Few tasks are more central to creating a happy, safe society than raising well-adjusted children to carry civilization forward. Yet few jobs are more difficult. Judging by the number of dysfunctional families and bratty kids observed in public places, raising children is a task that few have mastered in 21^st century New Urban Regions of the United States. Any help that parents can get in raising children is of profound personal and communal benefit.

 

Money, Time and Two Working Parents

 

There are many tangible and intangible strategies, facilities, programs and locational juxtapositions that can help families raise children. Family psychologists suggest the most important may be having two parents to share the responsibility.

 

According to research on the topic, having sufficient 

• A house with space for personal privacy and family activities

• At least one parent nearby in case of emergency

• An outdoor place to play close to the home

• Children of similar age living nearby with parents who are willing and able to share and exchange support

• Access to a natural area in which to explore

• Day care/preschool opportunities available in the cluster and neighborhood

• A neighborhood elementary school near enough for a five-year-old to walk to and small enough to create a sense of belonging

• A nearby multipurpose field with a backstop, soccer goal and backboard for dooryard- and cluster-scale pick up games and for cluster- and neighborhood-scale team practices

• A job close to home for the parents that work outside the home

• A corner store with a neighborly shopkeeper

• A middle school and a high school close enough and a pathway safe enough for a 7^th grader to walk to school

• After-school programs, clubs, sports activities, that do not require vehicular access

• Places to hang out that are visible enough not to invite mischief

• A nearby place for older children to work after school, on weekends and during the summer

• Several forms of commonly owned land to help children (and their parents) understand how to use and respect both private property and common property

• A library/information access beyond the Internet

• A social “third place” apart from home and work that anchors the neighborhood for adults

• A range of places for adult education, worship and opportunities to do hands-on work together that benefits the dooryard, cluster, neighborhood and village

• Close proximity to cultural and other stimulating sites and services

• Access to extended family –- aunts, uncles, cousins, grandparents and parents' adult friends -- living nearby

• A shared-vehicle system (aka, transit) to provide mobility for those too young to drive and access for those unable to drive due to age or other factors

The list could go on... While some items may vary importance to different people, these are the priorities that a focus group of parents and professionals in childhood education and health might cite. After thoughtful consideration, most parents would agree  resources, facilities and spacial relationships listed above would be helpful for child rearing.

 

The Myth vs. Physical Reality

 

Despite general agreement on the elements in the list, many parents would think there was an element missing, one of overriding importance: A house with a big yard where the children can play.

 

It never occurs to most parents, however, that buying a house with a big yard conflicts directly with other desirable goals. By maximizing the size of their yards, parents perpetuate a scattered, low-density pattern of development that precludes the existence of and/or access to the vast majority of the other child-friendly elements on the list above. In addition, the big yard eats up time and money that could be more effectively spent on other elements to support raising children.

 

Attaining a more functional human settlement pattern can't guarantee that the elements on the list will be available. But a settlement pattern defined by large yards around single-family dwellings will assure that most of the resources on the list will not be available for most households.  

A settlement pattern that provides most houses with a big yard for the kids at the cluster scale forecloses the opportunity for most of the other elements on the list to exist in functional proximity to the houses in a cluster or in a neighborhood made up of such clusters.

It is possible to design a cluster so either houses have big yards or to design a cluster with minimal yards but with common play areas for synergistically scaled groups of homes so everyone has access to play areas in every dooryard and every cluster. The latter design also provides accessibility to other important elements. It is not possible to design a big yard for every house in a dooryard and then agglomerate these dooryards, clusters and neighborhoods so that spacial arrangements accommodate most of the child-friendly elements.

 

For this reason, the market dictates that houses enjoying a rare combination of a big yard and access to the amenities listed above typically sell at a very high premium. For example, homes with large yards within 1/3 to ½ mile of METRO stations in the Rosslyn/Ballston Corridor in Arlington County, cost four times the price of the same house with the same size yard in an isolated cluster in Prince William or Loudoun Counties. This is a simple application of the law of supply and demand in an arena controlled by physics not policy, politics or preferences.

 

The cumulative footprint of many big yards results in dysfunctionally low densities and lack of diversity at the cluster, neighborhood, village and community scales.   Everything is a drive away, and only adults can drive.  Once in a car, distance is not as important, and this results in scattered destinations. Places to drive and park the cars required for access take up the space that is needed for synergistically located child-friendly facilities and programs.

 

It Takes a Community

 

Why is a fine-grained mix and diversity in the settlement pattern so important? Recall the adage that “it takes a village" to raise a child. We note in Chapter 9 Box 3 of The Shape of the Future that it takes a Balanced (Alpha) Community made up of functional dooryards, clusters, neighborhoods and villages to raise a child from infancy to adulthood. The automobile scatters origins and destinations of trips, and dissolves the glue that holds the components of a Balanced Community together.

 

What is Behind the Myth of the Big Yard?

 

Why has “a big yard for the kids” become the overriding spacial and locational desire of parents for raising children? The reason is simple. A house with a big yard is the only item for which an entire industry, in fact two-– the auto/oil/asphalt/road builders industry complex and the land speculator/developer/builder/

realtor/finance/home furnishings industry complex – which make the most money only if a big yard is deemed to be critically important. The big yard drives up per capita land consumption up by a factor of three. Three times as many land speculators go home happy each year. Billions of dollars in advertising –- including ads by federally chartered mortgage packagers -– pound away at families daily imploring parents to do the right thing for themselves and their children: Buy a house with a big yard for the kids. 

 

We did not specifically include the “big yard” as one of the housing myths in The Myths That Blind Us (Bacons Rebellion, October 20, 2003). We saved this element for special attention. The quest for the big yard is one of the most deeply ingrained in our national psyche. Any other housing choice is seen as a poor second-choice compromise.

 

In reality, given the existence of resources like those listed above, the big yard adds little to the child-rearing experience. When the oldest child gets strong enough to kick a soccer ball into her father’s flowerbed, it is time to move to a place with a nearby common field for practice or a pick-up game. The cumulative impact of big yards is that there are too few children living close by for even a game of three-on-three. (A future column will focus on additional design and use considerations of the big yard.)

 

Back to the Bottom Line

 

Ample research documents that money is the most important consideration in raising a child. Nothing, not race, not education, not place of national origin, correlates with how well a child does as the level of the family's disposable income available during childhood. Getting a good education, avoiding teen pregnancy, avoiding drug addiction, staying out of jail and participating in sports all correlate closely with level of disposable income during childhood.

 

The cost of buying and maintaining a big yard, putatively for the benefit of the children, soaks up disposable income that could be spent far more beneficially. Further, maintaining a large lot consumes time and sweat equity on such mundane tasks as cutting grass and raking leaves. Because of these and other drawbacks, few households take advantage of the creative landscape and gardening opportunities of a big lot. By the time the owner has the financial resources to create a well-landscaped yard, the children have left the nest. 

 

For these reasons, it does not make sense to tie up a money in a big yard during a child’s formative years. Funds could be more beneficially spent taking the family on vacations, paying for music lessons, sending a child on a class trip out of town, or simply enabling parents to spend more time with, and in support of, their children.

 

Where to From Here?  

If many families live in houses with a big, individual yards, it is rarely possible to enjoy close proximity to other things that would make raising children more satisfying and more successful.

When citizens understand the realities of owning a big yard, the market will shift. Compact, walkable clusters and neighborhoods with close-by services and amenities will gain favor. These functional components of human settlement can be agglomerated into diverse villages and Balanced Communities, which are beneficial in raising children.