|Re: covering startup and infrastructure costs||<– Date –> <– Thread –>|
|From: Fred H. Olson (fholsoncohousing.org)|
|Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 12:56:38 -0500|
Lynn Nadeau <welcome [at] olympus.net> is the author of the message below but due to a problem it was posted by the Fred the list manager: owner-cohousing-L [at] cohousing.org -------------------- FORWARDED MESSAGE FOLLOWS -------------------- In the case of RoseWind Cohousing, Port Townsend WA, we did not use bank financing. This could be the case in another group either because a financial institution was unwilling to loan, or because the members were unwilling or unable to go into debt. In short, the way we did it here was "pay as the money becomes available" and "keep costs low." We purchased our land on a purchase-option plan we made with the seller, which allowed us to keep our option on 8 acres, while only needing to initiate the purchase of one additional acre every six months, with $5000 and then to make monthly payments on such land. Since we were also doing all the development planning ourselves, in rare free time, the time lag this caused was not a problem. New members showed up, or early members added to their future-equity credit, in time to keep up the purchase this way. Infrastructure was not installed immediately after we completed our Planned Unit Development agreement with the city, but waited till we had enough new buy-ins to cover the costs. We also saved money, though definitely not time, by doing almost everything ourselves, rather than hiring consultants, designers, etc. We chose the lot-development model, so a buy-in supplied the cohousing project with money for the development (land, infrastructure, common facilities) but the cost of house- building was up to the lot owner, who could build to their own timetable, budget, and design. Had we all bought in at once, part of each buy-in would have been for land, part for infrastructure (roads, utilities, drainage, etc), and part for common house. Instead, we used all the money that came in, in sequence, for whatever we needed to accomplish next. We couldn't install infrastructure till we owned the land, couldn't build anything till the infrastructure was installed, and only now, years into the process, are we funded to build the common house. There are definite trade-offs. Doing the work and decision-making together for years builds community. And years go by and the little children become big children. On the other hand, we took no big financial risks, and at worst would have ended up living on some nice land in a great small town, with friends living nearby. I have never suggested that this is the best or only way to go. But so many cohousings are done on a faster track, necessitating much more money up front, that I think it useful to put out the example that says, "You can still build community, and have a cohousing project, even if you don't have the means to do it all at once." Lynn Nadeau RoseWind Cohousing, now 20 families, 16 houses built or building, and our last few lots available. Looks like we are about to close a deal with Habitat for Humanity on two of our last lots, thanks to certain members who are funding the lot purchase for Habitat.
covering startup and infrastructure costs brucefrishkoff, July 9 1999
- Re: covering startup and infrastructure costs Fred H. Olson, July 9 1999
- RE: covering startup and infrastructure costs Rob Sandelin, July 12 1999
- RE: covering startup and infrastructure costs Karen Schwalbe, July 12 1999
- RE: covering startup and infrastructure costs Mac & Sandy Thomson, July 16 1999
- RE: covering startup and infrastructure costs Mac & Sandy Thomson, July 26 1999
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.