The Shape of the Future

E M Risse


 

Cohousing and Dooryard Density

The "Cohousing" movement provides useful data on density for residential projects. If re-developed at "Cohousing" densities, our Subregions could accommodate growth for years without consuming any more land.


 

Those who believe that New Urbanism (aka, neotraditional design) has a role in shaping the future will find the newsletter "New Urban News" a good source of information. Started by New Urbanism advocate Robert Steuteville of Ithaca, NY, "New Urban News" added Phil Langdon, author of A Better Place to Live, a senior editor some time ago. The 24 page +/- newsletter, published ten times a year, presents useful text and graphics on neotraditional design and New Urbanism.

 

The front hook story in the June issue is a timely review of Cohousing. The Cohousing movement is made up of groups of families (and a cadre of specialized consultants) who take the need for more functional human settlement patterns into their own hands. Not all the projects called “Cohousing” create great examples of functional human settlement patterns but the practitioners' hearts are in the right place.

 

Of special interest here is the data in Langdon’s story relating to project density. Cohousing projects are places where people spend thousands of hours deciding just how they want to live. Frequently, cohousers go to great lengths to create the very best environment in which to raise their children. Cohousers then back up their ideals by investing a lot of money to build those places.

 

Langdon points out that several cohousing projects are found within New Urbanism “neighborhoods.” (See End Note One.) His data suggest that for this form of “well considered” housing, the Alpha Dooryard scale is between 12 and 26 dwelling units. (Ranging from smallest to largest, Alpha components are the Unit, Dooryard, Cluster, Neighborhood, Village, Community and New Urban Region/Support Region.) 

 

The density of the projects listed in the Langdon article ranges from 23 to 45 persons per acre. (Recall that, based on development planned and built since World War II, the minimum density for an Alpha, or Balanced, Community is 10 persons per acre at the community scale.) 

 

Those who claim that there is a rationale for disaggregation of urban land uses need to understand the impact of the Cohousing Dooryard numbers on the density of larger components. For instance, it is useful to plug these numbers into the Fairfax example in “Antidotes,” May 9, 2005. One finds these Cohousing numbers mean there would be far more open space in Fairfax County and far more citizens would be living in dooryard and cluster scale environments that meet their needs rather than in places that primarily meet the criteria of maximum profit to those who provide shelter under the current distorted market structure.

 

It goes without saying that at these densities there would be more that enough room in Fairfax County for all the workers holding the Fuller/Florida “More, Better Jobs” outlined in the “Antidotes” column.

 

One final note on Cohousing: S/PI has followed with interest the evolution of several Cohousing projects. The Cohousing process (from learning about the idea to looking for the right compatriots, finding a suitable site and the best design plus the actual construction) takes up to a decade in many cases. By the time the perfect place to raise a toddler comes into being, the child is about to go to high school and parents need to be focused on Alpha Village scale issues, not on Alpha Dooryard ones.

 

Based on this time frame, our observation is that if the earnest participants in a Cohousing process who spend thousands of hours working toward the perfect Cohousing Dooryard instead spent one quarter of that time and effort working with their current dooryarders, the result would be every bit as satisfying.

 

Even the idea of a shared space (“common house”) could be accommodated by evolving existing contexts. The problem is that first citizens have to know they would be better off living in an Alpha Dooryard. Before that, they would have to understand that such a thing as a Dooryard exists, or that they already live in one (albeit a Beta Dooryard). This is one of the tasks of PROPERTY DYNAMICS.

 

-- June 20, 2005

 


 

End Note

 

1. Many New Urbanist projects called “neighborhoods” correspond to what we refer to as al "Alpha Cluser." The cornerstone of an Alpha "Neighborhood" is a “neighborhood school.” Most New Urbanist projects are not large enough to support a 1 or 2 throuh 5 or 6 “neighborhood school.”  They could support a Pre-K thru 1 or 2 Alpha Cluster scale school in some cases. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ed Risse and his wife Linda live inside the "Clear Edge" of the "urban enclave" known as Warrenton, a municipality in the Countryside near the edge of the Washington-Baltimore "New Urban Region."

 

Mr. Risse, the principal of

SYNERGY/Planning, Inc., can be contacted at spirisse@aol.com.

 

See profile.