UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Co-operative housing : a study of user satisfaction Davidson, Jill 1976

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1976_A8 D38.pdf [ 8.95MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0093769.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0093769-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0093769-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0093769-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0093769-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0093769-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0093769-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0093769-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0093769.ris

Full Text

CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING - A STUDY OF USER SATISFACTION by J I L L DAVIDSON  B.A., Queen's University, 1972  A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS  in The School of Community and Regional Planning  We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard  THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA May, 1976 0  H i l l Davidson,  1976  In  presenting  this  thesis  an advanced degree at the I  Library shall f u r t h e r agree  for  scholarly  by h i s of  this  written  make  British  It  financial  for  the  requirements  Columbia,  I agree  r e f e r e n c e and  f o r e x t e n s i v e copying o f  purposes may be granted  for  of  freely available  that permission  this  gain s h a l l  that  not  copying or  University of B r i t i s h  2^  Columbia  that  thesis or  publication  be allowed without my  Qag^<y-rs»ll  for  study.  by the Head of my Department  i s understood  (2&r^yy<-^u^jJj^  2075 Wesbrook P l a c e V a n c o u v e r , Canada V6T 1W5  Date  it  fulfilment of  permission.  Department of The  the U n i v e r s i t y  representatives. thesis  in p a r t i a l  Plce<wx>-r^  i  ABSTRACT  The  purpose o f t h i s t h e s i s i s to e v a l u a t e the s a t i s f a c t i o n which  c o - o p e r a t i v e housing members e x p e r i e n c e and  l i v i n g i n their dwellings.  housing  d u r i n g the p r o c e s s o f o b t a i n i n g  With the r e c e n t surge of growth of  c o - o p e r a t i v e s i n B r i t i s h Columbia, an e v a l u a t i o n of t h i s  of tenure  seems t i m e l y .  T r a d i t i o n a l l y e v a l u a t i o n s t u d i e s have  form  assessed  a program or agency by r e l y i n g on the i n p u t of the a d m i n i s t r a t o r s . Although  s e v e r a l government s t u d i e s have i n v e s t i g a t e d c o - o p e r a t i v e  l i t t l e work has been completed which a s s e s s e s u s e r p o i n t of view.  t h i s type of tenure  A d i s t i n c t i v e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of co-operative  i s the o p p o r t u n i t y f o r the members to be t o t a l l y i n v o l v e d i n the and management of the p r o j e c t . housing living  T h i s study t h e r e f o r e e v a l u a t e s  housing, from  the  housing planning  co-operative  by i n v e s t i g a t i n g the s a t i s f a c t i o n which u s e r s d e r i v e from  their  environment.  Members of c o - o p e r a t i v e s i n the G r e a t e r Vancouver R e g i o n a l  District  whose p r o j e c t s were completed or i n the p l a n n i n g stages were p e r s o n a l l y i n t e r v i e w e d and t h i s survey,  f a c t o r s r e l a t i n g to s a t i s f a c t i o n were d i s c u s s e d .  i t became c l e a r t h a t the m a j o r i t y of people  s a t i s f i e d w i t h t h e i r housing  and  the process  are v e r y  they e x p e r i e n c e d  In the case o f completed p r o j e c t s , s a t i s f a c t i o n was  From  to o b t a i n i t .  strongly linked  with  c o - o p e r a t o r s ' p e r c e p t i o n s o f a s t r o n g sense o f community, attendance a t r e c e n t c o - o p e r a t i v e housing meetings, u n d e r s t a n d i n g  of c o - o p e r a t i v e ownership,  the^kind's o f - e x p e c t a t i o n s o f c o - o p e r a t i v e l i v i n g which members have, previous .stages  co-operative experience.  s a t i s f a c t i o n was  For members of p r o j e c t s i n the  l i n k e d w i t h understanding  of c o - o p e r a t i v e  a b i l i t y to''Contact the co-operative's Board of Directors and  and  planning ownership,  d e s i r e to j o i n  other  ii  co-operative a c t i v i t i e s .  Recommendations f o r improving or i n f l u e n c i n g  those f a c t o r s which a r e r e l a t e d  to s a t i s f a c t i o n a r e suggested.  Two major i s s u e s emerged t h a t r e l a t e to the c o - o p e r a t i v e housing movement i n g e n e r a l .  These a r e :  u s e r p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the p l a n n i n g and  management o f t h e p r o j e c t , and member e d u c a t i o n .  I t i s suggested  that  by e n l a r g i n g and improving t h e e d u c a t i o n program the f i n a n c i a l and s o c i a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s o f c o - o p e r a t i v e housing w i l l be b e t t e r understood and more people w i l l  take advantage o f t h e o p p o r t u n i t y t o p a r t i c i p a t e .  iii  TABLE OF CONTENTS Page  ABSTRACT  i.  LIST OF TABLES  v ~vi  LIST OF FIGURES  vii-  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS  CHAPTER ONE - INTRODUCTION  1  CHAPTER TWO - LITERATURE AND HISTORICAL REVIEW  4  2.1  LITERATURE REVIEW  4  2.2  DEFINITIONS  8  2.3  HISTORY OF CO-OPERATIVES IN CANADA  11  2.4  GROWTH OF HOUSING CO-OPERATIVES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA  16  CHAPTER THREE - THE METHOD  20  3.1  RESEARCH MODEL  20  3.2  MEASURES OF USER SATISFACTION  23  3.3  APPROACH TO USER SATISFACTION EMPLOYED IN QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY  24  3.4  INTERVIEW TECHNIQUE  26  3.5  CONSTRAINTS  30  3.6  CRITERIA FOR ANALYSIS  30  CHAPTER FOUR - RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 4.1  32  SENSE OF SATISFACTION  32  4.1.1  Level of S a t i s f a c t i o n  33  4.1.2  Important F a c t o r s i n S a t i s f a c t i o n L e v e l s E x p e r i e n c e d by Members o f P r o j e c t s i n the P l a n n i n g Stages  34  Important F a c t o r s i n S a t i s f a c t i o n L e v e l s E x p e r i e n c e d by Members o f Completed Co-ops  36  4.1.3 4.2  USER EXPECTATIONS OF CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING  39  4.3  UNDERSTANDING OF CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING  41  4.4  CO-OPERATORS' ATTITUDES TOWARD BOARDS OF DIRECTORS  44  4.5  ATTITUDES TOWARD THE CO-ORDINATING ORGANIZATION UHF  46  iv  4.6  4.7  CO-OPERATORS' ATTITUDES TOWARD PARTICIPATION 4.6.1  P a r t i c i p a t i o n D u r i n g the P l a n n i n g Stages  4.6.2  Participation After  Co-ops a r e Completed  SUMMARY  CHAPTER FIVE - CONCLUSIONS AND  RECOMMENDATIONS  5.1  RECOMMENDATIONS CONCERNING PROJECTS IN THE PLANNING STAGES  5.2  RECOMMENDATIONS  5.3  THE MAJOR ISSUES - PARTICIPATION AND EDUCATION  5.4  STUDY PARTICIPANTS' REACTIONS TO  5.5  RECOMMENDATIONS  5.6  CONCLUSIONS  CONCERNING COMPLETED PROJECTS  RECOMMENDATIONS  FOR FURTHER RESEARCH  LITERATURE CITED APPENDIX 6.1: Projects  Q u e s t i o n s Asked o f Members o f Completed  APPENDIX 6.2: Q u e s t i o n s Asked o f Members Whose Were i n the P l a n n i n g Stages APPENDIX 6.3:  Highlights  of U s e r - s a t i s f a c t i o n  Projects  Study  APPENDIX 6.4: C o r r e l a t i o n s Between L e v e l s o f S a t i s f a c t i o n arid Respondents' C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s  V  LIST OF TABLES Page  I:  II:  III:  IV:  V:  VI:  VII:  VIII:  Number of C o n t i n u i n g P a r - v a l u e C o - o p e r a t i v e U n i t s In P r o j e c t s whose Mortgages have been Approved by CMHC  15  C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of C o - o p e r a t i v e s and Numbers of Members Interviewed i n Each  27  S a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h Co-op L i v i n g as Expressed by Members'of Completed P r o j e c t s and S a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h the P l a n n i n g P r o c e s s as Expressed by Members o f Incomplete P r o j e c t s (In P e r c e n t )  33  E x p e c t a t i o n s of Co-op Housing by P r o j e c t Type (In P e r c e n t )  41  Which Members Express  Members Who D i d Not Understand C e r t a i n C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Co-op Housing (In P e r c e n t )  43  F a m i l i a r i t y o f Co-op Members w i t h T h e i r Boards of Directors  45  R e p r e s e n t a t i v e n e s s .of ..Boards of D i r e c t o r s (In Percent)  45  Members of P r o j e c t s i n P l a n n i n g Stages Who Expressed I n t e r e s t i n S p e c i f i c A c t i v i t i e s (In Percent)  49  vi  LIST OF FIGURES Page  I: II: III: IV: V:  Co-op Housing  10  DeCosmos V i l l a g e  17  Housing Costs i n Vancouver  19  Evaluation Process  2  2  L o c a t i o n o f Surveyed C o - o p e r a t i v e s  28  VI:  Mountain View  35  VII:  Co-op Meeting  37  DeCosmos V i l l a g e  40  Kanata  42  A z a l e a Gardens  47  DeCosmos V i l l a g e  50  Mountain View  57  DeCosmos V i l l a g e  59  XIV:  Mountain View  6  XV:  Mountain View  64  Co-operative Planning  67  VIII: IX: X: XI: XII: XIII:  XVI:  2  vii  ACKNOWLEDGMENTS  I would l i k e t o express my a p p r e c i a t i o n t o t h e f o l l o w i n g people who have h e l p e d me i n p r e p a r i n g t h i s t h e s i s .  Dr. Ann McAfee a c t e d  as my a d v i s o r and p r o v i d e d many u s e f u l s u g g e s t i o n s .  I am a l s o  g r a t e f u l t o Dr. Henry Hightower f o r h i s c o n t r i b u t i o n s as r e a d e r . The  c o - o p e r a t i v e members who p a r t i c i p a t e d  s p e c i a l thanks ideas.  i n the study  deserve  f o r t h e g i v i n g o f t h e i r time and many thoughts and  U n i t e d Housing  Foundation  p r o v i d e d me w i t h employment i n  o r d e r t h a t t h i s study c o u l d be c a r r i e d out and I am g r a t e f u l f o r t h e i r support.  A l l members o f t h e s t a f f were v e r y h e l p f u l and I would  e s p e c i a l l y l i k e , t o express my a p p r e c i a t i o n t o M i c h a e l Ryan and the co-op c o - o r d i n a t o r s . I am a l s o i n d e b t e d t o Bonnie Schoenberger who p a t i e n t l y the  manuscript. F i n a l l y I would l i k e t o mention Nancy Hood and E l i z a b e t h  two  typed  Cull,  f r i e n d s who have helped make my f i n a l y e a r a t U.B.C. so s a t i s f y i n g .  1. CHAPTER ONE - INTRODUCTION  C o - o p e r a t i v e housing has been i d e n t i f i e d as a p o t e n t i a l l y response  positive  to urban housing problems i n s e v e r a l government r e p o r t s r a n g i n g  from the C u r t i s Report of 1944 to t h e r e c e n t Housing  and Rent C o n t r o l i n  B.C. Study.  as a means to address  T h i s form o f housing has been suggested  the c o n t i n u i n g problem (Midmore, 1962).  o f p r o v i d i n g a f f o r d a b l e s h e l t e r t o a l l Canadians  A t t h e same time c o - o p e r a t i v e housing has been  suggested  as a panacea to t h e a l i e n a t i o n and l a c k o f community t h a t r e p o r t e d l y pervades  urban c e n t r e s ( C o - o p e r a t i v e League of the U.S.A., 1962).  While  s e v e r a l r e p o r t s document government r e a c t i o n t o c o - o p e r a t i v e  h o u s i n g , l e s s i s known about i n these housing p r o j e c t s .  the r e a c t i o n s o f t h e people who a c t u a l l y  live  People a r e o b v i o u s l y drawn to h o u s i n g c o -  o p e r a t i v e s to s a t i s f y . t h e i r b a s i c need f o r s h e l t e r but the n a t u r e o f t h e c o - o p e r a t i v e s i t u a t i o n has c e r t a i n economic and s o c i a l advantages.  If  c o - o p e r a t i v e housing i s to c o n t i n u e to p r o v i d e an a l t e r n a t i v e t o o t h e r types o f housing t e n u r e , i t i s important t o i d e n t i f y t h e g o a l s and e x p e c t a t i o n s of co-op u s e r s and to e v a l u a t e whether these g o a l s and expectations are f u l f i l l e d . Some e v a l u a t i v e s t u d i e s o f c o - o p e r a t i v e housing from the v i e w p o i n t o f the user have been undertaken  but these have f o c u s s e d e x c l u s i v e l y on t h e  s i t u a t i o n i n E a s t e r n Canada or t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s .  In a d d i t i o n  these  i n v e s t i g a t i o n s have used t h e case study approach which m e t h o d o l o g i c a l l y  2.  p r e c l u d e s g e n e r a l i z i n g the f i n d i n g s to statements general.  C e r t a i n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the B.C.  i n d i c a t e t h a t B.C.  about c o - o p e r a t i v e s i n  s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l  co-op members might have d i f f e r e n t e x p e r i e n c e s  t h e i r c o u n t e r p a r t s i n E a s t e r n Canada and  the U n i t e d S t a t e s .  climate than  These  d i f f e r e n c e s i n c l u d e the e x i s t e n c e of a number of s o c i e t i e s i n t e r e s t e d i n n o n - p r o f i t housing, commit funds  t h r e e y e a r s of a p r o v i n c i a l government w i l l i n g  to c o - o p e r a t i v e programs, housing  the h i g h e s t i n Canada, and tive lifestyles.  p r i c e s which a r e  a l a r g e community of people  seeking  In B r i t i s h Columbia c o - o p e r a t i v e housing  almost alterna-  has become  i d e n t i f i e d w i t h the p r a c t i c e of people p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n the d e s i g n p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s o f the housing. c o u n t r i e s c o - o p e r a t i v e s are  In the U n i t e d S t a t e s and  'turn-key'  to  -•  ~s  and  i n European  o p e r a t i o n s i n which members  become i n v o l v e d o n l y i n the management a f t e r the p r o j e c t has been completed. Research which examines user s a t i s f a c t i o n i n c o - o p e r a t i v e s i n Western Canada would t h e r e f o r e seem n e c e s s a r y . U n l i k e most o t h e r forms of tenure, c o - o p e r a t i v e housing demands involvement  B.C.  from i t s members d u r i n g the p l a n n i n g stages and  management a f t e r the r e s i d e n t s have moved i n .  For some p e o p l e  o p p o r t u n i t y to p a r t i c i p a t e i s the most important housing  in  this  aspect of c o - o p e r a t i v e  because i t g i v e them an added degree of c o n t r o l over t h e i r  The p r o c e s s of o b t a i n i n g the housing where the l e a r n i n g and p e r s o n a l and  adhering  s o c i a l rewards.  i s o f t e n seen as an end  to a c o - o p e r a t i v e p h i l o s o p h y  impossible.  has  C o - o p e r a t i v e housing  many f a m i l i e s w i t h home ownership which would o t h e r w i s e be  life.  in itself  A second approach to c o - o p e r a t i v e  i s to view i t simply as low c o s t s h e l t e r .  with  housing provides  financially  3.  The o b j e c t i v e of t h i s t h e s i s i s to e v a l u a t e the s a t i s f a c t i o n which members o f n i n e c o - o p e r a t i v e s i n the G r e a t e r Vancouver R e g i o n a l B r i t i s h Columbia, e x p e r i e n c e both b e f o r e and a f t e r moving i n t o projects. at  The  research w i l l  District, their  examine the p e r c e p t i o n s of members who  d i f f e r e n t stages of the c o - o p e r a t i v e housing  process.  are  This w i l l  i n v o l v e c o - o p e r a t i v e p r o j e c t s which are i n the p l a n n i n g stages  and  p r o j e c t s which are completed. The  s a t i s f a c t i o n t h a t i s e v a l u a t e d i s a s u b j e c t i v e statement  people's  r e a c t i o n s to a p a r t i c u l a r form of housing  experience to  to o b t a i n i t .  the socio-economic,  to the December 1975  i s suggested  i n B.C.  has  and  co-operative  change of p r o v i n c i a l p o l i t i c a l  power.  i t s peak and  i n the f u t u r e , new  economic and  political  w e l l c o n s t r a i n the development o f new p r o j e c t s .  This f i r s t housing  time.  t h a t the r e c e n t growth i n the c o - o p e r a t i v e housing movement  reached  r e a l i t i e s may  related  No attempt i s made to compare s a t i s f a c t i o n  would seem to be an e x c e l l e n t time to a s s e s s the  movement due  they  a t t i t u d i n a l and b e h a v i o u r a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of  between d i f f e r e n t types of tenure or through  It  the p r o c e s s  The r e p o r t e d l e v e l s of s a t i s f a c t i o n a r e  the c o - o p e r a t i v e members.  1976  and  of  c h a p t e r has  to p r e s e n t  served to i n t r o d u c e the t o p i c of c o - o p e r a t i v e  the s u b j e c t which w i l l be i n v e s t i g a t e d .  The  next  chapter w i l l review some of the e x i s t i n g l i t e r a t u r e which r e l a t e s to user s a t i s f a c t i o n of c o - o p e r a t i v e housing. housing movement i n B.C. c o - o p e r a t i v e s i n Canada.  the e m p i r i c a l survey  The methodology and approach used f o r e v a l u a t i n g i n the t h i r d c h a p t e r w i t h the  f o l l o w i n g i n the f o u r t h c h a p t e r .  r e s u l t s w i l l be d i s c u s s e d and recommendations suggested chapter.  co-operative  w i l l be g i v e n w i t h i n the c o n t e x t of the growth of  user s a t i s f a c t i o n w i l l be p r e s e n t e d of  A h i s t o r y of the  Finally  results these  i n the c o n c l u d i n g  4.  CHAPTER TWO  - LITERATURE AND  HISTORICAL REVIEW  T h i s chapter p r o v i d e s a framework f o r the e m p i r i c a l s u r v e y which i n v e s t i g a t e s the s a t i s f a c t i o n of members of c o - o p e r a t i v e h o u s i n g .  From  a review of the l i t e r a t u r e , a t h e o r e t i c a l base f o r the r e s e a r c h i s suggested and a summary of o t h e r s t u d i e s which have i n v e s t i g a t e d s i m i l a r problems i s presented.  A h i s t o r i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e of the c o - o p e r a t i v e movement i s g i v e n  s t a r t i n g w i t h the d e f i n i t i o n s of the v a r i o u s types o f housing c o - o p e r a t i v e s . Emphasis i s p l a c e d on the growth of housing c o - o p e r a t i v e s , p a r t i c u l a r l y those i n B r i t i s h Columbia.  The  content and impact  of v a r i o u s government  r e p o r t s p e r t a i n i n g to c o - o p e r a t i v e housing a r e d i s c u s s e d and s e v e r a l f o r the growth of t h i s type of housing i n B.C.  2.1  are  reasons  suggested.  LITERATURE REVIEW T h i s t h e s i s e v a l u a t e s a .type o f housing tenure where p a r t i c i p a t i o n  by the u s e r s i s p o s s i b l e not o n l y i n the management of the p r o j e c t but d u r i n g the d e s i g n stage.  The  t h r u s t of community p l a n n i n g i n r e c e n t y e a r s  has been to encourage the involvement their lives.  of c i t i z e n s i n d e c i s i o n s t h a t  affect  T h i s l i t e r a t u r e review w i l l p o i n t to some of the t h e o r y of  c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n to p r o v i d e a base f o r the subsequent of c o - o p e r a t i v e housing where user involvement Other  also  empirical  survey  i s potentially unlimited.  s t u d i e s which have i n v e s t i g a t e d t h i s type of tenure from the user  p o i n t of view w i l l be reviewed  to i l l u s t r a t e the s i m i l a r i t i e s and  differences  5.  i n the approach taken i n t h i s t h e s i s . D u r i n g the n i n e t e e n of c i t i z e n s was  s i x t i e s a tremendous amount of energy on  d i r e c t e d toward encouraging changes i n b u r e a u c r a t i c  social structures. r i o t s by m i n o r i t y  The  u p r i s i n g s on U.S.  and  part  and  Canadian campuses and  the  groups demanding s o c i a l e q u a l i t y i l l u s t r a t e a common  attempt by p e o p l e seeking community p l a n n i n g groups who  the  more c o n t r o l over the events i n t h e i r l i v e s .  a s i m i l a r movement was  m a n i f e s t e d i n the r i s e of  demanded more c o n t r o l over the p l a n n i n g  and  In  citizen  d e c i s i o n making  process. Friedmann was  (1969) d e s c r i b e d  termed a " s o c i a l a c t i o n model".  