INC NEWS - 2 things as neighborhoods meet this month

Mon Jan 8 19:35:27 EST 2007

This particular ordinance change only deals with "livable" interior space
and home occupations. Exterior space used as a business has to have proper
zoning in order to be a business at all (I think). There is a part of this
particular ordinance that specifically states there can be no outdoor
activity or outdoor storage that can be viewed by others.

RWP

> As i've said in the past, i am much less concerned by an accountant or a
> web designer working in an 800 sq. foot piece of their house than i am
> about a pit bull breeder, fighting bird seller, or auto repair business
> operating unlicensed with no restrictions in a residential neighborhood.
> All of which i've experienced on my block within the past 18 months with
> no enforcement mechanism in place at all. Who knows how much brake fluid
> or used motor oil made it into the storm draim on my block?
>
> Barry Ragin
> 1706 Shawnee St.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: RW Pickle <randy at 27beverly.com>
> Date: Monday, January 8, 2007 12:05 pm
> Subject: Re: INC NEWS - 2 things as neighborhoods meet this month
> To: inc-list at durhaminc.org
>
>> Regarding telecommuters, according to T.E. Austin of the Planning
>> Department, as he interpreted the clause, it could. But he said his
>> answerwas not the definitive one. I guess if there was some issue,
>> it would be
>> dealt with in the same manner other zoning issues are dealt with. The
>> latter statement is just my guess.
>>
>> But most telecommuters I know use only a small portion of the livable
>> space for an office (if you're going to take tax deductions for
>> having a
>> home office, it has to be dedicated space). Even under the old zoning
>> rules with a maximum cap (400 square feet), the home office could
>> be 20' X
>> 20' (which is huge). My home office for example is roughly 11' X 8'
>> (88square feet). Less than half of that space is office; the rest
>> of it is
>> filled with other crap. I count 4 computers, a scanner, an L shaped
>> deskwith bookcase, etc. for office stuff. It's a lot of stuff in
>> this small of
>> a space (and there's still room to move, but not much because of
>> all the
>> other crap across the floor that seems to accumulate here). It's
>> safe to
>> assume there is only a path to my chair at my desk. The whole
>> office is
>> really in need of being cleaned out of all of this other crap. But
>> it all
>> has to go somewhere I guess. My wife has the same size space and
>> has a lot
>> more room (even though it's the same size; she has less crap all
>> over the
>> floor space). So even under the old square footage cap, here are 2
>> homeoffice work areas in less than 180 square feet. Even with 2
>> spaces, that's
>> less than half the maximum cap that existed in the past.  If I went
>> withwhat is there now (with no maximum square footage cap, just the
>> less than
>> 30% rule), I could have a 1000+ square feet dedicated to a home office
>> (ten+ times more than I currently use!). I think the ordinance is
>> relativeto like a doctor or lawyer practicing out of their home
>> where they might
>> have a waiting room and need some additional space. That's the
>> example I
>> keep hearing as it relates to the ordinance in general.
>>
>> The difference between a "maximum square footage cap" and the "less
>> than30% of the livable space" rule is not incidental. It is
>> possible for it to
>> be a huge difference. Therein lies the issue.
>>
>> RWP
>>
>>
>> > Does the "Home Occupation" rule cover telecommuters?
>> >
>> > -Colin Crossman
>> > Walltown
>> >
>> > RW Pickle wrote:
>> >> The first is an INC piece of business.
>> >>
>> >> Please mention this at your Jan. neighborhood meetings. This is the
>> >> first
>> >> year where we are starting our calendar dues year, to run with the
>> >> calendar year (Jan.-Dec.). So from here on out (unless we change
>> it for
>> >> some unknown reason), INC dues will become due in Jan. for that
>> >> particular
>> >> year. This should make it easy for everyone to remember. Our
>> dues are
>> >> still a bargain; $25 for the whole neighborhood organization! So
>> send in
>> >> your dues for 2007! You can mail them to me (the Treasurer) at:
>> >>
>> >> Randy Pickle
>> >> 27 Beverly Dr.
>> >> Durham, 27707-2223
>> >>
>> >> Make checks payable to INC (or the Inter Neighborhood Council)
>> >>
>> >> The second item I'd like to get some feedback on relates to an
>> upcoming>> change in the UDO I have requested. The first week in
>> Feb. (on the 7th),
>> >> the Joint City County Planning Committee meets to discuss the
>> addition>> of
>> >> a maximum square footage for "home occupations" as found within
>> the UDO
>> >> regulations. For the last 20 or so years (in the City), it has
>> been 400
>> >> square feet or less than 30% of the livable space. When we
>> adopted the
>> >> new
>> >> UDO last year, we left off a maximum cap of square footage (like
>> the 400
>> >> square feet it once was) and just left it at less than 30% of the
>> >> livable
>> >> space. Their meeting in Feb. will be to discuss adding a maximum
>> cap to
>> >> the UDO (as it was in the past before the UDO was adopted). See
>> if there
>> >> are any feeling one way or the other about how much square footage
>> >> should
>> >> be allowed from your groups. There are a number of options:
>> >>
>> >> * make it the 400 square feet that it always has been
>> >>
>> >> * increase the square footage to ???
>> >>
>> >> * leave it at 30% and allow any size cap as long as it meets this
>> >> requirement
>> >>
>> >> * or any other solution you might want
>> >>
>> >> This will just be the first meeting to discuss the change. If they
>> >> decide
>> >> to do so, there will be the usual public comment periods etc. as it
>> >> moves
>> >> through the system toward being adopted. Frank Duke asked me
>> what we
>> >> wanted for a cap; I'm asking you if the 400 square feet it has
>> always>> been
>> >> will work? He said he wouldn't oppose the ammendment, he just
>> wanted a
>> >> square footage figure that was thought to be the magic number.
>> >>
>> >> Just ask your neighborhood group and see what they think. Send any
>> >> comments you might have to me off the list server.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> RWP
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> INC-list mailing list
>> >> INC-list at rtpnet.org
>> >> http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> INC-list mailing list
>> INC-list at rtpnet.org
>> http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list
>>
>

====================================================================
This e-mail, and any attachments to it, contains PRIVILEGED AND
CONFIDENTIAL information intended only for the use of the addressee(s) or
entity named on the e-mail. If you are not the intended recipient of this
e-mail, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering it to the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any reading,
dissemination or copying of this e-mail in error is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this electronic  transmission in error, please notify
me by telephone (919-489-0576) or by electronic  mail to the sender of
this email, RW  Pickle (pickle at patriot.net) immediately.
=====================================================================