Re: Handling Maintenance
From: R Philip Dowds (
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2014 06:08:26 -0800 (PST)
But it’s also a matter of prioritization.  A typical household or family might 
be comfortable with paying 20%, 30%, or (under duress, perhaps) 40% of its 
annual income on housing.  The mainstream household will spend $X to maximize 
privatized space: the single family house and yard.  A similar cohousing 
household will spend a similar $X, but trade off privatized space for some 
shared amenities.  It’s a different lifestyle choice, not a different budget.

Additionally, traditional condos in the high end of the market will often have 
common amenities like a clubhouse and pool.  What they don’t have is the 
intentional social network.


> On Nov 2, 2014, at 12:19 PM, Sharon Villines <sharon [at]> 
> wrote:
>> Although “saving money” is sometimes advocated as the rationale, there is no 
>> reason why cohousing should be notably cheaper than “ordinary” apartments, 
>> row houses, and condominiums — and indeed, it isn’t.
> The difference between cohousing and other condos is the comparatively large 
> common facilities -- the amenities. Work on the part of community members is 
> required to off-set the cost of those facilities. This is onne reason new 
> communities need to think twice before building common houses and grounds 
> that are too large for them to maintain.

Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.