organizations  (p. 315).  which  c a l l e d f o r the " c r e a t i o n of  new  t h e i r r e o r g a n i z a t i o n i n t o more e f f e c t i v e p a t t e r n s "  T h i s model i m p l i e s t h a t the b u r e a u c r a t i c  our p l a n n i n g as new  He  framework f o r p l a n n i n g  f o r guidance r o l e s , improvement i n the performance of  e x i s t i n g r o l e s and  are inadequate and  input sources.  upon t h e s e i d e a s and  process i s stressed. p r o f e s s i o n a l s but  through the p r o c e s s of making d e c i s i o n s .  According  Thus a d i a l o g u e  a l i e n a t i o n w i l l be  the  to t h i s view,  can be  learn created  Friedmann  i n t r o d u c i n g a "feedback guidance system,  toward n o n - p a r t i c i p a t i o n and  enlarges  where  the p u b l i c should  c l i e n t where mutual l e a r n i n g can o c c u r .  expresses hope t h a t by  citizenry  (1973) f u r t h e r  espouses a t r a n s a c t i v e s t y l e of p l a n n i n g  o n l y the p o l i t i c i a n s and  between p l a n n e r and  s t r u c t u r e s which guide  suggests the involvement of the  In h i s l a t e r work Friedmann  importance of the e d u c a t i o n not  an i n n o v a t i v e  1  the  trend  reversed.  S i m i l a r l y , the l i t e r a t u r e on c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n suggests t h a t user involvement i s important f o r s e v e r a l r e a s o n s . 1)  In a s o c i e t y c h a r a c t e r i z e d by i n c r e a s i n g d i v i s i o n of l a b o u r , i n d i v i d u a l i s losing his/her a b i l i t y  the  to c o n t r o l many d e c i s i o n s  that  6.  affect his/her l i f e .  Involvement can b r i n g a sense o f s e l f -  d e t e r m i n a t i o n t h a t many c o n s i d e r to be an important health 2)  a s p e c t o f mental  (Vrooman, 1972).  Involvement w i t h other people demands the a c q u i s i t i o n o f c e r t a i n which i s b e n e f i c i a l from a p e r s o n a l growth v i e w p o i n t  skills  (Government o f  O n t a r i o , 1972). 3)  D e c i s i o n s t h a t a r e made w i l l be o f a h i g h e r q u a l i t y and p a r t i c i p a n t s w i l l be more committed to the d e c i s i o n IiEriedmanass  citizen  cbheeptua'ltigramewoirk  (Government o f O n t a r i o , 1972).  eandpetheiv.idea'ssiof c;the  FparMeipateibnraadvoca.ueser^  h o u s i n g . The members of c o - o p e r a t i v e s have the o p p o r t u n i t y to p l a y a s i g n i f i c a n t r o l e i n g u i d i n g t h e development of t h e i r housing p r o j e c t .  By  becoming i n v o l v e d i n t h i s p r o c e s s , a "mutual l e a r n i n g " can occur t o the b e n e f i t of b o t h members and p l a n n e r s and o t h e r b u r e a u c r a t s .  When u s e r s  can i n f l u e n c e the d e s i g n of the p r o j e c t and t h e management o f t h e c o - o p e r a t i v e a f t e r moving i n , h i g h q u a l i t y d e c i s i o n s can be expected. Turner and  suggests  being.  (1972) s t r e s s e s the users', sense of c o n t r o l o f the h o u s i n g t h a t t h i s v a r i a b l e i s c r i t i c a l l y l i n k e d to a sense o f w e l l  He uses t h e term "housing" not i n t h e u s u a l sense  to i d e n t i f y a  noun, t h a t i s a commodity, but r a t h e r as a v e r b which d e s c r i b e s t h e p r o c e s s or a c t i v i t y o f housing.  T h i s approach has a p p l i c a b i l i t y i n c o - o p e r a t i v e  housing where user involvement  i s possible.  Turner r e l a t e s t h e p r i n c i p l e  of c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n to the housing p r o c e s s i n s t u d i e s which i n v e s t i gate t h e f o l l o w i n g h y p o t h e s i s :  "When d w e l l e r s c o n t r o l the major d e c i s i o n s  and a r e f r e e to make t h e i r own c o n t r i b u t i o n s i n the d e s i g n , c o n s t r u c t i o n , or management o f t h e i r housing, both t h i s p r o c e s s and the environment produced  s t i m u l a t e i n d i v i d u a l and s o c i a l w e l l - b e i n g .  When p e o p l e have no  7.  c o n t r o l over nor r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r key d e c i s i o n s i n the housing p r o c e s s , on the o t h e r hand, d w e l l i n g environments  may  i n s t e a d become a b a r r i e r  p e r s o n a l f u l f i l l m e n t and a burden on the economy" (p. 241). t h i s q u o t a t i o n i s the assumption  to  Implied i n  t h a t user s a t i s f a c t i o n i s r e l a t e d to u s e r  involvement. Andrews and B r e s l a u e r (1975) attempted  to e m p i r i c a l l y prove a p o s i t i v e  c o r r e l a t i o n between these v a r i a b l e s i n t h e i r study of a c o - o p e r a t i v e i n Missasauga,  Ontario.  S e v e r a l measures of s a t i s f a c t i o n were c o r r e l a t e d  w i t h p a r t i c i p a t i o n l e v e l s and i n c o n c l u s i v e r e s u l t s were found.  The  r e s e a r c h e r s suggest t h a t the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the two v a r i a b l e s i s q u i t e complex and t h e r e f o r e d i f f i c u l t to measure.  They emphasize the  b e n e f i t s of user c o n t r o l i n c o - o p e r a t i v e housing and conclude t h a t type of housing s h o u l d be viewed c h o i c e s i n the h o u s i n g market.(p.  this  as a means of i n c r e a s i n g the a v a i l a b l e 708).  Other l i t e r a t u r e has appeared which i n v e s t i g a t e s c o - o p e r a t i v e housing from the user p o i n t of view.  Sullivan  (1969) s p e c i f i c a l l y s t u d i e s the  s o c i a l e f f e c t s o f c o - o p e r a t i v e tenure of a p r o j e c t i n New  York C i t y .  He  h y p o t h e s i z e s t h a t c e r t a i n a s p e c t s of s o c i a l b e h a v i o u r , f o r example n e i g h b o u r l y i n t e r a c t i o n , community s o l i d a r i t y , and community p a r t i c i p a t i o n w i l l occur more o f t e n i n c o - o p e r a t i v e housing p r o j e c t s than i n p u b l i c r e n t a l accommodation. results,  A l t h o u g h he expresses some r e s e r v a t i o n s about h i s  the study f a i l s to f i n d any s t a t i s t i c a l l y  i n the behaviour and a t t i t u d e s of co-op members and A study done by T a t e of  significant  differences  renters.  (1973) i n v e s t i g a t e s b o t h the a t t i t u d e s of members  a c o - o p e r a t i v e housing p r o j e c t and those of r e s i d e n t s of a p r i v a t e  development i n London, O n t a r i o toward permanency of t h e i r h o u s i n g His  rental  situation.  r e s u l t s i n d i c a t e a p e r c e p t i o n of a g r e a t e r degree of permanency on the  8.  p a r t o f the c o - o p e r a t i v e r e s i d e n t . The  t h e o r e t i c a l s t u d i e s by Friedmann and Turner emphasize the  importance  o f c i t i z e n involvement  their lives.  i n planning r e l a t e d issues that  affect  T h i s r e s e a r c h i s s i m i l a r i n d e s i g n to the e m p i r i c a l work  done by Andrews and B r e s l a u e r i n t h a t the f o c u s is. on c o - o p e r a t i v e housing and  the s a t i s f a c t i o n e x p e r i e n c e d by i t s u s e r s .  T h i s i s i n c o n t r a s t to  the i n v e s t i g a t i o n s of S u l l i v a n and Tate where u s e r s a t i s f a c t i o n of coo p e r a t i v e housing i s compared to the s a t i s f a c t i o n l e v e l s of r e s i d e n t s o f a rental  project.  T h i s study seeks to uncover as viewed  the major i s s u e s o f c o - o p e r a t i v e housing  by members of p r o j e c t s i n the Vancouver a r e a .  c o - o p e r a t i v e housing a c t i v i t y i n B.C. terms used  2.2  i n the remainder  the  i s put i n an h i s t o r i c a l c o n t e x t , the  o f t h i s t h e s i s w i l l be d e f i n e d .  DEFINITIONS C o - o p e r a t i v e housing  ways i n which people may f o r themselves"  i s a " g e n e r a l term r e f e r r i n g to any o f many  get t o g e t h e r c o - o p e r a t i v e l y to p r o v i d e housing  ( C o - o p e r a t i v e Union of Canada, 1968,  p. 6 ) .  from a l e g a l v i e w p o i n t r e f e r s to a group o f people who and  Before  i n c o r p o r a t e d themselves  f o r the purpose  The  term  have o r g a n i z e d  of owning and c o n t r o l l i n g  the  p r o p e r t y and b u i l d i n g s o f a housing development which they occupy ( U n i t e d Housing  Foundation,  r e f e r s to "one  1974,  p. 7 ) .  T h i s d i f f e r s from the condominium which  o v e r - a l l a r e a having w i t h i n i t s boundaries  certain  s p e c i f i e d p a r t s owned i n f e e simple by the i n d i v i d u a l owners and  other  areas owned by a l l the i n d i v i d u a l owners as t e n a n t s i n common' (Hamilton 1  et a l . ,  1971,  p. 2 ) .  W i t h i n t h i s broad  framework two  types o f c o - o p e r a t i v e housing  exist.  9.  A  'building co-operative'  i s a k i n d o f housing development common i n Nova  S c o t i a and o f t e n c r e a t e d by 'sweat e q u i t y ' where the f u t u r e owners a c t u a l l y engage themselves i n the c o n s t r u c t i o n o f the houses. co-operative dwellings  i s g e n e r a l l y not found i n urban areas where m u l t i - f a m i l y  predominate and thus compound t h e d i f f i c u l t i e s  construction. others  This kind of  i n co-ordinating  What d i f f e r e n t i a t e s t h i s type o f c o - o p e r a t i v e  housing from  i s t h a t a l t h o u g h d u r i n g c o n s t r u c t i o n the group c o l l e c t i v e l y owns the  houses, upon c o m p l e t i o n the ownership r e v e r t s t o the i n d i v i d u a l Union o f Canada, 1968, p. 7 ) . A second type o f c o - o p e r a t i v e the  'continuing  co-operative'  (Co-operative  housing i s  where members " j o i n t l y own a m u l t i p l e  family  h o u s i n g development and i n d i v i d u a l l y l e a s e t h e i r u n i t s t o themselves a t cost"  (United Housing Foundation, I n f o r m a t i o n  of housing i s n o v e l because t h e c o - o p e r a t i v e landlord  Pamphlet No. 2 ) .  This  type  member i s a t t h e same time a  (owning a share i n the s o c i e t y t h a t owns the development) as w e l l  as a tenant  ( r e s i d e n t members l e a s e the u n i t s from t h e s o c i e t y ) .  When a  member wishes t o move from the development the share i s s o l d back t o t h e co-operative  a t the same p r i c e f o r which i t was bought, a d j u s t e d  rate of i n f l a t i o n . co-operative'  F o r t h i s r e a s o n t h e term 'par-value  f o r the  continuing  i s o f t e n used t o d i s t i n g u i s h these co-ops from those  commonly found i n Europe and the U n i t e d  S t a t e s where t h e d w e l l i n g  units  can be s o l d a t market p r i c e . This research  concentrates  s o l e l y on p a r - v a l u e  because these a r e the most popular  continuing  type i n B r i t i s h Columbia.  co-operatives Throughout  the remainder o f t h i s t h e s i s the shortened form of ' c o - o p e r a t i v e ' or 'housing c o - o p e r a t i v e ' co-operative.  w i l l be used to r e f e r t o a p a r - v a l u e  The term 'housing c o - o p e r a t i v e '  i s o f t e n used ambiguously  to r e f e r t o both t h e p e o p l e who form the c o - o p e r a t i v e which they i n h a b i t .  F o r t h i s study  continuing  'co-operative'  and the b u i l d i n g s  i s used t o i n d i c a t e a  10.  FIGURE I :  CO-OP HOUSING  group of people, a person who i s a member of a co-operative i s called a co-operator, and a co-operative project refers to the buildings which they occupy.  11.  2.3  HISTORY OF CO-OPERATIVES IN CANADA The  c o - o p e r a t i v e movement has  i t s o r i g i n s i n Rochdale, England  s t r i k i n g weavers founded a c o - o p e r a t i v e s t o r e i n 1844.  where  These weavers pooled  t h e i r meagre s a v i n g s and bought b a s i c f o o d s t u f f s which they then s o l d at market p r i c e s .  Rebates were i s s u e d on the p r o f i t s which were earned  p r o p o r t i o n to the purchases up to spread  of each member, and an e d u c a t i o n fund was  the i d e a s of c o - o p e r a t i v e e n t e r p r i s e s .  c o - o p e r a t i v e s i n t o the housing become w e l l developed  in  field  first  i n Scandinavian  The  set  e x t e n s i o n of  o c c u r r e d i n Germany and has  c o u n t r i e s and  i n Poland.  The  since  wide-  spread use of the c o - o p e r a t i v e i d e a f o r e s t a b l i s h i n g d i f f e r e n t k i n d s of e n t e r p r i s e s , f o r example food s t o r e s , i n s u r a n c e , a g r i c u l t u r a l equipment, l e d to  the a r t i c u l a t i o n o f s e v e r a l b a s i c c o - o p e r a t i v e p r i n c i p l e s .  These p r i n c i p l e s  were adapted by the I n t e r n a t i o n a l C o - o p e r a t i v e A l l i a n c e i n 1966 to  any k i n d of c o - o p e r a t i v e a c t i v i t y .  housing 1)  The  as a p p l i c a b l e  s i x p r i n c i p l e s as they a p p l y to  are:  V o l u n t a r y and open membership.  No  person  membership because o f r a c i a l , p o l i t i c a l ,  s h a l l be r e s t r i c t e d or r e l i g i o u s  from  affiliations.  Housing c o - o p e r a t i v e s attempt to e l i m i n a t e the c o n c e n t r a t i o n of income people  i n s p e c i f i c geographic  income l e v e l s w i t h i n each p r o j e c t . are formed on a f i r s t  come, f i r s t  areas by encouraging Waiting  Democratic c o n t r o l .  a mixture  of  f o r housing u n i t s  served b a s i s , w h i l e a l l o w i n g f o r  matching of house s i z e s w i t h f a m i l y s i z e and 2)  lists  low  income.  Each member of the housing  co-operative  has  equal v o t i n g r i g h t . 3)  L i m i t e d i n t e r e s t on c a p i t a l . t h a t the member purchases  No  interest  i s p a i d on the i n i t i a l  upon j o i n i n g the c o - o p e r a t i v e .  p a r - v a l u e c o - o p e r a t i v e ensures  share  However a  a r e t u r n i n c o n s t a n t d o l l a r s , meaning  t h a t a c o s t of l i v i n g adjustment i s made. 4)  D i s t r i b u t i o n of s u r p l u s .  Because a housing  c o - o p e r a t i v e attempts to  12.  balance  revenue w i t h c o s t s , a s u r p l u s i s r a r e l y generated.  should a s u r p l u s occur  However  i n any one y e a r , i t i s used t o reduce monthly  charges o r t o p r o v i d e members w i t h a r e f u n d . 5)  Promotion o f e d u c a t i o n . complex v e n t u r e important  The c r e a t i n g of c o - o p e r a t i v e housing  and many s k i l l s  have t o be a c q u i r e d .  isa  Equally  t o t h e t e c h n i c a l i n f o r m a t i o n t h a t s h o u l d be mastered i s the  l e a r n i n g o f c o - o p e r a t i v e i d e a s and p r i n c i p l e s . 6)  Co-operation for  among c o - o p e r a t i v e s .  Other types o f c o - o p e r a t i v e  example day care c e n t r e s and food co-ops, can be generated  activity, from a  housing  co-operative.  Members a r e encouraged t o p a r t i c i p a t e and  support  these o t h e r forms o f c o - o p e r a t i v e a c t i v i t y as w e l l as o t h e r  housing p r o j e c t s . In Canada t h e c o - o p e r a t i v e i d e a was f i r s t Maritimes Although  a p p l i e d i n O n t a r i o and the  to consumer a s s o c i a t i o n s founded i n the e a r l y n i n e t e e n c o a s t a l f i s h e r p e o p l e have c r e a t e d s t r o n g c o - o p e r a t i v e  t i o n s , most a c t i v i t y has been c e n t r e d i n the P r a i r i e s w i t h production.  C r e d i t unions,  hundreds.  organiza-  agricultural  i n t r o d u c e d i n Quebec i n 1900, have  spread  throughout the r e s t o f Canada. Co-operative  activity  i n the housing  s e c t o r was begun i n the t h i r t i e s  i n Cape Breton when c o a l and s t e e l workers j o i n e d t o g e t h e r building co-operatives. housing  p r o j e c t i n Canada was b u i l t  Little 1973,  In 1964 t h e f i r s t  par-value  t o form  continuing  co-operative  i n Winnipeg.  government a c t i o n was taken  t o encourage c o - o p e r a t i v e s  until  a l t h o u g h many r e p o r t s had urged a l l l e v e l s o f government t o  r e c o g n i z e the tremendous p o t e n t i a l o f t h i s type of housing.  The C u r t i s  Committee i n 1944  described  co-operative  housing as "an  through which a combination of government a s s i s t a n c e and may  be  secured"  (p. 266).  The Midmore Report of 1962  e x c e l l e n t medium group s e l f - h e l p  pointed  to the need  f o r i n c r e a s e d d e n s i t y i n urban a r e a s to ensure a more economical use land while admitting  to the ever present  dream.  h o u s i n g was  two  Co-operative  divergent  seen as "a means of r e c o n c i l i n g these  (p. 73).  that co-operative  changes i n t h i s  A l t h o u g h the H e l l y e r Report of  1969  housing d i d not r e c e i v e s p e c i a l treatment  under the N a t i o n a l Housing A c t ,  t h i s r e p o r t f a i l e d to recommend  specific  direction.  The Dennis and and  dwelling  a t t i t u d e s , p r o v i d i n g home ownership and more economical  housing at the same time" recognized  Canadian s i n g l e f a m i l y  of  F i s h Report p u b l i s h e d  i n 1972  economic b e n e f i t s d e r i v e d from c o - o p e r a t i v e  a r t i c u l a t e d the  social  l i v i n g as c i t e d by  N a t i o n a l Commission on Urban Problems i n the U n i t e d  States  the  (1971,;pp.  140-  These a r e : Social Benefits - working together  produces a f e e l i n g of i d e n t i t y and  - p r o j e c t s are run  democratically  - other  co-operative  ventures are often  a d e s i r e to  help  initiated  - a sense of ownership i s c r e a t e d - v a n d a l i s m and  delinquency  have been v e r y low  i n most p r o j e c t s  Economic B e n e f i t s - low  i n i t i a l purchase p r i c e because i n f l a t e d r e a l e s t a t e v a l u e s  are  not  added to the p r i c e - low maintenance and - low  supply  costs for parking,  c o s t s through b u l k  r e c r e a t i o n and  purchases  community f a c i l i t i e s by  sharing.  14.  The Dennis and F i s h Report  a l s o urges  t h a t changes be made to the  N a t i o n a l Housing A c t to encourage the growth of c o - o p e r a t i v e housing. 1973,  a year a f t e r t h i s study was  enacted  completed, new  In  f e d e r a l r e g u l a t i o n s were  to permit the f o l l o w i n g :  - n o n - p r o f i t c o - o p e r a t i v e s became e l i g i b l e f o r 100% up to 10% of c o s t s , and  s t a r t up funds  loans, c a p i t a l  grants  (grants to f i n a n c e p r e l i m i n a r y  organization); - the l o a n s c o u l d a p p l y e q u a l l y to new b u i l d i n g s and  c o n s t r u c t i o n or  rehabilitated  i f r e h a b i l i t a t i o n o c c u r r e d a d d i t i o n a l l o a n s and  g r a n t s were  a v a i l a b l e under a s p e c i a l r e h a b i l i t a t i o n program - members of housing and  c o - o p e r a t i v e s became e l i g i b l e f o r home ownership  s u b s i d i e s p r e v i o u s l y o n l y a v a i l a b l e f o r p u b l i c housing  grants  tenants.  S i n c e the enactment of these r e g u l a t i o n s , a s u b s t a n t i a l i n c r e a s e i n the number of s t a r t s of c o - o p e r a t i v e housing p r o j e c t s has o c c u r r e d .  As  the f o l l o w i n g t a b l e i l l u s t r a t e s many of these s t a r t s have been i n B r i t i s h Columbia.  The major events and  c o n d i t i o n s that are r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h i s  h i g h l e v e l of c o - o p e r a t i v e housing  a c t i v i t y w i l l be e x p l o r e d i n the  following section.  T a b l e IX:  Number of C o n t i n u i n g Parc-yaiLueiCo-operative U n i t s i n P r o j e c t s whose Mortgages have been Approved by CMHC  Canada B.C. Alberta Saskatchewan Manitoba Ontario Quebec New Brunswick Nova S c o t i a P.E.I. Newfoundland  1973  1974  180 74  1,011 466  106  94 140 314  1975  (Jan.-Oct.) 1,366 805 11 150 358 37  5  15.  Source:  1973, 1974 F i g u r e s - CMHC Index, Handbook, S e c t i o n B-43.  