INC NEWS - UDO and square footage change

[RW Pickle]

Last night at the Executive Board meeting, we discussed adding a square
footage cap back into the rules regarding home occupations. When we
switched from the old zoning rules to the new UDO rules, somehow the
square footage cap was left off and the cap became <30% of the livable
space. For the last 20-25 years, that cap had been 400 square feet. Now,
there is no maximum cap and those are the wheels I have put in motion to
get a cap placed back into the UDO.

We did a general consensus of the Board about what square footage was
thought to be appropriate, and we even took the square footage our our
homes and did the math to come up with a general idea for a cap. But it
was suggested that I ask the neighborhoods what might be appropriate to
them in their neighborhoods. Since we do not currently have any cap
(except the <30% rule), we can keep what it has been for 25 years (400
square feet) or change it to something else.

For example, in the County where larger lots and homes are the rule, the
cap is 1200 square feet. Currently in the RR tier, that would be on three
acres (in the particular watershed areas of FJA and MLR A&B). In the City,
where lots are smaller and neighborhoods are much more compact, it hardly
makes sense that it would be 1200 square feet.

Any thoughts on a square footage cap? I have to come up with a number and
that can be anything since it will be added and one currently does not
exist.

Someone mentioned last night that when you, as the reader of these emails,
get something like this from me, that it in some way implied that I was
speaking for INC. This will never be the case unless I state it as being
so. We have a President and other officers who represent INC views, not
me. I am a citizen just like the rest of you and do a great deal in that
capacity. My being the Treasurer of INC will never allow me to speak on
behalf of INC except when it comes to the financial or online issues
(since I deal with the online stuff as well). This is all I am charged to
deal with and address in any capacity with INC (unless it is in the
capacity of some committee I am on). My views and those of INC may not
always be the same. So when you get an email from me, please do not assume
I am speaking for INC. I am not and never will (except in those capacities
mentioned above; until such time those capacities might change).

RWP
27 Beverly