@reef-facilitation @Lee
Rereading the blueprint there are a lot of ācouldsā but also a must āthe common living roomā, including a kitchen facility , bar and quiet corner
Also part of the blueprint is āa place where neighbourhood can meet up and set up activitiesā. This was also mentioned in the meeting with the commune of Jette , which were enthousiastic about this.
=> i suppose we donāt need to inquire about this as it is part of the blueprint?
TBH that part of the Blueprint could have been more precise.
The way I intended to draft it was that the place to set up activities (by non-Reeflings) is a non-negotiatable, idem for the quiet corners (because of inclusion). Everything else I would consider open.
@Lee @reef-facilitation ,
still a question i am wondering aboutā¦
I agree that it is up to the architects to come up with architectural solutions to fulfill our needs (raising the ceiling so we can have a mezzanineā¦,ā¦)
One question i think we should have the reeflings advice on is: whether we want to increase the price/m2 to increase the m2 of our commons spaces. I refer to the proposal you (lee) made about having 30m2 of asterix as maybe a common intimate living area (a proposal that resonated with quite some people, and the reason for that being larger than just āincreasing the m2 for the common spacesā. ) Whatever the destination would be, it seems important to me to pass the extra info to the architects: we are willing (or not) to increase our price /m2 for extra common space, and that is: a maximum of an extra 30 m2.
Iāve calculated what it would mean to have an extra 30 m2 of common space (and 30 m2 less of logements): this would raise the price per m2 from 4307 to 4376 euro/m2. Iāve understood from Chris that you (lee) calculated it to be only a couple of euroās extra per m2. Maybe we should compare our calculations?
Sorry, I missed that (as I just explained somewhere else, Iām not at full speed yetā¦)
I am happy to be part of the discussion, although now Iāve missed the first meeting. Not sure if I can still help?
One input for now: the architects advised us to think in terms of multi-functionalities, so even though they will be the ones who will make it all go into the box, we might start brainstorming in that way (the example you gave about the coworking space becoming a homework space for example is a good one). That could be a question for people: ideas about how to combine different usage in one space.
For the possible common living room in Asterix: my calculations led to an additional 100k in the non-vendables (or something) which would lead to increase of 50 euro per square meter. In the discussions I would build on the assumptions that we will find that money somewhere. One possibility would be to use the money from the 2-4% that the latecomers will be paying extra.
Just in case it can be of use, I have added an idea on how you could collect input. Itās just an idea of course, but I wondered whether we can just ask people to write 3 post-it notes āwishesā in a Word document, and that afterwards Team Facilitation synthesises that and uses it to launch a discussion. The advantages of this way of working can be several:
Feel free to ignore all of it. Just wanted to make a little contribution to making progress on this. Link: https://c301.nl.tabdigital.eu/f/138945
i was also thinking in that way āwe should be able to find the money somewhereā. one other piste i was thinking off: we foresee 750 euro/m2 for all common spaces (including the bikeshed e.g.). My assumption is, the bigger you go with a space, the lower the price for the finishing will be per m2.
190 x 750 euro = 142500. Seems a lot to meā¦ Adding another 30 m2 means adding another 22500 euro to it as well.
i donāt know if you saw the document team facilitation was working on: https://c301.nl.tabdigital.eu/f/138564
this is with detailed questions, for me in this way people will think more about them, how they would like it to be (maybe we should also make sure they donāt start to dream). Making up these questions, made me think more about how i would imagine it. As people get a more than normal proportion of questions right now/important things to read, i personally think it should be well guided to make it easy and get as much information as possible out of it, but i let it to @reef-facilitation to share their opinion on it
I agree, but I also like to be safe when making up the budget.
To me both approaches are more or less equivalent. Personally I prefer openess, and not steering people, but thatās just me (e.g. I donāt care so much about furniture). Can it maybe be a combination of both approaches? This way you would ask people to make three big post-its, and at the top of the document you make a whole list of suggestions that people could elaborate on. Doer decides though, so please do it your way. I just wanted to offer some input, but Iād be really fine if it is not integrated.
Hi all 
Sorry Iāve been absent from this discussion for so long!
Reading through the posts, I donāt think weāre all that far apart on how we see the task, or the way forward. Perhaps the minutes didnāt necessarily reflect the strategy, which in itself is a work in progress.