Statistical  1975 F i g u r e s - CMHC Index, NHA S t a t i s t i c a l Summary. Although  these data r e f e r o n l y t o CMHC funded p r o j e c t s , i t i s  b e l i e v e d t h a t these comprise the m a j o r i t y o f c o n t i n u i n g p a r - v a l u e in  co-operatives  Canada. In summary i t would appear t h a t t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t  housing movement i n Canada i s a r e l a t i v e l y r e c e n t event o n l y gathered  momentum i n t h e l a s t  t a b l e presented  three years.  t h a t c o - o p e r a t i v e housing  of a co-operative and has r e a l l y  I t i s c l e a r from t h e  has o n l y become a r e a l i t y i n a  few p r o v i n c e s o f which B r i t i s h Columbia i s one.  2.4  GROWTH OF HOUSING CO-OPERATIVES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA The  e a r l y h i s t o r y o f c o - o p e r a t i v e housing  i n B.C. i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d by  by s e v e r a l f r u i t l e s s attempts a t d e v e l o p i n g p r o j e c t s . e s t a b l i s h c o - o p e r a t i v e housing of  The f i r s t  i n 1958 was u n s u c c e s s f u l because o f a l a c k  l e a d e r s h i p and p o l i t i c a l o p p o s i t i o n ( C o n s t a n t i n u , 1970).  Western C o - o p e r a t i v e  i n c u r r e d a f t e r p a r t i a l completion  of a project i n Port A l b e r n i .  s u c c e s s f u l p r o j e c t was s t a r t e d i n A b b o t s f o r d  difficulties The f i r s t  i n 1969 when a group o f people  from a l o c a l c r e d i t u n i o n and managed to complete  a p r o j e c t which now houses both s e n i o r c i t i z e n s and f a m i l i e s . another  I n 1969 the  Housing S o c i e t y f a i l e d because o f f i n a n c i a l  received strong backing  attempt t o  I n Vancouver  o r g a n i z a t i o n was formed from which t h e p r e s e n t U n i t e d Housing  Foundation  (UHF) developed.  UHF i s a n o n - p r o f i t o r g a n i z a t i o n which  as a r e s o u r c e group f o r housing  serves  c o - o p e r a t i v e s i n B.C. by p r o v i d i n g o r g a n i z -  a t i o n , a d m i n i s t r a t i v e , f i n a n c i a l , e d u c a t i o n a l , developmental and m a n a g e r i a l services.  I t s presence i s p r o b a b l y  one o f the most important  e x p l a i n i n g t h e growth o f c o - o p e r a t i v e housing  i n B.C.  factors i n  I n 1975 UHF was  a f f i l i a t e d w i t h more than e i g h t p r o j e c t s which were i n o p e r a t i o n and about  16.  FIGURE  DECOSrios  LT :  twenty i n the v a r i o u s p l a n n i n g Another important  VIL-L. A G E .  stages  (United Housing Foundation,  f a c t o r i n accounting  of co-ops i n B.C. i s government support.  1975).  f o r t h e s u b s t a n t i a l growth  F o l l o w i n g the e l e c t i o n o f the New  Democratic P a r t y i n 1972, the p r o v i n c e had a f i r m p o l i c y i n support o f c o - o p e r a t i v e housing.  T h i s p o l i c y was r e i n f o r c e d by the s u c c e s s o f e a r l y  c o - o p e r a t i v e p r o j e c t s such as the one i n A b b o t s f o r d i n Vancouver.  Haire  (1975) r e p o r t s i n h i s survey  and DeCosmos V i l l a g e  of c o - o p e r a t i v e and  n o n - p r o f i t p r o j e c t s a c r o s s Canada t h a t B r i t i s h Columbia extended more  17.  support  to these groups than any o t h e r p r o v i n c i a l government.  Provincial  assistance includes: - purchase o f l a n d f o r c o - o p e r a t i v e s o r p r e f e r e n c e  i n the d i s p o s i t i o n o f  Crown l a n d - p r o v i s i o n of land leases at a s p e c i a l r a t e - p r o v i s i o n o f a h i g h impact g r a n t which i s designed  t o ease the f i n a n c i a l  burden o f the e a r l y y e a r s o f t h e c o - o p e r a t i v e - p r o v i s i o n o f i n t e r i m f i n a n c i n g pending mortgage arrangements w i t h C e n t r a l Mortgage and Housing C o r p o r a t i o n  (CMHC)  - funds f o r d e p o s i t s and r e n t supplements f o r low income r e s i d e n t s (B.C., Department o f Housing, 1975, p. 1 5 ) . The  growth o f c o - o p e r a t i v e s has been encouraged by the presence o f  s e v e r a l other f a c t o r s .  The f i r s t o f these i s the support  land leases or rezonings to c o - o p e r a t i v e housing.  i n the form o f  t h a t most m u n i c i p a l i t i e s have been w i l l i n g t o g i v e A second f a c t o r which makes c o - o p e r a t i v e  housing  an a t t r a c t i v e a l t e r n a t i v e i s the h i g h c o s t o f home ownership i n B r i t i s h Columbia.  The Real E s t a t e Board s a i d i n 1974 t h a t t h e average house .  p r i c e i n Vancouver i s second o n l y to Toronto  i n expense.  The presence o f  a s t r o n g c r e d i t u n i o n network and l a b o u r movement throughout the p r o v i n c e i s a t h i r d f a c t o r which has encouraged the growth o f housing B.C. C e n t r a l C r e d i t Union has o f t e n p r o v i d e d and  l o c a l c r e d i t unions have informed  projects.  low c o s t housing  A f i n a l f a c t o r encouraging  a f a i r s i z e community o f people  f i n a n c i n g t o the c o - o p e r a t i v e s  t h e i r customers o f newly  c o - o p e r a t i v e s which a r e s e e k i n g members. been eager to support  co-operatives.  developing  S i m i l a r l y l a b o u r unions have  and have committed funds t o v a r i o u s c o - o p e r a t i v e s i s the e x i s t e n c e o f  seeking a l t e r n a t i v e l i f e s t y l e s .  p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h i s community makes these comments about  A recent  co-operatives.  18.  "A v i t a l p a r t o f the d e v e l o p i n g co-op movement. our own  The  a l t e r n a t i v e way  of l i f e  i n B.C.  i s the  essence o f t h i s approach i s g a i n i n g r e a l c o n t r o l of  l i v e s i n tangeable every day  Figure I I I :  ways" (B.C.  A l t e r n a t i v e , 1975,  p.  Housing Costs i n Vancouver  From t h i s d i s c u s s i o n s e v e r a l f a c t o r s have been i s o l a t e d t h a t help  e x p l a i n the growth of co-ops d u r i n g  should  4).  the l a s t  could  f i v e y e a r s i n B.C.  be emphasized t h a t t h i s a n a l y s i s a p p l i e s to the s o c i a l and  It  political  19.  c l i m a t e i n mid  1975.  With the r e c e n t p o l i t i c a l and accompanying  changes mentioned e a r l i e r ,  social  t h i s study might be documenting a b r i e f  p e r i o d w i t h i n a l o n g e r h i s t o r y of minimal  c o - o p e r a t i v e housing  growth  activity.  The d i s c u s s i o n thus f a r has c e n t r e d on the c o - o p e r a t i v e housing movement i n an i n t e r n a t i o n a l , n a t i o n a l , and p r o v i n c i a l framework. e m p i r i c a l r e s e a r c h done i n t h i s study aims to d i s c o v e r how  activity  The  the i n d i v i d u a l  co-op member p e r c e i v e s the advantages and d i s a d v a n t a g e s of c o - o p e r a t i v e housing.  For c o - o p e r a t i v e housing to meet the needs of i t s u s e r s i t i s  important to d i s c o v e r which advantages, important  to the members.  on a c o n t i n u i n g b a s i s , a r e most  A f t e r d e s c r i b i n g the methodology used b o t h i n  the t h e s i s and i n d a t a c o l l e c t i o n the r e s u l t s of the case study w i l l described.  be  20.  CHAPTER THREE - THE METHOD  The  r e s e a r c h model used i n t h i s t h e s i s i s based on a framework  proposed by McAfee (1975) i n which the r o l e o f the user o f the program under evaluation i s substantial. tion  The r a t i o n a l e behind  i n t h i s t h e s i s w i l l be p r e s e n t e d  t h i s model and i t s a p p l i c a -  i n t h i s chapter.  s a t i s f a c t i o n w i l l be e x p l o r e d and the d i f f i c u l t i e s measure w i l l be d i s c u s s e d .  The concept o f  i n operationalizing a  The approach used i n t h i s t h e s i s w i l l be  p r e s e n t e d w i t h r e f e r e n c e made to the q u e s t i o n s asked d u r i n g the data collection. of  3.1  F i n a l l y the t e c h n i q u e s ,  statistical  constraints, definitions  and methods  a n a l y s i s used d u r i n g the survey w i l l be d i s c u s s e d .  RESEARCH MODEL Research i n t e n d e d  t o e v a l u a t e a p r o j e c t o r program u s u a l l y  i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f dimensions f o r study,  entails  formulation of a research  data c o l l e c t i o n , data a n a l y s i s and f o r m u l a t i o n o f c o n c l u s i o n s .  design,  Many o f  the t r a d i t i o n a l e v a l u a t i o n s t u d i e s have r e l i e d almost e x c l u s i v e l y on the i n p u t o f programme a d m i n i s t r a t o r s and e v a l u a t o r s w i t h  the ideas o f the  programme p a r t i c i p a n t s o n l y b e i n g used a t the data c o l l e c t i o n  stage.  In c o n t r a s t t o t h i s , a study by .McAfee has c r e a t e d a methodology where the user as w e l l as the r e s e a r c h e r can p l a y major r o l e s i n a l l a s p e c t s o f the e v a l u a t i o n p r o c e s s .  T h i s p r o v i d e s a user p e r s p e c t i v e o f  the p r o j e c t which, due t o the p e r c e i v e d h i g h s o c i a l and economic c o s t s o f data c o l l e c t i n g ,  had not p r e v i o u s l y been adequately  considered.  McAfee  21.  concludes  t h a t p r o j e c t e v a l u a t i o n s which i n v o l v e the user w i l l be more  r e s p o n s i v e to the needs and p e r c e p t i o n s of the p a r t i c i p a n t s and run the s o c i a l and  economic c o s t s w i l l probably  T h i s study c o n c e n t r a t e s members.  An  important  i n the  long  be m i n i m i z e d .  on the p e r c e p t i o n s and  e x p e c t a t i o n s of co-op  p a r t of the c o - o p e r a t i v e p h i l o s o p h y  i s the i n v o l v e -  ment and p a r t i c i p a t i o n of people w i t h i n the c o - o p e r a t i v e o r g a n i z a t i o n . For t h i s reason  i t was  felt  e s s e n t i a l t h a t the co-op members be i n v o l v e d as  much as p o s s i b l e . The was  survey was  undertaken d u r i n g the summer of 1975  employed by U n i t e d Housing Foundation  of c o - o p e r a t i v e housing.  when the  to e v a l u a t e the user  author  satisfaction  F i g u r e IV i l l u s t r a t e s the e v a l u a t i o n p r o c e s s  was  f o l l o w e d and  the r e l a t i o n s h i p s  and  project administrators.  among  the c o - o p e r a t o r s ,  that  evaluator,  Those f a m i l i a r w i t h McAfee (1975) w i l l note  the s i m i l a r i t y to her approach.  The  co-op members (as w e l l as UHF)  were  c o n s u l t e d at a l l stages as i l l u s t r a t e d ; namely, i n i d e n t i f y i n g the dimens i o n s f o r study, understood  i n t r a n s l a t i n g the concepts  and problems i n t o  q u e s t i o n s , i n the c o l l e c t i o n of the d a t a , and  i n the  easily ratifica-  t i o n of c o n c l u s i o n s . R e s u l t s from the q u e s t i o n n a i r e s were coded and both q u a n t i t a t i v e l y and  qualitatively.  the d a t a were analyzed  R e s u l t s emerged through quantita-r •  t i v e a n a l y s i s t h a t i n d i c a t e d the a t t i t u d e s of the m a j o r i t y of  respondents,  w h i l e the q u a l i t a t i v e a n a l y s i s i d e n t i f i e d  s p e c i a l t o p i c s which were  to the s a t i s f a c t i o n of s m a l l e r numbers of  co-operators.  The  f i n d i n g s of the study were sent to a l l p a r t i c i p a n t s to i n f o r m them  of the outcome of the r e s e a r c h and The response to t h i s e f f o r t was presented  critical  i n Chapter 5 and  to s o l i c i t r e a c t i o n to the c o n c l u s i o n s .  minimal but the i n f o r m a t i o n o b t a i n e d i s  a sample of the summary sheet which was  mailed  22.  E l GUR E. EL :  EVALUATION  EVALUATION  aequesT  F12.0H  AC.& N C V  PROCESS  AC&MCV  Co - o f E p / \ T o ? S  PI MB.MSIO M X.t?E.NTiricATioN  I DENTlFtcATJOU STUOV  A C E N t Y  INPUT  rota. MO i-ATE  RBSE^acM  USSR. TB.Atfsi_A.roR.  X AGENCY  I K POT  DATA  C O U C E C T I O M  1 ACE-MC-y  RA,TiPy  PAT A  ANALYSIS  US«ER  EATiT=>  23.  out  can be found i n Appendix 6.3.  3.2  MEASURES OF USER SATISFACTION A l t h o u g h t h e concept of s a t i s f a c t i o n i s q u i t e e a s i l y understood on an  i n t u i t i v e l e v e l , t h e problems w i t h t r a n s l a t i n g t h i s i d e a i n t o measurable f a c t o r s are very  complex.  a l t h o u g h many 'conceptual  Andrews and B r e s l a u e r  (1975) p o i n t out t h a t  frameworks', 'paradigms' and 'models' e x i s t i n  the l i t e r a t u r e on t h i s s u b j e c t , most l a c k e x p l a n a t o r y to o p e r a t i o n a l i z e . using  power and a r e d i f f i c u l t  I n t h e i r work the n o t i o n o f user s a t i s f a c t i o n i s e x p l o r e d  the t r a d i t i o n a l economic concepts o f u t i l i t y f u n c t i o n s and i n d i f f e r -  ence c u r v e s .  I t i s suggested t h a t w i t h i n the b u i l t  i n d i v i d u a l trades  environment, an  .  o f f c e r t a i n q u a n t i t i e s o f one commodity, f o r example  k i t c h e n space, f o r q u a n t i t i e s o f a second commodity such as the number o f bedrooms. has  Although they suggest t h a t c o n c e p t u a l l y  t h i s type o f r e a s o n i n g  a c e r t a i n a t t r a c t i o n , the a u t h o r s admit t o s e v e r a l overwhelming  o p e r a t i o n a l problems i n moving from economic theory then to r e a l i t y . obtained  F o r example, i n economic theory  to s o c i a l theory and  the u t i l i t y f u n c t i o n i s  from the behaviour o f consumers whereas w i t h s a t i s f a c t i o n , the  e f f e c t s a r e o f t e n a ' f e e l i n g s t a t e ' r a t h e r than a s e r i e s o f o b s e r v a b l e actions.  In addressing  the problems o f p i n p o i n t i n g f a c t o r s t h a t  an i n d i v i d u a l ' s p e r c e p t i o n Gutman and Westergaard Firstly,  of s a t i s f a c t i o n with the b u i l t  (n.d.) b r i n g up the f o l l o w i n g  i ti sdifficult  influence  environment,  points.  to i s o l a t e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the b u i l t  environment t h a t a f f e c t s a t i s f a c t i o n from a v a r i e t y o f o t h e r  potential factors.  Secondly, d i f f e r i n g c o g n i t i v e s t r u c t u r e s make i t dangerous t o propose r e l a t i o n s h i p s between u s e r s and" the environment when the p e r c e p t i o n  o f environment  v a r i e s g r e a t l y between p e o p l e .  expectations  I n a s i m i l a r way, p e o p l e ' s  of the b u i l t environment a l s o d i f f e r preference  structures.  s u b s t a n t i a l l y due t o d i f f e r e n t  T h i r d l y , Gutman and Westergaard p o i n t t o the  temptation of erroneously generalizing experiences of s a t i s f a c t i o n or d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n with one s p e c i f i c item of a building to the whole b u i l d i n g . In this research the attempt to investigate user s a t i s f a c t i o n i s complicated by the fact that the evaluation i s concerned with user perception of a type of housing tenure rather than the b u i l t environment. the d i f f i c u l t i e s i n i s o l a t i n g c r i t i c a l factors i n the,built  If  environment  are as great as has been suggested above, then operationalizing a persontenure s a t i s f a c t i o n measure i s probably more d i f f i c u l t considering the abstract nature of 'tenure'.  A major problem i s d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g between  reactions of the user to the b u i l t environment form under which that b u i l t environment  3.3  under study and to the tenure  i s occupied.  APPROACH TO USER SATISFACTION EMPLOYED IN QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY Having no strong theoretical base on which to anchor this user  s a t i s f a c t i o n study of co-operative housing, the author chose to approach the topic by investigating the attitudes of members to a variety of topics. Two series of variables were i d e n t i f i e d ; the f i r s t set was chosen because the factors were considered p o t e n t i a l l y important to the sense of s a t i s f a c t i o n as experienced by the co-op members whereas the second set contained variables that were p o t e n t i a l l y important to policy formulation. From the i n i t i a l set of variables questions were formulated that probed the users' attitudes toward c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the co-operative structure.  For example, an internal subsidy exists within each co-operative  where people of higher income pay higher monthly charges for a unit for which lower income families would pay less.  Co-operatives therefore try  to encourage a community where there i s a mixture of income l e v e l s . Members were asked i f they agreed or disagreed with these c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s  25.  and why.  Other v a r i a b l e s t h a t were i d e n t i f i e d and q u e s t i o n e d  were the  s o c i a l and economic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f the respondent such as income m a r i t a l status, previous dwelling  level,  type.  A second s e r i e s o f v a r i a b l e s was chosen because i t was a n t i c i p a t e d t h a t p l a n n i n g p o l i c y c o u l d be drawn from t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p s t h a t were i n v e s t i g a t e d .  Expectations and  of c o - o p e r a t i v e housing.  The l i n k between t h e e x p e c t a t i o n s  the r e p o r t e d s a t i s f a c t i o n l e v e l s c o u l d i n d i c a t e whether people  c e r t a i n preconceptions  o f co-op housing  were more l i k e l y t o be happy w i t h  t h e i r l i v i n g environment than o t h e r s who had d i f f e r e n t Pre-occupancy e d u c a t i o n refinement  education housing  ora w i t h d r a w a l o f u n s u i t a b l e members.  o f c o - o p e r a t i v e housing.  f u l l understanding  expectations.  s e s s i o n s c o u l d then be c r e a t e d which would l e a d to  o f these e x p e c t a t i o n s  Understanding  with  o f the n a t u r e  I f s a t i s f a c t i o n i s r e l a t e d t o the  of co-operative housing,  pre-occupancy  s e s s i o n s should ensure t h a t a l l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t h i s type o f  were c l a r i f i e d  c o u l d be s t r e s s e d .  and c e r t a i n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s f r e q u e n t l y misunderstood  In the q u e s t i o n n a i r e s ' , c o - o p e r a t o r s ' "understanding  f o l l o w i n g major c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s - o f co-op housing  o f the  was i n v e s t i g a t e d :  - the member does n o t own the u n i t i n the f e e simple  sense but owns  a share i n the o r g a n i z a t i o n t h a t owns a l l the d w e l l i n g s - the member w i l l n o t be f o r c e d t o l e a v e h i s / h e r u n i t u n l e s s r u l e s o f the c o - o p e r a t i v e a r e broken.  The d e c i s i o n i s made by the Board o f D i r e c t o r s  - the member does n o t b u i l d up e q u i t y - a l l members have equal v o t i n g r i g h t s i n the management o f the co-op - an i n t e r n a l subsidy system e x i s t s as d e s c r i b e d above. A t t i t u d e of members toward co-op Board o f D i r e c t o r s .  Each  housing  c o - o p e r a t i v e a n n u a l l y e l e c t s a Board o f D i r e c t o r s t o manage the a f f a i r s  of  the project.  Major decisions are made i n consultation with the entire  membership and open meetings are held throughout the year.  How s a t i s f i e d  a member i s with his/her l i v i n g environment could be closely connected with the way i n which the Board of Directors handles i t s r e s p o n s i b i l i t y . Attitude toward the resource group.  As mentioned i n the previous chapter,  the task of developing co-operative housing i s a complex one and i n B.C. co-operatives have been aided by a resource group known as U.H.F. organization has a delicate role i n encouraging growth of co-operatives.  This  while not dominating the  For some members, exposure to the resource group  i s f i r s t and sometimes strongest contact with the co-operative movement. Satisfaction with co-operative housing could be linked to attitudes held toward the resource group. Attitude toward p a r t i c i p a t i o n .  