Have you ever been drawn into a fence dispute with a neighbour? We’ve certainly had our fair share… I’m not sure if it’s because of or despite the fact that my wife and I are from an architectural background. To us it’s a pretty straightforward deal: follow the local planning controls and fencing Acts, run a string-line along the boundary, agree on materials and select a quote, and boof! – there’s your fence. Simple, right?
Noooooo. Not on your life. The more I’ve shared our latest escapade with friends the more I’m convinced that this is Newton’s Fourth Law – Friction is directly proportional to the length of a new fence. It seems that most people have to suffer when installing a shared boundary fence.
Perhaps it’s this recent experience that has sent me off looking for the opposite effects (Newton’s Third Law?) – an approach to community design that negates the fence fights and acts to bring neighbours together.
A friend sent me this ‘pocket neighbourhoods’ link [by Ross Chapin] during the week and as soon as I jumped in it took me back to the period when I was doing a lot of retirement village master planning – maybe it’s the denominator of ‘common cause’ and a stronger focus on pedestrianism that made me sentimental, but in exploring this site I’m thinking ‘how can we decant that into larger urban scale development?’
My ability with words isn’t a patch on the photos on this site so just take a look for yourself… but look for the sustainable community attributes of these pocket neighbourhoods – how they deal with the commons and shared spaces (shared infrastructure), public-private (reduced land consumption), transport (reduced emissions), pedestrian connections (social and physical health) and so forth.
This site also has some good links to other urban sustainability sites – worth a cruise during your Friday lunch time.