Nieghborhoods and Communities

The reading on communities and neighborhoods seems to reinforce my group’s controversial argument that the Centennial Place apartments complex does not work well as a community. The complex contains 640 families over 25 acres, which as mentioned in the reading does not relate to the individual both in scale and in density. As neighborhood density increases social ties are either lost or never made.

An analogy can be drawn between the respective communities of IARC and UNCG. Because IARC makes up two floors of the Gatewood Studio Arts Building all of the students often come into contact with each other. Though all of the students don’t share classes, the common field of study provides a common ground for students within IARC to relate to. Though UNCG features dining facilities, fitness centers, dorms and recreation areas students are less likely to engage unknown students due to the lack of known commonalities and interests. We identify with smaller centralized neighborhoods because we know (or can get to know) most everyone in it without making much of an effort.

The Conservation Communities seem to be the purest form of community. Though they are not totally self-sufficient they have the power to build, farm and maintain their own land. Members then work together to build the most efficiently beneficial structures. On the opposite end of the spectrum are the mass-produced Planned Unit Development (P.U.D) neighborhoods made up of identical clustered houses on small land plots. Though the developers build to code, little thought is given to whether or not these houses are comfortably inhabitable. This process resembles the mentioned failure of the Pruitt-Igoe apartments. This automated neighborhood manufacturing system creates non-identities among a covenant system based on creating and preserving structural character.