Re: Age Diversity in Groups | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
From: Fred H. Olson (fholson![]() |
|
Date: Sat, 6 May 2000 10:57:37 -0600 (MDT) |
Howard Landman HOWARD [at] POLY.POLYAMORY.ORG is the author of the message below but due to a problem (posted from address other than subscribed address), it was posted by Fred the Nbhd-tc list manager: fholson [at] cohousing.org To get off Nbhd-tc, send email with UNSUBSCRIBE NBHD-TC or UNSUBSCRIBE NBHD-TC-DIGEST in the messsage body to: majordomo [at] freenet.msp.mn.us Questions? email Fred - addr above -------------------- FORWARDED MESSAGE FOLLOWS -------------------- > The group we are most interested in has practically no families with > children and I want to be part of a group with lots of children. In "A Pattern Language" they analyze the distribution of ages in the population and what it means for kids in a housing cluster. The conclusion is that to have a reasonable probablility of having enough kids in each age group for each other to play with, you need to have over 50 families in the cluster. This assumes the cluster roughly matches the age distribution of the population at large. Most cohousing developments are much smaller than this. Therefore, unless they can achieve a disproportionately high fraction of families with kids, there won't be enough to go around. River Rock Commons has this problem to some degree. My 6-year-old son ends up playing with a 4-year-old girl and a 10-year-old girl because there aren't any other boys in that age range. We have 34 households but most of them have no children living with them. Anyway, this is something that new developments should consider. If you really want "enough" kids in the community, then you either need to build a fairly large community (50 to 60 units), or do something to bias the community toward families with kids, or some combination of the two. You also need to *avoid* doing things (like not having large units) that would tend to drive families with lots of kids away. This conflicts somewhat with the trend towards "voluntary simplicity" - small compact units work well for retired people or single people but not so well for the sprawling needs of raising a family. This isn't really an affordability issue either - the cost of a unit has less to do with raw size than with the type of fixtures it contains. Framing and sheetrock don't cost very much compared to things like faucets and light fixtures and appliances. So the reasoning that goes "affordable means small" is often wrong, and needs to be examined closely. Howard Landman
-
Age Diversity in Groups Jasmine Gold, May 5 2000
- Age Diversity in Groups Lynn Nadeau, May 5 2000
- Re: Age Diversity in Groups RowenaHC, May 6 2000
- Re: Age Diversity in Groups Fred H. Olson, May 6 2000
- RE: Age Diversity in Groups Rob Sandelin, May 11 2000
- Re: Age Diversity in Groups Ginny Moreland, May 11 2000
- Re: Age Diversity in Groups Diane Simpson, May 12 2000
- Re: Age Diversity in Groups Howard Landman, May 15 2000
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.