|To subdivide or not to subdivide||<– Date –> <– Thread –>|
|From: Rebbry (Rebbryaol.com)|
|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 individuals. 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.