INSPIRE NEIGHBORHOOD FUTURES
  • ABOUT
    • What is SafeGrowth? >
      • SafeGrowth language
    • What we can do
    • Summits & Search Conferences >
      • 2017 Calgary
      • 2016 New Orleans >
        • Event Photos
      • 2016 Sacramento >
        • Event Photos
      • 2015 Canmore >
        • Event Photos
    • Media & Press Coverage >
      • Video
      • Press
    • Likeminded
    • Friends of SafeGrowth
  • RESOURCES
    • SafeGrowth theory >
      • What makes great neighborhoods?
      • Four tenets
      • Recommended readings
    • SafeGrowth documents & related publications
    • Video
    • TED-Ed tutorials >
      • SafeGrowth - Crime & the 21st Century City
      • Vision-Based Asset Mapping
    • Publications
  • BOOK
  • BLOG
  • ADVOCATES & PRACTITIONERS
  • TOOLKIT (PASSWORD ACCESS)
    • RISK ASSESSMENT FOR NEIGHBORHOODS >
      • Notes for SafeGrowth teams
      • RA Categories-Neighborhoods
      • Report guidance >
        • Report structure
        • Sample reports
      • Readings for download
      • Glossary
    • RISK ASSESSMENT FOR REGULATORS >
      • RA Categories-Regulators
  • CONTACT US

SAFEGROWTH® BLOG

An alternate future for neighborhood living

18/2/2016

0 Comments

 
Picture
Night lighting along cohousing common walkway - photo McAmant & Durrett

​Given the unsustainabity of sprawl, the persistence of crime hotspots, and the unending call for a stonger sense of community, there is a thirst for on-the-ground examples of cohesive, safer and resilient neighborhoods. Cohousing is one.


I’ve been visiting cohousing projects around Denver over the past few months and working with a group establishing an art and culture oriented cohousing community. Here is what I’ve learned.

​Cohousing is not for everyone. Some prefer towering condo apartments. Others prefer remote homes hidden in the bush. Those, of course, are legitimate choices.

However the overall trend is in the opposite direction. Over 80% of the developed world lives in urbanized cities. The UN says the majority of the world is now urban. More people migrate into cities than ever before. The truth is, cyber-creep notwithstanding, we are urban and we are social.

COHOUSING

I’ve been following the cohousing movement for 20 years. I described cohousing here 5 years ago -  Avoiding a wire-esque future and Fernwood Urban Village in Victoria, BC.

Most cohousing projects look like 25-35 unit condominiums with private residences and amenities similar to those anywhere. Yet cohousing communities are designed differently because they are designed by and for residents themselves in collaboration with architects. Cars are kept to perimeter parking and pedestrian walkways, gardens, and common greenspace areas are in the center.
Picture
Tour of community house dining room at Nyland Cohousing - Lafayette, Colorado

Cohousing governance is painfully democratic, intricate, and based on extended friendship networks. Those networks emerge from things like carpooling, shared childcare, sharing tools and common facilities like workshops and community gardens. Networks emerge from regular training in conflict resolution, mediation, and governance methods - the latest version is sociocracy. In the cohousing group I work with we are offering training in emotional intelligence skills.

Cohousing architecture includes a central common house with a library, guest rooms, play areas for kids and a large dining/kitchen area for community meals a few times a week.
Picture
Homes along the common walkway at Nyland Cohousing

REVEALING DATA

A few years ago the Cohousing Association of the United States funded a national survey of the cohousing phenomenon. How successful is cohousing and how does it differ?

Here is what it found:
  • Cohousers described more opportunities for personal growth, especially with group trainings in communication and conflict resolution
  • In 2011 there were 118 completed U.S. cohousing projects - another 100 under construction. 
  • Cohousing was more financially stable during the Great Recession
  • During the recession, less than a dozen cohousing units were foreclosed, out of thousands - far below national rates 
Picture
Lounge and fireplace at Nyland common house - a place to relax

In my experience, cohousing has lower crime and a greater desire for collaboration on difficult problems. They live more sustainably with shared gardening, recycling and ride sharing. And at the very core of social sustainability, they seem to call police less frequently to solve most problems that they instead solve themselves.

