We don't want income from the land.

We just don't want to be forced to sell it to people who will turn it into condos.

I'm not a lawyer, but like conway said, my own parents estate planning involved a trust to ensure that the government didn't take what my folks worked for. I don't see why a similar approach wouldn't work for your family.

Agree with Caeron. One aspects of the trust is that it shields the property from the claims of yours and your brother's creditors because it is owned by a third party for your benefit. You and your brother would be the beneficiaries of the trust receiving whatever income the asset of the trust throws off (be it rental income or sales proceeds if it is ever sold). In this case, there may be no income. You don't have to declare income from the trust's assets to be the beneficiary of a trust.

The big benefit of the trust in my parents' case was that if one pre-deceases the other, that would normally consume their exemption amount for estate purposes. The trust effectively ensured that when the second parent dies, we kids get the benefit of both parents exemptions, not just one. Not sure how it would apply in your case, but I think it bears a second look.

I'll mention it to my parents. Though, honestly, I think they'd reject the idea of a trust because it would make the land feel less "theirs" and the idea of owning this land because of it's family significance is very strong and important to them.