Co-operative housing provides a unique  opportunity for a group of people to plan and manage a multiple family development.  For future p o l i c y decisions i t would be interesting to  discover i f s a t i s f a c t i o n i s derived from or related to this process.  3.4  INTERVIEW TECHNIQUE A random sample s t r a t i f i e d by housing projects was followed using  membership l i s t s obtained from UHF.  The table below shows the breakdown of  the sample by co-op.and i l l u s t r a t e s some c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of each project. The locations of .'.the projects are shown on the map which follows the table. Seventy-seven personal interviews were conducted by the researcher in the homes of co-op members.  I t was decided to use personal interviews  because, with the quantity and the nature of the data required, phone or mail surveys would probably have been i n e f f e c t i v e .  People were approached  i n i t i a l l y by telephone and an appointment was arranged.  A l e t t e r of  confirmation followed when s u f f i c i e n t time and adequate postal service allowed.  Table  vr c ^ Name o f Co-op  I I : C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f C o - o p e r a t i v e s and Number o f Members Interviewed i n Each  TT • ^ J m U n i t s and Types  -i Completion  w  No. o f I n d i v i d u a l . . Members Interviewed T  Completed De Cosmos A z a l e a Gardens Kanata Mountain View  110 65 150 215  Townhouses Apartments Townhouses Apartments  1972 1973 1975 1975  14 14 14 14  540  Under C o n s t r u c t i o n New Westminster F a l s e Creek Klahanie Penta Penticton Plaza  42 Townhouses & Apartments 200 Townhouses 74 Townhouses 26 Townhouses 42 Townhouses 384  5  .  5 5 3 3  29.  The  i n t e r v i e w s took p l a c e d u r i n g the s i x week p e r i o d from June 9 to  J u l y 21, 1975.  One f i f t h of the i n t e r v i e w s were conducted  husband and w i f e .  In the remaining  was i n t e r v i e w e d i n d i v i d u a l l y . two hours w i t h an average  w i t h both the  )  cases e i t h e r the husband o r the w i f e  Interviews l a s t e d  from f i f t e e n minutes to  l e n g t h of about f o r t y minutes.  Printed question-  n a i r e s , examples of which a r e shown i n Appendix 6.1 and 6:2 w e r e used by the i n t e r v i e w e r to r e c o r d respondents' were conducted  comments.  w i t h members o f completed  F i f t y - s i x o f the i n t e r v i e w s  p r o j e c t s and twenty-one w i t h  p e o p l e whose p r o j e c t s were i n the v a r i o u s p l a n n i n g phases. C e r t a i n words and phrases  a r e used  throughout  the r e p o r t and should .  be e x p l a i n e d a t t h i s p o i n t Those i n t e r v i e w e d were i n " U H F - a s s i s t e d  co-operatives," co-operatives  who had c o n t r a c t e d to use the s e r v i c e s o f UHF, w i t h the e x c e p t i o n of the F a l e s Creek C o - o p e r a t i v e .  I t was i n c l u d e d i n the survey because a t the  time o f the sample s e l e c t i o n the s i g n i n g of a UHF a s s i s t a n c e c o n t r a c t seemed imminent. did to  not occur.  However, due to p o l i t i c a l problems a f f e c t i n g UHF,  For an a n a l y s i s o f these problems the r e a d e r i s r e f e r r e d  a t h e s i s by E. C u l l  (1976).  Nonetheless  the F a l s e Creek C o - o p e r a t i v e  worked w i t h UHF and the p r o c e s s o f development o f t h a t co-op was to  other UHF-assisted The  this  similar  co-ops.  study examines c o - o p e r a t o r s a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h a p r o c e s s which  p r o g r e s s e s through  several distinct  stages.  " P l a n n i n g s t a g e s " r e f e r to the  development of the c o - o p e r a t i v e from the f i r s t  o r g a n i z a t i o n a l meeting to  the time when the members move i n t o t h e i r d w e l l i n g s . the term "completed  p r o j e c t " i s used.  After this point,  " P l a n n i n g p r o c e s s " i n d i c a t e s the  s e r i e s o f d e c i s i o n s taken b e f o r e the housing u n i t s a r e completed ready f o r occupancy.  and  30.  P a r t i c i p a t i o n r e f e r s to the involvement co-operative. and  t h a t members have w i t h  Involvement can take the form of attendance at meetings  committees but a l s o i n c l u d e s i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h f e l l o w co-op members. To d i f f e r e n t i a t e between the Board of D i r e c t o r s o f UHF  of  their  the i n d i v i d u a l c o - o p e r a t i v e s , the l a t t e r w i l l be  and  the Boards  i n d i c a t e d by "Co-op  Board of D i r e c t o r s " .  3.5  CONSTRAINTS When choosing  to  a sample s i z e and  a method of o b t a i n i n g d a t a , the  ability  p r o j e c t the sample c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s to the f u l l p o p u l a t i o n i s o f t e n  t r a d e d o f f a g a i n s t the amount and In t h i s case, wealth  i t was  decided  depth of i n f o r m a t i o n t h a t can be  obtained.  t h a t p e r s o n a l i n t e r v i e w s would produce a  of i n f o r m a t i o n t h a t would j u s t i f y the n e c e s s a r i l y s m a l l sample  The  c o - o p e r a t i v e housing  phenomenon and has  movement i n Canada i s a r e l a t i v e l y  r e s u l t e d i n few user s a t i s f a c t i o n s t u d i e s .  of  77.  new  As a r e s u l t ,  t h i s r e s e a r c h had no d i r e c t l y comparable s t u d i e s to draw on. The n a t u r e laden. of  of the d a t a c o l l e c t e d i n t h i s study was  A concerted  e f f o r t was  b i a s i n the p h r a s i n g and  made by the r e s e a r c h e r to a v o i d  i n t o n a t i o n of q u e s t i o n s .  such as s a t i s f a c t i o n are not e a s i l y q u a n t i f i e d and i n f o r m a t i o n i s i n e v i t a b l e i n o r d e r to e l i c i t  3.6  CRITERIA FOR  expression  Certain variables  a l o s s of r i c h n e s s of  comparable r e s u l t s .  ANALYSIS  Since the data d i d not show a normal d i s t r i b u t i o n , s t a t i s t i c s were used to a n a l y z e was  inherently value-  the d a t a .  non-parametric  Kendall rank-order  correlation  used to m e a s u r e t h e a s s o c i a t i o n o f . s a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h the v a r i o u s  ent v a r i a b l e s - .  :  independ-  This-was f e l t .to' be the most a p p r o p r i a t e t e s t because a 5  p o i n t s c a l e was used r e s u l t i n g i n o r d i n a l c a t a g o r i c d a t a .  31.  The two  use  of K e n d a l l ' s tau i s o f t e n l i m i t e d to c o r r e l a t i o n s between  ordinal scales.  v a r i a b l e s with only  Several two  of the v a r i a b l e s used i n t h i s survey  possible  r e a s o n i n g of Norman H. Nie  categories.  However, f o l l o w i n g  (1970), a dichotomy here i s t r e a t e d  are the  as an  measure thus making the a p p l i c a t i o n of K e n d a l l ' s tau a p p r o p r i a t e . argues t h a t a l t h o u g h a rank o r d e r may d e f i n i t i o n s , p l a c i n g the v a r i a b l e s requirements o f  not  be  inherent  i n the  ordinal  Nie  category  i n t h i s o r d e r s a t i s f i e s the mathematical  ordering.  Only those r e l a t i o n s h i p s between v a r i a b l e s whose c o r r e l a t i o n s t a t i s t i c s were s i g n i f i c a n t at the This was  chapter has  undertaken.  research,  The  .05  l e v e l or l e s s were used i n the  p r e s e n t e d the  framework under which t h i s  methodological issues  the d e f i n i t i o n of terms, and  have been addressed. questionnaire  The  -  research  such as the c o n s t r a i n t s  methods of s t a t i s t i c a l  next c h a p t e r d e s c r i b e s  survey which was  analysis.  analysis  the r e s u l t s of  a d m i n i s t e r e d to co-op members.  of  the  the  32.  CHAPTER FOUR - RESULTS OF THE SURVEY  In t h i s chapter the r e s u l t s of the survey o f the members o f n i n e co-operative housing p r o j e c t s are presented. a c c o r d i n g to respondent  The f i n d i n g s are grouped  r e a c t i o n s to the f o l l o w i n g s i x s u b j e c t a r e a s :  4.1  Sense of S a t i s f a c t i o n  4.2  E x p e c t a t i o n s of Co-op  4.3  Understanding  4.4  A t t i t u d e s Toward the Boards of D i r e c t o r s  4.5  A t t i t u d e s Toward UHF  4.6  A t t i t u d e s Toward P a r t i c i p a t i o n  o f Co-op  Housing Housing  W i t h i n each o f the above s e c t i o n s , the r e l e v a n c e of the s u b j e c t and the methods o f e l i c i t i n g response  are f i r s t  discussed.  Secondly, the  f i n d i n g s o f the survey a r e p r e s e n t e d . Although and  the t a b l e s p r o v i d e an exact  statistics,  statement  approximate numbers have been used  o f the v a r i o u s numbers i n the d i s c u s s i o n to  enhance the r e a d i b i l i t y .  4.1  SENSE OF SATISFACTION Although  s e v e r a l d i f f e r e n t means o f measuring s a t i s f a c t i o n were  used,  the most d i r e c t was a q u e s t i o n a s k i n g the c o - o p e r a t o r to take a l l t h i n g s i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n and to rank h i s / h e r s a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h c o - o p e r a t i v e housing on a f i v e - p o i n t  scale.  L e s s d i r e c t measures were o b t a i n e d from q u e s t i o n s c o n c e r n i n g the  33.  l e n g t h o f time the respondent he/she had ever suggested measures were used  anticipated l i v i n g  co-op housing  i n the p r o j e c t and whether  to f r i e n d s o r r e l a t i v e s .  Similar  f o r those p e o p l e whose p r o j e c t s were i n the p l a n n i n g  and b u i l d i n g stages but the q u e s t i o n s r e l a t e d t o t h e i r s a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h the p r o c e s s o f o b t a i n i n g co-op  housing.  U s i n g these i n d i c a t o r s o f s a t i s f a c t i o n the f o l l o w i n g s e c t i o n examines the l e v e l o f s a t i s f a c t i o n t h a t i s e x p e r i e n c e d by a l l surveyed The  important  co-op  f a c t o r s t h a t a r e r e l a t e d to t h i s sense o f s a t i s f a c t i o n a r e  then d i s c u s s e d l o o k i n g f i r s t  a t the r e s u l t s from members o f p r o j e c t s i n the  p l a n n i n g stages and then a t the r e s u l t s from members o f completed  4.1.1  members.  projects.  L e v e l of S a t i s f a c t i o n The m a j o r i t y o f co-op members a r e v e r y s a t i s f i e d w i t h t h e i r  environment. almost  Taking a l l a s p e c t s o f t h e i r housing  into consideration,  t h r e e - q u a r t e r s o f the c o - o p e r a t o r s surveyed  to be q u i t e s a t i s f i e d .  living  considered  themselves  People whose p r o j e c t s a r e p r e s e n t l y i n .the  p l a n n i n g stages r e p o r t s i m i l a r h i g h l e v e l s o f s a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h the p r o c e s s they a r e e x p e r i e n c i n g .  Table H I p r o v i d e s the exact  figures.  T a b l e I I I : S a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h Co-op L i v i n g as Expressed, by Members o f Completed P r o j e c t s and S a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h the P l a n n i n g P r o c e s s as Expressed-by Members of Incomplete P r o j e c t s ( I n P e r c e n t ) S a t i s f a c t i o n L e v e l s (in Percent) Type o f P r o j e c t Low  High  Completed P r o j e c t s (n=56)  5.4  1.8  17.9  32.1  42.9  P l a n n i n g Stage P r o j e c t s (n=21)  4.8  9.5  14.3  23.8  47.6  Both  5.2  3.8  16.9  29.9  44.2  (n=77)  34.  The enthusiasm which some people f e l t One  f o r t h e i r housing was  exciting.  person d e s c r i b e d i t as "the c l o s e s t t h i n g to heaven t h a t I have ever  experienced".  Other people mentioned  g r e a t p l a c e where people a r e working  t h a t to them co-op housing was  "a  t o g e t h e r t o get t h i n g s done".  However, a t e n t h o f those surveyed r e p o r t e d some d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h the housing or the p r o c e s s . The s t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s i s which f o l l o w s i n the r e s t o f the c h a p t e r p o i n t s to some o f the reasons behind t h i s d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n .  The  comments  below should h e l p t o humanize the numbers: As f a r as I'm  concerned  i t ' s the same as l i v i n g  i n a ... p r i s o n .  (When q u e s t i o n e d as to which a s p e c t s of co-op housing were s i m i l a r to t h a t o f a p r i s o n , the person answered t h a t i t was and r e g u l a t i o n s . ) Other people misunderstood  because  or d i s l i k e d  of the r u l e s the n o n - e q u i t y  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c and, as a r e s u l t , were d i s s a t i s f i e d . I f you a r e i n here you f e e l l i k e , I ' l l never get o u t ! "  "I've h i t the bottom and  I'm not happy here because no matter how l o n g you a r e l i v i n g here you never get a n y t h i n g more than what you pay f o r i t . A few f a m i l i e s r e p o r t e d s o c i a l d i f f i c u l t i e s w i t h t h e i r neighbours a t t r i b u t e d t h i s to the p h y s i c a l l a y o u t o f townhouse  4.1.2  and  developments.  Important F a c t o r s i n S a t i s f a c t i o n L e v e l s E x p e r i e n c e d by Members of P r o j e c t s i n the P l a n n i n g Stages The a n a l y s i s attempted  t o uncover r e l a t i o n s h i p s b e t w e e n • s a t i s f a c t i o n  w i t h the p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s and v a r i o u s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the co-op members.  Only t h r e e c o r r e l a t i o n s c o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d s i g n i f i c a n t . " * "  Appendix 6.4  shows the c o r r e l a t i o n c o - e f f i c i e n t s and l e v e l s o f  significance.  35.  Those people who c l e a r l y understood c o - o p e r a t i v e and f e e simple  the d i f f e r e n c e s between  ownership r e p o r t e d h i g h l e v e l s o f s a t i s f a c t i o n .  Co-op members who a r e s a t i s f i e d w i t h the p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s have no problems c o n t a c t i n g t h e i r Board o f D i r e c t o r s . found  to be r e l a t e d  Also, high s a t i s f a c t i o n  were  to a d e s i r e to j o i n o t h e r c o - o p e r a t i v e s such as baby-  s i t t i n g and food co-ops.  F l GrUR.E-  levels  ~3L '.  KOUfJTAlM  VIEW  36.  These f i n d i n g s i n d i c a t e d t h a t s a t i s f a c t i o n l e v e l s a r e a s s o c i a t e d w i t h co-op member c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s which c o u l d be i n f l u e n c e d by programmes encouraged by the co-op o r g a n i z e r s . of  Although  these r e l a t i o n s h i p s a r e not c l e a r , by emphasizing  c o - o p e r a t i v e ownership and  education the  implications  the d e t a i l s of  the o t h e r forms of c o - o p e r a t i v e a c t i v i t i e s t h a t  c o u l d be i n i t i a t e d , user s a t i s f a c t i o n c o u l d perhaps be i n c r e a s e d . a d d i t i o n , encouraging  g r e a t e r communication between co-op Boards of  D i r e c t o r s and members c o u l d l e a d to h i g h e r s a t i s f a c t i o n  4.1.3  levels.  Important F a c t o r s i n S a t i s f a c t i o n L e v e l s E x p e r i e n c e d by Members of Completed Co-ops The v a r i a b l e s t h a t were found to be most s t r o n g l y r e l a t e d  members' sense of s a t i s f a c t i o n were:  co-op h o u s i n g ,  to co-op  a s t r o n g sense of community, a t t e n d -  ance a t the l a s t group meeting, understanding  of the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of  the k i n d s of e x p e c t a t i o n s t h a t are f e l t ,  knowledge of o t h e r c o - o p e r a t i v e a c t i v i t i e s . to  In  and  Each of these  e x p e r i e n c e or relationships  s a t i s f a c t i o n l e v e l s w i l l be d i s c u s s e d i n d i v i d u a l l y . The  survey found t h a t the l e v e l of s a t i s f a c t i o n t h a t co-op  people  e x p e r i e n c e i s r e l a t e d t o p e r c e p t i o n s of a s t r o n g sense of community. Important  components of community s o l i d a r i t y were taken to be  w i t h the community and Thus, people  the s h a r i n g of common v a l u e s  (Sullivan,  t h a t the s o c i a l m i x t u r e  was  t h a t the people  a p o s i t i v e f e a t u r e , and  The  1969).  r e p o r t i n g h i g h l e v e l s of s a t i s f a c t i o n a l s o approved  i n t e r n a l subsidy system, thought  differently  identification  felt  of the  of people  i n co-ops  i n co-ops r e l a t e d  to each o t h e r than d i d those i n a d j a c e n t neighbourhoods.  r e s u l t s a l s o i n d i c a t e d t h a t people's  t h e i r attendance  at the l a s t group meeting and  s a t i s f a c t i o n was  related  to the importance  to  people  p l a c e d on becoming i n v o l v e d w i t h a c t i v i t i e s t h a t were going on i n the co-op  37.  FIGOCE.  community.  3Z3L  co-op  Although i n the i n t e r v i e w s respondents o f t e n mentioned  how b o r i n g o r f r u s t r a t i n g is closely  HEE-nUGr  the meetings c o u l d be, i t seems t h a t  and p o s i t i v e l y r e l a t e d  satisfaction  to attandance.  A t h i r d a r e a t h a t was s t r o n g l y l i n k e d w i t h s a t i s f a c t i o n was understanding o f some o f the b a s i c c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s For  informally  clear  of co-operative housing.  example, those people who s t a t e d t h a t co-op housing was d i f f e r e n t  from  home ownership i n the f e e simple sense r e p o r t e d h i g h l e v e l s o f s a t i s f a c t i o n .  38.  The  converse i s a l s o  t r u e - p e o p l e who  r e p o r t e d low  o f t e n expressed some m i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g about the  l e v e l s of  n a t u r e of  satisfaction  co-operative  ownership. The  reasons f o r s a t i s f a c t i o n are  that people have on s a t i s f a c t i o n and  j o i n i n g co-operatives.  hopes f o r s e c u r i t y  a s t r o n g sense of community and the  c o - o p e r a t o r s who  d i d not  expressed h i g h l e v e l s of caused by that  An  the  satisfaction.  I t was  their unit.  related  o n l y to the  s t a n d i n g s were excluded from the  had  to co-ops (Tau  A group of r e l a t i o n s h i p s  also  not  c o s t s as an  people who  food or b a b y s i t t i n g  would be  Other r e l a t i o n s h i p s correlations  d i d not  status,  amount of p a r t i c i p a t i o n was r e s u l t s were e v i d e n t .  age  was  was  a  i n t h e i r area. l i k e l y to show s t r o n g  analysis.  type of u n i t .  results  experience  co-ops such as  No  factors  significant such as  correla-  stage i n  the  When a d i r e c t measure of  compared w i t h s a t i s f a c t i o n , no  However the  initial  High s a t i s f a c t i o n  in joining  started  from the  or  an  e x i s t s between s a t i s f a c t i o n and  found between s a t i s f a c t i o n l e v e l s and  l i f e c y c l e , marital  attractive  (n=37), s a t i s f a c t i o n l e v e l s  mentioned c o s t s as  that were i d e n t i f i e d as  materialize  actual  = -.02).  interested  co-op i f one  true,  e x p e r i e n c e d f i n a n c i a l misunder-  w i t h or knowledge of o t h e r c o - o p e r a t i v e a c t i v i t i e s . r e p o r t e d by  be  misunderstanding  d i s c o v e r y of the  s t a t i s t i c a l analysis  were s t i l l h i g h e r among those who cause f o r a t t r a c t i o n  had  that  t h i s could  I f t h i s were  to the mentioning of  However, when a l l those who  of  to co-ops  thought that  on  not  found between  i n t e r e s t i n g p o i n t here i s  the number of people e n t e r i n g co-ops w i t h the  f i n a n c i a l arrangements and  expectations  social benefits  mention c o s t s as an a t t r a c t i o n  d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n would then be  t i o n was  to the  A c o r r e l a t i o n was  of t e n u r e , and  sharing.  they would be making a p r o f i t  feature.  