|Re: Letter to Chuck Durrett re: developer-driven cohousing as an option||<– Date –> <– Thread –>|
|From: Sharon Villines (sharonsharonvillines.com)|
|Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2021 09:10:43 -0700 (PDT)|
> On Oct 24, 2021, at 1:26 PM, Steve Welzer <stevenwelzer [at] gmail.com> wrote: > > I still feel that you treat the “future residents must design it” idea as a > dogma. Let’s take Altair (which I worked with for two years): It will be 30 > units. Ten or fifteen of the ultimate 30 households will have participated > in the design charrettes. Fifteen or 20 will move into a cohousing > community they did not design. It’s a 55+ project. After twenty years only > two of the people or households will have participated in the design > charrettes. The other 28 will be grateful that the community got built. It think this is a good example of what actually happens compared to what we think should or does happen. The energy of a few is portrayed as the actions of all. It isn’t true that everyone in a successful community has been active in the decision-making. Studies of organizations and work in all fields seem to come down very close to 20% lead and 80% follow. It’s the 20%, however, that makes things happen. Takoma Village is an odd blend because the developer had the option on the land and hired Ann Zabaldo as the local cohousing burning heart to make the community happen. He actually had no expectations that she would put enough people together for cohousing to occupy the whole plot. He hedged his design with one half of the property circling the common house and the the other half extending beyond the courtyard as independent homes. Whatever has come up here has come up at other cohousing communities — I haven’t seen any differences. Good or bad. Good in that we were built much faster than many communities. One reason for the developers to say that the impetus has to come from the community is that they have been developing cohousing at a level that keeps them poor, so to speak. They don’t have hundreds of thousands of dollars to invest up front in starting a community. Cohousing has “professionals” who help others develop. They haven’t been working with the ambition to become big developers. Developers who finance part if not all of their own projects have amassed those funds by building increasingly larger and more profitable buildings. It’s a different world. > I wish a cohousing developer would “Get It Built” here in New Jersey and > finally give me a chance to live in cohousing. I would venture to say that the housing market is too weak for cohousing. Too weak meaning too strong. It costs too much. People who are interested in building anything there have to meet the market. They have to build things that will pay for the cost of building in an incredibly costly environment. The building costs are too high and getting anything built requires decades of learning the ins and outs of the construction industry — which is not democratic. Plus building regular old apartment buildings is so profitable, why bother with people? Sharon ---- Sharon Villines Takoma Village Cohousing, Washington DC http://www.takomavillage.org
Letter to Chuck Durrett re: developer-driven cohousing as an option Steve Welzer, October 24 2021
- Re: Letter to Chuck Durrett re: developer-driven cohousing as an option Sharon Villines, October 25 2021
- Letter to Chuck Durrett re: developer-driven cohousing as an option Katie Henry, October 25 2021
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.