Cohousing-L Mailing List: Retrofit Cohousing -- initiation and dev. process

[Fred H Olson WB0YQM (fholson]

On Thu, 19 Oct 1995 01:46:46 -0500, 
Douglas Simons  <doug [at] thoughtful.com > wrote:
(with Subject: Neighbours)

>
>I like the cohousing model, and I'm all in favor of seeing new  
>neighborhoods designed and built that way, but I'd also like to  
>explore ideas for "evolving" existing neighborhoods.  I understand N  
>Street came about this way (I'll try to get hold of Stuart  
>Staniford-Chen's article).  Are there any others?

There is a lot of information about N Street on the Cohousing WWW site
http://seclab.cs.ucdavis.edu/~stanifor/cohousing.html

It is also discussed as one example of an "Urban Cooperative Block"
in the "Community in the City" chapter of the 1995 book 
_Rebuilding Community in America_ by Ken Norwood and Kathleen Smith 
of the Shared Living Resource Institute.  A article based on this 
chapter also in the Summer (?) issue of the Cohousing Journal 
(cohomag [at] aol.com)

>
>Is it possible to form a true "cohousing" neighborhood this way (ie,  
>with common kitchen/dining facilities, other common facilities,  
>etc.)?  Are there other models we might explore along the way?  It  
>seems to me that there is a whole continuum of possibilities ranging  
>from where we are now (know about half of our neighbors, share a  
>lawnmower with 2 other households) to cohousing and beyond.
>
>If I want to "evolve" my neighborhood, what is the first step?  It  
>seems strange, but in many ways building a new project feels like an  
>easier way to build a community.  The effort of the project itself  
>gives everyone something in common (beyond, of course, the fact that  
>everyone involved was drawn by the idea of community in the first  
>place).  The notion of approaching my existing neighbors (even the  
>ones that I know) with grandiose ideas for reshaping the neighborhood  
>is a little scary.
>

The first (BIG) step is to get MORE THAN ONE participating
household committed to developing shared living on the same target 
block.  If you live on a block that you think could work and 
on which you are committed developing shared living,
 you've made half of the "first big step".  

Those of us who are committed but do not live on the
chosen target block have to buy (or lease or whatever) a house
on the target block... to catch up with you.

Getting more committed households can take two tracks. 
1) Recruit neighbors
2) Recruit committed people to buy (or lease or whatever)
    a house on the targetr block when one becomes available.

Certainly pursue number 1). Eating or other activities together are 
the way to go.  However my discussions indicate that Retrofit 
Cohousing evolves primarily (tho not exclusively) via "immigrants".  
My initial estimate (very rough - I'd like to hear from Polly Allen's 
estimates in Mass.) is that so far immigrants can be expected to 
make up make up 75% or more of Retrofit Cohousing.  This is logical.  
As Rob Sandelin pointed out recently, cohousing is not for everyone.  
Indeed I am convinced that self-selection of people who want to make 
it happen and live in cohousing is a very key factor in the viablity
of the model.  In the built from scratch model this self-selection
process is inherent in the recruitment of new members.  In the retrofit
model recruiting immigrants should also take this into account.

The recruitment of cohousing oriented people clearly relates to 
the whole question of diversity.  In my opinion cohousing oriented
folks can come from all races and economic levels but some shared
values are necessary. I can easily imagine living in a cohousing 
community with many of my neighbors. (We live on a block that is
about 75% African African -- mostly "middle class" )

The recruitment of cohousing oriented people to retrofit cohousing 
is complicated a bit by the evolutionary nature of the process.
People who wish to have regular potluck suppers at each other's 
houses NOW may not (later on) want to spend a monthly sum to
support a common dining facility.  As Douglas pointed out in his 
message, discussing grand plans/dreams with current residents to 
insure a larger domain of shared vision can be a a daunting task.

I convened a discussion at the recent National Cohousing Conference 
in Colorado on the topic of Urban/Retrofit cohousing.  Several 
participants commented that they felt it had been a good opportunity 
to share experiences among folks looking for an alternative to "Urban 
Fringe Cohousing".  (It was great - I organized it :) :) 
I have intended to outline/summarize the tape of that 
session at which about 11 people commented on their experience / 
perspective. (See list below)  I am also compiling a 
contact list of people interested in Urban/Retrofit cohousing starting 
with the those who attended this session.  If you would like to be 
addedto this list email me directly. I hope to do a follow-up paper 
mailing some time and who knows from there.

1995 National Cohousing Conference  Urban/Retrofit presenters:
Susan Scott           * Southside Park, Sacramento
Ole Svensson          * Swedish highrise retrofit that was a failure
Stuart Staniford-Chen * N Street
Eric Hart             * Mpls apartment bldg core of Retrofit Cohousing
Fred Olson            * Minneapolis Retrofit dreamer :)
Chris Williams        * for Erie Street (Polly Allen) in Mass.
Andrea Cunningham       August Green, Denver
Virginia Rock           benevolent landlady in Houston 
Chris Hanson            development consultant, now in BC, Canada
Bruce Coldham         * Architect Amherst Mass
Lout Host-Jablonski     Madison WI architect

* uses email, I dont have time to compile addresses at the moment

Fred

--
Fred H. Olson   fholson [at] uci.com   (612)588-9532  Amateur radio: WB0YQM
1221 Russell Av N, Minneapolis,MN 55411 Sysop of COHOUSING-L listserv;
COHOUSING URL's:  mailto://listserv [at] uci.com (w/ msg: Info Cohousing-L)
gopher://gopher.uci.com/   Twin Cities FREENET is in PUBLIC TEST PHASE 
URL's: mailto://info [at] freenet.msp.mn.us  http://freenet.msp.mn.us/