comparing co-housing · 2015-02-08 · comparing co-housing: overview 11-12-2014 2 1. emerging...

Newcastle)11)December)2014) 11/12/14)

[email protected]) 1)

COMPARING CO-HOUSING Ir Lidewij Tummers

Comparing co-housing: overview

11-12-2014

2

1.  Emerging trend Europe-wide 2.  Comparative features 3.  Various incentives 4.  Co-housing as urban strategy 5.  Gender perspective

UK: ‘Together we create a new world’ [Diggers & dreamers]

11-12-2014

3

Flanders: ‘Let us create villages in town’ [Lietard]

11-12-2014

4

Samenhuizen.be



France: ‘More than a roof over the head’ [Habicoop]

11-12-2014

5

2009

Germany: Wohngemeinschaft-Baugruppe

11-12-2014

6

NL: Centraal Wonen & ‘CPO’

Meals, parties school- and sports ‘taxi’ House-/dog-/cat-sitting Governance &maintenance

Meeting room

Guest-room

Playground

Car-sharing

Car-park

Terbregse.nl

Waste- recycling

Garden

Apartments

Offices

11-12-2014

7

family-units

Bicycle shed

Italy, Spain: reviving a tradition

11-12-2014

8

Co-housing Chiaravalle



Central Europe and the Baltic states

11-12-2014

9 eco-grishino.ru

Large variety of forms & context

11-12-2014

10 Jonckheere 2012

Januari 2014

COUNTRY co-housing type source date Quantity estimation

NETHERLANDS First generation 1977-97; Centtraal Wonen

Landelijke Vereniging Centraal Wonen 2013 membership = 54 projects

(3-160 units per project)

cohousing senior citizens Choi 2004; Bamford 2005 2100 units/app 210 projects

gemeenschappelijk wonen.nl "Community Addresses in The Netherlands". Federatie Gemeenschappelijk Wonen

2012

more than 300 cohousing communities; 73 mixed-generation and 231 senior cohousing, about 60 in planning or construction

CPO (Baugruppen) bouwenineigenbeheer.nl App. 30 realised projects and 30 in planning

eco-village initiatives ZOZ#117 (Omslag) 2013 19+other intentional communities

FRANCE cooperatives de logementApp. 250 realised or initiated projects since 2003

UK cohousing … UK cohousing network survey 2006 400 registered communities

http://www.cohousing.org.uk/groupsDec-13

15 established, 47 developing groups ¶ 12 new groups

self-buildingother intentional communities Metcalf (findhorn press) 2004

BRD Baugruppen/ Fedrowitz (Wohnportal) 201215-17 % of housing stock = genossenschaft old+new model

ID22 no information

AUSTRIA Wankiewicz & 2013Numerous projects in Vienna, few in other regions

LSCbeitrag? 2012BELGIUM/FLANDERS co-housing samenhuizen.be 2011 App. 175 projects & 50

start-upsBELGIUM/WALLONIE Habitat Groupé

HABITAT-GROUPE.BE 2013 lists 75 Projects (wide definition)

Baugruppen' Wonen in Meervoud (website bestaat niet meer) 2010 120 entries (not

neccesarily co-housing)

DENMARK Jonckheere 2010 400 projects

Durrett 2011

? 250.000 residents involved, 1% of housing stock

SWEDEN cohousing Kollektivhus.nu 2012 41 projects as full members

ecovillages

http://gen-europe.org/ecovillages/europe-map/

4 villages members of global network

FINLANDhttp://gen-europe.org/ecovillages/europe-map/

4 villages members of global network

SPAIN classical' housing coops concovi Dec-13 14.434 coops registered (notnecessarily co-housing)

co-housing initiativesMasqueunacasa (sostre civic) Dec-13

4-6 projects and 6-8 professional coops (consultants) in spain

eco-villages

http://gen-europe.org/ecovillages/europe-map/

Dec-13 12 members of global network

ITALY coops in Milano Housing Lab Polimi 2012 3-4 new projectsclassical' housing coops

PORTUGAL

OTHER TYPES Abbeyfield huizen Davey 2004; Verwey Jonker lit studie 2008:

since 1956; 900 houses worldwide (elderly)

BE 2012

Small numbers, large impact, growing body of research, But little monitoring > Comparability in search of framework

11-12-2014 11

2. Comparative features

’urban oasis’

[Haquebord]

‘pragmatic utopia’

[Sargisson]

“The unifying factor is creating alternatives for standardized, one- household units. Projects may show a mix of row houses with apartments for singles and seniors, and important differences in the housing plans.” [Sangregorio] Collectively developed and self managed housing with shared spaces : manifold typology

11-12-2014

12



DIY society & retreat of the state

11-12-2014

13

Types of definition

!  Self-governance, participation !  Elderly: institutional

involvement !  Alternative to mainstream

!  Distance to society !  Sustainability / ecology

!  Community-building !  idealist remote [Meijering c.s]

!  Time & Historical context !  Utopistes, Castors, Cité

Radieuse (france) !  Domestic work (Sweden)

!  Pragmatic idealism !  Baugruppe …

housing initiatives where the organizational & spatial unit overlap

[Fedrowitz-Gailing 2003]

