212 Practice
Metropolis, 1995). Low-pension adults immobilized in retirement, and the denial
of opportunities for children in younger families to socialize and enjoy outside
play during the slush of winter, are also problems for poor families in ex-urbia.
Well-understood ex-urban policies can render it possible to achieve rural-
residential conservation withdevelopment, involving no land taking, an aesthet-
ically acceptable and environmentally benign outcome being the end result. Offi-
cial controls are necessary simply because the operation of individual moral
conscience is partial. There exists an exhibitionist-commodifier will on the part of
a majority of ex-urban stakeholders to not conform, to profile their presence well
beyond the title boundary, and also to take in what ambience they can enjoy ‘free’
from beyond those boundaries. Quasi-urban development on land not suitable for
agriculture is acceptable and workable providedclear rules for siting, access,
profile, appearance and landscaping – set out in figure 5.4 as Ex-urban building
performance guidelines– are well understood, appreciated for what they are, and
get enforced.
Care is necessary for this is the urban frontier, there are few watchdogs and no
craft guilds at work here. Indeed Tom Daniels provides a five-page appendix to
hisWhen City and Country Collide(1999), entitled ‘A Warning About Living in the
Rural Urban Fringe’, covering such matters as access and shared access, utility
rights, ground water purity, noise (such as weekend go-karting), spray drift. And
in a box he sets down a few notes on ‘How to Tell if You Live in the Rural-Urban
Fringe’ (25-plus minutes’ commute, on-site septic tanks, less than 500 people per
square mile).
An advocacy for a ‘rules’ approach is contained in Randall Arendt’s well-
craftedRural by Design(1994). His sliding-scale alters the rate of dwelling numbersMuch reference is given to Oregon in the rural-residential ‘resistance’ literature.
Also noteworthy, relative to the Connecticut River Valley, are the innovative ‘work with the
flow’ guidelines put out by Yaro and Arendt (1994).
Foranyconstruction allowed under eithera ‘resistance’ or a ‘work with the flow’ situation it is
important, for the sake of local appreciation as well as the wider benefit to tourism, to conserve
existing woodlands, retain arable and pasture land for agriculture, group any allowed housing into
‘clusters’ and to prohibit building on profiled ridges or close to roadlines.
Tracking down from these general design parameters: the attainment of rural building harmony
predicates that attention be accorded the following on-site design and harmony factors for each
individual siting situation:- Setting:co-considerate discrete siting and clustering
- Grouping:buildings, garages, tanks, structures all-of-a-piece.
- Positioning:unobtrusive location, and heeling into the landscape
- Profiling:low-rise buildings, low-angle roofing; all below the skyline
- Texturing:surfaces low-sheen and non-reflective
- Colouring:use earth and woodland colorations on all buildings and structures
- Parking:out-of-sight, unobtrusive, screened
- Utilities:all within-site utilities under-grounded
Figure 5.4 Ex-urban building performance guidelines.