Re: More on the term Co-housing: two questions, two answers
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 ...






Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.