Prim Parcels Again

[Tanoujin Milestone]

We postponed the discussion on prim parcels to focus on the change of the general covenant. This is done by now, so I would like to take up the discussion again.

A lot was said about this in the original thread already: Revisiting parcel limits http://forums.slcds.info/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=8177
I tried to extract and summarize but I failed, so let me just quote Sudane’s last post and ask you if we can agree on that:

The prim parcels in NFS, and then later in CN, were INTENDED (as Em says) to supplement the prims of those owners of parcels within the walls who have tiny parcels and thus very few prims. Again, the INTENT was that one prim parcel could be purchased for each city parcel. And finally, the INTENT was that if you wanted still more prims, you would simply buy a normal parcel outside, *AND* give up the prim parcel to someone who could not afford the expense of a normal parcel outside the walls for prims.

I believe we could easily translate this very clear and lucid text into legislative code (to be added in the regional covenants) to make them binding for the future, giving us the option to grandfather cases that do not match the rule because we have no good means to change them but to appeal to those owners to arrange their property accordingly if their circumstances allow it.

Additionally, I would like to see the prim parcels locked again. Take them off the unregulated market and let the Chancellor enforce the somewhat new rule. The covenant would need a passage then where inhabitants of the cities are pointed to the possibility to request a free prim parcel from the executive.

Finally, I agree with Sudane that the prim lots in FS make no sense. Something should be done about that.

[Sylvia Tamalyn]

Would you foresee treating all parcels outside of the NFS walls as "normal"? We have a big variation in parcel sizes, from the fairly small one I have on the AM border to the much larger ones in the valley. Right now, I have two parcels inside the walls, my small parcel outside the walls, and one prim parcel. Putting aside for the moment that I assume the grandfather clause would exempt me anyway, would my current set up be "legal"? It seems like it would be, since I have one city parcel attached to an outside parcel, and one city parcel attached to a prim parcel. Just trying to make sure I follow what is being suggested here, for future reference.

Second question: When you say "free" prim parcels, you mean "available", correct? If not, I want in on that free parcel deal! I do agree with locking the prim parcels, to make sure that they are being correctly regulated. I also agree about the FS prim parcels. They seem to not be needed and so sit there unused and generating no income.

[Tanoujin Milestone]

1. I believe your set is legal. If you would purchase another NFS countryside parcel, you should give up your prim parcel. And again there is no proper way to enforce it but talking you into it... that is the downside

2. Ups, yes, "free" is wrong, I meant "available". Thank you!

[Sylvia Tamalyn]

Thanks, Tan. I think what you are suggesting makes good sense. Otherwise, what's to stop one person from eventually owning all the prim parcels as they become available? I prefer to have things made official instead of trying to rely on "this is what we meant" or "this is how it's always been done", mainly because I keep inadvertently running afoul of that sort of "law"!

[Tanoujin Milestone]

Okay then, let us take the CN specific covenant first. It states under „Zones and Typologies“ > „Zone R (Villa Quarter) and Zone L (South Riverfront Plots)“

11. 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.

What about changing that to:

11. Plots R.01-1 through R.01-5 are reserved to supplement the prims of those owners of parcels within the CN city walls who have tiny parcels and thus very few prims. One prim parcel can be purchased for each city parcel. There must be a minimum of 2 trees per plot.
The prim parcels are locked to make sure they are correctly regulated. You can request available parcels from the Chancellor. If you want still more prims, you would simply buy a normal parcel outside, in this case you are expected to give up the prim parcel to someone who could not afford the expense of a normal parcel outside the walls for prims.
The property situation that emerged before xx.xx.2017 is grandfathered.

Is that clear enough? Or do we need to explain Sylvia’s example as well? How should that be formulated? Please discuss.

Proposal for the NFS covenant follows after we fixed the CN covenant.

[Sylvia Tamalyn]

I like it, but yeah, it might be good to try to clarify that if you have a situation like mine, buying one normal parcel does not mean you have to give up ALL prim parcels. Maybe something like:

11. Plots R.01-1 through R.01-5 are reserved to supplement the prims of those owners of parcels within the CN city walls who have tiny parcels and thus very few prims. One prim parcel can be purchased for each city parcel. There must be a minimum of 2 trees per plot.

