scholarly journals Investing in community: community land trusts and affordable housing in Calgary

Author(s):  
Leah Dow

The cost of affordable rental units in Calgary is amongst the highest in Canada, despite a rental vacancy rate that is 3 percent higher than the national average (Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, 2017). Nearly 1 in 5 Calgary households are struggling to pay for shelter costs and as of 2016, more than 42,000 households were spending more than 50 percent of their incomes on shelter, putting this population at a greater risk of becoming homeless due to job loss or from some other unexpected financial hardship (City of Calgary, 2017). Counter to popular belief, economically depressed communities with weak rental and housing markets such as Calgary following the 2015 collapse of the oil and gas sector can be subject to a critical lack of affordable housing. A soft housing market cannot make up for an insufficient range of affordable and non-market housing options. In other cities facing similar challenges, especially those in the United States, the formation of Community Land Trusts has proven to be a viable solution for providing both affordable rental and affordable ownership opportunities for residents who are struggling to afford the cost of housing in their area. This paper explores whether the Community Land Trust model is an appropriate tool to augment Calgary’s limited supply of affordable housing and will end with five recommendations to encourage the adoption of the Community Land Trust model in Calgary. Key Words: affordable housing, affordable ownership, Calgary, community land trust, small-scale affordable development.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leah Dow

The cost of affordable rental units in Calgary is amongst the highest in Canada, despite a rental vacancy rate that is 3 percent higher than the national average (Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, 2017). Nearly 1 in 5 Calgary households are struggling to pay for shelter costs and as of 2016, more than 42,000 households were spending more than 50 percent of their incomes on shelter, putting this population at a greater risk of becoming homeless due to job loss or from some other unexpected financial hardship (City of Calgary, 2017). Counter to popular belief, economically depressed communities with weak rental and housing markets such as Calgary following the 2015 collapse of the oil and gas sector can be subject to a critical lack of affordable housing. A soft housing market cannot make up for an insufficient range of affordable and non-market housing options. In other cities facing similar challenges, especially those in the United States, the formation of Community Land Trusts has proven to be a viable solution for providing both affordable rental and affordable ownership opportunities for residents who are struggling to afford the cost of housing in their area. This paper explores whether the Community Land Trust model is an appropriate tool to augment Calgary’s limited supply of affordable housing and will end with five recommendations to encourage the adoption of the Community Land Trust model in Calgary. Key Words: affordable housing, affordable ownership, Calgary, community land trust, small-scale affordable development.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer Le

Housing in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA) is increasingly unaffordable due to rising housing costs. Community land trusts (CLTs) have recently emerged as a tool for providing affordable housing in the GTHA. This paper investigated the form that CLTs should take to ensure its long-term success for providing affordable housing. Through an analysis of academic and grey literature, the element of community control was identified as being a critical success factor. This paper explored four CLTs operating in American and European contexts to understand whether and how community control was manifested and the resulting implications it had on the CLT and residents. The findings of the paper confirm the importance of community control in the long-term functioning of CLTs, and that community control can be manifested in various forms. Planners operating in the GTHA must therefore be mindful of ensuring that community control is expressed in CLTs. Keywords: Community land trust; affordable housing; community control; Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer Le

Housing in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA) is increasingly unaffordable due to rising housing costs. Community land trusts (CLTs) have recently emerged as a tool for providing affordable housing in the GTHA. This paper investigated the form that CLTs should take to ensure its long-term success for providing affordable housing. Through an analysis of academic and grey literature, the element of community control was identified as being a critical success factor. This paper explored four CLTs operating in American and European contexts to understand whether and how community control was manifested and the resulting implications it had on the CLT and residents. The findings of the paper confirm the importance of community control in the long-term functioning of CLTs, and that community control can be manifested in various forms. Planners operating in the GTHA must therefore be mindful of ensuring that community control is expressed in CLTs. Keywords: Community land trust; affordable housing; community control; Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area


