TOGETHERNESS: Do the people yearn for community?

Read first: https://www.studiojay.ca/post/togetherness-density-is-necessary-but-not-sufficient

The immediate feedback I receive from most people on the topic of Building Togetherness is whether people will want something so different. They also wonder who will want to live in a co-living environment? Which markets does this style of housing serve?

When I think about who I believe a co-living situation serves, it could depend on each case. No different than any custom home would. Instead, it might help to first consider the general benefits associated with cohousing.

Perceived Benefits of Cohousing

1. Community and social security: Fosters a supportive environment that can help with social isolation and provide mutual aid, potentially delaying the need for more formal and costly support services. Examples range from daycares to retirement facilities.

   
   

2. Shared resources: Shared expenses, such as those for common facilities and potentially some utilities, can lead to reduced individual costs, contributing to financial security. 

   
   

3. Collective buying power: Shared expenses can also lead to greater efficiency in spending, with larger purchases being able to be more readily expensed with greater access to capital between the group vs. each individual.

   
   

Overall, these benefits outline a greater perceived value for efficient operations and maintenance, social support, and shared amenities.

Cohousing seems, at first glance, to be a constant exercise in communism, and is suited for those who have less interest, or ability, to manage their needs independently. It's fair to say the ideal cohousing tenant might need to be someone who is at least a little bit "cult curious."

There are already some development styles that exist that leverage the advantages of co-living designs. Typical examples include, but are not limited to;

• Student housing and other cohort variations that use co-housing designs. Often featuring shared utilities and amenities in bathrooms, kitchens, and common social spaces.

• Multi-generational housing is normalized within many immigrant cultures in North America. Usually, a more intimate version of co-living, with most members being family. Also provides social support and offers long-term investment value.

• Low-income and social need housing, where efficiency for operations is vital to the program's success. Often, an institution or governmental body.

• Remote Workplace housing. Efficient commercial/industrial. Typically temporary.

• Hospitality services like hotels, spas, and bed and breakfasts even take on a form of short-term cohousing.

Nonetheless, it's important to acknowledge that cohousing serves very particular populations, and this environment may not be suitable for everyone. It requires a certain level of social engagement and a willingness to participate in community life. 

As noted in my last thought on this topic, sharing our living space might be counterintuitive for most people in our consumption addicted society. The environmental context and user experience within our community designs may be the problem.

But let's say we were going to design a cohousing development. I would imagine it would depend on variables such as;

1. Number of tenants/units.

2. Structure of ownership

   1. Joint Tenants vs. Common Tenants vs. Corporate Ownership %

3. Tenancy goals, expectations, and exit strategies.

   1. Tenant familiarity = Forecasted turnover ratio, per period.

4. Tenants' share of maintenance and operations responsibility.

   1. Automated or work-intensive systems = High or low operation costs.

5. Other Financials: Revenue streams, expenses, and risks.

   
   

I think that within these variables, there are a few different opportunities for future cohousing developments to exist.

These are groups that I would consider "cult curious". Typical situations where arranging in groupings may provide benefits for certain prospective owners. This includes;

1. People who will choose to invest in properties in intimate, arranged groups of friends, family, or even business/investment partners.

2. Other people might gather within community contexts with lifestyle like-mindedness for anything from gardening to biking.

3. Some people may find it a financial tool so that they can access first-time home-buyer financing.

4. And finally, corporate developers will leverage these developments as branded real estate opportunities or rent-to-own development structures. (more on this later)...

Between these options, I think there is a lot of opportunity for cohousing designs to be marketed as specialized options for new home buyers. For half of the noted options, it will largely come down to presenting buyers with realistic design options that provide a greater value to their lifestyle.

This is further supported by other stakeholders in the housing market, as everyone's attention has turned towards the current housing affordability crisis facing Canadians.

Mortgage programs and lending institutions such as the CMHC are beginning to align with co-purchasing activities as they are slowly becoming a regular part of the market.

Additionally, the authorities having jurisdiction over governmental housing regulations are also loosening their standards to allow for more mixed-use zoning and more housing units on parcels. Further supported by split mortgages and co-signing of purchases in real estate.

All of these points to an opportunity to pivot real-estate developments towards a communal purchasing approach, with designs that suit this niche.

Furthermore, the creation of a community could be synonymous with the creation of a local market.

Cohousing can serve the investors, owners, and developers as operational real estate ventures. With micro-mixed use developments, developers can leverage density to operate their real estate investments with better cost efficiency on a $/sqft basis.

There are also potential revenue streams to generate profits for the ownership groups through commercial mixed-use spaces. Community gatherings provide a demand for retail storefronts, daycares, medical services, cafes, and other community-centric needs.

These can provide a significant economic boost for operations and financing. Potentially attracting commercial developers and other real-estate designers to rethink the opportunities within a co-living context.

So, who would live in a cohousing environment? It might be more important to ask who would pay for a cohousing environment....

I think there are plenty of people whose needs might drive them towards this option. But the true value of cohousing has likely yet to be discovered in the North American context.

Designs need to meet the needs of the tenants and also align with affordable costs in construction, operations, and maintenance.

Whether or not more cohousing will eventually exist will come down to the willingness of the market to be present, the imagination of designers to meet tenant needs, and investors. The people with money, the prospective owners, and the developers, will need to realize value for these concepts to be brought to life....

Maybe we should start to look at what designs can make a community valuable?

To be continued....