

I never really thought backyards mattered so much. I grew up in the suburbs but I mostly played with other kids in the street out front. People would use garages as porches. Then there was a neighborhood park that was always well used by older kids.

The added benefit of a rowhouse or walk-up in the city is that you exchange an unused backyard for proximity to more things in walking distance so teens can be more independent but otherwise it's not so different.

But what do kids do in a 50 story skyscraper surrounded by busy streets and malls and offices? I guess parents escort them to the park occasionally, but that seems like a pain.

[Gerrard]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

I am referring to Ford's double-down moment:


toronto star

• Video Link

I know.

True story though, last time I had KFC in Huntsville - the chicken was actually rotten.

[Innsertnamehere]

Originally Posted by llamaorama

I never really thought backyards mattered so much. I grew up in the suburbs but I mostly played with other kids in the street out front. People would use garages as porches. Then there was a neighborhood park that was always well used by older kids.

The added benefit of a rowhouse or walk-up in the city is that you exchange an unused backyard for proximity to more things in walking distance so teens can be more independent but otherwise it's not so different.

But what do kids do in a 50 story skyscraper surrounded by busy streets and malls and offices? I guess parents escort them to the park occasionally, but that seems like a pain.

condos (at least in toronto) often have large outdoor areas specifically for the condo owners of the building. those spaces, as well as the amenities could be used for the kids to fool around in a safe enviroment.

[J. Will]

Originally Posted by llamaorama

But what do kids do in a 50 story skyscraper surrounded by busy streets and malls and offices? I guess parents escort them to the park occasionally, but that seems like a pain.

I don't see why parents would need to escort them. I walked to school and back alone (maybe 12 minutes or so each way) every day by the time I was 6 or 7. This "helicopter parenting" that I see some parents do these days is ridiculous.

[vid]

Kids in places like that aren't in as much need for an escort, there are a lot of other parents around and everyone keeps an eye out for each other, compared to a suburban neighbourhood which is the kind of place where all those missing kids actually go missing from.

You don't hear "a little girl was abducted near her downtown apartment today", you hear "a little girl was abducted while playing in her suburban front yard".

I've always felt safer in downtown areas with people in them than walking alone in suburban areas, no matter what time of day.

[J. Will]

A suburban area is where I grew up. Nobody back then felt the need to hover over their kids once they reached maybe 8 years old at the oldest. Nowadays you have parents of kids 10+ years old hovering. It's really absurd.

[miketoronto]

One flaw with the Toronto case is that Adam Vaughan the downtown city councillor for that area, thinks that families have to live on every single street and condo building downtown.
He takes the idea of families living downtown just a tad too far.

The truth is that downtown Toronto has had families living downtown for decades, but mostly on the east side of downtown and along the waterfront.

Maybe just maybe not every single street in downtown has to have families?
Maybe families don't want to live in the entertainment district area, and who is to say that is bad?

[llamaorama]

A suburban area is where I grew up. Nobody back then felt the need to hover over their kids once they reached maybe 8 years old at the oldest. Nowadays you have parents of kids 10+ years old hovering. It's really absurd.

You don't hear "a little girl was abducted near her downtown apartment today", you hear "a little girl was abducted while playing in her suburban front yard".

It's not really about that at all. Of all the harmful things that could happen to younger children in the city being molested or kidnapped is less likely than a bunch of other things.

Just to me having to go a park just seems less ideal than having a street or alley to play in with kids who live next door. Also moderately dense low rise urban neighborhoods have parks too and when they are old enough they can take the bus so the point is moot.

Is it really so bad for kids to live downtown? No not really. But for there to be a justification for new regulations and subsidies to attract families to expensive downtown high rises then it should be the best environment for kids ever, which it obviously isn't. Also there is no justification to displace other functions of the central business district in some misguided effort to make downtown family friendly.

Kids in places like that aren't in as much need for an escort, there are a lot of other parents around and everyone keeps an eye out for each other, compared to a suburban neighbourhood which is the kind of place where all those missing kids actually go missing from.

Bystander effect. Downtown is more anonymous than a neighborhood. Neighborhoods have the eyes on the street effect, which is driven by familiarity.

[mhays]

The eyes on the street effect is only partially about familiarity. It's simpler: Most people are much less likely to commit a violent crime when someone is watching, or might be watching.

[TarHeelJ]

Originally Posted by vid

Kids in places like that aren't in as much need for an escort, there are a lot of other parents around and everyone keeps an eye out for each other, compared to a suburban neighbourhood which is the kind of place where all those missing kids actually go missing from.

