I came a across a university essay that I wrote 10 years ago about Co-housing models called ‘Shared Spaces’, the core of the message is still very relevant now. In the face of multiple crisis’ namely, climate, housing, loneliness, health, poverty, biodiversity – it is little wonder many people are looking to make changes to the way we live.
Co-housing is a bit of buzz word now, possibly riding the wave of the co-working-space boom but more and more examples of these projects are cropping up in the UK, as people are finding more ways to reconnect with one another. The term was coined in the 70’s when introduced to the USA but it was based on earlier Scadinavian examples.
The basic principle is that of, shared resources (in the broadest sense) and community, which can come in all shapes and sizes. Sitting somewhere between the intentional community and private housing – cohousing bridges the gap, finding a balance between the needs of the group and the individual. Accessing the benefits of shared community, whilst retaining the agency of the individual.
Often, co-housing schemes revolve around the idea of smaller ‘private’ homes of various sizes, around a common house containing shared amenities. This could range from 2 houses with a shared workshop, up to 100 homes that share a day-care centre and swimming pool with –everything in- between. The limitations are the imagination and reality of organising large groups (which we will come on to…)
Co-housing schemes tend to have some environmental ambitions and lends itself to sustainability. Land-use and sustainability are intrinsically linked. Despite with many differing views on this – the consensus is that sprawl is not ideal and increased density can be positive as it frees up land for other uses (food / energy / material production, re-wilding, etc…). Also, proximity means less energy intensive travel. This said, density ‘unchecked’ leads to the concrete jungles of high rises, lack of green spaces, polluted air, crime and other ills that can come with dense urban living. Co-housing projects have tools to engage with this design challenge, with productive outcomes. Shared amenities can mean more efficient use of external spaces and the common house can allow fir smaller dwellings, resulting in a more people/ m2 of ‘building’ than conventional housing of a similar scale. A step towards thoughtful densification and resource management
Energy efficiency can be improved by grouping buildings, producing better form factors - the principle of huddling together for warmth (like penguins) comes to mind. The development of multiple houses on a site allows for ‘huddling’ and sharing heating systems, renewable energy systems, sewerage treatment can increase efficiencies.
Cohousing schemes often engage with the issue affordability through shared financing models, economies of scale and access to cheaper land. Land can be offered by local authorities at below market value (sometimes nearly free), to community groups if it ‘is likely to contribute to the promotion or improvement of economic, social or environmental well-being’. Land prices being one of the biggest barriers to affordable housing development, this can mean significant savings.
It’s not lost on me, that many of the efficiencies I’m talking about exist in the more conventional top-down development methods; district heating networks; apartment blocks; housing developments… I’m interested in using these positives within a bottom-up model and all the other benefits this brings. Accessing the benefits of scale and sharing, whilst retaining agency and decision-making power often only afforded to one-off individual house development.
Often, a barrier to cohousing is time & effort. Sharing is caring, but it is also difficult and requires work. The formation of co-housing groups involves many meetings and discussions, often with people coming and going until the group settles.
Despite the effort, this process can form the backbone of the group, creating the resilience required to embark on a big project together, like with all commitments the more you put in, the more you get out. Depending on the size of group, these organizational structures might look quite different, but all will need systems for decision making. Co-design workshops are a great tool to create this resilience and make decisions together.
Fundamentally, this is nothing new - this idea of sharing used to, and still does happen in a less formalised way. Neighbours and communities are often still connected and share resources, especially in rural places – without the need for formal organisational structures. Unfortunately, there are many reasons why modern life has sometimes eroded these, more fluid neighbourly ties and some intentionality is really needed. Besides, like most good ideas, it’s based on positive elements from the past, re-imagined to work in the present.
Comentarii