|100% sold/recruitment||<– Date –> <– Thread –>|
|From: Judy (BAXTER%EPIHUBVX.CIS.UMN.EDU)|
|Date: Wed, 10 May 95 11:12 CDT|
On Date: Mon, 08 May 1995 Buzz Burrell <72253.2101 [at] compuserve.com> wrote: <<It's unlikely to be because of marketing; I suspect it's because the project is simply not appealing. It's not a good deal to enter into. I'm concerned that emphasis is put on recruitment of members, marketing, and so forth, and not on ways of making it affordable, beautiful, freedom, nice people, and a reasonable process. . .. . . . The context for this comment is that of all my friends, probably 90% of them are at least somewhat familar with coho. Community is a very popular concept today, at least in my peer group. Probably 80% of them would like to do something like this. Yet probably 2% of them are doing it. It has nothing to do with marketing; it's just the projects they have seen or heard about do not appeal to them. (edited) Reasons: "Too much time". "Too many meetings", variation of not wanting to live in an identical house to one's neighbor, and feelings of restriction. Then they might point out that although one can spend oodles of time, co-own all sorts of things, and be the financial risk-taker in the development, the end result is that coho is not cheaper than just walking into a real estate office, buying a detached house, and moving in 30 days later. >> We never said it was cheaper - and you are getting and getting into something Different. I apologise for repeating all that, but it seemed important. I too hear the same kinds of things, and I couldn't agree more that we MUST, and are trying, to improve the process, reduce the meetings, etc. I think we may need to change the model - I cannot recommend doing development as a group process , for us. And our efforts to hire professionals in many area have been fairly negative, with some exceptions. It is easy to make lists of criteria to use in choosing architects, developers (If any will talk to you), development consultants, etc., but hard to evaluate those lists, particularly if your group does not include professionals in these general areas, and maybe if it does. I also think that the bottom line is that for many people, cohousing is an interesting attractive idea, but they don't want to give up much for it - it has be to in just the right spot, price range, type of housing, not too much effort. And maybe, someday, if someone decided enough money can be made with it so developers are willing to take the risks, there will be a lot of such options. But right now, I see us attracting people who REALLY are looking for community, without the ideology and/or mission or whatever that, in my ignorant mind, goes with many "intentional communities". AND, I'm surprised there aren't more of us - who have been looking for something like this for a long time. For me, I would never have dared attempt this without the McCamant Durrett book as a guide, and it doesn't pretend it's easy, but I thought, others have done this, so can we. And I'm finding it tough - and worth it, today. Judy Slogging away in the trenches with getting close to final prices and a construction loan. Judy Baxter, Monterey Cohousing Community, (MoCoCo) Twin Cities Area, Minneapolis/St.Paul Minnesota e-mail: baxter [at] epivax.epi.umn.edu
- (no other messages in thread)
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.