Family Living Act of 2003: Difference between revisions

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.

===Housing construction limits===

===Incentives for UTCs===

The FLA made alterations to the tax law to provide incentives for developers to construct subdivisions which also included new or rehabilitated mixed-use structures, creating a legal framework for what would later be known as the "[[Housing_in_Urcea#Urban_town_and_country|urban town and country]]" model. The incentive scheme would grant as much as a 58% real property tax exemption for any subdivision which would include at least 20% mixed use development, a figure that would increase to 67% if such subdivision included preexistent and historic structures. The incentives also involved significant tax write-offs for construction-related expenses. The latter provision was intended to incentivize developers to build new developments around older, near-abandoned small towns or villages that were left behind following the downturn in the nation's industrial economy. Under the provisions of the law, the mixed-use structures had to actually be completed as mixed-use instead of being eventually transitioned to all-residential; in that case, the law stipulates a claw-back of exempted taxes from the developer by the [[Ministry_of_Administration_of_the_Realm_(Urcea)#Department_of_Administration_of_Tax_Collection_and_Receipts|Department of Administration of Tax Collection and Receipts]], which the law provided with additional funding to help ensure implementation.