Cohousing-L Mailing List: Re: community land trust

[Michael John Omogrosso (omo]

> The housing discussions I see on this list and on Cohousing-L fall into a 
> four part matrix--oversimplified, yes, but a basic pattern:  Urban, 
> rural, shared resource, private ownership.   If we were to make a shield
> representing our discussions the matrix of urban, rural, shared and
> private would be akin it the four directions of indigenious shields and
> much of the particulars like transportation, housing, food production,
> conservancy and local jobs would be woven in the design.  Different levels of 
> sustainablility permeate the discussions and I have found it all quite 
> stimulating and something I have not actively dialogued on in quite some 
> time.  Thanks.
> 
> The topic of community land trusts (CLTs) has been introducted on several 
> occasions with an anticipation of heady discussion--at least as heady 
> as my room temperature microbrew--yet little but a few private responses 
> of peak interest have resulted.  If I made a shield representing my 
> impression of CLTs, little would change beyond placing CLTs as a center 
> piece.
> 
> The community land trust seems such a good fit to our sustainability and 
> housing goals.  By removing the land from the speculative market place, a 
> major market value appreciation piece is controlled.  Resulting 
> impedments to increased taxes should be realized.  
> 
> Ownership of structures remains the same with a 99 year renewable and 
> inheritable land lease except that if resale occurs, the resale is 
> contingent on respect for the land trust covenant and only purchase cost 
> plus improvements, basically, used to calculate the selling price.  It 
> keeps owning a home affordable for a much broader range of society.
> 
> Finally, CLTs can apply to the full spectrum of economic, geographic and 
> social housing paterns from CoHo to low-income apartment complexes.
> 
> Interested?   
> 
> 
>