Re: Elevators and exclusions | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
From: John Faust (wjfaust![]() |
|
Date: Fri, 9 May 2008 10:53:51 -0700 (PDT) |
"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. ... " We could probably use a distinction here. All of the "exclusions" you list (except for economic) are really self-exclusions or preferences made by individuals who decide that cohousing is not right for them? The community is not excluding them. On the other hand, limited accessibility does seem to be a form of community exclusion. The disabled member can't choose to go or not go to the upstairs library if there is no way up. On the other hand cost (as Rob points out) can also be a form of community exclusion and adding accessibility adds to cost. Which form of community exclusion do we prefer? What does your vision statement say? What principles have you adopted to guide the community? I thought Ann Z covered that nicely. John Faust
- Design of Units, (continued)
- Design of Units Sharon Villines, May 20 2008
- Re: Design of Units Rob Sandelin, May 20 2008
- Re: Elevators and exclusions Tim Mensch, May 19 2008
- Re: Elevators and exclusions Ellen Keyne Seebacher, May 9 2008
- Re: Elevators and exclusions John Faust, May 9 2008
- Re: Elevators and exclusions Sharon Villines, May 9 2008
- Re: Required handicap access to 2nd floor/elevator Sharon Villines, May 8 2008
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.