When I was talking about this concept to a friend of mine, she pointed out that a big part of the allure of the small private green space (i.e. sizable back yard) as opposed to the larger common green space is that sending kids out to play in the back yard doesn't require mom to load up the car and take *everybody* in the family to the park. If you have a baby that needs to nap and a toddler who wants to play and other kids to consider as well, it's hard to get them all to the public green space. But with a yard, the ones who want to be outdoors can be outdoors and the ones who need to be indoors can be indoors all at once.
Good point. Similar to the point that transit might be cheaper when you're single, but when you have a couple of kids, you triple the cost, whereas a car trip costs the same (until the car is full.) I'm interested in the scenarios where having kids/being a parent complicates some urbanist ideas. I think urbanism can be pro-family but it can also sometimes be unconsciously oriented towards single and/or childless folks.
YES - as much as I wanted to live in a more walkable, downtown house we ended up in a place with just such a fenced yard. We're about to have 3 kids under 3, and that comes with so many logistical complications with naps vs. outside time (with so many different needs!) that finding the perfect time to load everyone up to go outside just is not practical..... or possible.
A big part of the problem is that planning decisions aren't made with the big picture in mind. It's true that if we don't densify Arlington, we're going to sprawl into Prince William, and that this will make Prince William residents unhappy. But they don't really go to Arlington and complain (and would be written off as outsiders if they did). A more regional approach to planning would help a lot.
Yes. There isn't any obvious mechanism to bring those two conflicting, but geographically separate, constituencies together directly. I'm far from an expert on municipal governance, but I can imagine, in theory, that if metro areas, weren't composed of so many distinct municipalities, this might be done in a more sensible way.
When I was talking about this concept to a friend of mine, she pointed out that a big part of the allure of the small private green space (i.e. sizable back yard) as opposed to the larger common green space is that sending kids out to play in the back yard doesn't require mom to load up the car and take *everybody* in the family to the park. If you have a baby that needs to nap and a toddler who wants to play and other kids to consider as well, it's hard to get them all to the public green space. But with a yard, the ones who want to be outdoors can be outdoors and the ones who need to be indoors can be indoors all at once.
Good point. Similar to the point that transit might be cheaper when you're single, but when you have a couple of kids, you triple the cost, whereas a car trip costs the same (until the car is full.) I'm interested in the scenarios where having kids/being a parent complicates some urbanist ideas. I think urbanism can be pro-family but it can also sometimes be unconsciously oriented towards single and/or childless folks.
YES - as much as I wanted to live in a more walkable, downtown house we ended up in a place with just such a fenced yard. We're about to have 3 kids under 3, and that comes with so many logistical complications with naps vs. outside time (with so many different needs!) that finding the perfect time to load everyone up to go outside just is not practical..... or possible.
A big part of the problem is that planning decisions aren't made with the big picture in mind. It's true that if we don't densify Arlington, we're going to sprawl into Prince William, and that this will make Prince William residents unhappy. But they don't really go to Arlington and complain (and would be written off as outsiders if they did). A more regional approach to planning would help a lot.
Yes. There isn't any obvious mechanism to bring those two conflicting, but geographically separate, constituencies together directly. I'm far from an expert on municipal governance, but I can imagine, in theory, that if metro areas, weren't composed of so many distinct municipalities, this might be done in a more sensible way.