Revisiting parcel limits

Here you might discuss basically everything.

Moderator: SC Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
Han Held
I need a hobby
I need a hobby
Posts: 690
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2015 3:52 pm
Contact:

Revisiting parcel limits

Post by Han Held »

This is a topic that has come up recently amongst us estate managers and some of us feel might be holding us back.

There is a limit to the number of parcels that any one person may own -both per region and for the estate over-all.

As it stands now, a person may not own more than 8192 m2 in the CDS. The intent of this is to prevent any individual from becoming invaluable to the running of the estate because their departure would place our finances in jeopardy.

That's sound enough reasoning, but there's obvious problems with it -particularly when you look at the map and see all of the yellow areas that we have.

I feel that we need to change the policy in the following way;

1)To prioritise new citizens
2)To encourage land purchase
3)To be dynamic enough to allow purchases when we have a surplus of open parcels, but to reserve parcels for new citizens when we have a shortage.

I'm not sure if this should be a law or simply a policy (there's a difference?).

I'm not sure how this would work exactly (hence -this thread), but I'd suggest something like the following;

The CDS encourages its' citizens to hold as much land as they both feel they can afford, and that they will be able to use. However, to safeguard the economic stability of the CDS as a whole we place limits on how much land any citizen may hold. The limits for ownership are as follows;

No more than 8192 m2 per region
No more than 4096 * [The number of regions] in the entire estate. (As of July 2017 we have six regions, so that would be 4096*6 total, with no more than 8192 in any one region). Exceptions may be granted for the sake of projects deemed to be a part of the CDS as a whole, such as Monastery. These projects must be approved by the RA, and Monastery itself shall be grandfathered in -considered preapproved.

If the CDS is low on parcels, as detirmined by (how WOULD we detirmine that?) priority shall go to newer property holders and citizens for any availalbe plots, and the parcel limits shall revert back to the original limit of 8192 m2 for the entire estate. This does not mean that anyone who owns property will be required to give it up, but they will be informally encouraged to divest of any unused land and formally limited from purchasing any further properties while the shortage lasts.

There are obvious flaws in that (eg what criteria would we use?) but hopefully that at the least gets the ball rolling in the right direction. :)

---
"I could talk talk talk, talk myself to death
But I believe I would only waste my breath" -Roxy Music "Remake, remodel"
User avatar
Sylvia Tamalyn
Master Word Wielder
Master Word Wielder
Posts: 458
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2016 8:07 am

Re: Revisiting parcel limits

Post by Sylvia Tamalyn »

For reference, the covenant for the estate as a whole states "An individual can own up to 8 CDS land parcels, totalling 8192 m2. Land ownership restrictions include any land donated to group-owned land in CDS. Additionally, some zones within individual CDS regions have specific parcel ownership restrictions."

So the current restriction is not only on the total square meters owned, but also the total number of parcels owned. Both limits need to be addressed, particularly since the provision regarding "8 CDS land parcels" includes prim parcels. One can easily hit the limit without coming anywhere near the 8,192 m2 total.

I absolutely support revising this in some matter, because it doesn't make sense to turn away too much potential income. I think there should be limits, just more flexible ones to accommodate changing situations.

User avatar
Han Held
I need a hobby
I need a hobby
Posts: 690
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2015 3:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Revisiting parcel limits

Post by Han Held »

A good point, also 16 m2 prim parcels need to be addressed seperately, too. Limited to make sure everyone can get one -but they shouldn't count against the total parcels one has because
a)they're tiny
b)they're unusable for anything other than adding to one's prim allotment.

---
"I could talk talk talk, talk myself to death
But I believe I would only waste my breath" -Roxy Music "Remake, remodel"
Em Warden
Passionate Protagonist
Passionate Protagonist
Posts: 136
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 5:05 pm

Re: Revisiting parcel limits

Post by Em Warden »

I managed to submit the same post twice. Since I couldn't find a way to remove one of them, I simply cleared it of it's contents and substituted it with an explanation.

SORRY ABOUT THAT. :?

Last edited by Em Warden on Mon Jul 24, 2017 6:38 am, edited 5 times in total.
When you go through hell- keep walking!

Winston Churchill
Em Warden
Passionate Protagonist
Passionate Protagonist
Posts: 136
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 5:05 pm

Re: Revisiting parcel limits

Post by Em Warden »

Maybe the prim parcels should be treated the way Han suggested for normal parcels:

Sometimes there is always a couple of available prim parcels to buy, and then restrictions should be mild. But as soon as they get scarce, and we have to stand in line to get one, we should limit the number per person.

