Strollerderby : cities

Best Places to Raise Your Kid in America

editors — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 20:22:00 GMT

Business Week just published their second annual Best Places To Raise Your Kid 2009. This year, they went state-by-state. Towns were judged primarily on school performance and safety, but other criteria like affordability and crime rates were also weighed. So, without further adieu, the top towns to raise your little ones. Do you already live in one them? Should your hometown have made the list? Tell us why! --Andrea Zimmerman

Huntsville, Alabama
Anchorage, Alaska
Gilbert, Arizona
Springdale, Arkansas
Arcadia, California
Fort Collins, Colorado
West Haven, Connecticut
Wilmington, Delaware
Pembroke Pines, Florida
Warner Robins, Georgia
Honolulu, Hawaii
Boise City, Idaho
Mount Prospect, Illinois
Fort Wayne, Indiana
West Des Moines, Iowa
Overland Park, Kansas
Lexington-Fayette, Kentucky
Bossier City, Louisiana
Portland, Maine
Gaithersburg, Maryland
Malden, Massachusetts
Ann Arbor, Michigan
Eagan, Minnesota
Biloxi, Mississippi
Lee's Summit, Missouri
Billings, Montana
Omaha, Nebraska
Paradise, Nevada
Nashua, New Hampshire
Edison, New Jersey
Rio Rancho, New Mexico
New Rochelle, New York
Jacksonville, North Carolina
Bismarck, North Dakota
Columbus, Ohio
Lawton, Oklahoma
Bend, Oregon
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Pawtucket, Rhode Island
Rock Hill, South Carolina
Souix Falls, South Dakota
Murfreesboro, Tennessee
Euless, Texas
Orem, Utah
Burlington, Vermont
Virgina Beach, Virginia
Bellevue; Washington
Charleston, West Virginia
Eau Claire, Wisconsin
Casper, Wyoming

Urban Planning for Toddlers

Miriam Axel-Lute — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 16:00:00 GMT

It's less talked about than many of the other changes with our new administration, but among us city types, the fact that we have a president who chose to live in a city, has worked on urban issues, and, not to put too fine a point on it, generally doesn't think cities are cesspools that need to be cleaned out with some good small-town values, has been a source of much hope.

Not to mention that in the current economy, living next to a public transit stop is looking better and better, even to country mice.

So in the spirit of a new urban renaissance, isn't it time to teach your toddler about smart growth and the urban-rural transect? Time to put "city planner" on their list of possible professions next to firefighter and doctor?

Tim Hailbur and Chris Steins, of the online planning clearinghouse Planetizen, thought so at least, and they've just released Where Things Are from Near to Far to fill that niche.

Making fun kids books on very specific and fairly adult topics is a challenge. Where Things Are, despite purporting to answer questions like "Who put that building there?" and "What's a city planner?" makes what I think is the wise decision to actually focus on a simple tour through the differences between a downtown, a city neighborhood, a suburb, the country, and a wilderness.

The drawings are fun and my going-on-three-year-old city girl digs it (although I actually found myself unable to give her an example of someone we knew who lived in the kind of sprawling suburb depicted. This made me unreasonably happy). In fact, I wanted that part of the book to be larger (how about some dense streetcar suburbs, or some exurban developments?).

It peters out at the end, with our main character's mom, an urban planner who has been conducting the tour, taking credit for the whole shebang (in suddenly more hokey rhymes) without actually giving any useful information about how she does her job. Alas. Not that I think the details of development politics and policies belong here, but in that case I might have left well enough alone on the "who" front. (On the other hand, I could imagine a few pages on mapping and permitting that could be made simple and interesting. Then again we have a custom-made map of our neighborhood in the corner of our living room for my daughter, so my perspective may be off.)

Still, the fact is, kids read an awful lot about farms and kids with large yards and then occasionally something about downtown blocks: having a short, neutral little introduction to how they fit together is worthwhile. I think Where Things Are From Near to Far is something I'll recommend to my local librarian.

