I've been putting together a list of Retrofit Cohousing communities for the 2015 National Cohousing Conference. It includes some failed attempts which maybe we can learn from. I finally realized that one attempt I was involved with early on (1994) should be included. Andersen Lane Cohousing was a retrofit effort on a block in South Minneapolis. Searching for some published information about that attempt produced little. I did find several Cohousing-L messages (below). THere is a little summary from memory at the end. ------ Re: Urban cohousing From: Fred H. Olson WB0YQM (fholsonmaroon.tc.umn.edu) Date: Fri, 25 Feb 94 09:55:43 CST http://lists.cohousing.org/archives/cohousing-l/msg00533.htmlSeveral of the households from the Seward Cohousing Group have joined the Andersen Lane Cohousing Group (ALCG). Since Oct of '93, 5 households have been meeting to plan the conversion of a 1.5 acre square block of existing housing in a low income area of Minneapolis to cohousing. The site has 22 units in 12 buildings (1 to 4 units per building) and an alley thru the middle. The changes would include closing the alley to traffic, removing the garages and fences to make common space, providing alternate peripheral parking and converting or building common facilities. -------- Re: Converting existing housing to Cohousing From: Fred H Olson WB0YQM (fholsonmaroon.tc.umn.edu) Date: Wed, 4 May 94 08:41 CDT http://lists.cohousing.org/archives/cohousing-l/msg00827.html On Tue, 3 May 94 14:34 CDT, Stephen Hawthorne wrote: >Fred: Who owns the alley? We had some luck in closing undeveloped city >right of ways in our neighborhood by requesting the city to deed over the >right of way to the bordering property owners. Could you get the alley >closed or deeded over to your group or the current residents? >Stephen Hawthorne >Blue Heron Partners >Chatham County, NC Closing the alley involves a number of issues but generally if adjacent owners agree we would expect to get it vacated and the alley would revert to the adjacent landowner (split down the middle). We dont anticipate removing the concrete at least initially and would probably keep it useable for emergency (fire) and utility access. There is timing problem associated with the alley. Many of us feel vacating the alley is a key item for the project and would be reluctant to buy property on the block before we were assured that the alley was to be closed. On the other hand, until we own the properties the alley cant be closed. So we need to get assurances that if the properties are acquired it will be closed and the purchase agreements on the houses will probably be contingent on acquiring all the others. It gets to be a big problem to orchestrate. jmetzler [at] aol.com wrote: >You might also look to the Dutch concept of the "Woonerf" as a >designed place which allows both people and cars to coexist safely. >If you needed to retain the alley, the concepts could be used to treat it >more as a pedestrian domain where automobiles were clearly >visitors needing to be on their best behavior. Interesting. I think I have heard of something like this but hadn't thought of it in relation to our proposal for Andersen Lane. Indeed the alternate way to deal with cars is a problem. -- Fred H. Olson fholson [at] uci.com Sysop of COHOUSING-L mailing list 1221 Russell Av N; Minneapolis, MN 55411 voice: (612) 588-9532 WB0YQM 146.64 MHz with DTMF Selcall: 233 ; FAX by arrangement ------------------ Re: Retrofit Cohousing / terminology From: Jeffrey O. Hobson (dcn00109wheel.ucdavis.edu) Date: Thu, 18 Aug 94 10:20 CDT http://lists.cohousing.org/archives/cohousing-l/msg01415.html Fred, could you elaborate on the things you've learned about how NOT to do it. Fred Olson recently wrote: [ in msg at http://lists.cohousing.org/pipermail/cohousing-l/msg01368.html ] > [Retrofit cohousing] would be a fair general description of . . . our (now > defunct) proposal for Andersen Lane in Minneapolis. AND > We at Andersen Lane have already learned some things about how not to do > retrofit cohousing. Jeffrey Hobson N Street Cohousing dcn00109 [at] wheel.ucdavis.edu Davis Energy Group ------------- I could not find a reply to Jeff's request... But I did come across the following message. Fred ------------- RE: Written rules: No cause to leave From: Kevin Wolf (kjwolfucdavis.edu) Date: Mon, 29 Aug 94 15:14 CDT http://lists.cohousing.org/pipermail/cohousing-l/msg01517.html Yeah for Rob Sandelin's post on sticking with it when getting co-housing started (or anything for that manner). We as individuals can make change happen, it takes time, patience and stubbed toes. Thanks for writing this out Rob. --- Kevin Wolf 724 N St Davis, CA 95616 phone and fax: 916-758-4211 ---------- April 8.2015 I think this last message summarizes a major reason why Andersen Lane Cohousing did not happen. We lacked the commitment to proceed and overcome the inability to acquire a number of properties at the beginning which would assure the ability to close the alley. Independently over the years I have come to the conclusion that alleys have a major advantage of giving access across the alley to neighbors lots even if not closed. Pursuing the "Woonerf" - traffic calming approach - to an alley seems like a reasonable alternative. Fred Olson
This page is maintained by Fred H Olson. Fred's Link page