| RE: Vertical cohousing in the city | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
From: Morales Jose (morales rorl.ucsf.edu)
|
|
| Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 10:00:07 -0600 | |
--====51514852504856525151===1 Folks, Thanks for responding all, keep it going. You know, I would prefer the typical type of co-housing since it seems more "ideal" but I have to be ready for Plan B. In terms of my fantasy for verticle cohousing, I found out that the city was selling city-owned buildings for cheap. I imagined buying, lets say, four buildings on one block... two facing one streeet and two facing the other. I thought perhaps we could create a common house on the first floor between all the buildings. Jose Morales Rad Onc UCSF / Envi Onc NYU morales [at] rorl.ucsf.edu BoricuaNet NCPRR jose [at] boricuanet.org Joani Blank wrote: >Hi Jose, > >I've often imagined an urban cohousing community made in an urban apartment >building, but there would be two absolute requirements in my opinion. > >One is that the common house be on the ground floor, perhaps made out of >lobby space plus one or two units with one kitchen and all but bearing >walls removed and rearranged to suit uses decided on by the group. If, by >chance the building had a good sized lobby like some former hotels, that >could be converted into the common house by the addition of a kitchen. >The point is that residents should be discouraged from going directly to >their apartments/condos without passing through the common space. If the >elevator is right near the door, for example, you can put the mail boxes >deeper into the building to draw people into the common house at least once >a day. Or you can serve appetizers in the common house that folks can grab >(and socialize a bit) on their way home from work, or after-school snacks >in the common house for kids. > >The second thing would be to find a way, if possible of opening up the >individual apartments onto the elevator lobby or corridor. Unfortunately, >fire regulations will usually not allow operable windows to open onto >inside corridors, but non-operable ones may be permitted with certain >restrictions. Dutch doors to the units would also be an option. Or doors >with glass in the top half or all the way. Of course the windows could be >covered sometimes for privacy, and the dutch door can be closed and secured > at will, but residents would also have the option of being partially or >totally open (visually) to neighbors passing by. If none of this is >possible, you can establish an ethic of people keeping their unit doors >open when they are receptive to drop-ins from neighbors. Also, neighbors >can post kid's art work or indoor type decor like indoor plants or wall >decorations outside their units as well as inside. And if there are nooks >and crannies or corners in the corridors, there is an opportunity to place >a bookshelf with books to share, or a little table with a table lamp and a >couple of small chairs, or a small table fountain. > >Remember, you will know all the people who live there with you, so any >fears about being intruded on by strangers should be quickly allayed. >Common meals are indispensable in any cohousing community, in my opinion, >but are particularly so in a vertical urban community, partly because the >architecture is not (let's face it) ideal, and partly because the group is >likely to be more scattered socially since there is so much other stuff >going on right at your feet, or very close by outside the walls of your >building. > >I'm interested to hear the response of others. > >Joani Blank >Doyle Street Cohousing and Old Oakland Cohousing (California) > >RFC822 header >----------------------------------- > >Received: from freedom.mtn.org (198.174.235.1) by rorl.ucsf.EDU with -0800 >Received: from freedom.mtn.org (server@[127.0.0.0]) > Wed, 13 Jan 1999 02:40:46 -0600 >Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 02:40:46 -0600 >X-Real-To: morales [at] rorl.ucsf.edu >Message-Id: <3.0.32.19990113004957.0068d620@209.3.225.32> >Reply-To: jeblank [at] ic.org >Originator: cohousing-l >Sender: cohousing-l [at] freedom.mtn.org >Precedence: bulk >From: Joani Blank <jeblank [at] ic.org> >Subject: Vertical cohousing in the city >X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0 -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas >X-Comment: Developing cohousing - collaborative housing communities > --====51514852504856525151===1 <HTML><HEAD></HEAD><BODY><FONT FACE="Geneva" SIZE=3 COLOR="#000000">Folks,<BR> <BR> Thanks for responding all, keep it going. <BR> <BR> You know, I would prefer the typical type of co-housing since it seems more "ideal" but I have to be ready for Plan B.<BR> <BR> In terms of my fantasy for verticle cohousing, I found out that the city was selling city-owned buildings for cheap. I imagined buying, lets say, four buildings on one block... two facing one streeet and two facing the other. I thought perhaps we could create a common house on the first floor between all the buildings. </FONT><FONT FACE="Monaco" SIZE=1 COLOR="#000000"><BR> <BR> Jose Morales<BR> <BR> Rad Onc UCSF / Envi Onc NYU<BR> morales [at] rorl.ucsf.edu<BR> <BR> BoricuaNet NCPRR<BR> jose [at] boricuanet.org</FONT><FONT FACE="Geneva" SIZE=3 COLOR="#000000"><BR> <BR> Joani Blank wrote:</FONT><FONT FACE="Geneva" SIZE=1 COLOR="#000000"><BR> >Hi Jose,<BR> ><BR> >I've often imagined an urban cohousing community made in an urban apartment<BR> >building, but there would be two absolute requirements in my opinion. <BR> ><BR> >One is that the common house be on the ground floor, perhaps made out of<BR> >lobby space plus one or two units with one kitchen and all but bearing<BR> >walls removed and rearranged to suit uses decided on by the group. If, by<BR> >chance the building had a good sized lobby like some former hotels, that<BR> >could be converted into the common house by the addition of a kitchen.