13,595
edits
Family Living Act of 2003: Difference between revisions
m
no edit summary
m (→Provisions) |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{wip}} | {{wip}} | ||
The '''Family Living Act''' (FLA), formally known as '''An Act to amend the Multiple Dwelling and Residence Law, the Public Housing Law, the Real Property Law, and the Tax Law regarding sale of homes to extended family bidding entities and the development of property for residential use''', is a landmark [[Urcea]]n law enacted by the [[Concilium Daoni]] in [[2003]] and signed into law by King Aedanicus IX on March 23, 2003. It represents the most significant pieces of housing and real estate law in the history of Urcea, and is considered one of the signature accomplishments of the administration of [[Procurator]] [[Michael Witte]]. | The '''Family Living Act''' (FLA), formally known as '''An Act to amend the Executive Law, Multiple Dwelling and Residence Law, the Public Housing Law, the Real Property Law, and the Tax Law regarding sale of homes to extended family bidding entities and the development of property for residential use''', is a landmark [[Urcea]]n law enacted by the [[Concilium Daoni]] in [[2003]] and signed into law by King Aedanicus IX on March 23, 2003. It represents the most significant pieces of housing and real estate law in the history of Urcea, and is considered one of the signature accomplishments of the administration of [[Procurator]] [[Michael Witte]]. | ||
The legislation had wide-reaching aims, including impeding the growth of {{wp|suburban}} sprawl throughout the country, reintegrating families and estates, preserving greenspace, and building durable "small urban" communities now known as the [[Housing_in_Urcea#Urban_town_and_country|Urban Town and Country (UTC)]] model. | The legislation had wide-reaching aims, including impeding the growth of {{wp|suburban}} sprawl throughout the country, reintegrating families and estates, preserving greenspace, and building durable "small urban" communities now known as the [[Housing_in_Urcea#Urban_town_and_country|Urban Town and Country (UTC)]] model. | ||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
As part of the implementation of MSFOR, developers are required to offer their properties on a National Property Exchange (NPE), which families could browse and bid on . The NPE was required to list the price, number of homes, average square feet per home, and other relevant real estate information. The exchange was established under the law as a public resource. From the implementation of the law until 2019, the exchange was listed online with requirements that all nearby new developments be placed as a {{wp|classified ad}} in any newspaper within 20 miles of the development with a circulation of 25,000 or more. In 2019, the newspaper requirement was abolished, and the NPE became an exclusively online resource. | As part of the implementation of MSFOR, developers are required to offer their properties on a National Property Exchange (NPE), which families could browse and bid on . The NPE was required to list the price, number of homes, average square feet per home, and other relevant real estate information. The exchange was established under the law as a public resource. From the implementation of the law until 2019, the exchange was listed online with requirements that all nearby new developments be placed as a {{wp|classified ad}} in any newspaper within 20 miles of the development with a circulation of 25,000 or more. In 2019, the newspaper requirement was abolished, and the NPE became an exclusively online resource. | ||
===Homeowner subsidy=== | ===Homeowner subsidy=== | ||
The Family Living Act created a new program of homeowner subsidies. This program was originally set to provide a scaling subsidy to anyone at or under 125% of {{wp|poverty level}}, and in the final version of the legislation was paid in the form of vouchers. These vouchers could be used for a certain number of services under the law, including mortgage payments, property taxes, utility payments, and even a limited number of essential home items or repairs. In order to administer the program, the Act created a new administrative apparatus - the [[Ministry_of_Administration_of_the_Realm_(Urcea)#Department_for_the_Royal_Subsidy_for_Homeowners|Department for the Royal Subsidy for Homeowners]]. | |||
Earlier versions of the legislation had not included a homeowner subsidy. Many proponents of the legislation also favored some kind of subsidy, but it was viewed as a separate issue - the broad strokes of the act were intended to change the way Urceans built and planned housing, not to necessarily make it easier for individuals to reside in homes. However, during the run-up to passage of the legislation, Michael Witte's administration negotiated the change in. The intention of the subsidy was not only to help impoverished people keep their home, but also to help transition poor Urceans out of {{wp|public housing}}, which was specifically condemned in the written legislative intent of the Act. In order to pay for these subsidies, the Act provides that a gradual scaledown and reduction of benefits under the [[Ministry_of_Administration_of_the_Realm_(Urcea)#Department_of_Administration_for_the_King's_Public_Housing_Program|King's Housing Program]], the nation's 1950s era public housing program. The mandatory scaledown was repealed in a subsequent act in [[2004]], but subsequent governments nonetheless began efforts to transition people out of public housing and into subsidized private housing in future legislative and budgetary actions. | |||
===Deference to preservation zones=== | ===Deference to preservation zones=== | ||
The Family Living Act created a new planning apparatus known as a "preservation zone", distinct from preexistant environmental conservation areas. Preservation zones were defined broadly to include any areas that the public interest demanded be free of urban sprawl, and that all preservation zones would be identified by resolution of the provincial governments and approved by the [[Concilium Daoni]]. Preservation zones, as established under the FLA, did not prohibit construction on individual pieces of property by individual owners or firms, nor did it affect the overall pre-extant planning and zoning systems. Instead, it provided that construction of multiple residences and subdivision thereof on property by a single individual, firm, or group of firms would be prohibited within a preservation zone. The FLA provided for a specific exemption process approved by the [[Ministry_of_the_Environment_and_Energy_(Urcea)#Agency_for_Environmental_Conservation|Agency for Environmental Conservation]], which was given additional funding and resources under the Act to ensure compliance. The exemption process was stated to have a specific preference for UTCs and other, very-low-density types of construction. The FLA identified all pre-extant environmental conservation areas as preservation zones, and subsequent legislation passed between [[2004]] and [[2012]] expanded the zones to cover much of the non-sprawl parts of [[The Valley (Urcea)|the Valley]]. The intention of the preservation zone model was to ensure the end of new suburban sprawl throughout the Valley and rest of Urcea; though market forces had already slowed their growth by [[2003]], advocates sought additional legal means to slow the growth of sprawl. | The Family Living Act created a new planning apparatus known as a "preservation zone", distinct from preexistant environmental conservation areas. Preservation zones were defined broadly to include any areas that the public interest demanded be free of urban sprawl, and that all preservation zones would be identified by resolution of the provincial governments and approved by the [[Concilium Daoni]]. Preservation zones, as established under the FLA, did not prohibit construction on individual pieces of property by individual owners or firms, nor did it affect the overall pre-extant planning and zoning systems. Instead, it provided that construction of multiple residences and subdivision thereof on property by a single individual, firm, or group of firms would be prohibited within a preservation zone. The FLA provided for a specific exemption process approved by the [[Ministry_of_the_Environment_and_Energy_(Urcea)#Agency_for_Environmental_Conservation|Agency for Environmental Conservation]], which was given additional funding and resources under the Act to ensure compliance. The exemption process was stated to have a specific preference for UTCs and other, very-low-density types of construction. The FLA identified all pre-extant environmental conservation areas as preservation zones, and subsequent legislation passed between [[2004]] and [[2012]] expanded the zones to cover much of the non-sprawl parts of [[The Valley (Urcea)|the Valley]]. The intention of the preservation zone model was to ensure the end of new suburban sprawl throughout the Valley and rest of Urcea; though market forces had already slowed their growth by [[2003]], advocates sought additional legal means to slow the growth of sprawl. | ||