Cohousing-L Mailing List: Developer Driven Cohousing

[Diana Kardia (diana]

> > Bruce Shimizu wrote:

> > Unlike a traditional cohousing community that starts with a group,  
> > or a
> > developer driven community that is built and then sold to members,  
> > this
> > model starts with the developer finding a good location, securing the
> > land,
> > and then assisting interested individuals in forming a group. From  
> > that
> > point on, the community building & development process is pretty much
> the same as in traditional cohousing.


Sharon Villines wrote:
Personally, I think the insistence on starting
with a group of people who intend to be residents and then beginning
the building process is over-emphasized as necessary to develop a
community.

Joelyn Malone wrote:
Cohousing Advocates has found that you don't need a group of people at
the beginning, to find a site and a willing developer, but you do need a
group fairly early on in the process.


Forgive me if this has already been covered - I'm still new to this  
listserve and also regularly fall behind in reading posts.  But I  
don't see any mention of the model used for Great Oak and Touchstone  
in Ann Arbor, MI.  As far as I know, both of these communities were  
built under the model described by Bruce - and it worked very  
effectively for creating cohousing (and achieving some of the  
efficiency that you describe, Bruce).  It does create other dynamics  
that need careful attention - there is a difference in the sense of  
ownership and also blood, sweat, and tears.  But those are negotiable  
in their own way.

I also like this model for another reason.  As someone who has tended  
to track the process issues more than the physical issues in  
cohousing (because that's where my attention gravitates - not because  
I think it's more important), I've been frustrated at times with the  
way the intensive focus on development and design in the early stages  
of cohousing trains communities to put their attention on the  
physical aspects.  That training doesn't necessarily mean we give the  
physical (or legal or financial) aspects all the attention - or the  
right kind of attention - that they deserve.  But it does contribute  
to an attitude of "we don't have time for all this talking - there  
are things that need to get done!"  I used to think this was my own  
private frustration but then saw a comment in Diana Leafe Christian's  
"Creating a Life Together" where cohousing communities, compared to  
other intentional communities that do not go through the same kind  
of  development process together, are known for being less attentive  
to process issues.

Diana Kardia
Sunward Cohousing
Coming up on 10 years of having those buildings built!  (The physical  
aspects should get their due!)