2004 ◽  
Vol 106 (1) ◽  
pp. 75
Author(s):  
Ernest VAUDRY ◽  
Susan ALTSCHUL

Author(s):  
Luqman Raji ◽  
Zhigilla Y.I ◽  
Wadai J

Nigeria is one of developing countries in the world that experience shortage of electricity for her economic and social development. In Nigeria, most of the small-scale industries use diesel/petrol-based systems to generate their electricity. However, due to the cost fluctuation of oil and gas fuel, an alternative power generation should be considered. This paper targets to examine the cost analysis of system for supplying electricity to LUMATEC Aluminium products shop in Mubi, Adamawa state Nigeria. Hybrid Optimization Model for Electric Renewable (HOMER) is used as a tool for cost analysis. The scenario consider in this study was only stand-alone with battery system. Results revealed that the system have 10kW PV with cost of electricity (COE) of $0.312/kW. The initial capital cost and total net present cost (NPC) are $21.775 and $26.148 respectively, with payback period of 5.8years. In conclusion, this study provides the solution of power supply to the small-scale industries at cost effective and available throughout the year and it is feasible to solve the small-scale industries, rural and urban electricity supplying in this country (Nigeria). It is recommended that Nigerian Government & Law makers should promotes the use of standalone PV system for domestic and small-scale industry by providing financial assistance through soft loans, subsides and grants.


Author(s):  
David Varady ◽  
Reinout Kleinhans ◽  
Maarten van Ham

Purpose – The aim of this paper is to assess the current potential of community entrepreneurship in neighbourhood revitalisation in the US and the UK. The global economic crisis has had a major impact on government spending for urban regeneration. In the context of these austerity regimes, in many European countries, community entrepreneurship and active citizenship are increasingly considered as a means to continue small-scale urban revitalisation. This paper investigates recent literature on both British community enterprises (CEs) and American community development corporations (CDCs). Design/methodology/approach – Starting from a seminal article, this paper reviews literature focusing on the role of CEs and CDCs in neighbourhood revitalisation. Differences and similarities are analysed, taking into account national context differences. Findings – While CDCs have a relatively successful record in affordable housing production in distressed areas, CDCs are fundamentally limited in terms of reversing processes of community decline. CEs in the UK have focused on non-housing issues. Research limitations/implications – This paper asks the question what CEs can learn from CDCs in terms of scope, aims, strategies, accountability, assets and partnerships with public and private actors. However, a systematic literature review has not been conducted. Originality/value – This comparison reveals not only similarities but also differences with regard to aims, organisational characteristics, cooperation on multiple scales and community participation. Apart from lessons that can be learned, this paper provides recommendations for further research that should cover the lack of empirical evidence in this field.


2013 ◽  
Vol 58 (2) ◽  
pp. 263-320 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna di Robilant

In recent years, common ownership has enjoyed unprecedented favour among policy-makers and citizens in the United States, Canada, and Europe. Conservation land trusts, affordable-housing co-operatives, community gardens, and neighbourhood-managed parks are spreading throughout major cities. Normatively, these common-ownership regimes are seen as yielding a variety of benefits, such as a communitarian ethos in the efficient use of scarce resources, or greater freedom to interact and create in new ways. The design of common-ownership regimes, however, requires difficult trade-offs. Most importantly, successful achievement of the goals of common-ownership regimes requires the limitation of individual co-owners’ ability to freely use the common resource, as well as to exit the common-ownership arrangement. This article makes two contributions. First, at the normative level, it argues that common ownership has the potential to help foster greater “equality of autonomy”. By “equality of autonomy”, I mean more equitable access to the material and relational means that allow individuals to be autonomous. Second, at the level of design, this article argues that the difficult trade-offs of common-ownership regimes should be dealt with by grounding the commitment to equality of autonomy in the context of specific resources. In some cases, this resource-specific design helps to minimize or avoid difficult trade-offs. In hard cases, where trade-offs cannot be avoided, this article offers arguments for privileging greater equality of autonomy over full negative freedom.


Author(s):  
Renata Cristina do Nascimento Antão ◽  
Tarcyla Fidalgo Ribeiro

O Community Land Trust é um modelo estabelecido com vistas à proteção de permanência de comunidades vulneráveis. Ela surge nos Estados Unidos, na década de 1960, atrelada aos movimentos por direitos civis e à população residente em áreas rurais. Este artigo busca avaliar as potencialidades e os limites de sua aplicação no Brasil enquanto resistência e prática biopotente em um espaço urbano marcado por elevados percentuais de irregularidade e por uma grave situação de desigualdade socioespacial. Em um contexto que agrava após os megaeventos no início da segunda década do século XXI e com a ruptura democrática e o aprofundamento da lógica neoliberal nas cidades a partir de 2016, torna-se necessário e urgente o estabelecimento de novas práticas e formas de gestão da propriedade que desenhem possíveis subversões à lógica do Poder. Os Community Land Trusts são propostos aqui como forma de prática jurídica subversiva, seja a partir da defesa da necessidade de uma legislação própria sobre o tema, seja pela utilização dos instrumentos jurídicos já existentes de forma a basear a criação de um modelo proprietário emancipatório.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document