So far as I know, nudist colonies are not really colonies, but clubs. No doubt somebody lives there and probably recieves room, board and a stipend for maintaining the house and grounds, but most of the members live somewhere else and pay a membership fee, and that pays the mortgage, property tax, utilities and upkeep of the place, and gives said members right to use the place whenever they please or whenever the rules say it's okay. Neighborhood 'beach clubs' make good examples 'cause they tend to be in tiny forms and are not for-profit country-clubs, which are businesses and don't give members a share in ownership. The ones I'm familiar with, a dozen or so residential properties include not only their own lots, but a share in a lot that has access to the water, giving everybody beach-front property rights while sparing them the expense of actually having their house on a lot by the water.
For the kind of thing we're talking about, a better comparison might be monestaries and the retreat-center type places owned by religious groups. Some people live and work there and are supported by charitable donations and by running the place as a retreat-center. People pay to come stay there for vacations or to hold conventions there, residents look after these visitors. Often these places also produce some sort of high-end agricultural product. Specialty beers, mead, honey, the plum-jam made by the Buddhists at Plum Village, New Skete's trained German Shepherd Dogs, that sort of thing.
'Real' communes tend to do the agricultural/craft thing but not host the visitors.
That sort of thing isn't really out of reach, depending on where you located it and how many people wanted to join or support it. Land that's far away from places of employment tends to be cheap. It'd be pretty concievable to get a big peice of land and have one house/building for the kitchen and common areas, and put up a bunch of little one-room cabins ("Unabomber" cabin-kits are cheap) for folks to sleep in. Heck, one might get lucky and find an old church-camp with all that stuff already in place.
Probably there are enough well-off trans-folks around who'd want to spend vacation time in a totally trans-friendly environment that it might just support itself as a trans-retreat center. Those folks might also be very keen to support it with donations if the place took in down-and-out transfolks and helped them. Certain liberal organizations that try to prevent homelessness and prostitution might also be willing to donate if the down-and-out were welcomed, since homelessness and prostitution are frequent landing places for transpeople who have nowhere to go and no job prospects. It could also host 'sensitivity training' type retreats for businesses and could do a great job at that 'cause the people being trained in sensitivity would be exposed to many different transpeople all the time they were there, instead of one or two inaccessable lecturers.
I don't imagine a lot of transpeople want to become farmers, but I've noticed that specialty wools can be a profitable venture, and alpacas and sheep can be raised on lands that aren't much good for anything else. That might balance out for the kind of people who'd be keen to live on such a place. Shearing in the spring, retreat-hosting all summer and autumn, spend the winter washing, carding, spinning and packing wool for sale.
