|RE: An alternative to the cohousing development ordeal||<– Date –> <– Thread –>|
|From: BARANSKI (BARANSKIVEAMF1.NL.NUWC.NAVY.MIL)|
|Date: Fri, 12 Nov 93 12:11 CST|
I think having a traditional developer is not going to work well. I doubt that the results will have much of the look & feel of Cohousing. It's important for (the core) community to go through the growth process together, learning how to resolve issues, and make compromises without going ballistic. On the other hand, finding a couple dozen like minded families interested in cohousing is a very difficult task in some areas. It's hard to find these people in reasonable time frame. In my opinion, it's much more feasible to start out with 6-12 families, and plan for growth. This way, newcomers are welcome, and a lengthy - getting to know - process with one newcomer at a time helps keep the continuity. Some people still seem to be thinking of cohousing as a transient/temporary lifestyle; speaking of the 'inevitable' scenario where all the core group have left.... This misses the point that co-housing is supposed to be a more or less permanent lifestyle/ place to live. It takes time to develop the community spirit. Jim.
An alternative to the cohousing development ordeal MDANNER, November 11 1993
- RE: An alternative to the cohousing development ordeal Elise Matthesen, November 11 1993
- Re: An alternative to the cohousing development ordeal Fred H Olson -- WB0YQM, November 11 1993
- RE: An alternative to the cohousing development ordeal BARANSKI, November 12 1993
- RE: An alternative to the coho dev. ordeal Nancy Wight, November 12 1993
An alternative to the cohousing development ordeal Jim Kingdon, November 14 1993
- Re: An alternative to the cohousing development ordeal Anna Yamada, November 18 1993
- Re: An alternative to the cohousing development ordeal david sucher, November 18 1993
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.