There are still issues to resolve in cohousing. For example internal conflict is lessened but it is not absent. But on whole cohousing is the most cohesive, safe and resilient neighborhood design I've seen yet. It’s a model worth considering in the 21st Century city.
0 Comments

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.


Leave a Reply.


    AUTHORS

    Gregory Saville
    Mateja Mihinjac

    Tarah Hodgkinson


    CATEGORIES

    All
    Art
    Bladerunner
    CCTV
    Change Agent
    Civility
    Community Building
    Community Empowerment
    Community Engagement
    Community Safety
    Connectivity
    CPTED
    Creativity
    Criminology
    Culture
    Defensible Space
    Design Out Crime
    Diversity
    Emotional Intelligence
    Ethics
    Evidence Based
    Evidence-based
    Eyes On The Street
    Fear Of Crime
    Graffiti
    HACE
    Health
    Homelessness
    Housing
    Human Scale Design
    Inclusiveness
    Latin America
    Law
    Lighting
    LISC
    Livability
    Livability Academy
    Lovability
    Neighborhood Governance
    Neighborhood Hubs
    Neighborhood Transformation
    Placemaking
    Policing
    Politics
    Problem-based Learning
    Public Health
    Quality Of Life
    Rural Crime
    SafeGrowth
    Safety Audits
    San Romanoway
    Science
    Security
    Sitability
    Social Cohesion
    Social Ecology
    Social Justice
    Space Activation
    Street Walkability
    Suburbs
    Successful Places
    Surveillance
    Sustainability
    Target Hardening
    Technology
    Third Generation CPTED
    Urbanism
    Violence


    ARCHIVES

    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    July 2013
    June 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    March 2013
    February 2013
    January 2013
    December 2012
    November 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    August 2012
    July 2012
    June 2012
    May 2012
    April 2012
    March 2012
    February 2012
    January 2012
    December 2011
    November 2011
    October 2011
    September 2011
    August 2011
    July 2011
    June 2011
    May 2011
    April 2011
    March 2011
    February 2011
    January 2011
    December 2010
    November 2010
    October 2010
    September 2010
    August 2010
    July 2010
    June 2010
    May 2010
    April 2010
    March 2010
    February 2010
    January 2010
    December 2009
    November 2009
    October 2009
    September 2009
    August 2009
    July 2009
    June 2009
    May 2009
    April 2009
    March 2009
    February 2009


SafeGrowth® 2007-2019   SafeGrowth.org. ​
All Rights Reserved
​.


SafeGrowth is a people-based planning method for creating 21st Century neighborhoods of imagination, livability, and safety. It develops new relationships between city government and residents in order to prevent crime and plan for the future. While technology and evidence-based practice plays a role, SafeGrowth is based on community building through annual SafeGrowth plans and neighborhood problem-solving teams networked throughout the city.​

CONTACT US

Submit
  • ABOUT
    • What is SafeGrowth? >
      • SafeGrowth language
    • What we can do
    • Summits & Search Conferences >
      • 2017 Calgary
      • 2016 New Orleans >
        • Event Photos
      • 2016 Sacramento >
        • Event Photos
      • 2015 Canmore >
        • Event Photos
    • Media & Press Coverage >
      • Video
      • Press
    • Likeminded
    • Friends of SafeGrowth
  • RESOURCES
    • SafeGrowth theory >
      • What makes great neighborhoods?
      • Four tenets
      • Recommended readings
    • SafeGrowth documents & related publications
    • Video
    • TED-Ed tutorials >
      • SafeGrowth - Crime & the 21st Century City
      • Vision-Based Asset Mapping
    • Publications
  • BOOK
  • BLOG
  • ADVOCATES & PRACTITIONERS
  • TOOLKIT (PASSWORD ACCESS)
    • RISK ASSESSMENT FOR NEIGHBORHOODS >
      • Notes for SafeGrowth teams
      • RA Categories-Neighborhoods
      • Report guidance >
        • Report structure
        • Sample reports
      • Readings for download
      • Glossary
    • RISK ASSESSMENT FOR REGULATORS >
      • RA Categories-Regulators
  • CONTACT US