More by this author:

10 Worst Places to Live in the U.S.

Madeline Holler — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 18:02:00 GMT

There's nothing like raising your kids in one of the 10 most miserable cities in the U.S. There, you get the pleasure of paying really high sales tax, losing your job, probably losing your house and/or having a super long commute. Oh, and becoming the victim of a violent crime.

All that and more was what Forbes magazine used to come up with this year's 10 most squalid -- assuming it had a population of more than about 380,000.

Morning News already revealed the winner (actually, loser, right?): Stockton, Calif., which pushed Detroit off the misery pedastal, where that city sat at the top last year.

Here's the rest of the list.

2. Memphis (crime really did this city in)

3. Chicago (now that the Obamas are no longer there ...)

4. Cleveland, Ohio (the magazine cites snow, but come on. It's Cleveland! Wait, didn't Cleveland use to rock?)

5. Modesto, Calif. (unemployment and high car theft)

6. Flint, Michigan (unemployment, unemployment, unemployment)

7. Detroit (no longer the most miserable ... so this is actually good new for the Motor City.)

8. Buffalo, N.Y. (too much snow and a shrinking population)

9. Miami, Fla. (27 percent of the cities mortgages are delinquent. Uh oh.)

10. St. Louis, Mo. (ranked in the bottom half in all the categories. Still, the Arch! What about the Arch?)

Do you call these cities home? Really, are they so bad?

Photo: Forbes

Prop. 8 Protests Spawn Hope and Great Photos

Hannah Tennant-Moore — Sun, 16 Nov 2008 21:22:00 GMT

Yesterday, thousands gathered in 300 cities across the United States to protest the passage of Proposition 8, which banned gay marriage in California. The protests were a poignant and powerful reminder that no civil right is easily won.

Equality for gay families will be an uphill battle--all of the 30 states that have voted on gay marriage have banned it--but the impressive organization and high turnout of yesterday's peaceful protests demonstrate that the gay rights movement has the momentum to fight for as long as it takes.

Jezebel has posted a slideshow of photos of the protests submitted by readers across the country. I'm unable to post individual selections from the slideshow (aptly titled "Love Not Hate"), but, as you can tell from this one highlight on the right, it's worth browsing the whole thing, especially if you're feeling discouraged about the election's decidedly anti-gay rights outcome.

One of the photos shows a young woman carrying a sign that says, "Jesus Says Relax." I'd like to add to that my favorite Jon Stewart quote. Speaking of gay marriage a few years back, he said, "I really don't see what the big deal is--unless, of course, they're going to make it mandatory."

Photo: Jezebel

Best Place to Raise Kids Depends on What Kind of Kids You Want to Raise

LilySea — Wed, 24 Sep 2008 16:49:00 GMT

In June, an article in Forbes.com offered a top-ten list of the best places to raise kids. The article goes on about the process of selection, but in the end, it seems to add up to “uniformly white and middle-class” when you look closely at both the criteria and the final list. The article even suggests that proximity to shopping malls is a plus, because hanging out in them is important to teenagers' social development.

People in my former town used to say “but it's a great place to raise children!” after gripe sessions about the lack of diversity, over-abundance of fundamentalist churches or minimal opportunities for adventure. But I never agreed. I knew I wanted to raise my children in a city, and the “great place to raise kids” line always seemed to imply, “unlike a city where we adults might find many other things to enjoy but our children would suffer.”

It all depends on what parents want for their children.

Shopping malls aren't on the short list of what I want for my kids. What I do want is for them to feel that art, music and literature are theirs to make and own, not the special purview of a few special people. I want them to speak more languages than English and feel confident as global citizens. I want them to be just two more faces in a sea of friends without a dominant race or other social type. I want them to know that they aren't the only kids in the world with two parents of the same gender; or with parents of a different race than theirs; or who came into their families through adoption. I want Black adults in their lives to give them comfort in their own skin. I want somewhere interesting to go when there are 16 inches of snow on the playground and the wind-chill is negative five.

