Re: Are We Done With the Rental Issue?
From: David L. Mandel (dlmandelpacbell.net)
Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2011 00:08:03 -0800 (PST)
There may be other good reasons to choose rental, but that's not one of them. 
Ownership of a home does not disqualify for SSI, Medicaid, SNAP, TANF, etc. 
David

--- On Fri, 2/18/11, Susan Tatelman <steppingstonecohousing [at] hotmail.com> 
wrote:

From: Susan Tatelman <steppingstonecohousing [at] hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [C-L]_ Are We Done With the Rental Issue?
To: cohousing-l [at] cohousing.org
Date: Friday, February 18, 2011, 9:27 AM



Hi Philip,
 
Just another side to the issue of renting vs owning...
 
I am involved with a group of local non-profits (in the Seattle area) that are 
developing a model, mixed-use cohousing community that will provide long term 
affordable housing, as well as community based support for seniors & special 
needs people. 
 
Many of the special needs individuals will be renters, as they are not allowed 
over $2000 in personal assets, or they lose ALL their benefits. They will 
definitely be long term renters, and become integral & contributing members of 
the community. The homes will either be owned by families or local non-profits.
 
Susan Tatelman
 
 
> From: cohousing-l-request [at] cohousing.org
> Subject: Cohousing-L Digest, Vol 85, Issue 28
> To: cohousing-l [at] cohousing.org
> Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2011 03:16:38 -0800
> 
> Send Cohousing-L mailing list submissions to
> cohousing-l [at] cohousing.org
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.cohousing.org/mailman/listinfo/cohousing-l
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> cohousing-l-request [at] cohousing.org
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> cohousing-l-owner [at] cohousing.org
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Cohousing-L digest..."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
> 1. Re: Are We Done with the Rental Issue? (R Philip Dowds)
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 19:00:37 -0500
> From: R Philip Dowds <rpdowds [at] comcast.net>
> Subject: Re: [C-L]_ Are We Done with the Rental Issue?
> To: CoHoL <Cohousing-L [at] cohousing.org>
> Message-ID: <C98320D5.1D084%rpdowds [at] comcast.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
> 
> Many of those who live in city multi-family are really trying hard to get to
> ? or at least dreaming about ? the suburbs and a single family home. Very
> few of those who have made it to the single family suburbs are anxious to
> get back to an apartment building in the city. Many of us who live in
> cities by choice are a little out of touch with the dreams and values of
> those who live otherwise.
> 
> I have no beef with those who rent, nor with they who offer rental
> accommodations to those who can?t, or won?t, buy. But I will continue to
> point that when evaluated for equity formation and lifetime personal
> savings, renting falls way short of owning. Creating rental opportunities
> for low-income families may add some luster to our cohousing communities,
> but isn?t necessarily much help financially to those in need. If we
> co-ho-ers were to use some of our excess personal capital to create and
> support a rent-to-own model (in other words, become mortgage lenders to
> those who might otherwise have a problem borrowing), then we would perhaps
> be doing something more important.
> 
> As a renovation architect, I agree completely that finding creative ways to
> convert old buildings into successful, modern living accommodations is a
> goal to be highly valued. But in some cases, it will require households to
> re-understand what constitutes an acceptable residential environment.
> 
> Change is hard on all of us.
> 
> RPD
> 
> 
> On 2/17/11 7:51 AM, "Fred H Olson" <fholson [at] cohousing.org> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Grace Kim <grace [at] schemataworkshop.com>
> > is the author of the message below. It was posted by
> > Fred, the Cohousing-L list manager <fholson [at] cohousing.org>
> > after deleting quoted digest and restoring subject line.
> > -------------------- FORWARDED MESSAGE FOLLOWS --------------------
> > 
> > Philip-
> > To your point, in the urban areas people. Don't think living in apts
> > is second class to sgl family homes. In fact, I am involved with a
> > small forming community in downtown seattle. We've not advertised at
> > all and people are finding us (2-3 new visitors monthly) because they
> > are interested in urban flats/apts. Daybreak cohousing is also an
> > example of very urban/dense but with lots of common area - doesn't
> > look/feel inferior to sgl family. And sgl family homes can be rented
> > as at Ravenna Commons in seattle, when they are existing homes.
> > 
> > I think there needs to be a paradigm shift in cohousing, not only in
> > rental vs ownership, but also new construction vs existing bldgs.
> > 
> > grace h. kim
> > schemata workshop
> > (sent via mobile messaging)
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at: 
> http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L/
> 
> End of Cohousing-L Digest, Vol 85, Issue 28
> *******************************************
                           
_________________________________________________________________
Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at: 
http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L/



Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.