The DHA is going to hear a number of presentations tonight. One is from Steve Dush re: the zoning code rewrite. Another is from Tom Taylor and Fran Millar on legislation for 2013.
Everyone's hackles go up when talk begins about the Zoning Rewrite. Even on John's blog, he zeroed in on home businesses (not the actual ordinance, just an excerpt from the last public presentation) and ignored everything else. Then there's arguments about bicycle accommodations. Then there's backyard farming. Then there's street-legal golf carts. Then there's infill redevelopment.
All of these topics are important because it defines diverse activity that is already happening, but there have been no workable boundaries set so that our evolving community can function without stepping over each
other. Or squabbling over the idea that someone's lifestyle is somehow different.
It's ironic that these individual foci have taken center stage in the zoning rewrite, and there has been NO attention paid whatsoever to the zoning topics that will affect each and every one of the 46K+ residents of this city.
The residential zoning regs have new elements that most take for granted. How many of you own a boat? Or Jetskis? Or an RV or camper? Or just stash your stuff in a shed you pick up at Home Depot? How many of you have a large, extended family with numerous cars? How many live with people you're not related to? (That includes LGBT couples too, gang.) How many of you have gardening equipment? Rototillers? Or even just a riding lawn mower to save time? I'll bet you didn't even think of how you keep your property because you don't get complaints from the neighbors, right?
Think again.
These new regulations were composed with YOU in mind. Forget about "commercial use" or "occupations" or "agricultural" or other niche interests. These zoning regulations are going to dictate to you how you may keep your own personal possessions on your own personal property. Every citizen of this community is going to be affected by these updated regs, at some point in your lifetime in Dunwoody.
From the "super module" released in January:
"Household means a group of individuals related by blood, marriage, adoption, guardianship or
other custodial relationship, or not more than 4 persons not so related, living together in a dwelling unit as a single housekeeping unit under a common housekeeping management plan based on
an intentionally structured relationship providing organization and stability."
You've just been informed how you may set up your household and with whom you may live. Say you're the Brady Bunch: Mom, Dad, six kids, a dog, and a live-in employee. Alice would not be allowed to live in the maid's quarters, because she is unrelated to more than 4 people in the house. Alice would not be permitted her own apartment (w/ kitchen, etc) within the house either because only relatives may live in "in law" apartments in a single-family home.
"The parking and outdoor storage of trailers, recreational vehicles, travel trailers, campers, pickup coaches, motorized homes, boat trailers, boats and similar vehicles and equipment is prohibited in street yards and within 20 feet of the rear lot line"
I can think of three homes right off the bat who are going to have to rethink how they store their personal property. Remember, none of this is the dreaded "commercial" use and there are homeowners who store their property happily at the moment without meeting these regulations. To make matters worse, there are no storage facilities inside city limits that rent parking spaces. Closest ones are in Doraville and Sandy Springs.
So you want to use PODS or a similar service to store your stuff off-property, or move from one house to another. Can you tell which storage company meets these regulations?
"The community development director is authorized to approve the use of portable
storage containers as a temporary use in any zoning district."
So to get a PODS to your house to get your stuff out of view, you need a permit. Who's going to think of that when calling the company?
"Temporary portable storage containers may not exceed 8.5 feet in height or
more than 260 square feet in area."
If you need more storage space than this, you're hosed.
Temporary portable storage containers may not be located in the public rightof-way or obstruct intersection visibility.
Need your driveway clear while you use a PODS to move your stuff? Bummer!
Temporary portable storage containers may not be located in side setbacks or side yards. Temporary portable storage containers may not be located in a street yard unless located on a driveway or other paved surface.
Double bummer if you have a small lot. Or a hilly one.
Rail cars, semi-trailers or similar equipment may not be used for temporary (or permanent) storage.
Hey, guy on Tilly Mill road next to the "J" - this was written for you!
Signs on temporary portable storage containers must comply with all applicable city sign regulations
Show of hands, who is going to read the city sign code to PODS or other storage company to see if the paint on the storage containers matches the code?
So while we have to keep smaller subsections of our community in mind when crafting a zoning document, let's not overlook the basic regulations that will eventually dictate the lives of every citizen, regardless of what district they live in, regardless of what kind of home in what subdivision. Forgetting the basics of zoning residential districts is like tripping over a $100 bill to pick up a quarter. And it will lead to more upset red-shirts clammoring for their rights down the line.
