Community Land Trusts: Toward Permanently Affordable Housing - Research Paper Example

Community Land Trust Introduction Community land trust (CLT) is a community based, on profit organization that buys land on behalf of the community and holds it in trust (Harper and United Nations Human settlement Programme, 2012). The land trust builds community wealth for the community by taking the land out of the market and capturing the equity gain. Bratt (2006) stated that majority of the community land trusts lease homes out to residents using a model that enables residents to gain a minority share of the equity gain, but keeping most of the gain in the trust, thereby ensuring affordability for the future members. The land trusts therefore serve to shield the community from dislocating effects of gentrification and land speculators (Abromowitz, 2000). Davis (2006) also defined a community land trust as a nonprofit corporation that develops and steward affordable housing, civic buildings, community gardens, commercial spaces and several other community assets on behalf of the community. CLTs help people in the society to balance the needs to access land and to maintain security of tenure with the community’s’ need to maintain economic diversity, affordability and local access to various essential services in the country. Kirby and Peters (2008) stated that Ralph Borsodi and Robert Swann introduced the CLTs in the United States using examples of planned communities on leased land in Gramdan villages in India and Garden city movement in the United Kingdom. The paper is going to discuss the use of community land trusts in general as well as using the model for preferred affordable housing, emphasizing how it is more beneficial to utilize CLT’s verses traditional single-family housing models. Use of the Community land trust CLTs are important in our society as they target their programs and resources toward charitable activities like redeveloping shattered neighborhoods and provide housing for people earning lower income (Christian, 2003). The poor and old people in the society are therefore, assured of having comfortable and safe homes since the CLTs ensure that they provide them with homes at affordable prices. Housing is a human right and CLTs ensures housing is made available to communities that were otherwise disenfranchised. It is more beneficial to utilize CLT’s versus traditional single-family housing model since CLTs provide the people with houses that are of high quality and well structured and the customer does not have to worry about the cost of constructing the houses. CLTs provides a very long term lease of land typically 99 years for the exclusive use by individual homeowners, nonprofit developers, cooperative housing corporations and other entities (Sutton and Kemp,2011). The CLT leases lands and homes to residents using a model that enables the people in society to gain a minority share of the equity gain, but keeping most of the customers’ gains in the trust, this ensures affordability for the future members (Mills, 2010). CLTs protect the community by preserving their land and preventing them from the investors who buy land in large chunks with speculation that they will gain profits from reselling the land in future. CLTs prevent urban gentrification, which results in population migration where poorer residents are displaced by wealthier newcomers. In the traditional single-family housing models, the owner has to locate the place they need to build the houses on their own and some of the places may be too expensive to acquire. CLTs are therefore more beneficial to utilize because they lease land to people at affordable prices and even the low-income earners are able to own better houses. CLTs acquire and retain land in trust for the community and never sell thereby ensuring that the low-income earners in the community have a right to land. Alperovitz and Speth (2011) stated that CLTs acquire vacant land and develop housing and other structures on it. Land and buildings acquired by CLTs are treated differently; the land acquired is held permanently by the CLT and well taken care of to ensure that it benefits the community while those who use buildings on the land can own them. The CLTs helps people to own their homes on their land there by making it easy for the community members. Boyle and Simms (2009) stated that when CLTs sell their homes, they lease the underlying land to the homeowners through a long-term of 99-year renewable lease, which gives the residents and their descendants the right to use the land for as long as they wish to live there. CLTs housing is affordable even for the next homeowners since those who decide to move out of their homes can re-sell to other low-income households at affordable prices. In the traditional single-family housing models, the owners build the houses on their lands, this land is inherited from their great grandparents, and no improvements are done to the buildings. It is therefore more beneficial to utilize the CLT’s because they are cost effective and better materials are used to construct the houses. The CLTs offers the right of ownership for building on trust land. This gives the low-income earners in the society a chance to own their own properties under their names. The procedure of getting a