Re: Creating a New Category of Renter | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
From: R Philip Dowds (rpdowdscomcast.net) | |
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2011 08:26:10 -0800 (PST) |
Public subsidy changes everything, always. But market housing formation, occupancy and maintenance have the same financial components of input ? land, construction, energy, debt service, profit, etc ? irrespective of any associated social or legal vehicle such as cohousing, condo, co-op, rental, land trust, etc. Given a specific site and dwelling units of a certain size and quality, housing units will cost about the same no matter which vehicle delivers them. Having just introduced this generality, I¹ll also offer some qualifications: 1. From the standpoint of one¹s fiscal lifetime, renting is ALWAYS more expensive than owning. Yes, rents may look ³cheaper² in the near term, especially to those who do not qualify for a mortgage, but over time, renting is very expensive because one develops no equity, and instead must contribute to someone else¹s profit. 2. The primary means for cohousing to ³save² money, relative to the other models, is that the founding residents are usually (but not always) their own developers. By investing years of time, and precious personal savings, to create a cohousing community, the founders exclude from the process the for-profit developer who is looking for a 25% ROI. And many of us think this is a trade-off valuable not just in economic terms, but also in social terms. So we do it ? even when we understand (as does the for-profit developer) that there is risk, and we may lose some savings. My points would therefore be: 1. There is absolutely no reason to imagine that cohousing should be ³cheap². 2. There is very little reason to believe that we are helping lower-income households by including rental units in our communities. Unless, of course, we are committed to internal cross-subsidies whereby we intentionally pay MORE for our condos, so that others can pay LESS for their rents. Philip Dowds Cornerstone Cohousing Cambridge, MA On 2/10/11 3:22 AM, "David L. Mandel" <dlmandel [at] pacbell.net> wrote: > > Zev and others: > > Even longer-term rental is problematic unless the landlord is a truly > accountable community organization -- and even then it can get tricky. Think > disputes over maintenance, among neighbors, ... > > Have you looked into the community land trust model? It's part way between > your idea and complete ownership. Ownership of the land (the speculative part > of real estate) resides permanently with a community based nonprofit, while > the building is held with long (typically 99-year, renewable, transferrable) > lease by residents who are responsible for upkeep as any homeowner would be. > It's quasi-ownership: you can get a mortgage to finance such a purchase, and > while there are many variations on the theme, a trust that wants to maintain > affordability permanently can do so by limiting resale prices (linked to area > median income or cost of living) and imposing economic eligibility limits. It > quite effectively separates housing from investment. Of course there needs to > be a source of initial investment to make it work, so without a very large > source, it's takes housing out of the market little by little. But it's a > start, and it could set an example that more and > more people would eventually demand. > David > > --- On Wed, 2/9/11, Zev Paiss <zpaiss [at] comcast.net> wrote: > > From: Zev Paiss <zpaiss [at] comcast.net> > Subject: [C-L]_ Creating a New Category of Renter > To: cohousing-l [at] cohousing.org > Date: Wednesday, February 9, 2011, 7:39 PM > > > Friends, > > Much of the discussion in this forum has surrounded the challenging > interaction between renters and owners in a renter cohousing model. I > propose that we offer up a totally new category I will call "Permanent > or Long-Term Renter." There are millions of Baby Boomers who have had > their savings, 401K's and IRA's evaporate over the past several years > (myself included) and may no longer expect or want to have a mortgage > as they move into their later years. What they (we) do want is > stability and the security that we will not be kicked out of our homes > because someone else has control over the property. > > I suggest we investigate the possibility of creating 5-20 year rental > agreements so those people living in home they do not own, are still > able to have the long term security of homeowners. This kind of > arrangement would open up cohousing and cohousing-like communities to > many people who can no longer qualify for a mortgages or for whatever > reason, do not want to own. > > Zev Paiss > Nomad Cohousing > Boulder, CO > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at: > http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L/ > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at: > http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L/ > >
-
Creating a New Category of Renter Zev Paiss, February 9 2011
-
Re: Creating a New Category of Renter David L. Mandel, February 10 2011
- Re: Creating a New Category of Renter R Philip Dowds, February 10 2011
-
Re: Creating a New Category of Renter David L. Mandel, February 10 2011
- Creating a New Category of Renter Rod Lambert, February 10 2011
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.