Friday Keynote: Cohousing in Denmark - a look back and forward

featuring Jan Gudmand Hoyer

Friday 7:00pm - 8:30pm
Note: Also available for $20 cash at door - check back here for directions to auditorium (no credit cards/checks). The keynote address is part of the full conference package, so there is no charge for attendees who are registered for the Fri-Sun event. This address is also available to the general public for $20 (cash at the door with limited seating: first-come, first served).

In this thought-provoking presentation, we will look at the emergence of Cohousing in Denmark - where it all began. This is a rare opportunity for the those involved in Cohousing to hear how it all started from Jan Gudmand Hoyer. He is uniquely suited to address this topic as one of original founders of the Cohousing Movement in Denmark. Gudmand Hoyer is an internationally recognized architect of numerous cohousing communities.

After authoring the seminal paper, The Missing Link between Utopia and the Dated One-Family House, Gudmand Hoyer was established one of the most influential early thought leaders of the cohousing movement.

An interview with Jan Gudmand Hoyer

Cohousing Association Board Member Grace Kim recently interviewed Gulmand Hoyer in preparation for the upcoming International Cohousing Summit.

What led you to explore cohousing? Can you share your first experiences with cohousing?

In 1951, while attending school, I had to prepare a paper on the subject Kibbutzes. The collective life form fascinated me. Later in about 1954, I read Thomas More’s Utopia and found the ideas very compelling. These factors took form with my first academic cohousing project for summerhouses in 1958. My teacher didn't like the idea and, once again, I received a poor grade. Then in 1960, I attended a master’s class at Harvard with Christopher Alexander. Alexander proposed a car city and openly opposed my idea of having the cars kept outside the housing group. Many years later, he made his Lima project with cohousing groups, feeling that in undeveloped countries, this idea would provide a workable solution. Even through our disagreements, many ideas where exchanged and this opened new avenues for changing architecture’s traditional perspective.

Why do you think cohousing has been so successful in Denmark?

Danish lifestyle really changed radically in the Fifties when women started to work outside the house. The standard house plans, both for apartments and one-family houses were at this time still made in same style as the beginning of the industrial period. People were ready for something new. Cohousing gave place for a new kind of people: it gave the family a structure for better teamwork. Cohousing allowed for the kitchen island and sectioning of the house. Common house dining gave people more time. Children were secure, without danger from neighborhood cars. Crime and juvenile delinquency were prevented because of nearby neighbors always watching. Plus, there were more possibilities for economically developing special features, like swimming pools, workshops, music rooms, children's playroom, library, or common caretaking for children. Lots of new social interaction was inviting for both children and grownups. I even think there are less divorces among the couples. Add to this lots of green economy and new ideas from their interacting with many professionals in the cohousing community. By driving together, to work, vacations, and entertainment like movies and theater, daily CO2 use is significantly reduced.

Are there things that you now view differently from your early work?

That people are more different in their lifestyle choices than I envisioned. I thought that the choice of a house within the overall plan, would be difficult and it was not. In the end, some wanted to be near the common house other to be near the pool, the tennis Court or the vegetable garden and so on. People naturally tend to be attracted to different things, so everything works pretty harmoniously.

I also notice that in most cohousing initial planning, community members think they want walls around their gardens and other types of privacy, but in the end, when they get used to each other, nobody wants this. By the time planning is completed, people want to break down the walls and share with each other, almost universally.

How do you see cohousing growing as an international movement?

In EU and US there is a natural need for cohousing. I see the greatest need in the US because there are less social support services than in other parts of the world. In EU, where the nuclear family is small compared to pre-industrial times, there is a significant up-tick in cohousing projects. The EU has increased numbers of single people, many elderly, and single parents—all feel very isolated and seek the fellowship of cohousing.

Some cultures still have tight relationships between generations. In Asia, for instance, many young people find the power of family obligations restrictive and are not ready to embrace multi-generation common living situations. Iran has a big need for cohousing in the cities, but not in the countryside, where women’s freedom is limited, like in Arab states.

The Cohousing Association has the opportunity to connect these disparate views and bringing people together in conference is a strong beginning for an international movement.

What do you see as contributing factors to cohousing’s developing success in America?

The financial crisis. The isolation of nuclear families. The many divorces. The desire for a sense of increased security and well being. People are more aware of the need for a greener lifestyle and suffer loneliness. All these needs and wants are addressed by cohousing communities.

Can you discuss differences between Danish and American cohousing projects?

Because of the cold climate and limited places for new development, many Danish cohousing projects are third generation projects with everything under one roof. Danish Cohousing projects in general have less square meters and more intimate social contact between separate dwellings. For example, it’s common in Denmark to have a window directly to a semi-private area with clear view of the neighbor’s dining room.

Has cohousing evolved in Denmark to include senior specific cohousing projects?

Yes, there are specific senior projects, but the preference is to have the whole life circle represented in mixed projects.

If you could shape or influence cohousing trends, what would you like to see happen?

To have whole cities divided into cohousing groups in future. Neighborhoods and districts could function as mini-villages.

Residents most often develop Cohousing projects. Do you have any sage advice for residents starting the development process?

Keep groups under 33 participants. If there are more than 33 in the group, divide the group. Have parties and social events together, go on excursions together. Give marks to the architecture you best like, discus it together, let everybody participate in these mini-groups. Also avoid groups with less than 20 participants. 33 seem to be the best number for several reasons. Utopia. Several primal groups. You don’t have to leave the project if you get unfriendly with one group, just move to another group. The optimal cohousing group size is 33, in my experience.

Is there something that you wish you would have known before you began your first cohousing experience?

Yes, a very important thing: have members write down their requirements and let the newcomers accept them and sign this acknowledgement… I mean, for instance, have group members designate specifics and priorities, such as which area belongs to the children and for what purpose. Is a garden more important than a pool or exercise room? Getting clear on these and putting them into writing will help attract the right new members and keep everyone working together toward Utopia.

On Friday, June 26, 2009, Gudmand Hoyer will give the National Cohousing Conference's Keynote Address. He is one of three Featured Speakers presenting at this annual National Conference.