|Re: More on the term Co-housing: two questions, two answers||<– Date –> <– Thread –>|
|From: VAN DEIST (vandeistmsn.com)|
|Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2016 06:24:14 -0700 (PDT)|
Greetings from Venice, Florida. After several years, working with Zev Paiss in attempting to establish an elder cohousing project in Sarasota County, we were in agreement that cohousing has two distinct parts: a sticks & bricks, physical part and a social part. The financial structure was much more receptive to a "pocket neighborhood" concept which didn't mention the social aspect. Down in Napes, Florida a group is constructing a cluster of homes to form a pocket neighborhood. All homes are individually owned, and there is no common house or any joint ownership of anything. They have agreed to be "neighborly neighbors" and be involved with one another. They're not calling their project cohousing, but they share the same spirit. I'm attempting to create a cluster of small, studio cottages for singles or couples who would participate as neighborly neighbors. The cottages are to be 600 ft2 of Universal Design and are to cost about $120K on a developed lot. The cottages are intended for elders preparing to age-in-place; millennials seeking downsized affordability and a sense of community; and for those who currently have physical challenges. They share similar zoning and financing challenges with cohousing as well as its spirit. .....Van..... vandeist [at] msn.com ________________________________ From: Cohousing-L <cohousing-l-bounces+vandeist=msn.com [at] cohousing.org> on behalf of William C. Wood <woodwc [at] gmail.com> Sent: Friday, October 21, 2016 7:10 AM To: cohousing-l [at] cohousing.org Subject: Re: [C-L]_ More on the term Co-housing: two questions, two answers > OK, I'll take the bait: What is "full cohousing"? I don't think I can be precise about this, but what I have in mind is about 10+ dwelling units, common house and common space, and formal governance. The reason it's on my mind is: Some of us in my area are trying to pioneer a much smaller model and we don't think of our project as "cohousing." We're occasionally called on to distinguish our approach from cohousing. "Let ten thousand flowers bloom," a researcher once told me, expanding on Chairman Mao's thought. His hope was that a bunch of different researchers would tackle a common data set to learn from it, knowing that there would be many false trails. I think that beyond single-family housing lie some promising directions for the future, and not all of them will be "cohousing" as the members of this group would define it. Just my 0.000002 cents worth. --- /Question 1: Should we as a society encourage alternative models of housing, somewhere between single-family residential and full cohousing? (My answer: yes)// // //Question 2: Should they be called cohousing? (My answer: no)// / _________________________________________________________________ Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at: http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L/ [http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4007/4489995122_eb762bb127.jpg]<http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L/> Cohousing-L Email List | The Cohousing Association<http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L/> www.cohousing.org Cohousing-L is an email discussion list on all aspects of cohousing -- development, design, move-in, organizing work, community life, governance, finances, legal ...
Re: More on the term Co-housing: two questions, two answers William C. Wood, October 20 2016
- Re: More on the term Co-housing: two questions, two answers R Philip Dowds, October 20 2016
Re: More on the term Co-housing: two questions, two answers William C. Wood, October 21 2016
- Re: More on the term Co-housing: two questions, two answers VAN DEIST, October 21 2016
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.