Cohousing-L Mailing List: interface person reply

[weigel (sweigel]

From: DBunnII [at] aol.com
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 15:07:50 EDT
Subject: Response to COHOUSING LIST
To: sweigel [at] lamar.ColoState.EDU
note: the following is a letter by Don Bunn in reply to a query posted on
the list a while back about having an interface person to liason between
contractor, developer, community, etc.  I subscribe to this list and
wanted to share what River Rock Cohousing has done, but wanted the person
involved to express the description.  
stephanie Weigel
sweigel [at] lamar.colostate.edu
((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((below from Don Bunn)))))))))))))
Dear Herb,

A fellow cohousing friend forwarded this message to me since I am currently 
performing the task which you have outlined in your e-mail noted below.  

First, I would like to note that Wonderland Hill Development Company in 
Boulder, Colorado is currently exploring this process with a manual called 
Streamlined Cohousing Development Model.  The River Rocks Commons Cohousing 
project located in Fort Collins, Colorado is, in essence, their first test of 
this model.  They would be a great resource for your community since they are 
a very active cohousing developer in the United States.

I have been involved with the project from the very beginning and am planning 
on being a member of the community.  My position title is Construction 
Interface Team(CIT) Point Person and I act as a laison between the community 
and the developer, contractor and architect.  Since the developer is based in 
Boulder, I am also their local eyes and ears on the project.  I have a 
relatively extensive background in construction and I have an employment 
arrangement with Wonderland Hill Development Company as an outside paid 
consultant.

As you noted this can be a very "treacherous and tricky balancing act" 
especially since in my case, I am a community member and representative of 
the developer.  There are times where I have to take my CIT hat off and put 
on my community member hat.  I have also had some difficulties dealing with 
the general contractor since he has not had to deal in this kind of 
arrangement before.  

I would strongly suggest that this be a paid position for a single 
individual.  There is too much work that must be done to make this a 
volunteer type of thing.  The problem with the paid position is that it is 
not a full time job so it is necessary for the individual to have other 
income sources.  I feel that to have a committee performing this function 
would make the process very unwieldy since it is difficult to know what has 
been done and what needs to be done and just who is doing it.  A single 
person acting as a single point of contact for the community and the 
professionals helps to alleviate the question of "Who do I call this time 
with this problem."

We have a Construction Interface Committee which is made up of community 
members who represent their particular unit type (i.e., Unit A 
representative, Unit B representative.....), myself as Point Person, the 
General Contractor and his On-site Superintendent.  At various times we have 
invited suppliers, the architect and other community members to the meetings 
to make presentations.  We have meetings twice a month at the contractors 
office.  Additionally, I perform weekly site visits where I walk the project, 
ask questions, make comments and generally review the construction process 
with the site superintendent.  Reports of the site visits are distributed to 
the developer, builder, and architect.  When appropriate, I bring up issues 
at the CIT meeting and we attempt to address them as a committee.  As point 
person for the CIT committee I present various issues to the community at our 
general meetings.  Each unit representative acts as an initial point of 
contact for the community members.  The unit reps are knowledgeable about 
their respective units and are able to field construction/design related 
questions.  If they do not know the answer then I am the next point of 
contact.  Generally, I can answer their questions without consulting the 
contractor or architect.  If I do not know the answer then I either bring it 
up in the CIT meeting or contact the professionals in a timely manner and 
report the results back to the questioner.  

I also work with individual community members who are going to be doing 
extensive customizations.  We have a meeting at the beginning of the process 
where I review their customizations with them and help them prepare for their 
initial meetings with the professionals (architect and builder).  This helps 
the professionals make the most of their meeting time and eliminates some of 
the more basic questions which can easily be answered.

I hope this answers your questions.  If you need further information, I am 
certainly available to assist you.  There is a lot of information which I 
have not included since it would be inappropriate to take up more Cohousing 
List space.  I apologize to any on the list who feel this was too long.  
Please feel free to contact me at:

Don Bunn II
Sustainable Homescapes
PO Box 830
Fort Collins, CO 80522
(970) 484-1711
dbunn2 [at] earthlink.net

On May 17, 1999, Herb Ettel wrote:

The first Cohousing community IN Washington, DC, Takoma Village, is due to
> break ground in July. During the 7-8 months of construction, our Design Team
> needs a process to monitor and liaison with the contractor, developer and
> architect et al. I checked the entire cohousing-L archives and found NO
> message on this at all.
>      Please reply with any advice, experience, resources and leads you may
> have. We especially need input re. whether this function is best served by a
> single paid professional, a pair of knowledgeable team members/volunteers,
> or a 3-4 person subteam.  We know this can be treacherous and a tricky
> balancing act.
> 
> Thank you,
> Herb Ettel, Takoma Village Design Team
> and webmaster, Co-op America
> 1612 K Street NW, #600, Washington, DC 20006
> 202-635-1910; Fax: (202)331-8166 / email: herbettel [at] coopamerica.org
~~