This article underscores the importance to childrens' development of utilizing urban neighborhoods-even problematic ones—as arenas for critical learning and intervention. It describes one participatory public art project undertaken with young people in a low income neighborhood in Holyoke, Massachusetts. The project provided teens with an opportunity to critically assess and positively revision their neighborhood through exploratory walks, surveys, discussions, and design activities that culminated in the production of colorful banners. In a larger context, the article goes on to explore methods to help young people claim a more central place in the life of their cities and begin to effect environmental change. It examines obstacles to such endeavors and considers how those in the planning and design professions might help support such efforts.Myrna Margultes Breitbart is Professor of Geography and Urban Studies at Hampshire College, Amherst, Massachusetts 01002 USA Lafayette and his nine-year-old cousin Dede danced across the worn lawn outside their building, singing the lyrics of an L.L. Cool J rap, their small hips and spindly legs moving in rhythm. The boy and girl were on their way to a nearby shopping strip, where Lafayette planned to buy radio headphones with the $8.00 he had received as a birthday gift.Suddenly, gunfire erupted. The frightened children fell to the ground. &dquo;Hold your head down!&dquo; Lafayette snapped, as he covered Dede's head with her pink nylon jacket. If he hadn't physically restrained her, she might have sprinted for home, a dangerous action when the gangs started warring. &dquo;Stay down,&dquo; he ordered the trembling girl.The two lay pressed to the beaten grass for half a minute, until the shooting subsided. Lafayette held Dede's hand as they cautiously crawled through the dirt toward home. When they finally made it inside, all but fifty cents of Lafayette's birthday money had trickled from his pockets. (Kotlowitz 1991, 9) Ideas about the dangers of city streets and efforts to restrict the access of children to them have a long history in the U.S., dating back to the 19th century when reform programs targeting youth crime were first conceived. Crime then, as now, was variously defined to encompass everything from &dquo;hanging out&dquo; with friends on street corners to petty theft and violence. Expressing concern about the risks they were purported to face, middle class reformers designed programs such as the Fresh Air Fund to remove city children to the salubrious countryside. Sometimes these risks were associated with childrens' physical safety; more often than not, they were associated with the &dquo;damages&dquo; presumed to result from being in the &dquo;wrong&dquo; environments to learn respectability or the proper tools for social advancement (Breitbart 1984(Breitbart , 1991. In the context of the unpredictability and brutality of contemporary life in public housing, as described above by Kotlowitz, being a child in the city in the 1990s can do more than put o...