closely related  indicate  that  significant  satisfaction  levels  are linked to variables such as sense of community and attendance at the l a s t group meeting which imply a high l e v e l of community involvement.  This  i s interesting because these are factors that the organizers and co-operative members can influence.  It would seem also that s a t i s f a c t i o n i s related to  user expectations which can be modified by e f f e c t i v e education.  These  expectations are discussed i n the following section. 4.2  USER EXPECTATIONS OF CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING People's expectations of co-op housing are greatly influenced by  c l e a r l y the concept i s understood.  These anticipations i n turn have a  large e f f e c t on the housing s a t i s f a c t i o n that they experience. the expectations of those who were asked why  how  To discover  are l i v i n g i n UHF-assisted co-ops, the members  they o r i g i n a l l y wanted to j o i n .  Co-op members hold a range of opinions about what co-operative housing i s and what i s a t t r a c t i v e about i t .  One person saw i t as "a training  ground for socialism and hopefully for communism". "no d i f f e r e n t than other townhouse developments".  Others described i t as Certain trends became  apparent i n the quantitative analysis. The survey confirmed that the most common reason people j o i n housing co-operatives i s f i n a n c i a l .  Almost three-quarters of those questioned  volunteered 'reasonable costs' as one of the prime motives for joining."*" It was  interesting  to . note  that - the. /second  mssteaconmon  reason for j o i n i n g co-ops was the perceived s o c i a l benefits of co-op housing.  One-third of the people said that they anticipated that co-op  This i s not i n contradiction to the previously reported findings which showed lower levels of s a t i s f a c t i o n among those who mentioned costs; rather the two sets of findings show that although the majority of co-operators are attracted by reasonable costs, their average s a t i s f a c t i o n tends to be lower than the minority's.  40.  F I G U R E  M L * .  DECOSMOS  vii_»-  AGE.  housing would p r o v i d e a g r e a t e r sense o f community and a g r e a t e r f e e l i n g of support and n e i g h b o u r l i n e s s than they had p r e v i o u s l y e x p e r i e n c e d . Other  f r e q u e n t l y mentioned a t t r a c t i o n s were the knowledge t h a t  they  c o u l d n o t be f o r c e d t o v a c a t e without r e a s o n a b l e cause and the a n t i c i p a t e d f e e l i n g o f home  ownership.  The e x p e c t a t i o n s o f people who l i v e d  i n completed  p r o j e c t s were v e r y  41.  s i m i l a r t o those whose p r o j e c t s were i n the p l a n n i n g s t a g e s . illustrates  those  T a b l e IV  findings.  I t has always been suspected t h a t c o s t f a c t o r s a r e the prime m o t i v a tion  f o r j o i n i n g housing co-ops and these f i n d i n g s c o n f i r m t h a t t h i s i s  t r u e i n U H F - a s s i s t e d co-ops. ranked  second  i n importance,  I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g t h a t the s o c i a l  benefits  i n d i c a t i n g t h a t f o r a good p r o p o r t i o n o f  p e o p l e , co-op housing s a t i s f i e s more than a need f o r s h e l t e r .  T a b l e IV: . E x p e c t a t i o n s o f Co-op Housing P r o j e c t Type ( i n P e r c e n t )  F a c t o r Mentioned  Costs Social Benefits S e c u r i t y o f Tenure Sense o f Ownership Physical Characterist i c s o f S i t e and U n i t Sense o f Support from Neighbours Location Able to have P e t s / Children  4.3  :  P l a n n i n g Stage Projects ,(n=21)  B  o  t  h  ,_ \ ^ " 7 7  }  71 34 30 25  76 24 29 33  73 31 30 27  27  20  25  27 18  23 5  12 11  7  0  5  UNDERSTANDING OF CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING The  ways.  Completed Projects (n=56)  Which Members'. Express by  term  ' c o - o p e r a t i v e housing' can be i n t e r p r e t e d i n many d i f f e r e n t  UHF attempts  to h e l p people understand  the term by i s s u i n g  pamphlets as w e l l as by making v e r b a l e x p l a n a t i o n s a t group  several  meetings.  How c l e a r l y t h e i d e a ends up b e i n g understood was examined by a s k i n g people to e x p l a i n i t as they would t o a c u r i o u s f r i e n d who knew n o t h i n g about i t .  42  FIGURE IX:  KANATA  C e r t a i n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s were mentioned security  o f tenure.  Other c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s  such as the  seemed t o be p a r t o f the respon  dent's understanding but these were mentioned co-op c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s  immediately  o n l y a f t e r prompting.  When  c o u l d not be o b t a i n e d even w i t h prompting, the  respondent was c l a s s i f i e d as n o t u n d e r s t a n d i n g t h a t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c . example, o n l y o n e - h a l f the people f e l t  that co-op housing i s c r e a t e d by  people g e t t i n g t o g e t h e r to s o l v e t h e i r housing problems. d i d not f e e l t h a t any more i n d i v i d u a l  For  The o t h e r h a l f  i n i t i a t i v e was r e q u i r e d i n j o i n i n g  a co-op than i n u s i n g any o t h e r government housing program.  43.  About ten p e r c e n t of the respondents  s a i d they r e a l i z e d o n l y a f t e r  they moved i n (some s t i l l d i d not r e a l i z e ) t h a t they d i d not own i n the f e e simple sense.  However, almost  t h e i r house  a l l those p e o p l e whose co-ops  were i n the p l a n n i n g and b u i l d i n g s t a g e s were aware of c o l l e c t i v e ownership, s u g g e s t i n g t h a t the e d u c a t i o n program at UHF The  i n t e r n a l s u b s i d y system was  a third  may. have improved  with.experience.  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c w i t h which a  t e n t h of the people surveyed were u n f a m i l i a r .  The p e o p l e who  were w a i t i n g  to get i n t o t h e i r u n i t s were l e s s aware than those a l r e a d y l i v i n g projects.  T h i s c o u l d be because t h i s f a c t o r i s not s t r e s s e d or  i n the  understood  by people u n t i l monthly payments are r e q u i r e d . A f o u r t h c h a r a c t e r i s t i c about which some of the respondents l e d g e a b l e concerns  the r u n n i n g of the c o - o p e r a t i v e a f t e r moving i n .  p a r t i c u l a r the e l e c t i o n procedures  whether l i v i n g i n  c o - o p e r a t i v e h o u s i n g developments or w a i t i n g to get i n t o t h e i r The above f i n d i n g s are summarized i n T a b l e VI. p r o v i d e i n d i c a t o r s f o r UHF  In  and f u n c t i o n s of the co-op boards of  d i r e c t o r s were u n c l e a r to t e n p e r c e n t of the respondents  understood  were not know-  units.  These f i n d i n g s  should  c o n c e r n i n g which c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s are b e i n g  through p r e s e n t communication channels and which need more  emphasis. T a b l e V:  Members Who D i d Not Understand Co-op Housing In P e r c e n t  Characteristics I n t e r n a l Subsidy System Non-profit Management of co-ops a f t e r Move-in S e c u r i t y of Tenure Created by People to Solve Own Housing Problem  Completed P r o j e c t s (n=56)  C e r t a i n C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of  P l a n n i n g Stage P r o j e c t s (n=21)  Both Types (n=77)  9 5  14 0  10 4  10 7  10 0  10 5  9  0  7  44.  4.4  CO-OPERATORS' ATTITUDES TOWARD BOARDS OF DIRECTORS How people p e r c e i v e d t h e i r Board o f D i r e c t o r s was thought .to be  important to t h e c o - o p e r a t o r s ' s a t i s f a c t i o n .  Each respondent was asked t o  d e s c r i b e t h e i r Board o f D i r e c t o r s i n terms o f what i t d i d , who i t s members were and how the members were s e l e c t e d . r e p r e s e n t the members was examined.  The degree to which the Boards  Another a r e a o f i n v e s t i g a t i o n was t h e  u n d e r s t a n d i n g which co-op members had o f the s e l f - g o v e r n i n g p r o c e s s . No s t r o n g c o r r e l a t i o n was found between s a t i s f a c t i o n and u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f the Boards o f D i r e c t o r s .  As was expected, the co-op members whose  p r o j e c t s had not y e t been completed knew l e s s about who was on the Board and how the Board was s e l e c t e d than those c o - o p e r a t o r s who were l i v i n g i n their projects.  The worst example was i n the a r e a o f knowing who comprises  the boards o f d i r e c t o r s .  Here, 33% o f the members i n the p l a n n i n g stage  co-ops showed a l a c k o f f a m i l i a r i t y .  The number o f members o f incomplete  p r o j e c t s who c o u l d d e s c r i b e t h e Board was a p p r o x i m a t e l y the same as i n completed p r o j e c t s .  Table VI:  T a b l e VI i l l u s t r a t e s these f i n d i n g s .  F a m i l i a r i t y o f Co-op Members w i t h T h e i r Boards o f D i r e c t o r s  P e r c e n t a g e s o f Members Who Answered "Don't Know" o r E q u i v a l e n t Question Members o f Completed P r o j e c t s  Members o f P r o j e c t s i n P l a n n i n g Stages  Who i s on the Board o f Directors?  24%  33%  What the Board o f D i r e c t o r s does  12%  9%  7%  19%  How they a r e s e l e c t e d  45.  I t had been thought the c o - o p e r a t i v e was  a t the b e g i n n i n g of t h i s study t h a t the l o n g e r  i n e x i s t e n c e , the more r e p r e s e n t a t i v e the Board  D i r e c t o r s would become.  U n f o r t u n a t e l y , due  of  to the wide v a r i a t i o n s i n r a t e s  of p r o g r e s s d u r i n g the p l a n n i n g stages t h e r e d i d not seem to be any v a r i a b l e a g a i n s t which t h i s h y p o t h e s i s c o u l d be t e s t e d . whose c o - o p e r a t i v e s are i n the p l a n n i n g stages thought  suitable  However, people t h e i r boards of  d i r e c t o r s were r e f l e c t i n g membership views more o f t e n than d i d those are p r e s e n t l y l i v i n g  in their units.  which d i r e c t l y a f f e c t  the everyday  the Board  More people have o p i n i o n s . o n  thus the o p p o r t u n i t y f o r disagreement  i s greater.  Table VII:  T h i s i s p r o b a b l y because more i s s u e s  l i v e s of members a r e d i s c u s s e d a t  meetings a f t e r moving i n than b e f o r e . t a n g i b l e i s s u e s and  who  these  w i t h members of  See T a b l e V I I .  R e p r e s e n t a t i v e n e s s of Boards of D i r e c t o r s ( i n P e r c e n t )  How O f t e n does the Board of D i r e c t o r s Represent Your Views?  Members of Completed P r o j e c t s  Members of P r o j e c t s i n P l a n n i n g Stages  Most of time  45  68  Sometimes  32  26  Occasionally  23  5  Another i s s u e was  r e v e a l e d i n open ended d i s c u s s i o n s w i t h members  were l i v i n g i n c o - o p e r a t i v e p r o j e c t s .  In co-ops where one v o t e was  who  allowed  per u n i t , many people, o f t e n women, f e l t a l i e n a t e d from the running of the co-operative. the day  S e v e r a l women commented t h a t s i n c e they were home d u r i n g  they were i n a b e t t e r p o s i t i o n to understand  of the co-op than the men  who  and d e a l w i t h problems  served on the boards of d i r e c t o r s .  In  Kanata, where a l l a d u l t s have one v o t e , s a t i s f a c t i o n , w i t h the system expressed.  was  4.5  ATTITUDES TOWARD THE  CO-ORDINATING ORGANIZATION -  As i n d i c a t e d i n the f i r s t c h a p t e r , UHF the o r g a n i z a t i o n of c o - o p e r a t i v e s . has been under review, i t was member viewed  UHF.  UHF  p l a y s a v e r y important r o l e i n  Because d i r e c t i o n o f the o r g a n i z a t i o n  thought u s e f u l to d i s c o v e r how  In o r d e r to approach  the co-op  the i s s u e o f r o l e s and  s i b i l i t i e s without b i a s i n g the response, the q u e s t i o n was  respon-  phrased  as  follows: Some p e o p l e have suggested t h a t UHF s h o u l d take l e s s r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r d e v e l o p i n g the housing and have the co-op members take more of the n e c e s s a r y s t e p s themselves. Other people have suggested t h a t co-op members don't have enough time and i n t e r e s t to take on more r e s p o n s i b i l i t y and would r a t h e r have UHF make most of the decisions. Respondents were asked to comment on t h e i r view o f the c o n t r o v e r s y .  In  a d d i t i o n , respondents were then asked to d e s c r i b e what f u n c t i o n s UHF performs a t p r e s e n t . A m a j o r i t y of people f e l t  t h a t UHF  was  d o i n g a good j o b and  t h e i r r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s should not be decreased. was  that  The f o l l o w i n g comment  typical: We c o u l d n ' t have got t h i s p l a c e without UHF. Let's face i t . Who's going to l e n d me a m i l l i o n d o l l a r s ? B e s i d e s , I'm not v e r y b r i g h t w i t h f i g u r e s and t h i n g s . UHF knows c o s t s and things. That's t h e i r j o b . B e t t e r l e t them do most o f i t . Many people a l s o f e l t  e a r l i e r co-ops and  t h a t UHF  has l e a r n e d through e x p e r i e n c e w i t h  so can h e l p the new  ones a v o i d the  pitfalls.  On the o t h e r hand, a l e s s e r number o f people p r o t e s t e d w i t h s t r o n g words what was t h a t UHF  called  the "heavy-handedness" o f UHF.  I t was  should p r o v i d e unbiased resumes of c o n t r a c t o r s and  and a l l o w p r e s s u r e - f r e e s e l e c t i o n o f p r o f e s s i o n a l s by the boards of d i r e c t o r s .  suggested architects  individual  47.  The answers to the q u e s t i o n r e g a r d i n g UHF's p r e s e n t f u n c t i o n ( i n summer 1975)  showed t h a t many people whose p r o j e c t s were i n the p l a n n i n g  s t a g e s had d i f f i c u l t y d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g between the r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of the co-op boards of d i r e c t o r s and UHF.  O f t e n the p e r c e i v e d f u n c t i o n s of both  groups were i n t e r t w i n e d and v a g u e l y d e f i n e d . c o u l d be made t o c l a r i f y  T h i s suggests  that e f f o r t  the r o l e s of these two b o d i e s not o n l y a t the  i n i t i a l c o n t a c t w i t h co-op members but throughout  the p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s .  The q u e s t i o n of r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s i s c l o s e l y r e l a t e d  to p a r t i c i p a t i o n  which i s d i s c u s s e d i n the f o l l o w i n g s e c t i o n .  4.6  CO-OPERATORS' ATTITUDE TOWARD PARTICIPATION The q u e s t i o n of i n d i v i d u a l p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n c o - o p e r a t i v e housing  c o n t r o v e r s i a l one.  Some people f e e l t h a t involvement  i n the p l a n n i n g  d e s i g n stages by c o - o p e r a t o r s i s a waste of time and money. members a t UHF  would argue t h a t the involvement  is a and  Some s t a f f  by the c o - o p e r a t o r s does not  mean a d e l a y and t h a t i t a l l o w s people to have c o n t a c t w i t h t h e i r f u t u r e neighbours.  S t i l l o t h e r people would say t h a t UHF  FIGURE X:  AZALEA GARDENS  does not a l l o w more than  token p a r t i c i p a t i o n and i s w i t h UHF,  t h a t t h i s i s because the u l t i m a t e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y  not w i t h the co-op members.  T h e r e f o r e , the q u e s t i o n t h a t comes to mind i s how living  i n completed  p r o j e c t s and  those who  the people who  are  a r e p r e s e n t l y i n v o l v e d i n the  p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s view the o p p o r t u n i t y to p a r t i c i p a t e . The who  s u b j e c t was  approached i n s e v e r a l d i f f e r e n t ways.  were a l r e a d y l i v i n g  i n t h e i r p r o j e c t s , the amount of  e x p e r i e n c e d b e f o r e moving i n and  the importance  p a r t i c i p a t i o n a f t e r moving i n was co-op members how importance  ranked  For the  people  involvement  each i n d i v i d u a l p l a c e d on  on a 5-point s c a l e by a s k i n g the  many a c t i v i t i e s they had  engaged i n , and by rank,  they c o n s i d e r e d p a r t i c i p a t i o n to have.  Additional  the  questions  i n v e s t i g a t e d whether an absence of p a r t i c i p a t i o n o p p o r t u n i t i e s , both b e f o r e and l e v e l s of  a f t e r they moved i n , would have i n f l u e n c e d t h e i r r e p o r t e d satisfaction.  Members were a l s o q u e r i e d about t h e i r d e s i r e to p a r t i c i p a t e i n p a r t i c u l a r a c t i v i t i e s concerned people were asked  w i t h the c o - o p e r a t i v e .  For example,  i f they would l i k e to become i n v o l v e d i n working  on  t r e e p l a n t i n g p a r t i e s , rummage s a l e s and c a r washes, or phone committees. S i m i l a r q u e s t i o n s a s c e r t a i n i n g the l e v e l and p a t i o n were asked  importance  of  of the c o - o p e r a t o r s s t i l l w a i t i n g to move i n t o  particitheir  units.  4.6.1  P a r t i c i p a t i o n During the P l a n n i n g  Stages  More than h a l f of the members whose p r o j e c t s a r e i n the p l a n n i n g s t a g e s s t a t e d t h a t they attended o r t r i e d basis.  The  to a t t e n d meetings on a r e g u l a r  same p r o p o r t i o n i n d i c a t e d t h a t involvement  c o n s t r u c t i o n stages was  important  and  during planning  t h a t i f they d i d not have t h i s  and  o p p o r t u n i t y t h e i r s a t i s f a c t i o n would be d i m i n i s h e d .  S i m i l a r l y , c l o s e to  o n e - h a l f o f c o - o p e r a t o r s now l i v i n g i n t h e i r u n i t s had been i n v o l v e d on a r e g u l a r b a s i s i n t h e p l a n n i n g o f t h e i r housing and more than o n e - t h i r d felt  t h a t the p a r t i c i p a t i o n aspect was so important  t h a t had i t n o t been  a v a i l a b l e t h e i r s a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h c o - o p e r a t i v e housing would be lower. Co-op members who had gone through t h e p r o c e s s i n d i c a t e d t h a t a t s e v e r a l times d u r i n g the p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s they wished a c t i v e r o l e but were n o t sure how t o go about  it.  t o take on a more  Respondents  suggested  t h a t p e r s o n a l communication w i t h Board members o r o t h e r a c t i v e members would have been an e f f e c t i v e means o f encouraging Co-operators were asked  this  involvement.  i f they were i n t e r e s t e d i n p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n  s e v e r a l s p e c i f i c a c t i v i t i e s such as rummage s a l e s and ear washes and the m a j o r i t y o f respondents  reacted p o s i t i v e l y .  These r e s u l t s a r e summarized  i n Table V I I I .  Table V I I I :  Members o f P r o j e c t s i n P l a n n i n g Stages Who Expressed I n t e r e s t i n S p e c i f i c A c t i v i t i e s ( i n Percent)  Activity  P e r c e n t o f Members Interested  Working on p a i n t i n g o r t r e e planting parties  67  C o n t r i b u t i n g o r a t t e n d i n g bake s a l e s , rummage s a l e s o r c a r washes t o c o l l e c t money f o r buying common equipment  71  Phoning people t o t e l l about co-op meetings  38  them  D u r i n g t h e i n t e r v i e w s some p e o p l e t a l k e d about  the s i t u a t i o n where  they would have been eager t o p a r t i c i p a t e d u r i n g t h e p l a n n i n g stages but had been admitted as  members too l a t e t o do so.  This situation  arises  50.  because o f people who j o i n two o r t h r e e co-ops o r become co-op members without b e i n g convinced t h a t t h i s i s t h e type o f housing t h a t b e s t t h e i r needs.  suits  When these people drop out o f a c o - o p e r a t i v e l a t e i n t h e  p l a n n i n g s t a g e s , a newcomer from a v i s i t i n g  list  i s s e l e c t e d but the  o p p o r t u n i t y to p l a n has passed.  