<BR> >The point is that residents should be discouraged from going directly to<BR> >their apartments/condos without passing through the common space. If the<BR> >elevator is right near the door, for example, you can put the mail boxes<BR> >deeper into the building to draw people into the common house at least once<BR> >a day. Or you can serve appetizers in the common house that folks can grab<BR> >(and socialize a bit) on their way home from work, or after-school snacks<BR> >in the common house for kids. <BR> ><BR> >The second thing would be to find a way, if possible of opening up the<BR> >individual apartments onto the elevator lobby or corridor. Unfortunately,<BR> >fire regulations will usually not allow operable windows to open onto<BR> >inside corridors, but non-operable ones may be permitted with certain<BR> >restrictions. Dutch doors to the units would also be an option. Or doors<BR> >with glass in the top half or all the way. Of course the windows could be<BR> >covered sometimes for privacy, and the dutch door can be closed and secured<BR> > at will, but residents would also have the option of being partially or<BR> >totally open (visually) to neighbors passing by. If none of this is<BR> >possible, you can establish an ethic of people keeping their unit doors<BR> >open when they are receptive to drop-ins from neighbors. Also, neighbors<BR> >can post kid's art work or indoor type decor like indoor plants or wall<BR> >decorations outside their units as well as inside. And if there are nooks<BR> >and crannies or corners in the corridors, there is an opportunity to place<BR> >a bookshelf with books to share, or a little table with a table lamp and a<BR> >couple of small chairs, or a small table fountain. <BR> ><BR> >Remember, you will know all the people who live there with you, so any<BR> >fears about being intruded on by strangers should be quickly allayed.<BR> >Common meals are indispensable in any cohousing community, in my opinion,<BR> >but are particularly so in a vertical urban community, partly because the<BR> >architecture is not (let's face it) ideal, and partly because the group is<BR> >likely to be more scattered socially since there is so much other stuff<BR> >going on right at your feet, or very close by outside the walls of your<BR> >building. <BR> ><BR> >I'm interested to hear the response of others. <BR> ><BR> >Joani Blank<BR> >Doyle Street Cohousing and Old Oakland Cohousing (California)<BR> ><BR> >RFC822 header<BR> >-----------------------------------<BR> ><BR> >Received: from freedom.mtn.org (198.174.235.1) by rorl.ucsf.EDU with<BR> Mail Server 1.1.2); Wed, 13 Jan 1999 00:52:15 -0800<BR> >Received: from freedom.mtn.org (</FONT><FONT FACE="Geneva" SIZE=1 COLOR="#0000FF"><U>server@[127.0.0.0</U></FONT><FONT FACE="Geneva" SIZE=1 COLOR="#000000">])<BR> > by freedom.mtn.org > Wed, 13 Jan 1999 02:40:46 -0600<BR> >Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 02:40:46 -0600<BR> >X-Real-To: </FONT><FONT FACE="Geneva" SIZE=1 COLOR="#0000FF"><U>morales [at] rorl.ucsf.edu</U></FONT><FONT FACE="Geneva" SIZE=1 COLOR="#000000"><BR> >Message-Id: <</FONT><FONT FACE="Geneva" SIZE=1 COLOR="#0000FF"><U>3.0.32.19990113004957.0068d620@209.3.225.32</U></FONT><FONT FACE="Geneva" SIZE=1 COLOR="#000000">><BR> </FONT><FONT FACE="Geneva" SIZE=1 COLOR="#0000FF"><U>owner-cohousing-l [at] mtn.org</U></FONT><FONT FACE="Geneva" SIZE=1 COLOR="#000000"><BR> >Reply-To: </FONT><FONT FACE="Geneva" SIZE=1 COLOR="#0000FF"><U>jeblank [at] ic.org</U></FONT><FONT FACE="Geneva" SIZE=1 COLOR="#000000"><BR> >Originator: cohousing-l<BR> >Sender: </FONT><FONT FACE="Geneva" SIZE=1 COLOR="#0000FF"><U>cohousing-l [at] freedom.mtn.org</U></FONT><FONT FACE="Geneva" SIZE=1 COLOR="#000000"><BR> >Precedence: bulk<BR> >From: Joani Blank <</FONT><FONT FACE="Geneva" SIZE=1 COLOR="#0000FF"><U>jeblank [at] ic.org</U></FONT><FONT FACE="Geneva" SIZE=1 COLOR="#000000">><BR> >To: Multiple recipients of list <</FONT><FONT FACE="Geneva" SIZE=1 COLOR="#0000FF"><U>cohousing-l [at] freedom.mtn.org</U></FONT><FONT FACE="Geneva" SIZE=1 COLOR="#000000">><BR> >Subject: Vertical cohousing in the city<BR> >X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0 -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas<BR> >X-Comment: Developing cohousing - collaborative housing communities<BR> ></FONT></BODY></HTML> --====51514852504856525151===1--
-
Vertical cohousing in the city Joani Blank, January 13 1999
- Re: Vertical cohousing in the city S. Hamer, January 13 1999
- RE: Vertical cohousing in the city Morales Jose, January 13 1999
- Re: Vertical cohousing in the city DHCano, January 13 1999
- Re: Vertical cohousing in the city Tim Behrend, January 13 1999
- Re: Vertical cohousing in the city Jeff Hobson, January 17 1999
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.