Thatās the plan, and I think Els has already prepared a first draft of a questionnaire. Itās possible that we got overly prescriptive with some of our thinking, but this can be ironed out fairly easily. How the post + questionnaire + plenary discussion all interrelate is an ongoing discussion.
@els and @mieke - perhaps we can have a short online meeting in the near future, to clarify the path forward based on whatās been prepared and the points emerging from this thread. We can organise a time on our WhatsApp group, as that sort of practicality doesnāt necessarily need to take place on the forum. For anyone following this discussion, we will post the time of the meeting here and add it to the Nextcloud calendar.
@Lee - would it be worth having a quick call, just to double check that weāre all on the same page?
Sure. Iāll be back starting from Saturday.
i donāt agree with this, but as chris proposes a short online meeting soon, i will bring it up in TF and after the discussion come back to that/or it will be in the notesā¦
As you have read in other posts, the question of the ācommon spacesā is one we might want to have a bit more clarity on before the vote on JET-14 (22/05)
This is the plan:
Could every full member write down what he/she would like to have in the common spaces.
Deadline: friday 17/05 20:00
Please send your file to reef-facilitation (Chris, Mieke, me) via a private message on ER
We will work on this next weekend and give a resume, and this before the 22/5.
There is a template for those who want: https://c301.nl.tabdigital.eu/f/140272
Basically we would like you to give your top 3 (top 4 max) of what you would like to have in the common spaces. Share how you picture this space/functionality, and what things are important and less important for you.
Thanks,
Hi there @reeflings
Just wanted to share an info about common spaces in another cohousing that I found rereading my notes about the visit there: see this link. Not fully informative because approximative, but that gives an idea of what is doable with less than a 100m brut (and we could find out more if needed with the architects? Or if somebody has a contact there?)
By the way for the new-er members, you can find info on all the different visits that we did in the tag cohousing-knowledge
Hi @reeflings !
Here is the link to the results of the common spaces questionnaire: https://c301.nl.tabdigital.eu/f/142571
It is in three parts. The first part is a table giving a complete overview of the responses (because @els is amazing). The second part is a representation of the responses organised according to each space (because @mieke is amazing). And the third part is the individual responses, listed in no particular order (because I know how to copy and past things). In this third part, we have not included names with the responses, for reasons explained in the document.
This has been an extremely interesting exercise, and if you take the time to look through the results, itās possible to get a sense of what is important to us both as individuals and as a group. My personal view is that we are not that far apart on what we consider important, and I have faith in our ability to communicate well, respect each othersā positions and compromise as we move forward
It is not the role of @reef-facilitation to design the common spaces. But we have taken on the task to move the discussion on in a constructive way. The next step in this process is at the plenary meeting this Sunday (the 26th), when common spaces has a half-hour spot on the agenda. This is obviously not enough time to make decisions, so we intend to harness our collective intelligence to decide on the path towards clarity and decision-making. We believe that there will never be enough time during our busy plenaries to achieve the precision we need to present to the architects, and that there should be a half-day workshop for this purpose. But this is for the group to decideā¦
Hello @reef-facilitation,
Thanks so much for this amazing job! I find it very interesting to read, and to me at least, it brings the reassurance that our wishes converge to a very strong extent.
One small thing though: our commitment to openness and radical transparency should mean that everything is out in the open. If it would have been a survey about sexually transmittable diseases I would understand some hesitance about sharing everybodyās response 
, but here we were just doing the online equivalent of filling in post-it notes to get an overview on whatās important for each of us, so to me it is counterproductive not knowing who said what. Would it please be possible to make everybodyās contribution available?
One final small note: Iām taking the liberty to rename the file and move it to the 2024 proposals folder in the Team Reef folder, so that it becomes easier to retrieve, also in the future.
Hi @reeflings !
As we said in this document, our decision not to include each Reeflings name with their responses was purely because we hadnāt told people we would do so and time was of the essence to make the information available. However, as Lie points out above, transparency is an important element of our working methods, so this post is to let people know that we will be editing the document to include the names. It seems unlikely to inconceivable that anyone would require anonymity regarding their common space preferences, but Iāll give it couple of days for anyone to object before doing soā¦
Iām not sure why, because itās not a proposalā¦ itās just a working document at this stage
It will be an input for a plenary discussion, so even if it is not a proposal, if it is in the proposals folder, newly incoming members will easily find this important document.