Cohousing-L Mailing List: Re: Questioning cohousing ideals

[Hans Tilstra (hanstilstra]

Cohousing is a choice, not a mandate. I'd hate to be prescriptive with this
model. I gather that in Denmark, 10% of new developments follow the
cohousing model. For people who put their cars in the #1 spot, the
conventional cul the sac would be preferable.

> 1.    How do you justify separating cars into central carparks on the
perimeter of a community?  Issues of access to the homes, weather etc seem
to preclude having perimeter parking in her mind.

Cars to the periphery achieves two aims:

- it creates a pedestrian centre, inviting human contact. It's a child
friendly approach, and builds on what has been experimented with in the
Netherlands, called a "woonerf". Here, traffic bumps and changed traffic
rules put the pedestrian first.

- limiting access for emergency traffic only, the approach enables for a
lower percentage of the land to be allocated to roads.

> 2.    How do clusters of houses help to improve closer relations between
residents and how do you still promote the wider public using your assets?

Clustering enables for more shared space. Connectiveness between residents
is achieved incidentally, by designing traffic flows from the carpark via
the mailbox ("hello, how are you") and possibly the common house ("who's
cooking tonight? anyone checked how Margaret is doing today?") to your own
unit.

Connectiveness is also achieved by the process of developing cohousing. This
is self selecting to a degree. If you don't like people you probably would
get irritated quickly by the consensus process. You certainly get to know
one another in the process.

Then, there's the potluck dinners, which again is a relationships builder. I
also imagine that any collaborative initiatives such as shared carpooling or
child care arrangements might increase relationships.

> 3.    What form would a common house take if you were attempting to
provide a restaurant, common eating, laundry, conference rooms and
apartments for short stay residents?  I have designed a three story arc
shaped building with apartments above conference rooms about more shared
assests like restaurant and community dining.

Depends on what the developing group comes up with. No use prescribing an
off-the-shelf solution if it hasn't passed the financial test. I'd be keen
on multi-functional space, using the modularity of the residential units to
ensure economies of scale. I gather that the guest rooms idea seems to be
economically viable, but am not too sure about the restaurant idea.


> 4.    The rythmn of the street relies on buildings having a prescribed
setback from the street [supposedly].  By clustering my buildings and facing
them toward the local river, I have turned my back on this 'streetscape'.
How do you address this change of rythmn and change of
> ownership of space [balance of public and private space has been altered].
>

Sounds like a visual thing, best assessed by having a picture say a thousand
words. Would the neighbours like the visual result?

cheers,
Hans
http://home.vicnet.net.au/~cohouse