Cohousing-L Mailing List: Re: Urban-Rural Dipole <FWD>

[Fred H Olson WB0YQM (fholson]

Joel Woodhull JWOODHULL [at] IGC.APC.ORG  is the author of this message but
due to a listserv problem it was posted by the COHOUSING-L sysop.

Brian Bansenauer - "Ah there's that ZONING again!" 3:25 PM  Sep
13, 1994 - writes about wanting to live in the country in
Wisconsin.  In response he receives some advice about getting the
zoning changed to permit cohousing.

We all would like to live close to the city, but in the country. 
Fulfillment of that wish is the primary culprit in suburban
sprawl, with its many attendant problems, including auto
dependence.  If Eau Claire is zoning for 40 acres per dwelling
unit to keep urban development within bounds and preserve the
surrounding agricultural and natural lands, it is doing much
better than the rest of the cities in the U.S.

For some time now, my wife and I have wanted to combine cohousing
with food growing and other aspects of sustainability.  But if
someone truly wants to farm, the easy conversion of farmland to
urban uses raises the price of land far beyond what can be
afforded for agriculture.  It is a dilemma.  A possible solution
that we have come up with is the following:

THE URBAN-RURAL DIPOLE

The success of urban and rural areas depend on each other.  For
the health of both, urban areas need to be contained.  The suburb
has been offered as an escape from city to country, but it is
neither urban nor rural.  It has become the problem.

One possibility for creating urban growth boundaries is for the
people in the urban area to buy up surrounding land in order to
keep it in agriculture or other non-urban use.  Another
possibility is the urban-rural dipole, in which an association is
formed to assemble contiguous parcels of urban land, as well as
rural parcels, in order to preserve their uses as urban and as
rural.  Specifically, a co-housing association could be the
instrument, composed of urban and rural members.


Use of Land Purchase to Prevent Urban Use

Boulder has created a local tax which is used to buy up
surrounding open space.  Boulder even bought land in the adjacent
county.  There is little that the other jurisdiction can do to
keep the scheme from working, because zoning only limits the
intensity of use, and the purchasing jurisdiction's aim is to
keep the land at a lower intensity of use.  It is believed that
the development value of the purchased land "migrates" to the
purchaser's land in an amount at least equivalent to what is paid
out.

The Urban-Rural Co-Housing Association

People interested in co-housing have some of the same yearnings
for rural life as do other people.  This has led to the formation
of co-housing groups on rural land.  (Some of the tendency to
seek rural sites is undoubtedly motivated by the difficulties of
developing co- housing communities under urban zoning rules.) 
Not all co-housing has moved outward from the cities however. 
Some have formed purposely on very urban sites, motivated in part
at least by wanting to avoid the same suburban migration that
afflicts urban development in general.

The urban-rural dipole model suggested here is a way to
accommodate the rural yearnings without despoiling the
countryside or abandoning the central cities, and even to have a
positive, or stewardship effect on both.

Having both an urban and a rural site, with restrictions of the
rural site to agricultural or other appropriate uses, members
could choose to be urban or rural, to any degree.  In other
words, they could have only an urban residence, only rural, or
some arrangement for both.  Any family could have a primary
residence in one place and guest residence in the other.  The
guest residence might be as simple as a bunk in a dormitory. The
arrangement would provide a natural opportunity for Community
Supported Agriculture (CSA), in which a group of food consumers
pays an annual fee to contract for a specified supply of food by
a farming unit.  The urban co-housing unit could be an assured
market for the farm co-housing unit.

Agglomeration

There could be additional ties between the farm unit and other
cooperating co-housing clusters to achieve suitable enterprise
scale.

The ultimate goal of urban containment and rural preservation
would be achieved when initial dipoles become  successful enough
to warrant emulation, and the concept spreads widely.

Benefits of the Dipole

Assuage the rural yearnings that most people have.

Maintain rural areas in a permanent sustainable use, encouraging
continuous investment in soils, vegetation, habitat, etc.,
because the potential for rural-to-urban land conversion has been
nullified.

 - Protect open space for all.

 - Provide urban and rural experience for children, rather than
the neuter suburban experience which most of them have under
current arrangements.

 - Provide a variable level farm labor pool without migratory
labor. 

 - Provide a source of farm capital.

 - Solve some of the marketing problems of the farmer (with the
CSA).

 - Provide assured quality food.

 - Provide a sense of community in both locations.  Normally the
only feasible rural experience available to an urban dweller is
to vacation in rented quarters, not the same as a home
environment.  Likewise with the rural dweller seeking an urban
experience. 

Likely Obstacles or Hurdles

In the formation of a co-housing group, selection of a site is
often difficult.  Agreement on two sites might prove very
difficult.

Typical rural zoning may often inhibit or even prohibit
multi-family clustered farm dwellings. 

Joel Woodhull
Pasadena