You don't hear "a little girl was abducted near her downtown apartment today", you hear "a little girl was abducted while playing in her suburban front yard".

I've always felt safer in downtown areas with people in them than walking alone in suburban areas, no matter what time of day.

Obviously...the suburbs are where most American kids live, so that is where most of the abductions would take place. It certainly doesn't mean that the central city is safer for children than the suburbs...it may be true in some cases, but it's not a conclusion you can make based on that statement.

Parents don't necessarily trust other parents to watch out for their own kids. Just being a parent does not make someone responsible.

[Doady]

It's not even really a matter of raising kids in an apartment vs. a house because the suburbs of Toronto are full of apartments and lots of children live in them too... does Doug Holyday seriously believe that the residential high-rises in his ward (and there are quite a few of them, containing around 40% of the ward's population) are devoid of children? Apartment living already a normal part of living in Toronto, even in its suburbs.

Of course, the real issue here is location - safety in particular is the issue implied. Personally, considering that old Toronto statisically has a lower crime rate than the suburbs, I would rather take my chances with old Toronto.

[miketoronto]

Originally Posted by Doady

It's not even really a matter of raising kids in an apartment vs. a house because the suburbs of Toronto are full of apartments and lots of children live in them too... does Doug Holyday seriously believe that the residential high-rises in his ward (and there are quite a few of them, containing around 40% of the ward's population) are devoid of children? Apartment living already a normal part of living in Toronto, even in its suburbs.

But Doug Holyday's demographic does not live or raise kids in those suburban high-rise buildings. They would never raise kids in a million years in a high-rise, be it suburban or urban. And this goes for a large percentage of Toronto's population which has lived year for decades and has set their lives up.
Most of the people raising their kids in high-rises in Toronto are not doing it because they don't want a house. They are doing it because they are new to Toronto. The only exception really being condo dwellers who do make a choice.

[jodelli]

Originally Posted by llamaorama

Just to me having to go a park just seems less ideal than having a street or alley to play in with kids who live next door.

Alleys seem to be an endangered species so to speak. There atta to be a law that developers include such alleys next to their buildings, so that today's deprived tots can also have the heady experience of retrieving rotten fruit from a smelly dumpster and hurling them in the general direction of passing law enforcement conveyances.
I mean if you're going to have kids around...

[Doug]

Originally Posted by J. Will

I don't see why parents would need to escort them. I walked to school and back alone (maybe 12 minutes or so each way) every day by the time I was 6 or 7. This "helicopter parenting" that I see some parents do these days is ridiculous.

Yes escorting my 3 year old down 46 floors and across 3 blocks of wall to wall people and traffic to a crowded park is helicopter parenting.

[TarHeelJ]

Originally Posted by Doug

Yes escorting my 3 year old down 46 floors and across 3 blocks of wall to wall people and traffic to a crowded park is helicopter parenting.

We live in different time...yeah I could walk up the street to friend's houses and to the store or school in the 70s/80s, but that's not a very common thing today. I would never let my child walk around anywhere alone - that's the way they get snatched or injured. Honestly I would say around 12-13 would be the age that I would let them out of the house alone. That's just common sense.

[SHiRO]

Originally Posted by TarHeelJ

We live in different time...yeah I could walk up the street to friend's houses and to the store or school in the 70s/80s, but that's not a very common thing today. I would never let my child walk around anywhere alone - that's the way they get snatched or injured. Honestly I would say around 12-13 would be the age that I would let them out of the house alone. That's just common sense.

That's not "common sense", that's damn near imprisoning your child...

[vid]

12 to 13? Holy fuck!

I remember when I turned 6 and was allowed to go to the corner store by myself for the first time. It was near the highway so only older kids could go without their parents. I got two dollars worth of candy, which in 1994, for a 6 year old, was a shit tonne of candy.

Americans are fucking paranoid, man. I blame the media.

[MonkeyRonin]

Originally Posted by TarHeelJ

We live in different time...yeah I could walk up the street to friend's houses and to the store or school in the 70s/80s, but that's not a very common thing today. I would never let my child walk around anywhere alone - that's the way they get snatched or injured. Honestly I would say around 12-13 would be the age that I would let them out of the house alone. That's just common sense.

I can't tell if this post is serious or not, but crime rates across America were much higher in the 70s and 80s than they are now. Either way, not letting your kid out of the house unsupervised until teenagehood is just plain awful parenting, wherever and whenever you live.

[SHiRO]