Biology is destiny, declared Sigmund Freud.
But if Freud were around today, he might say “design is destiny”—especially after taking a stroll through most modern cities.
The way we design our communities plays a huge role in how we experience our lives. Neighborhoods built without sidewalks, for instance, mean that people walk less and therefore enjoy fewer spontaneous encounters, which is what instills a spirit of community to a place. A neighborly sense of the commons is missing.
You don’t have to be a therapist to realize that this creates lasting psychological effects. It thwarts the connections between people that encourage us to congregate, cooperate, and work for the common good. We retreat into ever more privatized existences.
Of course, this is no startling revelation. Over the past 40 years, the shrinking sense of community across America has been widely discussed, and many proposals outlined about how to bring us back together.
One of the notable solutions being put into practice to combat this problem is New Urbanism, an architectural movement to build new communities (and revitalize existing ones) by maximizing opportunities for social exchange: public plazas, front porches, corner stores, coffee shops, neighborhood schools, narrow streets, and, yes, sidewalks.
But while New Urbanism is making strides at the level of the neighborhood, we still spend most of our time at home, which today means seeing no one other than our nuclear family. How could we widen that circle just a bit? Cooperative living and cohousing communities are gaining popularity, especially among young people. Yet, millions more people are looking for more informal arrangements with neighbors, where they share more than a property line.
That’s an idea Seattle-area architect Ross Chapin has explored for many years, and now showcases in an inspiring book: Pocket Neighborhoods: Creating a Small-Scale Community in a Large-Scale World.
He believes that groupings of four to twelve households make an ideal community “where meaningful ‘neighborly’ relationships are fostered.” But even here, design shapes our destiny. Chapin explains that strong connections between neighbors develop most fully and organically when everyone shares some “common ground.”
That can be a semi-public space, as in the pocket neighborhoods Chapin designs in the Seattle area. In the book’s bright photographs, they look like grassy patches of paradise, where kids scamper, flowers bloom, and neighbors stop to chat.
But Chapin points out these commons can take many different forms—an apartment building in Cambridge, Massachusetts, with a shared backyard; a group of neighbors in Oakland who tore down their backyard fences to create a commons; a block in Baltimore that turned their alley into a public commons; or the residential pedestrian streets found in Manhattan Beach, California, and all around Europe.
The benefits of a living in such a community go farther than you might imagine. I lived in one while in graduate school, a rundown 1886 row house with a common courtyard near the University of Minnesota campus. At no other time in my life have I become such close friends with my neighbors. We shared impromptu afternoon conversations at the picnic table and parties that went into the early hours of the morning under Italian lights we strung from the trees.
When the property was sold to a speculator who jacked up the rents to raise capital for the eventual demolition of the building, we organized a rent strike. And we won, which would never have happened if we had not already forged strong bonds with each other. Because the judge ruled that the landlord could not raise our rents until he fixed up the building, he abandoned plans to knock it down. It still stands today, and I still remain in contact with some of the old gang that partied in the courtyard.
Jay Walljasper wrote this article for YES! Magazine, a national, nonprofit media organization that fuses powerful ideas with practical actions. Jay is a senior fellow at On the Commons and editor of OnTheCommons.org.
YES! Magazine is a national, nonprofit media organization that fuses powerful ideas with practical actions. This article is shared here with permission.
1 reply: Hb | Post Your Reply
Sidewalks are irrelevant, the main cause of people not socializing outdoors is central air conditioning and multiple TVs in people's homes. This guy is talking nonsense.
I have been interested in co-housing for years. Although I've never joined an official community, I believe I've achieved the essence of it with my neighbors. We took down fences and have picnics together on tables spanning our yards. We house each others' guests when our own houses are too full. We share lawn mowers. We garden together. We've done triathlons together. Neighborhood design is definitely part of the equation. Neighbors having the desire to interact with one another is a bigger part. I guess I share this only to say, Don't wait until you move to the right setting to achieve neighborhood. It can happen where you are.
Please can you resend the article about class -- as experienced in Britain -- upper, middle etc.
to me at: clare.hallward048@sympatico.ca
Thanking you in advance. Somehow I had mislaid it.
On Dec 2, 2013 L.Lalancette wrote:
I would like to talk about the concept of Coop housing. I live in a 16 apartment complex with a wonderful backyard that gives onto a wooded hill. It is quiet and peaceful. Yet there's absolutely no sense of community. People are extremely self-centred. Out of 16 only 4-5 people enjoy the yard in summertime and even then not at the same time. Many don't care about their neighbours and forget cooperation and collaboration which are the essence of Coop living. I arrived here in Dec of 2003,and the only outdoors communal event they ever had was in August of that year. We've never had another one. It's really a shame. I love my place, the peace and quiet - I just wish people would be friendlier. I lived 5 yrs in Ontario before moving here and lived those 5 yrs in a 15 story building where there was a great atmosphere and neighbours talked to each other at least. As a member of the board (as secretary) I am distressed about the situation.
Post Your Reply