Re: Elevators and exclusions | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
From: mrbouchez06 (mrbouchez06![]() |
|
Date: Fri, 9 May 2008 03:46:30 -0700 (PDT) |
it's been interesting following this thread because good points are made from several angles. so with that said, i have to second Rob and Matt and several others who introduced the thought that exclusionary aspects reach far beyond accessible floors for all members of society. in trying to solve one issue, we heap on many more, one being affordability to many. i am presently discussing a "retrofit" concept with a local government and of course the first discussed roadblock was ADA compliance. The suggestion was made to raze the present building, a mere 8 years old, and build a new structure . (yes, destroy/decimate/total) So the tradeoff here would be nothing for anyone, no common meeting/gathering space because eliminating a half million dollar structure and rebuilding another is cost-prohibitive. one might say, pick another location but the idea here is to retrofit an existing community, not start a community. so, regulations per se that exist as well as mindsets of those passionate about an issue such as elevators and the like must consider new solutions/new ways of approaching age-old problems. otherwise, by taking "a one-size-fits-all situations" approach, we make absolutely no progress for anyone. my fifty - cents worth (cost of gas is significantly driving up the cost of everything) tricia In a message dated 5/8/2008 12:00:47 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, floriferous [at] msn.com writes: By building a cohousing community you are excluding most people right from the start who would never choose to live in such close association with their neighbors. You are excluding those who do not like meetings, you are excluding those who want privacy. The list of exclusions involved in creating a community from scratch is huge and probably the biggest in many cohousing endeavors is economic. Lots of people simply can not afford to buy a house. So to worry about being exclusionary is not worth the energy. Instead, you might think about what goes on upstairs which is being denied people if you choose not to host the expense of an elevator. If dinner and large meeting space is on the accessible floor, then what exactly would the upper floors be used for? And then take into account if those activities could be moved to the lower floor if needed to accommodate someone. If upstairs is secondary meeting rooms, library, etc then you might not want to host the expense of an elevator and rather, if the need arises, simply move those activities down to the main floor. A large dining room can host many activities besides dinner. Rob Sandelin Sharingwood Cohousing _________________________________________________________________ Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at: http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L/ **************Wondering what's for Dinner Tonight? Get new twists on family favorites at AOL Food. (http://food.aol.com/dinner-tonight?NCID=aolfod00030000000001)
-
Re: Elevators and exclusions mrbouchez06, May 9 2008
- Re: Elevators and exclusions mrbouchez06, May 9 2008
- Re: Elevators and exclusions Dave and Diane, May 9 2008
-
Re: Elevators and exclusions mrbouchez06, May 9 2008
- Re: Elevators and exclusions Tim Mensch, May 11 2008
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.