After their first two weeks in the city, my children have helped a professional artist with a piece for an upcoming show. They have met a dozen kids at the playground behind the loft where we're living and no two are in the same demographic. They have a French-speaking baby sitter and many Spanish-speaking friends and neighbors. They have a membership to the aquarium and have been there three times. There are two playgrounds within easy walking distance and an independent book store with a fabulous children's section and a weekly story hour across the street. True, the cost of living here is higher, but almost everything on that list is free.

When I opened the front door of the art gallery we are living above to a breathless young man introducing himself as “the drunken [expletive] that stole your bench last night” I was struck by how perfectly the event contained both the upside and the downside to living in an urban neighborhood. It seems the young man had a few too many and woke up with a new bench in his apartment. He recognized it as the bench the gallery owner keeps outside to accommodate the community of artists, art fans, neighborhood friends and homeless locals who gravitate towards her place.

I know that for some parents, the potential hazards of drunken revelers on the front steps is not worth the benefits of city life, but for my family, the limitless opportunities for reaching across difference and making friends out of those who might seem threatening at first glance, is more than a fair return for an occasional wandering piece of public furniture.

My Son Crapo

Jen Chaney — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 13:32:00 GMT

The Chicago Tribune recently ran this short piece about the now common practice of naming children after famous cities, citing such favorites as Madison, Savannah and Sydney. The story then runs down MomLogic's list of top five city baby names to avoid, which include Boring, Md., and Intercourse, Pa. (That last one should be ruled out based on redundancy. You had to engage in intercourse to create the child. Why keep bringing it up for the rest of his/her life?)

Personally, I have a few more that easily could have made MomLogic's list:

Accident, Md.: Finally, a way to let the world know that your kid was conceived because some people still don't understand how the rhythm method works.

Booger Hollow, Ark.: For the parent who thinks Lil' Snot is too subtle.

Lizard Lick, N.C.: You have to admit, it has a nice, alliterative flow.

Crapo, Md.: Okay, seriously, what is the deal with the lousy city names in Maryland? I live in Maryland and I am frankly appalled. Who is naming our towns, two guys from Salisbury State University named Harold and Kumar?

Sugartit, Kentucky: If Mel Gibson ever has another daughter, well, this name is just perfect.

Beebeetown, Iowa: Because of my generous spirit, I'm going to offer this up to Miss Halle Berry as a potential name for her upcoming new arrival. Beebeetown Berry? Oh, I like the sound of that.

Photo Courtesy of Rural Arkansas Magazine, Via TieDyeTravels.com

Pollution is as Bad for Kids as Secondhand Smoke

Karen Murphy — Sat, 16 Feb 2008 17:34:00 GMT

Let's talk about ways to lower kids' IQs: one thing that works pretty well is smoking in utero, and another is exposing them to lead. And still another is simply living in a high traffic-pollution area. Ouch.

Sad-but-true: kids living in high-traffic areas rife with pollution were measured IQ-wise, and the resultant IQ drops were consistent with those found in kids exposed to secondhand or in utero smoking or lead exposure.

Sadder-but-true: kids living in high-traffic-pollution areas likely have little choice about it. Urban living, even when it's a firm lifestyle choice, has its tradeoffs. I think I might choose the myriad cultural opportunities offered in most cities over an average 3-point IQ drop, or at least I'd not be so dissuaded from urban living with so little an actual effect, but I'm not sure how clear or well-defined the research has been in this. They do know that memory and cognition are also affected.

Still, I don't like the idea of high-traffic pollution anyway. Surely the effects are greater than we're presently aware, and isn't that enough reason to cut down on emissions?