14

11-12-2014

Co-building or cohousing? 15

11-12-2014

LVCW Dutch cohousing federation BIEB co-building consultants

Institutional partners

11-12-2014

16



Integrate into planning process:

!  DNR: new regulations for architects

!  De Regie: new profession ‘coaching’

!  Catalogue: preconceived models

!  Zoning plan: software generated

!  Still no new law for co-housing initiatives

11-12-2014

17

Co-housing ≠ Gated Community

11-12-2014

18

Different generations of projects 19

11-12-2014

CW Romolen, 1980s

!  1968 and environmental awakening

!  No environmental standard

!  Energy scarcity >saving !  National policy = social

housing !  33-77 units, rental !  Urban renewal, new

Generation 1980-90s

Evolution of context 20

11-12-2014

MMWW Meander, 2000s

!  Spoiled consumer and active citizen

!  Established environmental standards for housing

!  Energy label, EPC !  National

policy=privatization !  48-96 units, HO/mix !  Urban extension, new

21st century



3. Different incentives

Response to societal challenges

!  Changing household structures > !  Ageing populations + !  Young families back to the inner city

! Keeping sub-urban qualities ! Mutualise resources during building and in

everyday life ! Environment and health >

Collectively developed and self managed housing with shared spaces

11-12-2014

21

Flanders: land scarcity & urban quality

Samenhuizen.be 11-12-2014

22

K. Van Herck, B. De Meulder, Wonen in Meervoud, SUN, Amsterdam, 2009

Germany: aging, shrinking

11-12-2014

23 2014 TU Kaiserslautern

Tübingen, Co-housing as urban strategy

11-12-2014

24



France: grassroot to government

La loi ALUR du 24 mars 2014 permet la reconnaissance du statut de coopérative d’habitants.

!  Con’s

11-12-2014

25

Eco-quartier Strassbourg

!  Con’s

11-12-2014

26

NL: national housing policy 2000!

!  Privatization of building and property!!  Inprove quality inner cities!!  Consumer-oriented; special needs !!  Goal: 2005= 30% self-managed housing!

11-12-2014!

27

Encouraging home-ownership

11-12-2014

28



4. Co-housing as urban strategy

11-12-2014

29

Krämer & Kuhn 2007

Wüstenrot Institut

!  Local Authority: ! Pro-active director (Tübingen, Almere) ! Tandem (Strassbourg) ! Facilitator (Hamburg, Amsterdam)

High expectations for urban development

!  Social cohesion !  Citizens’ involvement !  Mutual help (aging

population) !  Create sustainable

environments !  Taylor made housing !  Mixed income areas

LoExpectations DOubts

11-12-2014

30

"  but only inside the projects?

"  Or extra management tasks?

"  or creative middle class?

"  or exclusive environments? "  Planning depends on

quality of partners

Urban form

Cohousing=Eco-engineering? 20120313

31

NL: breaking with Masterplanning 32

11-12-2014

MW2 Meander, Zwolle Floorplan



Mixed use, mixed property

Cohousing=Eco-engineering? 20120313

33

Kersentuin, Utrecht

Housing typology 35

5. Gender perspective of cohousing

11-12-2014

36

[Toker 2010]

“Cohousing developments attracted unconventional households and women with more egalitarian gender ideologies compared to ‘new urbanist’ developments. Women living in cohousing developments spent a lower percentage of their time at home doing housework and had more egalitarian gender ideologies compared to women living in ‘new urbanist’ developments.”



Organizing the everyday

11-12-2014

37

Grass-root incentive

11-12-2014

38

Typically feminin time-space pattern!

!  Domestic work!!  Care for children/dependants!

!  Interrompted journeys!

!  Complex days!

!  Public transport !

!  Lower average income!!  Longer lives!

!  Expedient (less play)!

Feminist Utopia?

11-12-2014

40

Vienna: FrauenWerkstatt



Participation

11-12-2014

42

DIY co-housing laboratories of ‘urbanism of proximity

Conclusion 1: self-organized proximity

-  Mutualize resources -  Create community -  Facilitate everyday life -  Mix: income, generation, use, .. -  Decentralized energy networks -  Short circuit recycling -  ‘prosumers’

> BUT: Planning results depend on quality of

institutional partners

Conclusion 2: Comparative studies 43

Mapping, zoning plans

Technical drawings, briefings

Building application

Energy calculations

Reports of building process

International comparative research to: !  Identify the bottlenecks and the margins

for project realization !  Recognize impact & urban qualities !  Understanding how planning is receptive to

new housing models > innovation

#  Framework of comparison to be clearly defined

11-12-2014

Conclusion 3: Gender perspective

11-12-2014

44

Beyond the reconciliation pragmatism

!  Strong presence of women in the everyday organization of co-housing

!  Co-housing as alternative way of living is potentially an emancipatory environment

!  Proximity and collective self-management are no guarantee for breaking with gender roles

!  “social control” & stepping out?

comparing co-housing · 2015-02-08 · comparing co-housing: overview 11-12-2014 2 1. emerging...

Documents