Hi everybody, just barely learned a few minutes ago some additional info.
The neighborhood chair Kurt Peterson replied to me --
"You aren't even telling people the whole story regarding 3 to 2. Do you realize this only applies in R1 neighborhoods, and only in new applications for rentals? It doesn't apply in 90 % of my neighborhood, the RC.
People, I did the best I could with very limited time last night. I hope you'll give me the benefit of the doubt. I did not know that: * It only applies to new applications for rentals.(rental dwelling licenses?) * It does not apply to RC zones But I did say below that: * It only applies to "single-family homes" which is the common man's term for the technical term of R1. * I did say that the limit of 2 was in l4 neighborhoods. Additionally -- Kurt Peterson wrote:
It is also just one piece of these 2 bills, which have other impacts, like limiting the ability a city has to require that any structural changes be made in order to get a rental. You may think that's just fine, but there are a lot of us who don't. I have a stepdaughter in college-I want the places she lives in to be safe, and have reasonable things like egress windows, smoke detectors, CO2 detectors, and at least a 7 foot ceiling.
I did not have time to read the rest of the new laws. Sorry I did not know about the other parts sooner. However that does not change the concern about double standards. There should neither be a limit of 2 or 3 or 4. The limit should be based on something that applies to both singles and married -- renters and owners. Either: #1 - parking spaces per home #2 - square footage per home I think all sides want the same goals -- at least most of us do -- I want to get married someday and have children. I want neighbors that are friendly and children in the neighborhood to play with my children. I want my children when they are singles in their 20's and 30's to be able to rent out their condos or houses to their friends and not have the city being big brother saying that 4 friends living together in a house is too many. Double standards are wrong. Make everybody play by the same rules -- like parking or square footage. That's all we're asking for. To be treated like everyone else. Please come to speak out or listen TONIGHT. 5:30pm till who knows when at 351 W. Center St. Thanks! Roger Brown 801-356-1032 Quoting Roger Brown <[email protected]>:
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ *HUMONGOUS Town Hall Meeting* tomorrow, *Tuesday July 13th @ 5:30pm* @ City Hall ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ New amendments to existing state laws were recently passed and signed into law by the Governor on March 30th. While many people have rejoiced because these amendments started to restore rights that were taken away -- others have been fuming about it ever since it passed. /These people do not believe that you should have a right to be a wise steward over your own property -- specifically they don't believe you have the right to determine how many unrelated people live in your own home./ Check this out! #1 - S.B. 45 Substitute - UTAH FIT PREMISES ACT AMENDMENTS http://le.utah.gov/~2010/bills/sbillenr/sb0045.htm *****QUOTE***************** This bill: . prohibits counties and municipalities from placing a specified limit on the number of unrelated individuals allowed to occupy a single-family unit; *************************** Wow! Sounds huge by itself -- but if you keep on reading you get the details -- actually the state legislators said they could have a "specified limit" and that limit is 3. Don't ask me why they contradict themselves! :( *_Anyway, why is this big for Provo?!_ In 14 out of 34 neighborhoods in the city, there is a limit of 2 unrelated adults per "single-family home" -- even if it's a 3, 4, or 5+ bedroom house -- CRAZY! So any zoning officer or Provo City official that tries to tell you that you can't have 3 single adults in your home is either ignorant of breaking state law! It is against the law to limit it to only 2!* #2 - H.B. 381 - MUNICIPAL LAND USE PROVISIONS http://le.utah.gov/~2010/bills/hbillenr/hb0381.htm I'll let you read this one on your own -- it's /very/ important but not as exciting as the one above. To get a little background please read this article to be printed in Tuesday morning's Deseret News: *** http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700047661/Controversial-state-zoning-laws-subject-of-Provo-town-hall-meeting.html *** PLEASE COME to the meeting!! Send a family member or friend if you can't come. This is of extremely serious import - please come! :) Roger Brown 801-356-1032 http://ProvoCitizens.net P.S. Here's just one comment from those that oppose the partial restoration of rights -- someone who is supposed to just pass on the facts without bias - "Unfortunately, these bills limit the power of cities to engage in various activities which can help neighborhoods and maintain safe places for people to live." source: July 9th email from Kurt Peterson, Joaquin Neighborhood Chair People, your property rights are at stake! * ***Please forward this email to at least 2 other Provo residents.* P.P.S. City Hall is at 351 W. Center St.
P.S. Know someone that wants to receive these emails? :) Tell them to sign up by sending a blank email to [email protected] --> Don't live in Provo anymore and want to unsubscribe? Send a blank email to [email protected] and the list program will automatically unsubscribe you.