This speaks for a policy rather than a law. Changes in policy, adapting to the availability of both kinds of parcels at any given time, would be the RA's responsibility.

When you go through hell- keep walking!

Winston Churchill
User avatar
Tanoujin Milestone
I need a hobby
I need a hobby
Posts: 535
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 5:42 pm

Re: Revisiting parcel limits

Post by Tanoujin Milestone »

Let us keep this simple. Thinking of the CDS low on parcels - when will that ever happen again? - but okay - wouldn’t the ones who are holding a lot of parcels give some up by themselves out of common sense? Another possibility is the revival of private land sales, even if we have almost forgotten about that, the functionality is still there ;) I do not think we need „flexible“ regulations, there is a danger to overly complicate things and cause a lot of confusion when which rule has to be applied.

This discussion is partly motivated by the intent to legalize some transgressions we already have. It is hard to force a citizen to give up parcels while we are in yellow to such a degree. Let us focus on that.

I believe it would be sufficient to lift the land ownership limits by 25%. So the passage in the General Covenant that Sylvia quoted already would read:

An individual can own up to 10 CDS land parcels, totalling 10,240 m2. Land ownership restrictions include any land donated to group-owned land in CDS. Additionally, some zones within individual CDS regions have specific parcel ownership restrictions.

Another point is the restriction of land ownership in Neufreistadt by its region specific covenant.

A person may not hold more than 2 plots or more than 1024m2 in zones I [Inner City] and P [Adjacent to Marketplatz].

I recommend to keep that in place. In my Opinion it is very important to have diversified ownership within the NFS city walls, because this is our core supply of both cheap and attractive starter plots, and a retreat for citizens who want to keep in touch on a minimal basis. The NFS city is almost sold out for that reason at any time and we have to make sure to control the competitive pressure there.

Let us talk about the prim lots then. We have two prim farms in our estate, one in NFS and one in CN. Now this is interesting: the CN specific covenant states:

Plots R.01-1 through R.01-5 are reserved for attachment to parcels within the city walls. There must be a minimum of 2 trees per plot.

I think this makes it clear that you can have a prim lot only if you already own a parcel in the city of CN. I would clarify further, that you can have only one prim lot per parcel you own in the city. This is even more important since the parcels are no longer locked so that everyone has free access to them.
I strongly recommend to add a similar passage in the NFS covenant regarding P280-01 to P280-20.

And yes, i am fine with the suggestion not to count them against the ownership limit. So the passage in the general Covenant would read:

An individual can own up to 10 CDS land parcels, totalling 10,240 m2 and extra prim lots attached to parcels in the City of Neufreistadt and Colonia Nova not counting against the limits. Land ownership restrictions include any land donated to group-owned land in CDS. Additionally, some zones within individual CDS regions have specific parcel ownership restrictions.

Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle.
Ian Maclaren
User avatar
Sylvia Tamalyn
Master Word Wielder
Master Word Wielder
Posts: 458
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2016 8:07 am

Re: Revisiting parcel limits

Post by Sylvia Tamalyn »

After reading and considering the points Tan has made, I agree with his proposal and think it is very sensible. If by some chance in the future we actually do have a shortage of available land, then the issue could certainly be revisited at that time. For now, I like the simplicity of just raising the limits a bit and removing the number of owned prim parcels from said limits. This addresses the concerns that started the whole conversation in the first place, without adding a bunch of complexity and red tape to the process.

I also agree with the suggested change re: the prim plots, which keeps a person from owning a single parcel within the walls while also owning several prim plots. This suggestion is quite reasonable.

User avatar
Sylvia Tamalyn
Master Word Wielder
Master Word Wielder
Posts: 458
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2016 8:07 am

Re: Revisiting parcel limits

Post by Sylvia Tamalyn »

Em Warden wrote: Mon Jul 24, 2017 6:16 am

I managed to submit the same post twice. Since I couldn't find a way to remove one of them, I simply cleared it of it's contents and substituted it with an explanation.

SORRY ABOUT THAT. :?

The X button next to the edit button should allow you to delete a post. I can't say I've tried it out myself, but that's what its label says. It, like the edit button, is only available for a limited time, though.

Em Warden
Passionate Protagonist
Passionate Protagonist
Posts: 136
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 5:05 pm

Re: Revisiting parcel limits

Post by Em Warden »

Then the question arises: those who already have more than one prim parcel but only a single NFS parcel- will they be forced to give up the "surplus" and thus having to restructure their NFS homes? (I know one citizen who would give up his NFS "business" if he were to abandon one of his two prim parcels.)

