We must support models of life that can improve our current state and reducing the material demands on the planet.
Existing urban development models that can achieve these goals are spreading across North America. One example is shared housing or common living.
Given that communities consider the development of smart cities, they must consider how citizens contribute to the relative "news" of the city. Cohousing is just one such model that is both a form and process a collaborative proposal that helps to create lively and resilient communities.
Alphabetical sidewalk laboratories are mapping a new kind of neighborhood that would rebirth the 12-acre quay neighborhood in Toronto called Quayside from the "Internet Up".
This is just the beginning of the relationship, because all eyes are on the future development of 750 acres that adjoins a place along the eastern seafront.
It was a year of Silicon Valley scandals, from Google, which shared emails with application developers, on a joint investigation between the Department of Justice, the FBI, the Federal Trade Commission and the Securities Commission, and the Facebook Data Loss Exchange. An Internet-up-up networking site may not be a sales feature that Sidewalk Labs hoped would be. It should not be a surprise that many people suspect this proposal.
Several paths to a smart city
There are different paths that lead to smart cities. We have, for example, techno-utopias that focus on digital city optimization, with a particular focus on infrastructure. Or, we might consider how social innovation can lead to a better quality of life for more people.
Of course, there are times when these approaches intersect but I can not even see that it focuses mainly on the technological aspects of almost every critique of the Quayside project.
These criticisms from academics, technology writers, and citizens concerned are justified because, so far, the "intelligent city" is approaching the global relationship, they have generally been linked to top-down processes focusing on new technologies. People who live in these cities are often excluded from meaningful participation in the planning process, which later affects their lives. Given the extent of involvement in this issue, it is quite clear that Toronto citizens are hungry for the opportunity to genuinely participate in making their city better.
In view of this, I would like to draw attention to one element of the plan presented in the Quayside proposal: Cohousing.
Model of meaningful cooperation
There is a premise that people understand what is meant by what is meant by a common thing, but as a researcher in this area, I can assure you that most people do not.
Some think it is some approach to affordable housing, which is not yet possible in North America. It is unclear how the nature of this kind of deliberate community represents a relatively radical and positive shift in modern life where people, through regular practice, enlighten themselves with their neighbors on issues of sharing, cooperation and meaningful cooperation.
It is a model of design, development and management, which, when properly implemented, can contribute to a "bottom-up" approach to building a city. Yet, in design and media coverage, the cock is not clearly defined.
What is cohousing?
Cohousing involves participating in the design, development and management of a project by a self-governing group or a collective. This is one of a series of collective housing models that emerged in northern Europe in the late sixties and seventies.
Decisions are taken by consensus, and conversations through difference are essential for the creation of these communities. Residents own or rent full private apartments within a larger project (typically between 15 and 33 households) and share common property such as a common house, a large kitchen and a dining room, guests and gardens.
The legal structure of these communities may vary: Some are cooperatives, while others are condominium associations.
Material simple, relatively rich
One of the reasons why this model is interesting is that it shows us that when members of the target community gather together their own neighborhood, they decide for less personal space and more shared resources; they will opt for a matter of simple but rich relational lives.
These projects can also help "mount the community" into a larger area. Despite the fact that most of these communities are not a certified green building, research shows that socially-related dwellings can overcome green buildings on environmental measures, probably linked to governance rather than technological innovations. Clever, right?
The case study in Barcelona suggests that a combination of top-down top-down approaches to bottom-up approaches to smart city development can be gained, as partnerships between different stakeholders can enhance cooperation.
Cohousing communities in Canada and the United States could benefit from the capacity of companies such as Sidewalk Labs to mobilize people, policies and resources.
In order for it to work for clustering communities, there must be a real opportunity to work with potential residents to have their own responsibility for the process, as classmates must be the driving force behind the process.
The sense of community that emerges from cohort development is not only due to its physical design, nor to a happy accident – it is the main goal of the process of development and management that begins previously to the design and development of these communities.
Explore the following:
Low-carbon life begins in the US