5 Comments
User's avatar
Noah Tang's avatar

We tried starting a co-housing group in central Illinois a couple years back and the #1 thing that killed the project was financing.

In a time where infill development in smaller towns in the Midwest does not pencil on its own, a whole co-housing development was an added barrier.

Nearly all co-housing developments are initiated by the group of initial residents who want community, the project is suit to their needs and desires. While nobody in the group was versed in real estate development, banks were not confident in us.

That is why there are specialized co-housing developers that contract with forming groups, but by that point we figured that out, our group was out of steam and ceased meeting. Fingers crossed to more of this development.

Aaron Lubeck's avatar

Yup. Common, unfortunately. We need to make these simpler to build and easier to amalgamate into new communities.

Loren Wood's avatar

Love the model. As mentioned, not right for everyone but appreciate you sharing this. I've been following examples like Frolic out in Seattle. Are there some other places or projects you're aware of that are creating a healthy environment for more co-housing like this?

Always looking for examples to continue to follow.

Aaron Lubeck's avatar

yes, there are so many variations of it. Carrboro and Durham have some great ones. None of it really scales as of yet. Ross Chapin's book on Pocket Neighborhood goes through the history of the "hardware," and we regularly hand out his books to clients to help them learn about the design concepts.

Robert J LaVelle's avatar

Maybe I’m delusional, but I think that there’s demand for smaller scale co housing within buildings. Small apartments with kitchenettes and larger shared common spaces make a lot of sense in our demographic future