Oh, and the worst-offending high-pollution cities have populations that can less afford ill effects in kids. Here's a late-2006 list of the world's worst:

Dzherzhinsk, Russia
Norilsk, Russia
Rudnaya Pristan, Russia
Linfen, China
Haina, Dominican Republic
Ranipet, India
Mayluu-Suu, Kyrgyzstan
La Oroya, Peru
Chernobyl, Ukraine
Kabwe, Zambia

*Cough*

Photo: www.pedestrians.org

America's Cities of Misery or Opportunities for Change?

Karen Murphy — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 18:02:00 GMT

Which do you want first, the good news or the bad news? Okay, we'll take the bad news first: ten American cities have been named "most miserable" by Forbes.com. Sucks, eh? They rated cities by unemployment, personal tax rates, commute times, weather, crime and the amount of nearby toxic waste. Uh...so what's the good news? It's that every city has its good points as well as its bad ones. And every city has within it a viable community, if you only know where to look.

But first let's go back to the Misery List, shall we?

At #1 is seemingly our favorite city to bash, lovely Detroit. But have you had a look at Sweet-Juniper's eloquent homage to a city many have given up on? There's a lot more there than meets the eye.

Two cities I grew up near, farther-out bedroom communities of San Francisco, made the list (Stockton and Modesto). Maybe it's the three-hour commutes? But these are nice communities, and the fact that they're a heck of a lot more affordable than close-in communities means a lot.

You'd expect to see New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles on the list: big cities with known big-city problems are sure to be miserable. But they're also wonderful, exciting, stimulating places to live, filled with culture and resources you can't find other places.

And that's the trade-off about any city. Every city is undergoing transformation, and sometimes it doesn't look so pretty. But if you look underneath, you see what's real, and you see what is, for so many people (and with good reason), home.

P.S. My city made #5.

Photo: www.surrealplaces.com

Teeny Tiny, Itty Bitty Tatas

Madeline Holler — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 21:04:00 GMT

A car company at the New Dehli Auto Expo in India lifted its shirt earlier today to expose one perky, proportioned, pert little Tata. The unveiling got the attention of high-level executives. Cheapskates around the world are certainly aroused. Today, everybody is talking about Tatas.

They are teeny tiny, itty bitty, suuuuuuuuper cheap five-person cars. Retailing at around $2,500, it's meant to get India's growing middle class off scooters and into cars. Tata's Nano runs on something like a souped up lawn mower engine, topping out at about 50 miles per hour and gets 50 miles to the gallon. But here's why I, an admitted trunk woman, am getting excited about Tatas.

The Wall Street Journal: [Tata's] Nano is part of a global race to lower the prices of entry-level cars for millions of new developing world consumers.

That's good news! Because (1) we just don't need 2 billion people driving around in massive Chrysler Escalades and (2) maybe this means we'll get some super-tiny, cheap, cheap, cheap cars for sale here in the U.S.

I want one.

For almost seven years, we have been a one-car family, which is about one car too many for the hardcore urbanite, but since we live in Southern California, I think we're doing pretty well. However! There are times when I wish we were more like a one-and-a-half car family. As my kids get older, the schedules don't always coincide. But I hesitate to spend even $10,000 on something that will sit in front of the house most days of the week. Car-sharing isn't available here.

Anyway, how about you? Are you ready to wave good-bye to the era of enormously bloated and expensive cars and usher in spare and cute wheels? What do you think of these Tatas? Think even a single carseat would fit in the back? Yeah, me either.

50 Best U.S. Towns to Raise Your Kids

Karen Murphy — Sun, 18 Nov 2007 13:47:00 GMT

Oh man. Not another one of these lists. For one thing, they always leave out some great places to live. Can't help that, I guess. But I'm often confused by the results, which more often than not display some rather odd choices amidst the ones you'd expect.

For instance, in this list, compiled and rated by the people at Business Week, a number of things were considered: test scores, cost of living, recreational and cultural activities, number of schools, and risk of crime. Those criteria all make sense. But why do 11 of the 50 have to be in Nebraska??

