Twenty Years Later: The State of Cohousing in America

It is the eve of the 2008 Cohousing Conference. It has been 20 years since the concept of cohousing was introduced to an increasingly transient and anonymous American population. It therefore seems like a natural time to step back and survey the movement’s current state, as well as its trajectory – to measure our successes and to recognize the work that lies

ahead.

We have seen more than 100 communities fully realized in this country, with many more on their way. What was once a marginal endeavor now comes complete with an abundance of information and a network of very supportive advocates and professionals. The achievements are mind-blowing and everyone involved deserves a standing ovation. If this June’s conference is not replete with congratulatory hugs and frequent back pats, humility will have definitely gotten the best of us. And of course, when the confetti settles, we will all humbly roll up our sleeves and get back to the often joyful yet always challenging business at hand: informing, empowering and attempting to live by example.

So, where are we on this enlightening adventure and what crucial challenges lie ahead? Let us place our collective finger on the pulse of cohousing in America:

• We see elders taking control of their ability to age successfully with the cooperation and support of friends. We see a new generation of young adults and young families exploring cohousing as a lifestyle option, with the potential to influence cohousing in ways not yet imagined.
• We recognize the appeal of a grassroots movement and, at the same time, the need for greater structure and formality.
• We witness some cohousing groups go from initial vision to move-in within two to three years while other groups struggle for years, with plenty of camaraderie and group decision-making skills, but with no physical community to show for their efforts.
• We see some cities welcome cohousing with open arms while in many other municipalities, we feel the skeptical stares of officials when confronted with the prospect of cohousing on their turf.
• We recognize the power and flexibility of the cohousing movement in its ability to accommodate groups with very specific interests, beliefs and lifestyles. At the same time, we recognize the imperative that cohousing not become inextricably linked in the public eye with any specific values beyond those of community and social and environmental responsibility.
• We find creative solutions to the scarcity and cost of land in dense urban environments. At the same time, we see that providing common space can tip the scale from market-rate to luxury for potential cohousing developments in some high-priced urban markets.
• We find nonprofit developers excited about cohousing as a model for creating greater social support in affordable housing developments, and we see many groups finding creative ways to establish greater affordability in cohousing. At the same time, affordability remains one of the greatest struggles that cohousing groups grapple with today.
• We appreciate the seemingly limitless selflessness of many cohousing advocates as they work to advance the cause, while many cohousing professionals struggle to strike a balance between the health of the movement and the health of their businesses within an increasingly competitive environment.
• We watch those rare developers who take groups by the hand and guide them with skill and understanding to the realization of their vision, yet we also see many more developers, initially intrigued by the concept of cohousing, quickly retreat when they realize they will be expected to live up to those relatively uncompromising standards.
• Recently in these desperate times, we’ve seen some developers view the prospect of committed, pre-approved buyers as their salvation, while others are simply perplexed by the idea of involving an organized group of buyers early in the development process.
• We find some rare mortgage brokers brandishing their credentials as cohousing advocates and some banks enthusiastically courting cohousing groups for construction loans. At the same time, we watch so many lenders scratch their heads when hearing the term “cohousing” for the first time.
• We witness the sense of empowerment that some groups experience when they recognize their collective ability to contract highly qualified professionals to assist in the realization of their vision. At the same time, we experience the frustration felt by other groups as they realize that there are no truly qualified professionals providing services in their area.
• We see desperate groups willing to throw the participatory design and development process out the window in order to find physical homes for the thriving social communities they’ve already created, while some impatient developers try to call all kinds of things “cohousing,” only to find their efforts corrected by the movement’s definition of the word.
• We commend the movement’s commitment to diversity, while acknowledging that cohousing still does not achieve the diversity that it seeks.
• We witness other forms of housing design and town planning being influenced by cohousing’s commitment to community and sustainability, yet we occasionally experience a level of skepticism toward the prospect of other forms of development influencing the cohousing model that we’ve become comfortable with.
• We bristle with excitement over the forthcoming cohousing conference, while we acknowledge that a movement that has truly become a mainstay of American society requires no such conferences.

Some basic questions.

It is easy to feel overwhelmed when confronted by so many seemingly contradictory observations on the current state of cohousing in America. Is this a movement with an identity crisis, or are we simply experiencing natural growing pains? Should we be feverishly and methodically trying to sort things out and find solutions, or will this all just sort itself out as part of a slow-moving paradigm shift? Perhaps a valuable first step in assessing and addressing the situation at hand is to distill it into some basic questions that we can ask ourselves and each other:

• How do we make cohousing development more accessible to interested groups everywhere without watering down the meaning of “cohousing?”
• How should the cohousing movement grow and change to accommodate new interests and demands?
• How do we establish and maintain the level of organization necessary to best coordinate this growing movement? What level of organization is actually needed or desired?
• How do we best continue to inform the general public, government officials and pertinent professionals about cohousing?
• How do we increase diversity within the cohousing movement?
• How can we make cohousing more accessible to those with limited financial resources?
• How can we best facilitate mutual empowerment through shared knowledge and experience?
• How can we maintain the openness and cooperation at the heart of this movement while adjusting to the healthy competition that a growing movement demands?
• How do we want the general public to identify with cohousing? How do we shape that identity, and how far do we go to protect it?

As we grapple with these challenges and move forward into this next generation of cohousing in America, it is helpful to step back (way back) and seek guidance in the universal truths upon which this movement is founded:

• The whole is always greater than the sum of its parts.
• Focus on the goal, but definitely enjoy the journey.
• Treat all with the respect that we would hope to receive ourselves.
• Entitlement is a naive concept unless it is also selfless.

So, with acknowledgment of our many great accomplishments as well as the challenges that lie ahead, may we bravely move forward together, guided by the pure logic that can only be found in the heart.