{"id":1851,"date":"2012-09-01T07:29:58","date_gmt":"2012-09-01T13:29:58","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.interculturalurbanism.com\/?p=1851"},"modified":"2013-06-28T10:11:04","modified_gmt":"2013-06-28T16:11:04","slug":"cultural-inclusion-as-an-element-of-neighborhood-planning","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.interculturalurbanism.com\/?p=1851","title":{"rendered":"Cultural Inclusion as an Element of Neighborhood Planning"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>In a post at <a href=\"http:\/\/bettercities.net\/news-opinion\/blogs\/howard-blackson\/18813\/five-cs-neighborhood-planning\">Better! Cities&amp;Towns<\/a>\u00a0and also <a href=\"http:\/\/placeshakers.wordpress.com\/2012\/08\/30\/the-five-cs-of-neighborhood-planning\/\">PlaceShakers and NewsMakers<\/a>\u00a0Howard Blackson succinctly summarizes what he considers the 5 basic elements of neighborhood planning, pitched as the \u201c5 Cs\u201d:<\/p>\n<p>1. <strong><em>Complete<\/em><\/strong>: a mix of uses (allowing living, working, playing, lounging, eating, shopping, worshiping), bounded by a distinct edge.<\/p>\n<p>2. <strong><em>Compact<\/em><\/strong>: a maximum 5 minute walk from the center of the neighborhood to its edge.<\/p>\n<p>3. <strong><em>Connected<\/em><\/strong>: multiple modes of transportation (walk, drive, bike).<\/p>\n<p>4. <strong><em>Complex<\/em><\/strong>: a variety of civic spaces (plazas, greens, recreational parks, natural parks), civic buildings (libraries, churches, community centers, assembly halls), private buildings (residences, offices, shops), and thoroughfare types (boulevards, avenues, streets, alleys, bike lanes, paths).<\/p>\n<p>5. <strong><em>Convivial<\/em><\/strong>: supportive of human connections or relationships that are \u201cfriendly, lively, and enjoyable.\u201d<\/p>\n<div id=\"attachment_1853\" style=\"width: 432px\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\"><a href=\"http:\/\/placeshakers.files.wordpress.com\/2012\/08\/ruraltnd.jpeg\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-1853\" class=\"size-full wp-image-1853\" title=\"Neighborhood.640\" alt=\"\" src=\"http:\/\/www.interculturalurbanism.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2012\/09\/Neighborhood.6401.jpg\" width=\"422\" height=\"480\" \/><\/a><p id=\"caption-attachment-1853\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">Credit: Duany Plater-Zyberk, &amp; Company<\/p><\/div>\n<p>I think that element #5 is a bit of an apple among the oranges.\u00a0 Physical properties of neighborhoods are one thing; human relationships can be quite another. \u00a0Blackson clearly recognizes that there\u2019s a relationship between built form and social interaction, that neighborhoods consist of many and varied communities, and that the human ability connect physically across these communities has something to do with our ability to, in his words, \u201cthrive culturally.\u201d\u00a0 But I\u2019m not sure that conviviality is a neighborhood feature that\u2019s as easily generated as the others. \u00a0For example, the physical form of Denver&#8217;s widely celebrated\u00a0<a href=\"http:\/\/www.interculturalurbanism.com\/?p=878\">New Urbanist neighborhoods<\/a>\u00a0too often signal, to non-Americans and ethnic \u201cOthers,\u201d homogeneity and exclusivity. \u00a0They are too often highly-ordered, all-too-predictable settings devoid of street life.\u00a0 Where such conditions exist a particular <a href=\"http:\/\/www.interculturalurbanism.com\/?p=523\">epistemology and theory of urbanism<\/a> (and culture) is at work.<\/p>\n<p>Alternatively, there&#8217;s something to be said for the messiness of city-life including, perhaps, the <em>conflicts<\/em> (or tensions) that can emerge when cultural differences are brought together. \u00a0Such conflicts don&#8217;t have to end badly; they can be productively channeled. Efforts to resolve conflicts over the form and use of urban space can produce creative interventions in the urban fabric and new, <em>collective<\/em> forms of social and spatial belonging.\u00a0Thus, I\u2019d propose that <strong><em>Culturally-Inclusive<\/em><\/strong> replace Convivial as the 5th &#8220;C&#8221; on Blackson\u2019s list. We\u2019ve made a point on this blog of highlighting work (e.g., <a href=\"http:\/\/www.interculturalurbanism.com\/?p=1307\">here<\/a>) that explores the specifics of culturally-inclusive design from the standpoint of both process and product.\u00a0 Other blogs do likewise, such as Julian Agyeman\u2019s <a href=\"http:\/\/julianagyeman.com\/2012\/08\/cultural-competency-towards-culturally-inclusive-practice\/\">Just Sustainabilities<\/a> and Phil Wood\u2019s <a href=\"http:\/\/subversiveurbanism.tumblr.com\/\">Subversive Urbanism.<\/a> Attention to this work might help New Urbanists, and others, better <a href=\"http:\/\/www.interculturalurbanism.com\/?p=1364\">calibrate for culture<\/a>.\u00a0\u00a0 The task is to design not for conviviality, but rather for cultural-inclusion. We need settings that allow conviviality, cacophony, creativity, community, and even periodic chaos to flourish.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>In a post at Better! Cities&amp;Towns\u00a0and also PlaceShakers and NewsMakers\u00a0Howard Blackson succinctly summarizes what he considers the 5 basic elements of neighborhood planning, pitched as the \u201c5 Cs\u201d: 1. Complete: a mix of uses (allowing living, working, playing, lounging, eating, [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"spay_email":"","footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_is_tweetstorm":false,"jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true},"categories":[8,18,16,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1851","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-general","category-intercultural-city","category-new-urbanism","category-placemaking"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p1H2bI-tR","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.interculturalurbanism.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1851","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.interculturalurbanism.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.interculturalurbanism.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.interculturalurbanism.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.interculturalurbanism.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1851"}],"version-history":[{"count":16,"href":"http:\/\/www.interculturalurbanism.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1851\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2855,"href":"http:\/\/www.interculturalurbanism.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1851\/revisions\/2855"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.interculturalurbanism.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1851"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.interculturalurbanism.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1851"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.interculturalurbanism.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1851"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}