Re: co-housing v.s. old-fashioned neighborliness
From: Robin D. Ellison (Robin.D.EllisonDartmouth.EDU)
Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 10:11:13 -0500
---  jim willits wrote:
I have to agree with robin ellison. the continued suburban sprawl with 
"hip" new packaging ..."cohousing" is still just traditional suburban
sprawl. Urban restoration and village revitalization is the real need
--- end of quote ---
Thank you for agreeing with me, but I'm afraid that is not the point I was 
making.

For one, I ' don't think co-housing is "just  traditional suburban sprawl."  
From what I've heard co-housing is quite often done in neighborhood or even 
urban settings.  The housing is most often more dense than any "suburban 
sprawl, " due partly to the pedestrian nature of co-housing.

I do think you are right that retrofitting old neighborhoods and village 
centers is a great way to go, but I don't expect to see that till we have 
people of more moderate means taking up co-housing.  

My feeling is that people do co-housing for personal reasons, not primarily 
ideological reasons,  so they will pick what they think is the nicest, and most 
convenient site they can afford [and everyone has different criteria].  

I think the best way to attract people to " urban restoration and village 
revitalization" is to make those site more desirable to the people you want to 
live there.  I think co-housing is one of those ways.  It is also possible that 
if one "quieted" traffic [redesigning streets with plantings and pedestrian 
space so that traffic moves at 10-15 MPH], as they do in some cities in Europe, 
that those neighborhoods would become highly desirable.

It is a fascinating topic, and I think more suited for an urban renewal 
discussion not necessarily co-housing.

happy trails 
Robin Ellison
Hartland VT 

Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.