Cohousing-L Mailing List: Re: Low Income [ was Affordable Cohousing]

[R Philip Dowds (rpdowds]

Actually, it’s not Cornerstone or “Philip’s group” at all.  What drives the 
train here is a municipal program legislated by the City of Cambridge called 
“inclusionary zoning”.  This program applies to many sites and lots throughout 
the City, in many different zoning districts.  The idea is that the developer 
gets a “density bonus” (more dwelling units per acre) *IF* the developer agrees 
to build 10% of the units as “affordable”, and donate them, free for nothing, 
to the City.  Thereafter, the City administers them in perpetuity as limited 
equity ownership units.  The City chooses the family that moves into each such 
unit, and Cornerstone is expressly forbidden from interfering in this process 
in any way.

The “density bonus” is carefully calculated to make the whole trade-off 
slightly (not greatly, but slightly) attractive to the developer, and in many 
cases, the developer signs up voluntarily.  Not all Cambridge neighborhoods 
like this program; the Cornerstone project was hotly litigated by the neighbors 
for a couple of years, which cost the founders a ton of money.  Cornerstone was 
the very first project in Cambridge history that was subject to inclusionary 
zoning.  One of the ironies here is that while I had almost nothing to do with 
Cornerstone in its development phase, I was one of the citizen activists who 
had been lobbying the City for inclusionary zoning.

My wife and I were out in Ithaca for the first time this summer.  When we come 
through again (and we will), we’d love to drop in on Ecovillage at Ithaca.

Thanks,
Philip Dowds
Cornerstone Village Cohousing
Cambridge, MA

> On Sep 24, 2015, at 10:05 AM, Rod Lambert <rod [at] ecovillage.ithaca.ny.us> 
> wrote:
> 
> Re: keeping it affordable/building equity,
> 
> Curious about how Philip's group limits equity.
> Perhaps they are already doing this, but wondering if using local median
> income as a benchmark for affordability could work, at least in part. What
> if a number of units were built to be sold such that someone earning say,
> 80% of median income (statistics kept by local government) could afford it.
> The requirement from this buyer in return would be that it had to be resold
> in perpetuity for 80% of median. That would allow for some gain in equity
> but it would presumably keep it "affordable". The financial logistics for
> initial build could be as suggested by earlier posts. Not sure if/how condo
> docs could reflect this restriction but I think it can work in a coop legal
> structure.
> 
> Had to smile at Philip's mention of management challenges. Our human
> quality of hating to see someone getting a better deal than we are creates
> many difficulties. Perhaps at least the fact of not being able to
> participate in equity at the same level as the others will stimulate the
> "undeserving" to move on to units that allow unlimited equity and pass the
> unit on to the more "deserving"?
> 
> Rod Lambert
> EcoVillage at Ithaca, NY