Last edited by Em Warden on Mon Jul 24, 2017 11:05 am, edited 2 times in total.
When you go through hell- keep walking!

Winston Churchill
Em Warden
Passionate Protagonist
Passionate Protagonist
Posts: 136
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 5:05 pm

Re: Revisiting parcel limits

Post by Em Warden »

Sylvia Tamalyn wrote: Mon Jul 24, 2017 10:36 am

The X button next to the edit button should allow you to delete a post. I can't say I've tried it out myself, but that's what its label says. It, like the edit button, is only available for a limited time, though.

Thank you, Sylvia. The next time something similar happens, I'll hurry to hit the x-button.

When you go through hell- keep walking!

Winston Churchill
User avatar
Sylvia Tamalyn
Master Word Wielder
Master Word Wielder
Posts: 458
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2016 8:07 am

Re: Revisiting parcel limits

Post by Sylvia Tamalyn »

Em Warden wrote: Mon Jul 24, 2017 10:50 am

Then the question arises: those who already have more than one prim parcel but only a single NFS parcel- will they be forced to give up the "surplus" and thus having to restructure their NFS homes? (I know one citizen who would give up his NFS "business" if he were to abandon one of his two prim parcels.)

Interesting question. I just checked the Casper site and found at least two citizens who might be affected by a change to the NFS prim parcel rules. I suppose one possible solution would be for the person to purchase a second NFS parcel, which would entitle them to a second prim parcel (or make the need for a second prim parcel disappear). On the other hand, I'm not real big on taking people's property away from them, so maybe we need to consider some sort of "grandfather" provision if we do put a limit on prim parcel ownership.

(As a side note, I wonder if those citizens' NFS parcels will get some relief from the prim shift project that the LUC is working on?)

Gareth Kanarik
Casual contributor
Casual contributor
Posts: 14
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2017 4:32 pm

Re: Revisiting parcel limits

Post by Gareth Kanarik »

Greetings everyone from the new guy! I fear that I may be the catalyst that sparked this conversation by inadvertently buying too many parcels in the wrong places, fortunately, everyone was kind and helped me resolve that and be in compliance with the rules (I wasn't a forum member yet, so I hadn't been able to read the covenant detailing the limits at the time).

I gave up houses in two other places in Second Life to move here, so I admit, I'm a prim hog. I've played a long time and have a lot of stuff!

I've tried to make the extra plots of land I've bought look like they blend with the landscape, not leaving them blank, but buying the trees and other landscaping items used around them and repeating them so they'd blend seamlessly with what you guys have already done. I've appreciated your feedback as I've met some of you while I've been out doing that.

I won't offer an opinion on parcel limits, either in size or number, I understand the thought behind a rule like that in the first place and agree. I did hate to give up a couple of parcels I had decorated that are now empty again though, I was happy to do that, I already had all the stuff in my inventory and I enjoyed setting them up.

I'm happy to do whatever is best for the community, and if I ever do something dumb, please just let me know and I'll fix it!

Thanks!

User avatar
Ranma Tardis
Veteran debater
Veteran debater
Posts: 219
Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 6:28 pm

Re: Revisiting parcel limits

Post by Ranma Tardis »

I do not see the need to argue this out at this time. New citizens are not clambering for lots in CDS. I look apon a sea of yellow of lots that are for sale. The CDS is in a budget deficet and restricting ownership will make things worse not better

I have four lots just under the limit trying to help.

We need to table this disussion until there is a shortage of land within CDS.

User avatar
Sylvia Tamalyn
Master Word Wielder
Master Word Wielder
Posts: 458
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2016 8:07 am

Re: Revisiting parcel limits

Post by Sylvia Tamalyn »

Ranma, I'm not sure what you think we are talking about, but the point of this is that we do have so many available parcels. Adjusting the limits that we are allowed to own will allow current citizens to buy more parcels, thereby getting RID of some of that yellow. We are discussing easing the rules on ownership, not restricting it more.

User avatar
Han Held
I need a hobby
I need a hobby
Posts: 690
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2015 3:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Revisiting parcel limits

Post by Han Held »

It needs to be as easy as possible for people who want to buy parcels to do so. But at the same time there is the "whale" issue (as Coop put it) although at this point I think our reserves would kick in and prevent us from being hurt too badly by any single person's departure.

---
"I could talk talk talk, talk myself to death
But I believe I would only waste my breath" -Roxy Music "Remake, remodel"
Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion”