Subcultural Boundaries

About this pattern

The vast spread of urbanisation results in alienated people and communities instead of a mosaic of recognisable suburbs that include many subcultures.

Mosaics of subcultures need to be identified by boundaries, which are like ecotones that allow for social mingling with other subcultures as well as intensifying the subculture within the boundary. Such ecotonal areas can be shared playing fields, football and cricket ovals, public buildings such as libraries, large parks and water bodies. Where the boundaries are open space, they contribute to cooling of surrounding residential areas.

A pattern for a great variety of subcultures in a city is not a pattern to form ghettos; rather it is a pattern of opportunity, allowing a city to contain a multitude of different ways of life with comfortable intensity. A rich mix of subcultures will not be possible if each subculture is being inhibited by pressure from its neighbours.

The subcultures are ideally defined by shared land, which is not residential land, and which should be afforded as generous an area as possible.

Pattern Conditions

Enablers:

• Subcultural Boundaries as public commons.
• Natural boundaries can be areas like local bushland, creeks, streams and rural fingers.
• Artificial boundaries can include ring roads, industrial ribbons, infrastructure, although they lack the potential to be ecotonal.

Constraints:

• State & Local Government planning that does not encourage fine grain zoning.

Commoning Concerns

Access: Varies; ideally unrestricted.

Use: Recreation, environmental planning, infrastructure.

Benefit: Social tolerance; mitigating heat islands.

Care: Community groups, Local Government, private owners, landcare.

Responsibility: Community groups, Local Government, private owners.

Ownership: Community groups, Local Government, private owners.