I'd bet it's also more expensive, less safe, less space, basically none of the things that you think of when you imagine the typical American nuclear family
I grew up in New York City (Queens) so YMMV, but none of these are huge blockers.
- more expensive: pre-K is now universally funded by local government and the public schooling system has decent pathways. General living expenses are more expensive, but not so much so if you're comparing with any of the NYC suburbs with decent schools.
- less safe: NYC has become, on a per-capita basis, one of the safest cities in the country, and certainly the safest large one. In general, a massive amount of "eyes on the street" helps keep crime down, whereas in the suburbs being outside alone is not uncommon.
- less space: in terms of living area and backyard, strictly speaking, yes. But I lived fine in a two-bedroom apartment with my parents. There are also houses with modest front and backyards within the city limits, and we moved to one of those with the addition of another child. Do you need 3000 sq ft and an acre of land to raise a child?
As far as outside, the city offers a lot of playgrounds and parks with other people in it. And then as you get older and outgrow the playground, the constant variety of things really helps with boredom, and many attractions like the museums are even free for residents. And the cherry on top is that the mass transit system allows children to travel without a chaperone of legal driving age, so parents don't have to pick between chauffeuring children around or keeping them at home.
American cities are strange because you usually have the spiky, tall central districts and the extremely low density suburbs, but nothing in the middle.
Queens is 2.3M people, but they're mostly in low-rise, <5 story apartments and houses of various sizes. Fresh Meadows, NY is hardly suffocating levels of density, and yet this kind of neighborhood is simply not available in most metropolitan areas. https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7337074,-73.7813407,3a,75y,3...
Exactly this. You could not even pay me to raise my two kids in the city. What the city offers to someone in their 20s does nothing for those in their 30s spending most of their time working or child rearing (and I work from home).
I require space, comfort, and convenience for family, not eatery and nightlife variety. Proximity to interstates and international airports is also desirable though for work and vacation travel.
As a late-20s person living in the city, this is a thing I've been pondering. I grew up in typical suburban sprawl living "close" to school, soccer practice and friend's houses... but "close" still meant entirely dependent on my parents for rides to each place (less the 5-10 children my age within a 1-mile walk). It was a huge time sink for the family, and having to be driven everywhere felt isolating as a child (i.e. can't hang out because mom is too busy to drive me). Not every urban neighborhood is inherently walkable, but many cities have inner ring suburbs (usually within city limits) where all of those amenities are at most a 20 minute walk away. Would this type of neighborhood be livable with your requirements?
Maybe. Suburbs streets have so little traffic you can let a 4 year old play games in them. As you get closer and closer in there is more traffic. If I lived on any of the roads near downtown in my tiny city I'd be concerned about my kid running out the door and into the street. While I worry about that anywhere, the odds are in my favor where I live now because there are so few cars, while in the city there are cars all the time.
Possibly! Depends on the climate. The more mild, the more I’d consider it. I’m not walking 20 minutes in weather below 32F (Chicago) or above 90F (Tampa, Orlando, Miami).
My partner is a stay at home mom who wouldn’t mind providing daily transportation, and after a certain age we’ll just provide electric scooters and bikes to our kids before they’re old enough to drive.
