Public Good? The Final Word (?) | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
From: Cohomag (Cohomag![]() |
|
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 17:24:24 -0600 |
The thread I started a couple weeks ago about the city planning profession's perspective on cohousing ("elite lifetyle vs. public good") finally seems to have subsided. I thought I'd post this response from the principal city planner who worked with us on getting approvals for our community here in Berkeley. Don Lindemann cohomag [at] aol.com FORWARDED MESSAGE Subj: "CoHousing:Elitist or Public Good?" Date: 97-10-27 12:56:53 EST From: STB1 [at] ci.berkeley.ca.us (Stephen Barton) Sender: Postmaster [at] ci.berkeley.ca.us Reply-to: STB1 [at] ci.berkeley.ca.us To: cohomag [at] aol.com Hi Don, Thanks for the copy of your article and questions on the future of CoHousing and congratulations on the fine profile in the S.F. Chronicle. I am stunned by Roger Montgomery's comments -- they apply to gated communities, not to CoHousing, and I find it hard to take them seriously. It is true that if CoHousing is to become racially diverse, the CoHousing movement may need to incorporate more affirmative action, just because it comes out of a particular historical group of people of predominantly European descent who desire a more collective and social lifestyle and thus tend to bring in others from the same social networks who are basically similar to themselves. This certainly is not the result of exclusionary intentions as he seems to suggest. I have a more pessimistic view of your other question, however. I think both that CoHousing will remain a niche market for a limited number of people, and that at the same time you will have to work very hard to make it grow to its potential and can not simply rely on the market and private developers to deliver the goods. Anyway, it would be detrimental to the CoHousing ideal to be so passive about developing CoHousing! The great publicity and all the phone calls from the media are not the result of an enormous untapped public demand for CoHousing. It results from the fact that you are different, and thus newsworthy, but friendly-different rather than scary-different. You are a positive alternative, and hundreds of people will feel that they like something about the ideas you embody for every one that is willing to actually live in CoHousing. People who sustain communal ideals perform a valuable role in society even if they are only a small fraction of the whole. Bits and pieces of what you learn will be adopted by others, but rarely the whole, just as happened with the Garden City ideal. You will get to both contribute to a better society and live your ideals -- not as good as actually saving the world of course, but a damn good life nonetheless. Feel free to share my response with anyone else. Best regards, Steve Stephen Barton Senior Planner Planning & Development Department City of Berkeley stb1 [at] ci.berkeley.ca.us 510-705-8130
- (no other messages in thread)
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.