Re: still happening........... | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
From: Wendy Willbanks Wiesner (wwiesneraffordablecohousing.org) | |
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 2015 08:44:53 -0700 (PDT) |
Hello All, Such a vibrant discussion and some excellent points made! I think we're actually making progress, and I'd like to talk about it a bit, mainly from the perspective of Partnerships for Affordable Cohousing (PFAC), where we've been working on these issues for over three years. One of the organization's priorities has been developing relationships with national financial institutions and intermediaries, CDFI's, public agencies (housing + finance), and non-profit and for-profit housing providers (developers and managers). At the local level, we've been meeting with housing authorities, community banks and credit unions, politicians, and development and planning committees. As an example, last fall we met with a housing authority in a large Colorado county, in a meeting set up by a forming group. At the beginning, there was great confusion about what cohousing in fact really is; the agency's perception of cohousing was akin to a collective house in Canada. Although the collective house can share certain cohousing principles, the terms are most certainly not interchangeable! We were able give clear information and sell the benefits at the same time. In the end, the agency put its support behind the groups' CDBG application, and it is now helping the group to pursue an all-affordable senior housing community on a cohousing model, where the municipality has land to contribute and the transit authority is part of the equation. Not only do these agency-level friends have relationships with local developers, local banks, non-profits, foundations, politicians etc., but they interface with colleagues at the county, state, and national level. At this point, we know that they will not only understand what cohousing is, but talk favorably about it--as a type of housing that contributes to overall well-being--in ways that when well-executed can make constituents (of all income levels) less dependent upon "the system". Budget constraints, you know! We have also gotten across the message that community framework (well-conceived and thoughtfully put into practice) mitigates risk, especially in relationship to a condominium, where common management practices often work against the development of strong social fabric, which as we all know delivers real economic value over time. Most important, please don't confuse the organizational and management practices within cohousing with the methods practiced in many an oft-hated and unproductive HOA! Its been Selling 101, made easier (fortuitously) because PFAC folks are working from the inside. As a group, we know "the system" and its technicalities well. We know tax credits, affordable housing, single and multi-family housing finance, cooperatives, condos and land trusts. We can talk the talk. At the same time, we have a clear vision of how enabling institutions (local, state, national) can evolve and change to better meet human needs. Not all of them will be able to make this transition, but some will, and these are the ones we will work with to develop the kind of mutually-supportive, professional relationships that can support both the success of current projects and the development of a broader cohousing movement. Isn't it interesting to think about cohousing professionals making cohousing-like relationships with industry-level colleagues? A good formula for institutional change, I believe. Wendy Wendy Willbanks Wiesner Founding Board Member and Treasurer Partnerships for Affordable Cohousing (PFAC) 1601 S. Franklin Street Denver, CO 80210 (303) 881-6138 affordablecohousing.org On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 1:55 PM, Ann Zabaldo <zabaldo [at] earthlink.net> wrote: > > Diana and all – I totally understand how difficult it was for people Who > endured the crash to come up with mortgage money. Painful and bloody. > > It was hard to get a loan for any housing at all. My only point is I don't > think it had anything to do with "Cohousing" as much as it had to do with > Lenders be much happier to sit on mortgage money authorized by the Congress > than actually lend it out. It was a disgrace all around. And it still is. > > Ann zabaldo > Takoma Village Cohousing > Washington DC > > > Sent from my iPhone > > > On Apr 25, 2015, at 3:30 PM, Diana Carroll <dianaecarroll [at] gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > > "Skulk"? > > > > Our first unit came on the market right when the real estate market > crashed > > in 08. Since then it's taken us nearly 7 years to sell all our units. Our > > development entity is bankrupt and a lot of individuals lost a LOT of > > money. > > > > You can come lecture us about how we should have stood up to the banks > > instead of "skulking" when it's YOUR money on the line, not ours. > > > > Diana at Mosaic Commons > > > >> On Saturday, April 25, 2015, R Philip Dowds <rpdowds [at] comcast.net> > wrote: > >> > >> > >> But … many condos own stuff in common: Stairwells, swimming pools, > >> clubhouses, lawnmowers, fences, laundry rooms, etc. And all condos also > >> govern themselves via sub-groups such as managing boards and committees. > >> So how is cohousing different? > >> > >> Well, as a design and construction professional who worked the > residential > >> market for more than a decade, I can report that condominium > associations > >> have a bad reputation generally for being unreliable and hard to work > >> with. Many architects, engineers and contractors refuse to work for a > >> condo association, except maybe as a last resort when other business has > >> dried up. In general, I think that condos organized as cohos are more > >> rational and dependable than those organized otherwise; they certainly > >> aren’t any worse. If a bank is willing to loan for a dwelling unit > >> embedded in a aggregation of alienated strangers, it should surely be > >> willing to lend for a similar unit in a community of friends. > >> > >> So I remain totally opposed to skulking around, hoping that the > capitalist > >> interests of money and property fail to notice that I live in > cohousing. I > >> think we need to keep on doing what we’re doing: Educating, and leading > >> the way. > >> > >> RPD > >> > >> > >>>> On Apr 25, 2015, at 1:31 PM, Diana Carroll <dianaecarroll [at] gmail.com > >>> <javascript:;>> wrote: > >>> > >>> From the > >>> perspective of the banks, they are happiest when it is just a condo, > >> plain > >>> and simple. > >> > >> _________________________________________________________________ > >> Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at: > >> http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L/ > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at: > > http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L/ > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at: > http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L/ > > >
- Re: still happening..........., (continued)
- Re: still happening........... Sharon Villines, April 25 2015
- Re: still happening........... But it could be different .... Ann Zabaldo, April 25 2015
- Re: still happening........... Diana Carroll, April 25 2015
- Re: still happening........... Ann Zabaldo, April 25 2015
- Re: still happening........... Wendy Willbanks Wiesner, April 26 2015
- Re: still happening........... R Philip Dowds, April 25 2015
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.