FIGURE XI:  In  s e v e r a l cases i t was mentioned t h a t t h e c o - o p e r a t i v e s were having  d i f f i c u l t i e s maintaining interest was  DECOSMOS VILLAGE  i n t h e running o f t h e i r p r o j e c t s .  It  a l s o mentioned t h a t t h e same people were c a r r y i n g out t h e n e c e s s a r y  t a s k s i n running the o r g a n i z a t i o n s year a f t e r year and these people  wished  o t h e r co-op members would take on some r e s p o n s i b i l i t y . It  seems c l e a r t h a t a c o n t i n u a l r e j u v e n a t i o n o f l e a d e r s h i p i n t h e  c o - o p e r a t i v e s i s needed as w e l l as a commitment by t h e membership t o t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s o f running a housing  project.  51.  A s m a l l p r o p o r t i o n of the sample ( l e s s than a tenth) r e p o r t e d some difficulties of  i n t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p s with t h e i r neighbours.  Some cases  v a n d a l i s m and m a r i t a l breakdown were c i t e d a l o n g w i t h problems of dogs  and use of barbeques. The r e s u l t s c o n c e r n i n g c o - o p e r a t o r s ' a t t i t u d e s toward  participation  d u r i n g the p l a n n i n g stages i n d i c a t e t h a t a simple, s i n g l e approach to the q u e s t i o n i s not p o s s i b l e .  For h a l f the people p r e s e n t l y going through  p l a n n i n g and d e s i g n i n g of t h e i r homes, t h i s was t h e i r reason f o r j o i n i n g the c o - o p e r a t i v e s . the people who  a v e r y important  More than a t h i r d  had a l r e a d y e x p e r i e n c e d the p r o c e s s thought  p a r t of  (40%)  i t was  the  of  critically  important. S e v e r a l d i f f e r e n t approaches to these r e s u l t s are p o s s i b l e . be argued  I t could  t h a t because those i n t e r e s t e d i n p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the p l a n n i n g  do not r e p r e s e n t a c l e a r m a j o r i t y , the o p p o r t u n i t y s h o u l d be d i s c o n t i n u e d . On the o t h e r hand, f o r those people who  were i n t e r e s t e d  d u r i n g the p l a n n i n g s t a g e s , t h i s r e p r e s e n t s a c r i t i c a l  in  involvement  component of  their  s a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h co-op housing. Furthermore,  t h i s r e s p o n s i b i l i t y which members assume, not o n l y d u r i n g  p l a n n i n g but a f t e r p r o j e c t completion, g u i s h e s c o - o p e r a t i v e housing  from most o t h e r types of h o u s i n g p r e s e n t l y  a v a i l a b l e a t s i m i l a r moderate c o s t s . a l s o have i n i t s e l f  i s a c h a r a c t e r i s t i c which d i s t i n -  The p a r t i c i p a t i o n e x e r c i s e might  some s o c i a l b e n e f i t i n t h a t demands are made.on people  which f o r c e s the a c q u i r i n g of c e r t a i n s k i l l s , groups of people. strengthened  e s p e c i a l l y i n working w i t h  T h i s o p p o r t u n i t y f o r p a r t i c i p a t i o n perhaps should  be  and made more i n v i t i n g to a l a r g e r number of co-op members.  52.  4.7  SUMMARY The research showed that the majority of co-operative members express  considerable satisfaction with thei-r housing and the„process they experience-to obtain it.  In the case of completed projects, s a t i s f a c t i o n was  strongly linked  with co-operators' perceptions of a strong sense of community, attendance at recent co-operative housing.meetings, the kinds of expectations of co-operative l i v i n g which members have, and previous co-operative experience. members of projects i n the planning stages s a t i s f a c t i o n was  For  linked with  understanding of co-operative ownership, a b i l i t y to contact the 2"  r.  co-operative's Board of Directors and desire to j o i n other co-operative activities.  S a t i s f a c t i o n levels were not found to be strongly related to  income or p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the planning process.  This suggests that,  although p a r t i c i p a t i o n during the planning stages i s not c r i t i c a l to s a t i s f a c t i o n , involvement with the community after moving i n JLS_ important to user s a t i s f a c t i o n . The major reason co-op members gave for j o i n i n g was f i n a n c i a l .  The  second most frequently given reason referred to the s o c i a l benefits of co-op housing, i . e . a strong sense of community and a f e e l i n g of support and neighbourliness.  This indicates that the s o c i a l benefits of co-operative  housing are recognized by members and are more important as an a t t r a c t i v e force than the physical c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the project and i t s location. The majority of respondents  showed a high l e v e l of understanding of  the concepts and c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of co-operative housing.  However, the  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s which were least understood were the existence of an i n t e r n a l subsidy system and the management of the co-operative after move-in. These areas could be stressed i n UHF's education programme.  53.  In terms of representativeness of the individual Boards of Directors, a majority of members of projects i n the planning stages f e l t that t h e i r Boards of Directors were r e f l e c t i n g membership views most of the time. smaller percentage of people l i v i n g i n completed projects f e l t this  A  way.  It seems that more contentious issues are discussed a f t e r project completion than during the planning stages, thereby providing more of a forum for divergent opinion. In general co-op members indicated that they were s a t i s f i e d with the job that UHF  i s doing.  However, many members of planning-stage projects  had d i f f i c u l t y distinguishing between the r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of the co-op Boards of Directors and those of UHF.  This suggests that these roles could  be made more clear to co-op members. When asked about p a r t i c i p a t i o n , one-third of the surveyed co-op members presently l i v i n g i n their units stated that t h e i r sense of s a t i s f a c t i o n would have been lower i f the opportunity to p a r t i c i p a t e i n the planning process had not been available. opportunity for p a r t i c i p a t i o n was  The other two-thirds did not f e e l this c r i t i c a l to their s a t i s f a c t i o n .  Surveyed  members whose projects were i n the planning stages were s p l i t over the issue - half f e l t that the opportunity to p a r t i c i p a t e was  a significant  factor i n their sense of s a t i s f a c t i o n while half f e l t i n d i f f e r e n t toward i t . Such a d i v i s i o n i n opinion suggests that the opportunity for p a r t i c i p a t i o n during the planning stages should vary according to the needs of each individual co-operative. The implications that these findings have for the co-operative  housing  movement w i l l be discussed i n the next chapter and related to studies with similar  concerns.  54.  CHAPTER FIVE - CONCLUSIONS AND  RECOMMENDATIONS  The r e s u l t s of the user s a t i s f a c t i o n study i n d i c a t e t h a t the m a j o r i t y of  co-op members surveyed were v e r y s a t i s f i e d w i t h t h e i r h o u s i n g and  p r o c e s s they e x p e r i e n c e to o b t a i n i t . identified  i n both completed  chapter w i l l  However c e r t a i n problems were  co-ops and p l a n n i n g stage co-ops.  examine s e v e r a l t o p i c s r e l a t e d t o these  This  findings.  To b e g i n , s o l u t i o n s to the problems t h a t were noted d u r i n g the w i l l be d i s c u s s e d and recommendations w i l l be proposed. first  the  survey  The d i s c u s s i o n w i l l  f o c u s on recommendations f o r a l t e r i n g the o p e r a t i o n a l and o r g a n i z a -  t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e of the surveyed  c o - o p e r a t i v e s by examining  f i r s t w i t h p r o j e c t s i n the p l a n n i n g s t a g e s and  p o s s i b l e changes  then w i t h completed  projects.  From these p r o p o s a l s s e v e r a l i s s u e s t h a t r e l a t e to the c o - o p e r a t i v e h o u s i n g movement i n g e n e r a l w i l l become apparent  and w i l l be e x p l o r e d .  As  mentioned i n an e a r l i e r c h a p t e r , r e s e a r c h on c o - o p e r a t i v e s from a user p o i n t of view has been c a r r i e d out i n E a s t e r n Canada.  The  r e s u l t s of  those  s t u d i e s w i l l be d i s c u s s e d i n r e l a t i o n to the f i n d i n g s of t h i s r e s e a r c h . Some of the recommendations which are proposed i n o t h e r c o - o p e r a t i v e s i n the U n i t e d S t a t e s and noted.  To conclude  here have been implemented these e x p e r i e n c e s w i l l  be  the t h e s i s , s e v e r a l s u g g e s t i o n s f o r f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h  w i l l be made and a summary of f i n d i n g s of t h i s study w i l l be g i v e n .  55.  5.1  RECOMMENDATIONS CONCERNING PROJECTS IN THE PLANNING STAGES As described i n the previous chapter, more than one-third of the  people i n completed projects and one-half of the people i n planning stage projects f e l t that p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n planning was c r i t i c a l to their l e v e l of s a t i s f a c t i o n .  Although this i s not an overwhelming majority i n either  case, i t does show that for a substantial proportion of co-op members, considerable involvement  during-the planning stages i s important.  It i s therefore recommended that the co-op organizers continue to encourage the formation and growth of co-operatives where members have an opportunity to be involved i n the planning stages of the project. The degree of involvement  desired by co-op members varies considerably  and therefore a range of services i s demanded from the co-ordinating group. As each co-operative i s begun people are brought together to form a unique blending of a b i l i t i e s  and i n t e r e s t s , and the co-ordinating group should be  responsive to the d i f f e r e n t needs. The services, fees and contracts that are offered by UHF should be s u f f i c i e n t l y f l e x i b l e to meet the d i f f e r e n t demands of the various co-operatives. The research indicated that people whose projects were i n the planning stages were enthusiastic about their co-operative and eager to become involved.  However, there seemed to be a question i n many people's minds  as to exactly what was happening and how they could contribute to the process.  Usually these people f e l t that they had a certain s k i l l which  could be useful but did not know whom to approach and whether their input was wanted.  In addition people expressed a feeling of distance from the  project and from the people who were involved. It i s suggested that more interaction between members of co-op Boards of Directors and the other co-operators on an i n d i v i d u a l basis be encouraged. Also increased i n t e r a c t i o n among theomembers-of a "Co-op is_-suggested.  56. More energy should be d i r e c t e d towards encouraging members to a t t e n d meetings and s o c i a l events, and to j o i n committees. The need f o r member involvement should be l i n k e d to the s u c c e s s f u l o r g a n i z a t i o n o f the c o - o p e r a t i v e . ~ T h e - r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s asso'eiated w i t h membership i n a c o - o p e r a t i v e should be c l e a r l y s p e l t out. Respondents suggested"some p o s s i b l e ways of-implementing - P h o n e committees c o u l d be e s t a b l i s h e d where one  person  this  recommendation:  calls five  people,  each of whom c a l l s 5 more p e o p l e . - Many people way  but  signed up f o r committees hoping  then d i d not hear a n y t h i n g more.  to become i n v o l v e d i n t h a t  A f t e r people v o l u n t e e r f o r a  committee, they should meet once, immediately,  to make c l e a r how  and  when t h e i r committee w i l l be needed. - A welcoming committee c o u l d be  s e t up to t a l k w i t h people who  co-op a f t e r the o r g a n i z a t i o n a l meeting. the f i r s t to  c o n t a c t as w e l l as p r o v i d e an o p p o r t u n i t y f o r the new  c a t c h up on what has happened i n the p a s t .  nature o f c o - o p e r a t i v e housing  and  p r o j e c t s go through.  about  the  the r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s t h a t go w i t h i t .  - S e s s i o n s c o u l d be h e l d w i t h o f f i c i a l s  housing  member  In a d d i t i o n , f a c e - t o - f a c e  i n i t i a l misunderstandings  government to e x p l a i n and  the  T h i s would serve to humanize  i n t e r a c t i o n c o u l d c l e a r up any  of  join  and p l a n n e r s from a l l t h r e e  levels  emphasize the p r o c e s s t h a t c o - o p e r a t i v e Problems such as r e z o n i n g  applications,  f u n d i n g f o r s t a r t - u p and mortgages c o u l d be d i s c u s s e d and methods of l o b b y i n g c o u l d be Although  explored.  on a whole the concept  w e l l understood,  of c o - o p e r a t i v e housing was  c e r t a i n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s were not t o t a l l y c l e a r .  fairly People  r e p o r t e d t h a t even though they read the p r i n t e d m a t e r i a l p r o v i d e d by most o f t h a t u n d e r s t a n d i n g e x p l a n a t i o n s a t meetings.  o f c o - o p e r a t i v e housing  came from v e r b a l  UHF  57.  FIGURE.  The r e s u l t s  of  X3L:  HOUWTWIJ  the survey p o i n t  p e o p l e who h a v e a c l e a r  experience social  satisfaction  to high s a t i s f a c t i o n  understanding of  C o - o p members who u n d e r s t a n d o n l y  VI&\AJ  all  the aspects  the f i n a n c i a l  experienced of  co-op  side are less  t h a n t h o s e p e o p l e who a n t i c i p a t e  by  housing.  likely  to  b o t h economic  benefits.  M o r e t i m e a n d e n e r g y s h o u l d be s p e n t o n e x p l a i n i n g t h e o f c o - o p e r a t i v e h o u s i n g t o new and p o t e n t i a l m e m b e r s .  nature  and  58. - I n t e g r a t e d w i t h a s o c i a l and b u s i n e s s  event c o u l d be t r a i n i n g workshops  where p e o p l e break i n t o s m a l l groups and t a l k about the v a r i o u s i s t i c s o f co-op housing.  These workshops should be compulsory f o r a l l  p e o p l e who p l a n to move i n t o co-op housing commitment i s n e c e s s a r y .  character-  Asking  p r o j e c t s , j u s t as a f i n a n c i a l  people to e x p l a i n t h e term t o o t h e r s  o f t e n b r i n g s up p o i n t s t h a t a r e not c l e a r l y understood.  F o r example,  when this-method was used i n t h i s survey, many p e o p l e who i n i t i a l l y t h a t they completely  said  understood the term o f t e n began to wonder about  what happened to t h e i r payments a f t e r t h e 40-year mortgage was p a i d . - The d i f f e r e n c e s between f e e simple  ownership and c o - o p e r a t i v e  c o u l d be made more c l e a r i n w r i t t e n and v e r b a l e d u c a t i o n s .  ownership  F o r example,  use of v a r i o u s s c e n a r i o s which p r o j e c t the f i n a n c i a l p o s i t i o n o f Mr. CO-OP and Ms. FEE-SIMPLE over time c o u l d be u s e f u l . d i f f e r e n c e s i n payments and e q u i t y c o u l d be  I n t h i s way the  clarified.  - The p o s s i b l e r o l e s o f UHF, the co-op Board o f D i r e c t o r s and the members h i p c o u l d be e x p l a i n e d  s e v e r a l times as p a r t o f an e d u c a t i o n a l package.  A f t e r t h e a p p r o p r i a t e r o l e s have been decided  upon by a l l t h e a c t o r s ,  they should be s t r e s s e d s e v e r a l times to the membership The  s i t u a t i o n where some members  the p l a n n i n g  stages,  join  s e v e r a l co-ops which a r e i n  s e l e c t i n g t h e i r c h o i c e o n l y l a t e i n the p r o c e s s  should be changed. F i n a n c i a l commitment on the p a r t o f the co-op members should be made a t an e a r l i e r stage than the p r e s e n t $550 share purchase - a f t e r the a r c h i t e c t i s s e l e c t e d , a r e f u n d a b l e $200 should be c o l l e c t e d from each co-op member. In some c o - o p e r a t i v e s  d i s c o n t e n t was expressed  a d u l t r e s i d e n t s had f u l l membership and v o t i n g  because not a l l  rights.  I t i s t h e r e f o r e suggested t h a t UHF c o n t i n u e t o make t h e o p t i o n s c o n c e r n i n g v o t i n g r i g h t s known to t h e c o - o p e r a t i v e when the c o n s t i t u t i o n i s b e i n g d r a f t e d .  59.  5.2  RECOMMENDATIONS  CONCERNING COMPLETED PROJECTS  I t was o f t e n mentioned, p a r t i c u l a r l y from people i n the l a r g e r co-ops that  the Boards o f D i r e c t o r s had a tremendous amount o f work p l a c e d on  them.  I t was f e l t  broken i n t o s m a l l  that  t h i s could  be l e s s e n e d by h a v i n g the p r o j e c t  f u n c t i o n a l groups.  UHF should c o n t i n u e to encourage the b r e a k i n g down o f l a r g e r p r o j e c t s i n t o c l u s t e r s , each w i t h i t s own c l u s t e r c o u n c i l as has been done i n Kanata. Some concern was expressed over the r e g u l a t i o n s within  which s t a t e who  the co-op gets p r i o r i t y when a u n i t becomes v a c a n t .  resentment has o c c u r r e d i n t h e past because these g u i d e l i n e s not  C o n f u s i o n and were e i t h e r  decided on o r n o t p u b l i c l y a v a i l a b l e . G u i d e l i n e s c o n c e r n i n g the a l l o c a t i o n o f u n i t s which become vacant a f t e r the p r o j e c t i s completed should be c l e a r l y s p e l l e d out as e a r l y as p o s s i b l e , p r e f e r a b l y d u r i n g the planning stages. These g u i d e l i n e s should c l a r i f y both the c r i t e r i a by which f a m i l i e s w i t h i n the c o - o p e r a t i v e move to a new u n i t as w e l l as c r i t e r i a f o r s e l e c t i o n o f new r e s i d e n t s .  FIGURE X I I I :  DECOSMOS VILLAGE  60.  Much h a r d s h i p and resentment has o c c u r r e d i n co-ops over i s s u e s such as p e t s and the use o f barbecues. p u b l i c annoyance i s o n l y vaguely l i v i n g i n c o - o p e r a t i v e housing  The l i n e where p r i v a t e enjoyment meets drawn.  One of the r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s o f  i s an agreement to abide by the r u l e o f t h e  majority. The f u l l i m p l i c a t i o n s and r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s o f democratic government w i t h i n a co-op should be s t r e s s e d d u r i n g the educationals. A l s o , the r u l e s o f t h e c o - o p e r a t i v e should be c l e a r l y s p e l l e d out t o a l l members as soon as they a r e d e c i d e d upon. The and  survey  showed a s t r o n g r e l a t i o n s h i p between attendance  satisfaction.  Participation i s often d i f f i c u l t  p e r s o n a l approaches were suggested  a t meetings  t o encourage b u t  by co-op members as an e f f e c t i v e means  of i n c r e a s i n g attendance. UHF should s t r e s s t o co-op members and Boards o f D i r e c t o r s t h a t attendance a t meetings i s important t o the c o n t i n u i n g success of the co-op. I n d i v i d u a l Boards o f D i r e c t o r s s h o u l d attempt t o develop methods and means of p a r t i c i p a t i o n t h a t w i l l encourage t h e i r members t o a t t e n d . F o r some co-ops t h i s might mean o r g a n i z i n g b a b y s i t t i n g w h i l e f o r o t h e r s combining s o c i a l a c t i v i t i e s l i k e p o t - l u c k d i n n e r s w i t h b u s i n e s s events might be needed. S e v e r a l people  expressed  concern  a l t e r e d o f t e n enough t o r e f l e c t  t h a t the monthly payments were not  changes i n f a m i l y income.  I t i s suggested t h a t income be reviewed every two y e a r s and monthly payments be a l t e r e d t o account f o r l a r g e changes i n f a m i l y income.  