|Re: Handling Maintenance||<– Date –> <– Thread –>|
|From: R Philip Dowds (rpdowdscomcast.net)|
|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. RPD > On Nov 2, 2014, at 12:19 PM, Sharon Villines <sharon [at] sharonvillines.com> > 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.
- Handling Maintenance Norman Gauss, November 1 2014
- Re: Handling Maintenance Sharon Villines, November 2 2014
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.