Greater Grand Rapids is regularly recognized as one of the more appealing family towns in America. But how child-friendly really is the city today? And what would it take to make the place better for kids to live? One way to answer these questions, and improve the lives and futures of our children, is to apply some sustainable-city thinking.
Lynn Heemstra, administrator of the city’s Office of Children, Youth, and Families, points to the Kid-Friendly Cities Report Card to get the conversation started. The report card, sponsored by Population Connection, an activist outfit based in Washington, D.C., uses several variables - public health, safety, environmental quality, etc. – to assess the quality of the lives of children in U.S. urban areas.
Cities are graded based on the individual indicators; assigned an overall grade of A, B, C. D, or F; and then ranked in order in a way that distinguishes major cities from the merely large places like Grand Rapids.
How did GR do? Not bad. With a credible – even enviable – overall grade of B+, the city earned a ranking of 20th in the list of the largest cities with less than 2.5 million in population.
Clearly, the immediate question is ‘what must the city do to get an A?’
Some variables in the report card, released in 2004, would appear in most anyone’s appraisal of child well-being. Such measurables as poverty, teen pregnancy, math and reading proficiency, health care, and violent crime rates are clear no-brainers. Each of these markers contributes meaningfully to the overall social, environmental, and economic sustainability of a community.
But a couple of gauges are, perhaps, more specifically related to how deeply a city embraces the philosophy of sustainability thinking and, ultimately, builds a healthy place for kids:
First, Population Connection assumes that a percent change in population – be it up or down – correlates with shortfalls in critical children services. Thus, sharp changes in population may mean negative impacts on other variables affecting children’s well-being. Although Grand Rapids has experienced modest population gains in recent years, the city experienced dramatic losses in the closing decades of the 20th century. Those fluctuations clearly have taken a toll on the central cities schools, playgrounds, and other vital services.
Interestingly, another useful and related variable is the percent growth in urbanized land or, put another way, the increase in sprawl from a city’s core. Population Connection views urban sprawl as a strong negative for kids, principally because it forces kids to spend more low-quality time in automobiles being carted from place to place.
There’s growing consensus that obesity, a “national epidemic” according to the American Medical Association among others, derives in large part from a diet rich in fatty foods and a sedentary lifestyle linked to the cultural habit of conveying people around like sentient baggage – even over easily walkable distances – in automobiles.
If Grand Rapidians accept the general notion that being chauffered around the metropolis by mom or dad is not really quality time for a child, then reducing kids’ travel time appears like magic on the list of reasonable strategies to achieve a more kid friendly society. Organizing community life around more walkable, bikeable distances suitable for kids, as was done decades ago, also becomes a visionary goal and strategy to achieve a more sustainable society.
The chauffeur-driven children, after all, frequently become by age 16 or 17 car-owning children, whom overly attentive parents have endowed with their very own automobile. This is, in most cases, a defensive reaction: being a chauffeur is not really quality time for a parent, either. So many jump at the first opportunity to launch their child into the motor maelstrom calling it a “necessity.”
And maybe it is. But it’s also a risk in numerous respects: traffic accidents; youthful criminality; and let’s not forget careless love.
One fundamental solution to this challenge is expanded mass transit service. Greater reliance on public transportation, experts agree, will translate into more exercise for tubby children, as they resort to muscle power between bus stops, school, and hangouts. In the Grand Rapids area, transit riders can take their bicycles along on the bus, and many young bus passengers do exactly that.
“Our urban youth are more likely to use public transportation, and know how to use it because, since 2002, our public high school students have to use public transportation if they need a ride to and from school,” says Lynn Heemstra.
But, she adds, that is not necessarily the preferred choice. “Driving a car is historically a rite of passage within our society,” she says. “If you have the means, you want to drive.”
“Public transportation is a net positive for kids,” Heemstra concludes. “I hope our use of it continues to grow.” And with it, necessarily, more walkable, bikeable urban designs, healthier neighborhoods, and ultimately more sustainable – and kid friendly – community living.
Tom Leonard, the former executive director of the West Michigan Environmental Action Council, is a writer and independent consultant living in Grand Rapids. He covers the sustainability beat for Rapid Growth.
Photos:
Kids reading at Roosevelt Elementary - Grandville Avenue area
A family with a group of teens at Rosa Park Circle
Junior racers downtown at Priority Health Grand Classic bike race
Photos by Brian Kelly - All Rights Reserved