5.3  THE MAJOR ISSUES - PARTICIPATION AND EDUCATION These recommendations have been concerned  specific interest  with issues that are of  t o the c o - o p e r a t i v e s t h a t were surveyed.  From these  c o n c l u s i o n s two g e n e r a l i s s u e s emerge t h a t r e l a t e t o the c o - o p e r a t i v e housing movement i n more g e n e r a l terms.  These a r e :  user, p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n  61.  the p l a n n i n g stages of the p r o j e c t  and user e d u c a t i o n .  Both  these  i s s u e s w i l l be d i s c u s s e d i n t u r n . The  c i t i z e n participation l i t e r a t u r e referred  suggested control  t h a t user involvement  that i s experienced  i s important  by a c t i v e  t o i n Chapter Two  because o f the sense o f  individuals.  However attempts by  Andrews and B r e s l a u e r to e s t a b l i s h an e m p i r i c a l l i n k between user i n v o l v e ment and user s a t i s f a c t i o n were u n s u c c e s s f u l . The  survey  completed by t h i s author  yielded  similar results i n cor-  r e l a t i o n s between p a r t i c i p a t i o n d u r i n g the p l a n n i n g s t a g e s and measures o f satisfaction.  However when the q u e s t i o n o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n and i t s  importance was approached i n another discovered.  manner, i n t e r e s t i n g r e s u l t s were  When asked d i r e c t l y how they would be a f f e c t e d  i f they d i d  noc have the o p p o r t u n i t y t o p a r t i c i p a t e d u r i n g the p l a n n i n g s t a g e s , p e r c e n t o f those people  still  i n the p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s  fifty  s a i d they would be  less s a t i s f i e d . The  opportunity  to p a r t i c i p a t e i n the d e s i g n i n g and p l a n n i n g o f an  urban home f o r moderate income people  i s unique to c o - o p e r a t i v e  U n l e s s one i s i n the f i n a n c i a l p o s i t i o n building  t o a f f o r d h i r i n g an a r c h i t e c t and  one's own home, most urban d w e l l e r s have l i t t l e  adapt one's housing  housing.  needs t o s u i t the e x i s t i n g s t o c k .  view which encourages a wide range o f housing  choice but to  From the p o i n t o f  c h o i c e s , i t would t h e r e f o r e  seem t h a t such an o p p o r t u n i t y t o p a r t i c i p a t e s h o u l d be m a i n t a i n e d . T h i s i s s u e i s o f c o n s i d e r a b l e importance when i t i s c o n s i d e r e d the p r o v i n c i a l housing 1975  to c o - o r d i n a t e  exclude review  c o r p o r a t i o n , D u n h i l l , had been encouraging  turn-key  that  UHF d u r i n g  c o - o p e r a t i v e s which would by d e f i n i t i o n  t h i s user involvement.  However a B.C. p r o v i n c i a l government  o f the a c t i v i t i e s o f UHF a d v i s e d a g a i n s t c o n t i n u i n g such  action  (Review Committee of UHF,  1975).  At the time of the s u r v e y , UHF  d i d mention the need to p a r t i c i p a t e  i n the i n f o r m a t i o n b r o c h u r e s i t p u b l i s h e d as w e l l as a t o r g a n i z a t i o n a l meetings of new  co-operatives.  F o r example  i n one pamphlet  i s asked, "What do I have to do to j o i n a housing co-op?" i s quoted below.  the q u e s t i o n The response  63.  Go-operators should be prepared to agree to t h r e e b a s i c p r i n c i p l e s : t h a t they own t h e i r own homes c o l l e c t i v e l y as members of the c o - o p e r a t i v e r a t h e r than i n d i v i d u a l s ; secondly,- t h a t they a c t i v e l y p a r t i c i p a t e i n the d e s i g n , development and c o n t i n u i n g management of t h e i r c o - o p e r a t i v e ; t h i r d l y , t h a t they accept a par v a l u e redemption of t h e i r share p u r c h a s e - ( a d j u s t e d , -of'course, to. t h e , c o s t of l i v i n g ) , i n r e t u r n to q u a l i t y housing at r e a s o n a b l e c o s t .  However no means has been a v a i l a b l e t o ensure w i t h or understand as i s suggested  the commitment.  the co-op members agree  By e n l a r g i n g the e d u c a t i o n programme  below, a commitment to p a r t i c i p a t i o n s h o u l d be  from the co-op member.  T h i s l e a d s to the second  obtained  i s s u e , e d u c a t i o n , which  has r e l e v a n c e f o r both the Canadian and American c o - o p e r a t i v e housing movement. Although  the m a j o r i t y of the surveyed  co-op members  expressed  s a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h t h e i r l i v i n g environment, the need f o r a e d u c a t i o n program became apparent. an u n d e r s t a n d i n g  of the  E d u c a t i o n i n t h i s context r e f e r s t o  'complex a s p e c t s of l i v i n g  f i n a n c i a l o b l i g a t i o n s which must be assumed, and be d e r i v e d i f co-op members p a r t i c i p a t e f u l l y co-operative'  ( S t a t e of New  i n a c o - o p e r a t i v e , the  the b e n e f i t s which  i n the communal l i f e  can of the  York, 1963).  In every p r o j e c t surveyed  some members expressed  the b a s i c c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of c o - o p e r a t i v e h o u s i n g . b e l i e v i n g they would e v e n t u a l l y s e l l the p r e v i o u s c h a p t e r .  pre-occupancy  i g n o r a n c e of some of  Examples of  people  t h e i r u n i t at a p r o f i t were c i t e d i n  In other cases the co-op member asked  the r e s e a r c h e r  to e x p l a i n b a s i c s such as d i f f e r e n t i a l s i n monthly payments a c c o r d i n g to income.  F I G U R E . XZ. \  hootOTAVM  uiew  In a d d i t i o n to a l a c k of knowledge o f the f i n a n c i a l c o - o p e r a t i v e s , complaints  aspects of  were o f t e n v o i c e d about t h e p h y s i c a l d e f e c t s <  a p r o j e c t , the n o i s e made by o t h e r people's c h i l d r e n and p e t s , o r poor management p r a c t i c e s blamed on an i n e f f i c i e n t had  been e l e c t e d by the c o - o p e r a t o r s ) .  justifiable  i n some c a s e s ,  by c o - o p e r a t o r s  Board o f D i r e c t o r s (which  Although these  complaints  were  they o f t e n i n d i c a t e d the d i f f i c u l t i e s f a c e d  who had not y e t made the adjustment from b e i n g a tenant  65.  w i t h a l a n d l o r d to a member of a c o - o p e r a t i v e group who  share ownership  1  responsibilities. Very r a r e l y d i d co-op members see t h a t they were p a r t of a l a r g e r movement of c o - o p e r a t i v e a c t i v i t y which embraced the p r i n c i p l e s enunc i a t e d i n the f i r s t  chapter.  Andrews and B r e s l a u e r ' s study i n O n t a r i o  a l s o i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h i s e d u c a t i o n p r o c e s s was Toronto-based  o r g a n i z a t i o n s i m i l a r to UHF  " I don't t h i n k we process  ... and  lacking.  was  r e p o r t e d as s a y i n g ,  d i d a v e r y good j o b of the whole community development  I spent most of my  time w o r r y i n g  about  w i t h the c o n t r a c t o r and making sure the b u i l d i n g was S u l l i v a n suggests  A member of a  relationships  going a l o n g "  t h a t the s o c i a l e f f e c t s of any housing  (p.  714).  programme a r e  l a r g e l y dependent on e d u c a t i n g the r e s i d e n t s to the g e n e r a l norms and v a l u e s o f the r e s i d e n t i a l development.  He a s s e r t s f u r t h e r t h a t the  "success or f a i l u r e of tenant e d u c a t i o n may  affect  the o v e r a l l  social  c l i m a t e of a c o - o p e r a t i v e - by a f f e c t i n g the extent t h a t r e s i d e n t s are both a b l e and w i l l i n g to understand co-operative housing"  and accept the p r i n c i p l e s of  (p. 20).  In the recommendations a r t i c u l a t e d e a r l i e r  i n t h i s chapter,  e n l a r g e d and more e f f e c t i v e e d u c a t i o n programme i s suggested. proposals concerning Mainland  an Several  the form t h i s programme should take w i t h i n the Lower  c o n t e x t are a l s o g i v e n .  In support  of t h i s s u g g e s t i o n , a .  d e s c r i p t i o n i s g i v e n here of the l a r g e and r e p o r t e d l y s u c c e s s f u l educat i o n programme i n New  York S t a t e .  The programme i s p r o v i d e d by the New and Community Renewal to a l l sponsors Although  i t was  York S t a t e D i v i s i o n of Housing  of c o - o p e r a t i v e housing  developments.  o r g a n i z e d to f a c i l i t a t e p a r t i c i p a t i o n of members i n  management, the programme c o u l d be extended u s i n g a s i m i l a r framework i n  U H F - a f f i l i a t e d c o - o p e r a t i v e s where u s e r p a r t i c i p a t i o n b e g i n s d u r i n g the p l a n n i n g s t a g e s .  U s u a l l y a c o n s u l t a n t i s a s s i g n e d to one p r o j e c t  b e g i n s work wittu.the f u t u r e r e s i d e n t s a p p r o x i m a t e l y a year b e f o r e ancy.  B e f o r e a membership meeting  and  occup-  i s c a l l e d , q u e s t i o n n a i r e s are sent to  members o u t l i n i n g the committees t h a t w i l l be formed and a s k i n g them to i n d i c a t e i f they would l i k e to j o i n one or more. ling  The p o s s i b i l i t y o f  i n a v o l u n t e e r l e a d e r s h i p course i s also presented.  meeting  committees are formed and  At the g e n e r a l  these groups c o n t i n u e to r e p o r t back to  the g e n e r a l membership u n t i l occupancy o c c u r s .  D u r i n g the year meetings  a r e h e l d where members l e a r n of the r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s , both s o c i a l f i n a n c i a l , they a r e u n d e r t a k i n g . s e r i e s of 'Meet your Neighbours' arranged  enrol-  and  About s i x weeks p r i o r t o moving i n , a meetings a r e h e l d .  These are u s u a l l y  i n s m a l l groups and t h e r e i s i n f o r m a l d i s c u s s i o n on what the  c o - o p e r a t o r s a n t i c i p a t e , what they a r e apprehensive about and what they expect to c o n t r i b u t e to the c o - o p e r a t i v e . S e v e r a l s i x to eight-week v o l u n t e e r l e a d e r s h i p c o u r s e s are a l s o h e l d which cover a l l a s p e c t s o f h o u s i n g c o - o p e r a t i v e s ( l e g a l , f i n a n c i a l managerial).  People l e a r n how  to conduct meetings,  and e v a l u a t e the work o f i n d i v i d u a l s and groups.  and  o r g a n i z e committees,  A survey of the  c o - o p e r a t i v e housing movement and d i s c u s s i o n of the r e l a t i o n s h i p s between housing c o - o p e r a t i v e s and The New  the s u r r o u n d i n g community a r e i n c l u d e d .  York S t a t e D i v i s i o n o f Housing  q u i t e s a t i s f i e d w i t h the achievements  and Community Renewal i s  of t h i s programme.  United  Housing  Foundation and o t h e r o r g a n i z i n g groups c o u l d draw from t h i s programme to c r e a t e an e f f e c t i v e e d u c a t i o n s e r v i c e .  In t h i s c o n t e x t , the p r o c e s s o f  i n v o l v i n g the members would b e g i n when the c o - o p e r a t i v e i s i n i t i a l l y created.  67.  T h i s chapter has served to a r t i c u l a t e recommendations which stemmed from the f i n d i n g s o f the survey and to expand upon some o f the i d e a s presented firstly,  i n the recommendations.  The major i s s u e s which emerged were,  the need f o r c o n t i n u i n g the o p p o r t u n i t y f o r co-op members to  p a r t i c i p a t e i n the p l a n n i n g and d e s i g n i n g of t h e i r p r o j e c t s and, the need f o r an e n l a r g e d and improved e d u c a t i o n program.  secondly,  Where these  i s s u e s had been mentioned i n o t h e r r e s e a r c h p r o j e c t s , the context and f i n d i n g s were d i s c u s s e d .  A l a r g e e d u c a t i o n program f o r c o - o p e r a t o r s i n  New York S t a t e was d e s c r i b e d to support  t h i s study's recommendations.  Before  summarizing the substance and conclusions of t h i s study, the reactions of the study XS*.*S».6?S2G*?:r.-- CV» C^:«NJ»,C: S <?--» Q> t  FIGURE XVI:  < V i  !&Q.tv3 CO,*>»,<VO,CSa  CO-OPERATIVE PLANNING  ^? <N» <V3  tfS*  <N»C>» ;  68.  p a r t i c i p a n t s to these recommendations w i l l be p r e s e n t e d and f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h i n r e l a t e d t o p i c s w i l l be  5.4  STUDY PARTICIPANTS' REACTIONS TO  suggested.  RECOMMENDATIONS  A summary of the f i n d i n g s of t h i s study and  the recommendations t h a t  were drawn from i t were sent to a l l the people surveyed. s o l i c i t e d by a s k i n g c o - o p e r a t o r s whether they agreed recommendations. t h i s survey was  R e a c t i o n s were  or disagreed with  M a i l surveys g e n e r a l l y do not e l i c i t no e x c e p t i o n .  issues for  a wide response  the and  M e t h o d o l o g i c a l problems abound i n terms of  the u n r e p r e s e n t a t i v e n e s s of the people who  do respond.  Although only  6%  of the p a r t i c i p a n t s m a i l e d t h e i r r e a c t i o n s back, the e f f o r t of p r o v i d i n g the summary and recommendations was  c o n s i d e r e d worthwhile  because a l l  p a r t i c i p a n t s were informed of how  the m a j o r i t y of o t h e r surveyed  co-op  members viewed the major i s s u e s .  R e a l i z i n g t h a t the r e a c t i o n s which were  r e c e i v e d a r e not i n d i c a t i v e of any g e n e r a l l y h e l d a t t i t u d e s , i t i s i n t e r e s t i n g to note t h a t on a l l but two  recommendations the p a r t i c i p a n t s  i n d i c a t e d unanimous agreement w i t h the p r o p o s a l s .  5.5  RECOMMENDATIONS FOR  FURTHER RESEARCH  A major t h r u s t of t h i s paper has been to a s s e s s the importance participation.  Andrews and B r e s l a u e r a l s o concerned  t h i s v a r i a b l e c o r r e l a t e d with user s a t i s f a c t i o n : Andrews and B r e s l a u e r (1975) and  t h i s study f a i l e d  r e l a t i o n s h i p s between the two v a r i a b l e s .  the low-percentage  with  Both the r e s e a r c h o f to f i n d  significant  that intervening v a r i a b l e s  of t o t a l v a r i a n c e e x p l a i n e d between the  of p a r t i c i p a t i o n and user s a t i s f a c t i o n .  :how  However, s e v e r a l problems w i t h  the measures e x i s t . Andrews and B r e s l a u e r suggest caused  themselves  o f user  They conclude  t h a t the  factors  relationship  between the two variables which are examined i s at best only a partial summary of the  69.  two  concepts.  I t i s suggested  i s important  t h a t these two  v a r i a b l e s , whose r e l a t i o n s h i p  to p o l i c y d e c i s i o n s , be examined much more c l o s e l y .  A second r e l a t e d i s s u e i s the r e l a t i o n s h i p between pre-occupancy involvement  and post-occupancy involvement.  investigate  in B.C.  housing  projects.  T h i s has been i m p o s s i b l e to  i n the past because of the y o u t h f u l n e s s of most  co-operative  However as the p r o j e c t s mature and w i t h the w e a l t h  information provided  of  i n s t u d i e s as Andrews and B r e s l a u e r , such a t a s k  becomes both p o s s i b l e and  interesting.  A t h i r d a r e a o f p o s s i b l e i n v e s t i g a t i o n i s the s o c i a l b e n e f i t s of co-operative housing.  Dennis and F i s h  (1972) a s s e r t t h a t  1.  c o - o p e r a t i v e s l e a d to s t a b l e , a t t r a c t i v e  2.  l e s s vandalism  and  d e l i n q u e n c i e s occur  communities  i n co-operatives.  E m p i r i c a l data have y e t to.be produced which support In f a c t i t was survey  suggested  such  to t h i s r e s e a r c h e r at s e v e r a l times d u r i n g  t h a t the r e v e r s e was  t r u e and  in fact,  p e r s o n a l c o n f l i c t s between  the  f a m i l i a r i t y as i s encouraged  w i t h i n c o - o p e r a t i v e s c o u l d l e a d to h i g h d i v o r c e r a t e s , v a n d a l i s m  5.6  statements.  and  neighbours.  CONCLUSIONS While t h i s t h e s i s has  c o - o p e r a t i v e housing, theory and  f o c u s s e d on i n v e s t i g a t i n g user s a t i s f a c t i o n of  the r e s u l t s can be r e l a t e d to community p l a n n i n g  practice.  The housing  c o - o p e r a t i v e c o u l d be  seen as a microcosm of the s o c i e t y  d e s c r i b e d by Friedmann where mechanisms f o r 'feedback' and been c r e a t e d .  During  the p l a n n i n g s t a g e s , b u r e a u c r a t s ,  members meet to 'guide' can o c c u r .  'guidance' have  planners  the development o f the p r o j e c t s and  and  co-op  'mutual l e a r n i n g '  S i m i l a r l y when the p r o j e c t i s complete, the management i s  70.  c a r r i e d out by e l e c t e d r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s who large.  r e f e r back to the membership at  The problems which a r i s e from the management of a c o - o p e r a t i v e  c r e a t e a s i t u a t i o n where l e a r n i n g i s 'The  ongoing.  demand f o r i n c r e a s e d c o n t r o l over l i v i n g environments, as o u t l i n e d  by Turner  can p o t e n t i a l l y be f u l f i l l e d by c o - o p e r a t i v e t e n u r e .  the b e n e f i t s are d i f f i c u l t  to measure i n q u a n t i f i a b l e o r d o l l a r  Although terms,  c o l l e c t i v e d i r e c t a c t i o n has p r o v i d e d some co-op members w i t h a psychol o g i c a l sense of w e l l - b e i n g . and  The  recent i n t e r e s t  the d e s i r e f o r f l e x i b l e housing  in self-help  housing  i n terms o f i n t e r i o r d e s i g n a r e o t h e r  examples of s o c i e t y ' s d e s i r e to o b t a i n t h i s k i n d of  control.  From the i n v e s t i g a t i o n s c a r r i e d out f o r t h i s study, h i g h l e v e l s of s a t i s f a c t i o n are e x p e r i e n c e d by people who tenure where b o t h Turner's  enjoy a c o - o p e r a t i v e type of  ' c o n t r o l ' and Friedmann's 'guidance'  and  'mutual l e a r n i n g ' a r e p o s s i b l e .  However, the o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r i n v o l v e -  ment w i t h i n the c o - o p e r a t i v e and  the context of each c o - o p e r a t i v e w i t h i n  the l a r g e r c o - o p e r a t i v e movement s h o u l d be s t r e s s e d through member education.  71.  LITERATURE CITED  A l t e r n a t e Community Group. B.C., 1975.  B.C. A l t e r n a t i v e .  1520 W. 6th Ave., Vancouver,  Andrews, H.F. and H.L. B r e s l a u e r . C o o p e r a t i v e Housing: A Case Study.of D e c i s i o n Making i n D e s i g n and User S a t i s f a c t i o n . Ottawa: Ministry o f S t a t e o f Urban A f f a i r s , 1975. Constantinu, Marianthi. Housing C o o p e r a t i v e s i n B.C. U n p u b l i s h e d Master's T h e s i s . Vancouver, B.C.: U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia, 1970. C o - o p e r a t i v e League o f the U.S.A. Chicago, 1962. C o - o p e r a t i v e Union o f Canada.  P l u s V a l u e s i n C o - o p e r a t i v e Housing.  See Midmore, J . F .  C u l l , E. ..The R i s e and F a l l o f U.H.F.: A Case Study o f a C o - o p e r a t i v e Housing Resource Agency. Unpublished Master's T h e s i s , Vancouver, B.C., U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1976. C u r t i s Report.  See Government o f Canada.  Dennis, M i c h a e l and Susan F i s h . Programs i n Search o f a P o l i c y , Low Income Housing i n Canada. T o r o n t o : Hakkert, 1972. Friedmann, John. "Notes on S o c i e t a l A c t i o n , " J o u r n a l o f the American I n s t i t u t e o f P l a n n e r s , XXXV (Sept. 1969): 311-318. . R e t r a c k i n g America: A Theory o f T r a n s a c t i v e P l a n n i n g . Garden C i t y , N.Y.: Anchor P r e s s , 1973. Government o f B r i t i s h Columbia. F i r s t Annual Report, Department o f Housing. V i c t o r i a , B.C.: Queen's P r i n t e r , 1975. Government o f Canada. A d v i s o r y Committee on R e c o n s t r u c t i o n (Report on Housing and Community P l a n n i n g ) . Ottawa: Queen's P r i n t e r , 1944. . Report o f the F e d e r a l Task F o r c e on Housing and Urban Development. Ottawa: Queen's P r i n t e r , 1969. Government o f O n t a r i o . C i t i z e n Involvement, Committee on Government Productivity. T o r o n t o : Queen's P r i n t e r , 1972. Gutman, R. and B..Westergaard. " B u i l d i n g evaluation, user s a t i s f a c t i o n and d e s i g n , " B u i l t environment r e s e a r c h Paper No. 19. P r i n c e t o n U n i v e r s i t y - Rutgers U n i v e r s i t y , no d a t e . Haire, Christopher. In Want o f P o l i c y : A Survey o f the Needs o f N o n - P r o f i t Housing Companies and C o - o p e r a t i v e Housing S o c i e t i e s . Ottawa: Canadian C o u n c i l on S o c i a l Development, 1975.  