1 Shehayeb, D., Turgut Yildiz, H. & Kellett, P. (Eds.) (2007). The Appropriate Home: Can We Design “Appropriate” Residential Environments? HBNRC: Cairo, Egypt. (ISBN 499-17- 4798-3). Proceedings of the First HNBRC & IAPS-CSBE Network Joint Symposium. Neighbourhood Design and Community Building: A model of social interaction Dina K. Shehayeb, Ph.D. & Yaldiz Y. Eid, Ph.D. Abstract The aim of this paper is to discern lessons that would guide the design and planning process of residential environments. As a continuation of previous work discussing the social dimension of dwelling/home design, including near-home spaces, and the significance of sharing the same physical boundaries as a basis for community formation, this paper draws from the findings of an empirical research project funded by the National Academy of Scientific Research and Technology in Egypt, and conducted at the Housing and Building research Centre. The issue in question is which design and planning features of the outdoor spaces and streets of a neighbourhood affect certain aspects of social interaction and how. We present a model of social interaction that sets forth two critical objectives in neighbourhood design. The empirical data analysis sheds the light on the role of the built environment in influencing social interaction among residents directly and indirectly through providing reasons for being in the neighbourhood’s streets and open spaces, and fulfilling the requirements that make different resident groups spend more time in such spaces. The findings reinforce the model presented confirms that this role is inherent in the built environment’s potential along two dimensions; its’ potential to allow opportunities to “meet”, and opportunities to “control” social interaction with other occupants. The significance of this model is therefore to better guide the design and planning of urban neighbourhoods by putting forth these two, usually hidden factors, as clear objectives for future neighbourhood design. Introduction: Theoretical Background The problem with the design and planning of outdoor spaces in the neighbourhood is the fact that the built environment lasts a long time, particularly at the level of street systems and site layouts (e.g. Lozano, 1990; Maurrain, 1993; Rapoport, 1991; Visher, 1985). Another implication of the temporal dimension is that even the best of participatory design can only benefit the first-off users of a place. Acknowledging these points lead to a reversal in the goal of urban design from "maximizing choice" to "minimizing disadvantage" for first-off and future users. In practice this meant an interactive design process with users (in consideration to current users), complemented by the application of tried and tested solutions which have proved to work over time for different users (in consideration to future users), thus the need to understand the underlying mechanisms that are common to those tried and tested solutions. In urban design theory, the terminology is still in the features domain; typologies, patterns, and precedents are considered and then predictions are made about the use. An example of