INC NEWS - 2 things as neighborhoods meet this month

Mon Jan 8 20:50:19 EST 2007

I can see where it would be a violation if the party was running a tire
business. But just having tires doesn't sound like a violation.

For example, I bought a tow truck several years ago in Boston to transport
a disabled dune buggy I had in New Jersey back to NC (it was more cost
effective to do it this way instead of paying for a tow). When the tow
truck arrived back here at the house, it wasn't 2 days before Planning and
Zoning enforcement personel were out here asking questions. It had been
reported I was running a business over here and it looked like it was
towing (as they suggested). After I answered their questions, they left
and decided there was no violation. It';s okay to own a personal tow
truck, so there was no issue.At least not for me. It wasn't that I was
running a business at all, but some neighbor didn't like it because they
had to drive by and see a tow truck parked in my driveway. It continued to
bother them and I saw those enforcement personel again about 2 weeks
later. There was nothing anyone (but me) could do about the fact that
someone didn't like seeing the tow truck. And eventually, when I finished
with it, I resold it.

Perhaps that is the case with the tires. It's not illegal, but folks just
don't like looking at them. If it's a tire business, then that's another
deal.

Frank Duke is on this list, perhaps he'll comment.

RWP

> Wonderful news. Maybe the planning department will be able to enforce
> that part of the ordinance as well. When an inspector came out last
> year, we were told that the 16 tires stacked on the porch and the end of
> the driveway were not a violation.
>
> Barry Ragin
>
> RW Pickle wrote:
>> 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.
>> =====================================================================
>>
>>
>

====================================================================
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.
=====================================================================