Cohousing-L Mailing List: Re: "Second Home" Cohousing Communities

[gary (gary]

Patty replied "I would not be attracted to a community that was build
for "vacationers".  

My "Second Home" cohousing proposal would be aimed at individuals and
families who lived within weekend commuting distance of the cohousing
community and spent most weekends as well as vacations living there.
Thus, the community would be populated primarily by "weekenders" rather
than vacationers, although during the summer months when children are
out of school family members may spend extended periods in the
cohousing community, especially if one parent does not work outside the
home. At the stage in life when individuals retire, they would then have
the option of moving to the cohousing community full-time.  If several
did so, overtime there would be increasing numbers of older, full-time
residents in the cohousing community, enjoying many of the benefits
experienced by residents in senior cohousing developments. For that
matter, older individuals could opt for buying housing in the
couhousing community even before they retire, perhaps planning to spend
moe time there after they retire.

How do these further clrifications affect your attidude towards "Second
Home" cohousing communities? 

Gary A. Storm
Founder
The Woodland Community
Sunrise Beach, MO
Gary [at] thewoodlandcommunity.com
+ 1 (217) 367-0879




> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [C-L]_ "Second Home" Cohousing Communities
> From: patjavcc [at] aol.com
> Date: Tue, May 16, 2006 6:30 am
> To: cohousing-l [at] cohousing.org
> 
> I would not be attracted to a community that was build for 'vacationers'.  
> Nor would I be happy if my primary home had a bunch of neighbors who went 
> away every chance they could.
>  
> However, I could see investing in a shared retreat with a bunch of cohousers. 
>  In my imagination I could see a large farm-type property with a big house 
> and a bunch of bedrooms.  Folks could sign up for a bedroom or even reserve 
> it for a private getaway sometimes on a rotating basis.  All decision about 
> this shared property would be made in the way decisions about the commonhouse 
> are made.  
>  
> Patti
> JPCohousing, Boston
>  
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sharon Villines <sharon [at] sharonvillines.com>
> To: Cohousing-L <cohousing-l [at] cohousing.org>
> Sent: Fri, 12 May 2006 20:53:50 -0400
> Subject: Re: [C-L]_ "Second Home" Cohousing Communities
> 
> 
> 
> On May 12, 2006, at 8:39 PM, Deborah Mensch wrote:
> 
> > I suppose that owners could decide either to contribute labor to the 
> > upkeep
> > or to pay additional fees to cover hiring some of the work out, as in 
> > some
> > buyout systems in existing communities. But how do you deal with the
> > decision-making? Would it be necessary to hire a management company to 
> > take
> > care of things that cohousing HOAs normally handle or decide?
> 
> This is why in the case of the urban cohousing solution I was proposing 
> you would have to have a critical mass of people who form a community 
> and others who rent and pay going rates -- so that portion of the 
> property at least uses hired out labor.
> 
> With a country community, I think it would be hard if there were no one 
> "living in" in a regular basis. Although some lake communities do have 
> a live in caretaker who does the work and manages outside workers.
> 
> Sharon
> -----
> Sharon Villines
> Takoma Village Cohousing, Washington DC
> http://www.takomavillage.org
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at: 
> http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L/
> ________________________________________________________________________
> Check out AOL.com today. Breaking news, video search, pictures, email and IM. 
> All on demand. Always Free.
> _________________________________________________________________
> Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at: 
> http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L/