RE: co-housing and real-estate investments | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
From: Loren Davidson (lmdbeauty.batnet.com) | |
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 95 18:27 CST |
At 05:16 PM 2/13/95 CST, John Eaton wrote: >> >> We are drawing up our documents, and are considering a clause which grants >> the community the option to buy any member's lot at a "limited equity value," >> The intent of this clause is to prevent the value of these lots from rising >> so rapidly that they are no longer affordable to moderate-income families. >> (As community living becomes the trendy lifestyle of the future!) >Bad idea. The community is not at risk if the value goes down but stands to >gain if the value goes up. That is not fair. The biggest problem comes from >"The tyranny of the majority". Majority rule is not always fair. In this case >if the property has skyrocketed then 51% of the residents could decide to >force out the other 49% at a fraction of the real value and then turn around >and resell the units at market value and make a killing. > > >Giving the community the right of first refusal is a better idea. Let the >market determine the price. I don't agree. Since we're taking "opinions" and not just "experiences" on this one, let me add my $0.02. I've been reading a lot lately about communities and various development types, and about such things as Community Land Trusts. This sounds a lot like a CLT in intent if not in actual form. The purpose of a CLT is to start taking real estate out of the speculative market. It is this speculative market that has jacked the cost of land up so far in the first place, making cohousing (and all other forms of housing) so highly expensive. John, you're making this sound like if the community (which community? Merely the development itself, or the greater community that might benefit from lower housing costs?) is somehow an adversary of its members in this. This "zero sum" thinking is anathema to what I consider community to be. I believe these folks are to be commended for trying to create their own small corner of sanity in an otherwise speculative marketplace. Taking land out of speculation this way is perhaps the most effective way of doing this, and certainly preferable to any government attempts to regulate land and housing costs. _________________________________________________________ Loren Davidson lmd [at] beauty.batnet.com http://www.batnet.com/beauty This document made from 100% recycled electrons.
- Re: co-housing and real-estate investments, (continued)
- Re: co-housing and real-estate investments Jim Snyder-Grant, February 10 1995
- RE: co-housing and real-estate investments Rob Sandelin, February 13 1995
- RE: co-housing and real-estate investments Dan Everett, February 13 1995
- RE: co-housing and real-estate investments John Eaton, February 13 1995
- RE: co-housing and real-estate investments Loren Davidson, February 13 1995
- RE: co-housing and real-estate investments Rob Sandelin, February 14 1995
- RE: co-housing and real-estate investments Ryan O'Dowd, February 14 1995
- RE: co-housing and real-estate investments Loren Davidson, February 15 1995
- Re: co-housing and real-estate investments RAYGASSER, February 23 1995
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.