True. Of the 50 winners, 11 places were in Nebraska, 7 in both Illinois and Ohio; 6 in New York; 4 in Tennessee; 3 in Michigan; 2 apiece in Georgia, Kentucky, and Texas; and 1 each were in Alabama, Mississippi, and Oregon.

Which seems rather Midwest-centric, doesn't it? (I notice Pennsylvania, where I live, did NOT make the list. Huh.)

After all, earlier we gave you the Five Best Cities to Have a Baby. Oh, except Omaha made that list. And it's in Nebraska. Not to be topped, we also provided the Five Best Cities to Conceive Babies. Which did include a town in North Dakota, does that count? And then we had the Fittest Cities for Kids, which seems not surprisingly in synch with the list of Bike-Friendly Cities.

But to me there's a whole lot more going on in what makes a town or city great to live in and raise a family than simple statistics. The winner in this case was Groesbeck, Ohio. Ever heard of it? It's a suburb of Cincinnati, which also made the Fittest Cities list but at the same time has a high rate of crime.

It seems that there's a tradeoff with choosing any place to live. Groesbeck didn't top any of the categories but its overall score placed it at the top of the list. It seems that you could take these lists with as many grains of salt as you please; it's you and your family that decides what's important to you and where you should live accordingly, and often there are simply too many extenuating circumstances to really consider mre than a few major categories. Most people like to live fairly near where they work, for example, and living near family likely comes second.

But if you live in a suburb of a larger city, especially in the midwest, have a look at the list and you just might find something else to love about your hometown.

Bike-Friendly Cities Also Family-Friendly

Karen Murphy — Mon, 12 Nov 2007 12:30:00 GMT

I'm something of a cyclist. It happened when I moved to a town not far outside of Boulder and I saw that bikes were pretty much standard-issue in that area. It was great: cyclists were everywhere! In the city of Boulder they seemed to be well-respected by drivers and well-taken care of by the bike lane and bike rack gods and it wasn't unusual to see Burley trailers being towed along which contained a kid or two next to the groceries. And it spoke to me about a very different way of life from the isolating car-centric society we seem to have built. Since then, I've had to move again to eastern Pennsylvania, where things aren't nearly so bike-friendly.

This article in Wired about bike-friendly cities around the world got me to thinking about how being bike-friendly also means, by extension, that a city is family-friendly:

Cities with a lot of bikes tend to have less pollution. Unless they are Beijing. Or Bankok.
People who ride bikes as transportation (sweeping generalization here) tend to be more eco-friendly in other ways too.
Cities that are friendly to bikes tend to be more people-centric in general, which is good for families.
Cities with thriving neighborhoods that are bikeable or commute-friendly attract families.
Biking is wonderful exercise and can be part of an overall healthy family lifestyle.

If you live in a bike-friendly city, I am envious. Can I move in with you? (You don't mind a few extra kids, do you?) Seriously, I think a wonderful way to raise kids is in a smaller city that's bikeable and walkable.

Buying a Family Dream House? Not if You Live in One of These Cities

Karen Murphy — Sun, 29 Jul 2007 20:12:00 GMT

Depending on who you talk to, real estate's in a slump right now. That's what I heard a few months ago, anyway, which accounted for the bath I took when selling my marital domicile, but maybe things are different where you live.

But, slump or no, there are plenty of places where things simply aren't affordable. Way too many places. Like, probably, where you live. Give up renting and finally buy your family dream home? Sorry, it's not gonna happen unless you can live in your dog's house. Especially if you live in the following cities:

Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Diego, New York, Miami, Sacramento, CA, Las Vegas, Seattle, Boston, Orlando.

Any of these places sound familiar? Several of them used to be thought of as affordable. So everyone moved there, and guess what happened? Prices went up and now look where we are.

Moral of the story: live in the middle somewhere; California's going to slide into the ocean someday anyway.