deed for a building from the CLTs is easier than following up with the government to own a particular piece of land because of corruption and other political interests. The traditional single-family housing model is therefore prone to attacks by the wealthy people who have powerful influence to grab their lands hence losing their homes. In the research done by Davis and The Institute for Community Economics (2001) it is stated that CLTs provide affordability protections in growing communities. In most of the societies today, the population growth and economic investment are driving up the real estate prices whereby fewer low and modest income workers can afford to buy homes and rent in the communities where they work (Manzi, 2010). The government has provided limited funds to subsidize the housing costs for the low-income households and this is where the CLTs have helped the community to curb this problem. Walker (2010) stated that CLTs control the housing costs by permanently limiting land costs and attracting subsidies so that they benefit many homeowners and do not need to be repeated each time a home is sold. CLTs are beneficial to utilize versus traditional single housing models because they facilitate community control in disinvested neighborhoods by ensuring that residents can capture the value they create to benefit their own community (Dotzauer ,2001). In the traditional single housing, the residents only benefit themselves and even when the houses are sold, the rent is paid to absentee owners who have left the community. CLTs enable the community to benefit from what they own and hence developing the economy of the neighborhood. CLTs provide flexible community development options, whereby the society can use land for various services that help the community; for example building of technology centers, business premises, food banks, parks, plazas, and fuel wood production in the cases of rural CLTs (Flint, 2006). This shows that CLTs are beneficial to utilize than the traditional single housing models since they ensure development in the society by taking into consideration both the rich and the poor. Conclusion The use of CLTs has enabled lower income people in the society to gain access to property they desire and improve their financial situations. Through CLTs, people have been able to preserve their land and own their homes at affordable prices. CLTs have also provided other community benefits such as jobs through development of small businesses and through cooperative agreements with local banks. It has provided community spaces to develop community gardens .CLTs have also enabled ownership of opportunities whereby people have a right to own the houses over a period of 99 years and can resale if they want. This shows that it is more beneficial to utilize CLTs versus traditional single-family housing models because CLTs benefit the community by considering the low-income earners and the people who cannot afford to buy expensive lands to build their own homes. References Abromowitz,M.(2000). “An Essay on Community Land Trusts: Toward Permanently Affordable Housing.” In propety values. Washington,DC: Island Press Alperovitz, G., and Speth, J. G. (2011). America beyond capitalism: Reclaiming our wealth, our liberty, and our democracy. Boston, MA: Democracy Collaborative Press/Dollars and Sense. Boyle, D., and Simms, A. (2009). The new economics: A bigger picture. London: Earthscan. Bratt, R. G. (2006). A right to housing: Foundation for a new social agenda. Philadelphia, Pa: Temple Univ. Press. Christian, D. L. (2003). Creating a life together: Practical tools to grow ecovillages and intentional communities. Gabriola Island, BC: New Society Publishers. Davis, John Emmeus. (2006). Shared Equity Homeownership: The Changing Landscape of Resale-restricted, Owner-occupied Housing Montclair, NJ: National Housing Institute. Davis, J. E., and Institute for Community Economics (Springfield, Mass.). (2001). Options & issues in creating a community land trust: A report prepared by the Institute for Community Economics with support from the MacArthur Foundation. Springfield, MA: Institute for Community Economics. Dotzauer, T. (2001). Kulshan Community Land Trust: A community partner for permanently affordable homeownership. Bellingham, WA: Huxley College of Environmental Studies, Western Washington University. Flint, A. (2006). This land: The battle over sprawl and the future of America. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Harper, D., and United Nations Human Settlements Programme. (2012). The community land trusts: Affordable access to land and housing. Nairobi: UN Habitat. Kirby, E., and Peters, E. (2008). Community gardening. Brooklyn, NY: Brooklyn Botanic Garden. Manzi, T. (2010). Social sustainability in urban areas: Communities, connectivity and the urban fabric. London: Earthscan. Mills, S. (2010). On Gandhi's Path: Bob Swann's Work for Peace and Community Economics. New York: New Society Publishers. Sutton, S. E., and Kemp, S. P. (2011). The Paradox of Urban Space: Inequality and Transformation in Marginalized Communities. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Walker, C. (2010). Land, memory, reconstruction, and justice: Perspectives on land claims in South Africa. Athens, Ohio: Ohio University Press. Read More