Cohousing-L Mailing List: Re: Designing gathering spaces

[Sharon Villines (sharon]

On 24 Apr 2012, at 2:46 PM, Nessa Dertnig wrote:

> On one hand I would like to think that no one would take advantage -- on the 
> other, it does seem like everyone might have different expectations and that 
> it could be better if things were clear from the beginning.

It would be nice to hear from Cobb Hill on this but I find that often in any 
issue there are members who think things are just fine when others are really 
furious and grumbling privately. We all have blind spots and sensitive spots. 
In cohousing, all the blind spots and all the sensitive spots become yours. The 
best way to deal with this is to bring expectations out in the open and keep 
them there.

And even if it isn't true, it's best to handle the topic as understanding 
differing expectations. As an example, after we moved in and beginning to set 
up maintenance, use, and private scheduling of the CH we discovered that people 
had vastly differing expectations. They included:

1. An center for distributing activist literature and holding activist meetings 
on all topics. A public place where people could always find action. Some thing 
akin to an active university student center.

2. An income source that would be rented frequently, even several times a week, 
to defray expenses and make living here less expensive. At least to pay the 
expense of having a CH.

There were more. But they were all unrevealed until we moved in and began 
acting out our expectations. The same will happen with the land use.

> When you said (in point 2.) to "let demarcations float" do you mean that we 
> should give a general outline of what we think yards will look like, but not 
> confirm this in our documents until a year after everyone moves in?   Also, I 
> really like the idea of ongoing discussions about how everyone is feeling 
> about how the space has been allocated.

I meant some sort of temporary demarcations but something that is clear so you 
know what space people are claiming as theirs and for what purpose. Perhaps 
stakes and ropes or something similar — or even a map on a white board 
somewhere which is updated regularly.

> One thing:  Would you be willing to elaborate more on what you meant when you 
> said that self-regulation in communities is a problem?

Decisions are hard. Most of us avoid making them as long as possible. Then we 
avoid enforcing them. By self-regularion I meant self-governance as a community 
— the community taking responsibility for governing its members. 

We find it almost impossible and have had some fairly egregious situations. 
People just don't want to take responsibility for their neighbor's behavior. 
Money for some reason is easier, which is why I suggested tying land use to a 
paid fee. That will make it much easier. 

The first level of governance will be to keep to the schedule of discussions 
about land use, for example. These will begin slipping by the wayside. Use 
rounds so everyone is automatically expected to speak up. They don't have to 
"volunteer" the information. It is expected. This will help bring things out in 
the open.

A proposal on dealing with this would probably begin with a temporary or 
introductory discussion with a map, but you may be so busy you don't complete 
anything this complicated. It may need to be a map of the whole property, on a 
white board, that can be filled in and amended as you go along. A plan of 
decision more than a decision. The important part is regular discussions and 
review of the map.

> We have 42 acres, and our houses are clustered on about six acres.

With this much land this is not a huge problem, or at least not as large as it 
is when there are 43 units on 3 acres.

Sharon
----
Sharon Villines
Takoma Village Cohousing, Washington DC
http://www.takomavillage.org