To subdivide or not to subdivide
From: Rebbry (
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 16:32:58 -0600
Several members of Ozark CoHousing (Fayetteville, Arkansas) monitor the
cohousing-l discussion group. I find the number of postings just about perfect
and the topics, invariably germane.  My filing cabinet is spilling over with
messages I've stockpiled for future reference. I occasionally dialog with

We have a quasi option on a tract of land in the City of Fayetteville's
planning area.  This means that, if we subdivide, both the City and County
review the plat.  All along we have considered the option of holding land in
common, instead of subdividing it, as a way of facilitating a sense of
community in the land tenure dimension. Now it seems that holding land in
common may generate a loop hole through which we can bypass planning review.

We know that we can accomplish this as a cooperative where land and buildings
are owned by the cooperative and members purchase a share that permits them to
occupy a certain unit for a certain price.  Some people think that
cooperatives are difficult to finance.  

Another option is to build units, attached and/or detached, and to sell them
without lots but with an undivided interest in land and common facilities.  We
think this would be done under condominium laws but aren't sure about that or
if there are other methods for deeding structures alone.  We are leery of
anything with the scent of condos for marketing reasons.

Your advice would be appreciated.

Rebecca Bryant,
Ozark CoHousing 

Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.