Cohousing-L Mailing List: RE: Cohousing for a college?

[Stuart Staniford-Chen (stanifor]

Rob (in fiery mood today) says:
> I have said this so much people are sick of hearing it but I will say 
> it yet again.  All my experience with communities (not just cohousing) 
> leads me to believe that community does not come from buildings, 
> pathways, or how social the mailbox is, community comes from the 
> relationship of the people and their commitment to that relationship

> Every example Chuck gave in his closing address about community had 
> NOTHING to do with architecture.  I have visited socially designed 
> communities which have great architure for community and very little 
> community happening and places with very poor site design for community 
> who are thriving as a community (Sharingwood would qualify in this 
> description).

Well, I'm certainly not sick of hearing what Rob has to say, but I disagree 
here.  Firstly, I do agree (and I think this was a theme at the conference) 
that architecture has been overemphasized in cohousing.  In particular, the 
Cohousing book overemphasized it.  In fairness, Chuck and Katey are architects 
and it's natural that they see things that way.  

However, to say that architecture has "NOTHING" to do with community is going 
much too far in the other direction (IMO).  In my community (N St), it chances 
that the common house and most of the houses are on N St, while a few of the 
houses are on Lessley Place (in back of N St).  All the houses are contiguous, 
but our main path runs along the N St side.  It's fairly noticeable that much 
more interaction happens on that side.  I rarely bump into anyone in my own 
back yard (I live on the Lessley side), but it would be quite hard to walk up 
and down the N St side without bumping into someone.  I think that kind of 
thing matters.  If it was unlikely that we bumped into each other in any place 
in the community, I'm sure our community would be noticeably less vibrant. 

Lori Pavese said:

> I have been doing a lot of reading on cohousing, and I just visited Pioneer
> Valley in Amherst, MA. I have been led to believe that some of the issues we
> are dealing with on a college campus are being addressed by cohousing. I 
> understand that we would not be able to create the experience of the group
> planning process that seems to be foundational in cohousing and also that we
> are dealing with a transient population of students, but I am interested in 
> hearing your feedback on this idea.  What I am envisioning is a community of
> 20 to 30 students and faculty.

It's a very interesting idea.  I don't think it would work quite the same way 
as cohousing, but I could imagine it working well in a different way.  When I 
was an undergraduate, I lived for a time in a student apartment.  There were 
six of us who each had our own room, and then we shared a kitchen and living 
room.  We were randomly assigned to apartments.  The apartment I was in 
definitely had some sense of community.  Since we often were in the kitchen at 
the same time, we would sometimes eat together etc.  I remember it fondly.

At the same time, we made no efforts at community building per se (the kind of 
things Rob was talking about), and thus we had trouble dealing with conflicts 
(over refrigerator cleaning etc).  I think if we had had some traditions of 
community that we could have stepped into that might have helped, and might 
have made it more fun to live there.

It's true that there would not be the experience of building the place to draw 
community together.  One thing that would be working for you though is that 
you get a new crop of freshpeople each year.  They are always very outgoing 
and looking for friends because they are away from home and don't know anyone.


Good luck with the thesis.

Stuart.
stanifor [at] cs.ucdavis.edu
`N' St Cohousing.