72.  Hamilton, S.W., I . D a v i s and J . Lowden. M e t r o p o l i t a n Vancouver. Vancouver, G r e a t e r Vancouver, 1971.  Condominium Development i n B.C.: R e a l E s t a t e Board o f  H e l l y e r , Paul. See Government o f Canada, Report o f the F e d e r a l F o r c e on Housing and Urban Development.  Task  I n t e r d e p a r t m e n t a l Study Team on Housing and Rents. C o n t r o l i n B r i t i s h Columbia. V i c t o r i a , B.C.,  Rent  Housing and 1975.  McAfee, R.A. I n t e r a c t i v e E v a l u a t i o n : A U s e r - O r i e n t e d P r o c e s s to A s s i s t Housing Program R e f o r m u l a t i o n . Unpublished D o c t o r a l D i s s e r t a t i o n . Vancouver, B.C.: U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1975. Midmore, J.F. Report on C o - o p e r a t i v e Housing. Union o f Canada, 1962. N i e , Norman H. New York:  Ottawa:  Co-operative  S t a t i s t i c a l Programmes f o r the S o c i a l S c i e n c e s . M c G r a w - H i l l , 1970.  R e a l E s t a t e Board o f G r e a t e r Vancouver. The Land Development P r o c e s s As I t A f f e c t s the Supply o f New Housing W i t h i n the G r e a t e r Vancouver Regional D i s t r i c t . Vancouver, B.C., May 1974. S t a t e o f New York, D i v i s i o n of Housing and Community Renewal. for Co-operative L i v i n g . New York, May 1963.  Education  S u l l i v a n , Donald. C o o p e r a t i v e Housing and Community Development. New York: P r a e g e r , 1969. T a t e , J.V. Towards an Understanding of C o - o p e r a t i v e Housing. •• U n p u b l i s h e d Master's T h e s i s . Kingston, Ontario: Queen's U n i v e r s i t y , 1973. T a y l o r , Andy, C a t h i e Macleod ( t e x t ) , L o u i s e Roy ( g r a p h i c s ) . Co-op Housing. The N a t i o n a l F i l m Board o f Canada: Coach House P r e s s , May 1975. T u r n e r , John F.C. "Housing As A Verb," Freedom to B u i l d , T u r n e r , J.F.C. and Robert F i c h t e r ( e d s . ) . New York: The M a c M i l l a n Company, 1972. U n i t e d Housing F o u n d a t i o n . Notes on C o - o p e r a t i v e Housing, 3rd E d i t i o n . Vancouver, B.C., A p r i l 1974. 3  C o - o p e r a t i v e Housing.  I n f o r m a t i o n Pamphlet No. 2, What i s Vancouver, B.C., no d a t e .  Vrooman, P.C. "The Power Dilemma i n C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n , " W e l f a r e , May/June 1972.  Canadian  73.  APPENDIX 6..1  QUESTIONS ASKED OF MEMBERS OF COMPLETED PROJECTS  1.  Type of p r e v i o u s d w e l l i n g  2.  Tenure of p r e v i o u s d w e l l i n g  3.  How  4.  Upon moving i n , what was  5.  Length of p r e s e n t r e s i d e n c e i n d w e l l i n g ?  6.  At p r e s e n t , what i s your a n t i c i p a t e d l e n g t h of  tenure?  7.  What were the f e a t u r e s of c o - o p e r a t i v e h o u s i n g  t h a t a t t r a c t e d you?  8.  Have you suggested  9.  Does knowing some of your neighbours b e f o r e you move i n make any d i f f e r e n c e to the c o n t i n u i n g management o f the co-op?  d i d you  i n i t i a l l y hear of c o - o p e r a t i v e housing? your a n t i c i p a t e d l e n g t h of  c o - o p e r a t i v e housing  tenure?  In p r o j e c t ?  to f r i e n d s ?  To  relatives?  10.  Do people i n t h i s p r o j e c t r e l a t e d i f f e r e n t l y i n an a d j a c e n t neighbourhood?  11.  Do you approve of the mixture co-operative?  12.  Are you f a m i l i a r w i t h the i n t e r n a l subsidy system and approve o f i t ?  13.  What i s your t o t a l monthly payment?  14.  How much, i f any, have you spent on maintenance, r e p a i r s , home improvements i n the p a s t year?  15.  Present  16.  Occupation  17.  Do you have enough o p p o r t u n i t y to take p a r t i n d e c i s i o n s you f e e l are important? I f no, which d e c i s i o n s would you l i k e more o p p o r t u n i t y to p a r t i c i p a t e i n and how c o u l d t h i s happen?  18.  Do you ever f e e l p r e s s u r e d i n t o p a r t i c i p a t i n g when you would p r e f e r not to? I f yes, i n what ways have you f e l t t h i s p r e s s u r e and how c o u l d i t be stopped?  19\  Are you p r e s e n t l y working on a committee, o r on the Board of D i r e c t o r s ? I f yes, which committee, Board of D i r e c t o r s ? I f not, on the Co-op Board o f D i r e c t o r s can you d e s c r i b e - whom i t c o n s i s t s o f - how the members are s e l e c t e d - what i t does  of people  and  to each o t h e r than  those  f a m i l y s t r u c t u r e s i n the  i f so do  you  f a m i l y income? o f head(s) o f household?  74. Do you have any problems contacting the Board of Directors? Do you think they r e f l e c t your views? Do you see yourself some day on the Board of Directors? 20.  In the l a s t year how  often did you attend general meetings?  21.  Did you attend the l a s t meeting or election?  22.  Which of the a c t i v i t i e s were you involved with during the planning stages?  23.  What functions does UHF perform? Do you have an opinion as to well i t performs these functions?  24.  Have you been involved i n other types of co-operative a c t i v i t y ?  25.  Would you be interested i n j o i n i n g a food or other type of If yes, how should these be started?  26.  Would you be interested i n - attending pot luck suppers - phoning people to t e l l them about co-op meetings or events - typing notes for meetings - working on painting and tree planting - contributing or attending bake sales, rummage sales, car washes to c o l l e c t money for common equipment - showing other people how to do a s k i l l - taking children on Saturday outings  27.  Imagine I was a friend who had never heard of co-operative housing and wanted an explanation. How would you describe i t ?  28.  Taking everything into consideration, how a place to l i v e ?  29.  I f there had not been the meeting where co-op members had the opportunity to p a r t i c i p a t e i n planning and design would you s t i l l rate your s a t i s f a c t i o n the same?  30.  If the management was not done by co-op members, would you s t i l l rate your s a t i s f a c t i o n the same?  31.  If you could own the same type of unit you have now, that to co-operative ownership?  32.  I f you could own a house, would you prefer that to the unit you own co-operatively?  how Type?  co-operative?  s a t i s f i e d with this co-op as  would you prefer now  APPENDIX 6.2  QUESTIONS ASKED OF MEMBERS WHOSE PROJECTS WERE IN THE PLANNING STAGES  1.  How d i d you f i r s t hear o f c o - o p e r a t i v e housing?  2.  What type o f d w e l l i n g w i l l you be moving i n t o ?  3.  How l o n g do you p l a n on s t a y i n g ?  4.  What were the f e a t u r e s o f c o - o p e r a t i v e housing t h a t a t t r a c t e d you?  5.  Have you suggested c o - o p e r a t i v e h o u s i n g t o f r i e n d s ?  6.  Does knowing some o f your neighbours b e f o r e you move i n make any d i f f e r e n c e t o the c o n t i n u i n g management o f the co-op?  7.  Do you t h i n k p e o p l e i n t h i s co-op w i l l r e l a t e d i f f e r e n t l y t o each o t h e r than those i n a d j a c e n t neighbourhoods.  8.  Do you approve o f the m i x t u r e o f people and f a m i l y s t r u c t u r e s i n t h e co-operative?  9.  Are you f a m i l i a r w i t h the i n t e r n a l s u b s i d y system and i f so do you approve o f i t ?  To r e l a t i v e s ?  10.  What w i l l your t o t a l monthly payment be?  11.  Present family  12.  O c c u p a t i o n o f head(s) o f household?  13.  Do you have enough o p p o r t u n i t y t o take p a r t i n d e c i s i o n s you f e e l a r e important? I f no, which d e c i s i o n s would you l i k e more o p p o r t u n i t y t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n and how c o u l d t h i s happen?  14.  Do you ever f e e l p r e s s u r e d i n t o p a r t i c i p a t i n g when you would p r e f e r not t o ? I f y e s , i n what ways have you f e l t t h i s p r e s s u r e and how c o u l d t h i s be stopped?  15.  A r e you p r e s e n t l y working on a committee, o r on t h e Board o f D i r e c t o r s ? I f y e s , which committee, Board o f D i r e c t o r s ? I f n o t on the Co-op Board o f D i r e c t o r s can you d e s c r i b e - whom i t c o n s i s t s o f - how the members a r e s e l e c t e d - what i t does Do you have any problems c o n t a c t i n g t h e Board o f D i r e c t o r s ? Do you t h i n k they r e f l e c t your views? Do you see y o u r s e l f some day on the Board o f D i r e c t o r s ?  16.  I n the l a s t year how o f t e n d i d you a t t e n d g e n e r a l meetings?  17.  D i d you a t t e n d t h e l a s t meeting o r e l e c t i o n ?  income?  76.  18.  Which of the a c t i v i t i e s were you stages?  i n v o l v e d w i t h d u r i n g the  planning  19.  What f u n c t i o n s does UHF perform? Do w e l l i t performs these f u n c t i o n s ?  20.  Have you been i n v o l v e d i n o t h e r types of c o - o p e r a t i v e  21.  Would you be i n t e r e s t e d i n j o i n i n g a food or o t h e r I f yes how should these be s t a r t e d ?  22.  Would you be i n t e r e s t e d i n - a t t e n d i n g pot l u c k suppers - phoning people to t e l l them about co-op meetings o r events - t y p i n g notes f o r meetings - working on p a i n t i n g and t r e e p l a n t i n g - c o n t r i b u t i n g o r a t t e n d i n g bake s a l e s , rummage s a l e s , c a r washes to c o l l e c t money f o r common equipment - showing o t h e r p e o p l e how to do a s k i l l - t a k i n g c h i l d r e n on Saturday o u t i n g s  23.  Imagine I was a f r i e n d who had never heard of c o - o p e r a t i v e and wanted an e x p l a n a t i o n . How would you d e s c r i b e i t ?  24.  Taking e v e r y t h i n g i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n , how as a p l a c e to l i v e ?  25.  I f t h e r e had not been the meetings where co-op members had the opport u n i t y to p a r t i c i p a t e i n p l a n n i n g and d e s i g n would you s t i l l r a t e your s a t i s f a c t i o n the same?  26.  I f the management was not done by co-op members, would you your s a t i s f a c t i o n the same?  still  27.  I f you c o u l d own the same type of u n i t you have now, p r e f e r t h a t to c o - o p e r a t i v e ownership?  you  28.  I f you c o u l d own a house, would you p r e f e r t h a t to the u n i t you own c o - o p e r a t i v e l y ?  you have an o p i n i o n as to  how  activity?  type of  co-operative?  housing  s a t i s f i e d with t h i s  would  Type?  co-op  rate  now  APPENDIX 6.3  How  HIGHLIGHTS OF USER-SATISFACTION STUDY  s a t i s f i e d are co-op members w i t h t h e i r  housing?  The m a j o r i t y o f co-op members are v e r y s a t i s f i e d w i t h t h e i r environment.  living  When asked to take a l l a s p e c t s of t h e i r h o u s i n g i n t o c o n s i d e r -  a t i o n , almost t h r e e - q u a r t e r s o f those i n t e r v i e w e d s a i d they were q u i t e satisfied. The enthusiasm which some p e o p l e f e l t exciting.  quite  One person d e s c r i b e d i t as "the c l o s e s t t h i n g to heaven t h a t I  have ever e x p e r i e n c e d " . was  f o r t h e i r h o u s i n g was  Other people mentioned  "a g r e a t p l a c e where people are working  t h a t to them co-op housing  t o g e t h e r to get t h i n g s done".  However a t e n t h o f those surveyed s t a t e d t h a t they were v e r y d i s s a t i s f i e d w i t h the housing. "As  f a r as I'm  The  concerned,  f o l l o w i n g comments show t h i s . i t ' s the same as l i v i n g i n a ... p r i s o n . "  " I f you a r e i n here you f e e l l i k e , never get out!"  'I've h i t the bottom and  I'll  "I'm not happy here because no matter how l o n g you a r e l i v i n g you n e v e r get a n y t h i n g more than what you pay f o r i t . " Why  here  do some people f e e l s a t i s f i e d and o t h e r s don't? The people who  expressed the s t r o n g e s t sense o f s a t i s f a c t i o n a l s o  t h a t they were i n v o l v e d w i t h the o t h e r people i n t h e i r community. u s u a l l y meant g o i n g to g e n e r a l meetings, s o c i a l time w i t h t h e i r Those people who  This  s e r v i n g on committees o r spending  neighbours. were v e r y s a t i s f i e d a l s o f e l t  t h a t most o f the f e a t u r e s  of c o - o p e r a t i v e housing were p o s i t i v e , f o r example h a v i n g a v a r i e t y o f f a m i l y s i z e s and income l e v e l s , and h a v i n g d i f f e r e n t monthly payments a c c o r d i n g to income.  said  78.  How well people understood the f i n a n c i a l side of their housing was also important to their s a t i s f a c t i o n .  Those people who saw that co-op  housing was d i f f e r e n t than outright home ownership on moving out) said that they were very s a t i s f i e d .  (eg., no p r o f i t i s made I t also seemed that the  people who had joined the co-operative but did not r e a l i z e what i t would mean f i n a n c i a l l y , were often most d i s s a t i s f i e d . How important i s involvement with the designing and planning of the housing? For half the people who are now waiting for the units to be b u i l t , the opportunity to have a say i n the design and planning was very important. Those people now l i v i n g i n completed projects and looking back on their experience were less enthusiastic about this involvement.  A t h i r d said that  i f they had not had t h i s opportunity to be involved their s a t i s f a c t i o n with co-op housing would be l e s s . CONCLUSIONS OF USER-SATISFACTION STUDY Projects i n the Planning Stages I.  Agree  Many people whose projects were i n the planning stages were enthusiastic about t h e i r co-operative and eager to become involved.  However people didn't  always know what was happening and how they could become involved. To avoid t h i s s i t u a t i o n the following changes are suggested: 1.  Phone committess  could be established where one  person c a l l s 5 people, each of whom c a l l s 5 more people.  Disagree  79.  Agree 2.  Disagree  A f t e r people v o l u n t e e r f o r a committee, they should meet once,  immediately,  t o make  clear  how and when t h e i r committee w i l l be needed. 3.  A welcoming committee be s e t up t o t a l k w i t h people who j o i n the co-op a f t e r the first  II.  o r g a n i z a t i o n a l meetings.  F o r many people i t i s important t h a t they can become i n v o l v e d i n the p l a n n i n g and d e s i g n i n g o f t h e i r c o - o p e r a t i v e . or  O f t e n people j o i n two  t h r e e co-ops o r become members w i t h o u t b e i n g sure t h a t they want t o  live  i n the p r o j e c t .  These people u s u a l l y drop out l a t e  p l a n n i n g stages and t h e newcomers t h a t f i l l  i n the  the openings have missed  the o p p o r t u n i t y to p a r t i c i p a t e . 1.  I t i s suggested t h a t a f i n a n c i a l commitment be n e c e s s a r y a t an e a r l i e r stage than the p r e s e n t $500 share purchase.  A f t e r the a r c h i t e c t i s  s e l e c t e d a r e f u n d a b l e $200 c o u l d be  collected  from each co-op member. III.  The people who a r e most s a t i s f i e d w i t h c o - o p e r a t i v e housing a r e those who c l e a r l y understand both the s o c i a l and f i n a n c i a l  responsibilities.  To make s u r e t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n i s g i v e n t o co-op members more time and energy 1.  s h o u l d be spent.  Combined w i t h a s o c i a l o r b u s i n e s s event c o u l d be workshops where people break i n t o t a l k about what co-op housing i s . c o u l d be compulsory move i n , j u s t necessary.  s m a l l groups and These workshops  f o r a l l people who p l a n t o  as a f i n a n c i a l commitment i s  80.  Agree 2.  The r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s o f U n i t e d  Housing  Foundation and the co-op Board o f D i r e c t o r s were o f t e n confused people.  i n the minds of many  The p o s s i b l e j o b s each group c o u l d  take on, as w e l l as e x a c t l y how  individual  members can p a r t i c i p a t e should be d e c i d e d upon and made more c l e a r to a l l people i n v o l v e d . P r o j e c t s which a r e Completed I.  Some people were concerned  about  the r e g u l a t i o n s which  s t a t e who w i t h i n the co-op gets p r i o r i t y when a u n i t becomesvacant.  C o n f u s i o n and resentment  has  o c c u r r e d i n the p a s t because these g u i d e l i n e s were e i t h e r not d e c i d e d upon o r not p u b l i c l y a v a i l a b l e . i s suggested  It  t h a t these g u i d e l i n e s be made c l e a r and  publicized. II.  Much h a r d s h i p and resentment  has o c c u r r e d over i s s u e s  such as pets and the use o f barbecues. move i n i t i s suggested  Before  people  t h a t they be f u l l y aware o f  t h e i r r e s p o n s i b i l i t y to abide by the d e c i s i o n s of the majority. III.  The people who were most happy l i v i n g i n t h e i r homes were those who were i n v o l v e d w i t h neighbours  their  and the running o f the c o - o p e r a t i v e .  Boards o f D i r e c t o r s as w e l l as co-op members should t r y to e n t i c e people to meetings and s o c i a l  Disagree  happenings.  A p e r s o n a l approach was  most p e o p l e to be most IV.  suggested by  inviting.  Some p e o p l e expressed concern t h a t the  monthly  payments were not a l t e r e d o f t e n enough to r e f l e c t changes i n f a m i l y income.  I t i s suggested  income be reviewed every two y e a r s and  that  monthly  payments be a l t e r e d to account f o r l a r g e changes in family  Name Co-op  incomes.  82.  APPENDIX 6.4  A.  CORRELATIONS BETWEEN LEVELS OF SATISFACTION AND RESPONDENTS' CHARACTERISTICS  Completed P r o j e c t s (N=56) The  following l i s t  o r d e r s the v a r i a b l e s which show a c o r r e l a t i o n w i t h  s a t i s f a c t i o n i n terms o f importance  a c c o r d i n g to K e n d a l l ' s Rank C o r r e l a t i o n s ,  S i g n i f i c a n c e l e v e l s on a two t a i l e d  t e s t f o r each c o r r e l a t i o n a r e shown.  Level of Significance  V a r i a b l e Name Community s o l i d a r i t y  Correlation Co-efficient  .001  .37  .001  .28  Consider t h a t people i n co-op r e l a t e d i f f e r e n t l y to each o t h e r than people i n a d j a c e n t n e i g h bourhoods  .001  .28  Attended  .001  .30  .001  .33  Approve o f s o c i a l mix  .003  .26  Name s e c u r i t y o f tenure as an a t t r a c t i v e f a c t o r o f co-op  .006  .23  C o n s i d e r involvement i n community a c t i v i t i e s important  .009  .22  Have had p r e v i o u s involvement co-operative a c t i v i t y  .01  .20  Mention s o c i a l b e n e f i t s o f co-ops as a t t r a c t i v e f a c t o r , i . e . sense o f community o r f e e l i n g o f s h a r i n g  .02  .15  Show i n t e r e s t i n j o i n i n g o t h e r co-operative a c t i v i t i e s  .05  .14  Mention c o s t s as an a t t r a c t i v e f a c t o r t o j o i n i n g housing co-op  .05  -.14  Agreement w i t h i n t e r n a l system  last  subsidy  co-op meeting  Show u n d e r s t a n d i n g characteristic  of non-profit  with  83.  B.  P l a n n i n g Stage P r o j e c t s  (N=21)  V a r i a b l e Name Show an u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f c o - o p e r a t i v e ownership v e r s u s fee simple ownership Have no problem i n c o n t a c t i n g Board o f D i r e c t o r s  co-op  Would l i k e to j o i n o t h e r c o - o p e r a t i v e a c t i v i t i e s i f a v a i l a b l e i n housing project  Level of Significance  Correlation Co-efficient  .01  .37  .01  .36  .05  .31  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0093769/manifest

Comment

Related Items