The prim parcels are locked to make sure they are correctly regulated. You can request available parcels from the Chancellor. If you want still more prims, you would simply buy a normal parcel outside the city walls, and in exchange, you would give up the prim parcel that the normal parcel is now replacing. This would free up the prim parcel for use by someone who cannot afford the expense of purchasing a normal parcel outside the walls to use as a prim parcel. This exchange is on a parcel by parcel basis, so that for each normal parcel purchased, you would give up one of your owned prim parcels. The purchase of any additional normal parcels would be treated the same, with the exchange of one owned prim parcel for each normal parcel purchased.

The property situation that emerged before xx.xx.2017 is grandfathered.

Hopefully that makes sense!

[Tanoujin Milestone]

It's cool Always a pleasure to cooperate with you!

[Sylvia Tamalyn]

Right back at you! Just let me know any time you need more words added to something!

[Tanoujin Milestone]

So, if there is no objection or further comment at the moment, I adapt this text to NFS, in detail discarding the 2 trees per lot rule and exchanging the parcel names. This text would have to be added in the NFS specific covenant under "A) Zones and Typologies" > "Zone O:(Outside city walls)"

5. Plots P280-01 trough P280-20 are reserved to supplement the prims of those owners of parcels within the NFS city walls who have tiny parcels and thus very few prims. One prim parcel can be purchased for each city parcel.

The prim parcels are locked to make sure they are correctly regulated. You can request available parcels from the Chancellor. If you want still more prims, you would simply buy a normal parcel outside the city walls, and in exchange, you would give up the prim parcel that the normal parcel is now replacing. This would free up the prim parcel for use by someone who cannot afford the expense of purchasing a normal parcel outside the walls to use as a prim parcel. This exchange is on a parcel by parcel basis, so that for each normal parcel purchased, you would give up one of your owned prim parcels. The purchase of any additional normal parcels would be treated the same, with the exchange of one owned prim parcel for each normal parcel purchased.

The property situation that emerged before xx.xx.2017 is grandfathered.

I will present both changes as a proposal at the RA meeting tomorrow for discussion.

[Sylvia Tamalyn]

That looks good, Tan. NFS is probably the region most likely to have prim parcel issues, so it will be good to have clarification there.

[Ranma Tardis]

Since there are no available R lots this seems rather pointless.

[Tanoujin Milestone]

Depends what meaning you assign to the term "pointless". First of all Em and Sudane asked for clarification, and it is an advantage to let new people know what the purpose of that parcels is when they read the covenant for the first time. My second point is that no prim parcels available is part of the problem. And third I assume we will be around for more years and decades to come, and the prim parcel issue may "grow out" with time. Finally I hope those who are not inline with the "new" prim parcel policy reconsider their holdings, the more because we now have more prims per parcel with the recent change the glorious Lindens made.

[Sylvia Tamalyn]

I don't know what possible harm could come from clarifying the law for the future. In addition, as Tan pointed out, if there are current holders of prim parcels who are not in line with the proposed changes, they may *voluntarily* choose to free up a prim parcel or two once this went into effect.

More to the point, there is a prim parcel available: R01-02, and I believe there is also one available in NFS. So there you go.

[Lilith Ivory]

Just a suggestion.
Could the RA please include the prim parcels we have in Alpine meadow ( DH9 and DH10) in the discussion too?
Both are made prim parcels for the simple reason they have no direct access to public land and both are vacant most of the time as it often gets forgotten they exist

[Sylvia Tamalyn]

Do all prim parcels need to have these ownership limits put on them? If that's what you mean, then there are also prim parcels in LA and FS that should be included in the discussion as well. I'm not aware of any in Monastery, but that doesn't mean there isn't one hidden under a rock or something.

However, for what it's worth, I would think that only the ones Tan mentioned need to have these limitations put on them, as they are the ones in high demand.