INC NEWS - N&O: Effort aims to cut yard parking

[Mike - Hotmail]

Thanks Ken,

But what was left out of the article was the commitment INC and the PAC's have made in the past (and continue) to provide venues for people to learn what's going on in their community and ways to improve it.

The article seems to only focus on enforcement.

One of the things I tried to convey during the interview last Wednesday with the N&O reporter was the PAC's and INC focus is on getting information, like this, out in a more neighborly fashion.

It's the way to treat people.

At least this is the way I'd hoped the article would have focused on.

I'd also mentioned the initiatives that the Durham Realtors have organized and the work of so many other neighborhood individuals have done to make their community a more pleasant place to live.

But alas,  there's only so much information you can squeeze into a 500 word article.


mike


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Ken Gasch 
  To: pac2 at yahoogroups.com ; inc-list at durhaminc.org 
  Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 12:28 AM
  Subject: INC NEWS - N&O: Effort aims to cut yard parking


  Effort aims to cut yard parking
  Durham enforcing a new regulation
  Michael Biesecker, Staff Writer
  Luis Sanchez had no idea he was risking a $500-a-day fine as he and his amigos worked on a misbehaving Mitsubishi parked in front of his East Durham duplex. 
  But the shade-tree mechanic is the prime target of a new countywide crackdown on parking in front yards. 

  While the city is empowered to issue tickets to drivers who park illegally on public streets, it cannot fine someone for parking improperly on private ground. It can, however, issue a citation for a zoning violation against the property owner -- in this case Sanchez's landlord. 

  Sanchez, a house painter who earns about $500 a week, said people park anywhere they want in his native Mexico. Outside his squat brick apartment in one of the Bull City's poorest neighborhoods, there is no grass to kill in the dirt yard, and maintaining curb appeal is obviously not a priority for the unit's absentee owner, whom Sanchez said he has never met. There were four vehicles arranged on the tiny lot Wednesday. 

  "It's not fair," Sanchez said of the rule. "Some of us have several cars. We can't fit them all in the driveway." 

  An obscure city ordinance has forbidden parking in the front yards of single-family homes and apartment buildings since 1994, but enforcement of that provision has been inconsistent and, because of a hiccup in the zoning rules, duplexes, triplexes and quadruplexes were exempt. 

  At public meetings held last year to help create Durham's new city-county Unified Development Ordinance, neighborhood leaders were emphatic that fighting front-yard parking was a top issue. The new ordinance that went into effect Jan. 1 got tough, making the prohibition against residential grass-top parking universal and cranking up the potential penalty from $300 to $500 each day -- the maximum daily fine allowed by state law. 

  Mike Shiflett, an advocate of the parking ban and the past president of Durham's Inter-Neighborhood Council, stressed that drivers of all races can and do park in their front yards. But often the issue, he admitted, is a cultural one. 

  "I think what the community is saying is that blight is unacceptable," Shiflett said. "People parking in their yards detracts from the beauty of our neighborhoods and kills our trees. There are people new to our country who don't know what the community's expectations are. If I were to move to a different country, I hope someone would explain to me the responsibilities of being a good neighbor." 

  Under the new ordinance, offending property owners are issued a warning letter by certified mail that grants them one day to remove any autos. If the vehicle is gone in 24 hours, there is no fine. But if it is not moved, or if a zoning inspector spots a vehicle parked in the same yard within two years, the $500 daily fines start accruing immediately, potentially up to the $40,000 maximum for zoning violations. 

  Little-known rule 

  City-County Planning Director Frank Duke said his office has not tracked how many parking-related violations it has issued since Jan. 1. Though he acknowledged that most city residents probably haven't heard of the rule, he said that is not his problem. 

  "There is no way I can go out and make people aware of every single provision in a 300-page document," Duke said. 

  At a recent City Council meeting, however, several of the elected officials who voted to enact the new development ordinance also seemed surprised by the $500-a-day fine, which one described as "Draconian." 

  The provision certainly was an unwelcome shock to landlord Larry Hester, who owns a rental house on Cook Road. He received a Jan. 12 notice of violation for yard parking, compliments of a zoning enforcement officer. 

  The new ordinance can put landlords in a difficult spot. They can try to collect the fine from their tenant, who might refuse to pay or remove the vehicle. It can take more than 60 days to evict a parking scofflaw, during which the daily fines could balloon. 

  Duke said it is within his authority to waive fines for those having such a problem, but offending homeowners should not count on his mercy. The fines are steep to encourage compliance. 

  "I can't move or tow a car," Duke said. "That's up to the property owner." 

  Still, Hester said, Durham's elected leaders should reconsider the issue. 

  "Five hundred dollars a day is too punitive," he said. "That is a lot of money for any person -- tenant, landlord, whoever. It's too much."

  Staff writer Michael Biesecker can be reached at 956-2421 or mbieseck at newsobserver.com.

  Copyright 2006, The News & Observer Publishing Company


   


------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  INC-list mailing list
  INC-list at rtpnet.org
  http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/private/inc-list/attachments/20060221/5e2c09ea/attachment-0001.htm