Tom and Fran would do well to focus their legislative comments tonight on ways to extricate Dunwoody from the ever-failing DeKalb School System. Whenever DCSS' credibility hits bottom, they start digging. Eugene Walker should be in China by now. We can argue and fuss and conspire and ruminate about all of the zoning in the world. But all of that effort will be worth a hill of poop in the dog park if Dunwoody's schools are associated with a system that is all but designed to fail.
If we're going to preserve (I prefer "conserve"...) our community for future generations to enjoy and live in, let's make sure the foundations and basics of the zoning code and other legal structures are truly livable. Worry less about the "occupations" and the "livestock"; worry more about the actual residential rules.
We haven't even gotten to the residentially-zoned stream buffers yet.
The latest updates from SDOC Publishing Internet Solutions for our clients, our community, and the web design field. Our Dunwoody, Georgia studio serves clients all over the United States and Canada.
Sunday, February 10, 2013
Friday, February 1, 2013
Who Wants Their Own Reality Show?
I just received this request and I'm passing it on. There has to be at least one business owner in Dunwoody whose daily business life would make for interesting TV.
Email us today at DevelopmentLA@LeopardFilms.com
We are Leopard Films USA, a major US television
production company that produces family friendly shows like House Hunters
International for HGTV, as well as series on A&E, Discovery, Food Network
amongst many other major TV Networks.
There are NO COSTS to any businesses to participate in
this opportunity and participation could only lead to national PUBLICITY for
their businesses to benefit their families and your local economy.
As you know, there certainly are lackluster reality TV series
on the air today, but Leopard Films prides itself with producing only the
highest quality, family friendly TV-series that always benefit any business and
community involved.
All the best,
Harlan Freedman
West Coast Head of Development
Leopard Films USA
1415 N. Cahuenga Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90028
323-424-7300
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Put your business on a national TV series!
Leopard Films USA (www.leopardfilmsusa.com), a major
U.S. production company with docu-series on TV networks including A&E,
Food, Discovery, History, Travel, and HGTV is searching for businesses that are
right for their own TV series that meet at least ONE of the following criteria:
1. Businesses that
have interesting characters working there.
OR
2. Businesses with
a unique product/service or are the best at what they do.
OR
3. Businesses that
are family run (3 or more family members)
If you know of such a business, please email us TODAY to
begin the FREE and easy process to determine if your or someone you know,
business, should have your own TV series!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Thursday, January 24, 2013
Zoning Sounding Board Confidential
As of last night the zoning code rewrite drafting is about 3/4 done. Last module is going to involve the stream buffers and related issues.
When the Sounding Board was first assembled, Steve Dush cautioned all of us that discussions would be heated and there was a potential for them to get out of control.
That never happened. We each had areas of concern and expertise, but no fights broke out. There were no "hijacked" meetings. Once we got to know each other in the context of the Board and its goals, once we were sure that none of our perspectives would be dismissed or censored, we came together as a group and looked for ways that all of the diverse interests of Dunwoody's many communities could be accommodated. That is, we recognized that not all districts or subdivisions, or businesses were alike. One size fits all wasn't going to happen. We strove to watch a code develop that would accommodate ever-diversifying interests through the next two decades of the 21st century.
We hashed through all kinds of interests. Some of which I believe will become anachronisms in 20 years when the zoning code has to be reviewed again. There were all sorts of groups looking to have their interests codified. There were sloppy displays of Gluteus smoochium to the Atlanta Regional Commission. There were activities and interests I couldn't imagine myself involved with in a million years. There were major conflicts that needed fine lines drawn. When last night's meeting rolled around, the Sounding Board members present and reps from the City and the consultants were sitting around, agreeing with each other (!) that the current draft was comprehensive, consistent, accommodating of various interests when able and most of all, fair to the entire city, not just one segment of it.
There are going to be individual cases to be worked out one at a time. But the framework is in place.
The most interesting thing I learned was that it is not necessary to personally endorse an activity or perspective to accommodate it in the code. That epiphany broke down a lot of barriers. There were some requests and recommendations that I thought were ridiculous. But determining their place in the code wasn't about what I thought personally. It was about making room for as many as possible.
City staff and council members have sat in on these sessions at various times, usually without comment. Last night Denny Shortal visited and offered his personal advice to the team. (Unfortunately, he did so in the bottom of the 6th out of nine innings, bless his heart.) Denny's advice was (paraphrased) to base our decisions of what the code should read based on what we would like to live next to personally.
Denny is wrong and last night's advice was bad for Dunwoody. Here is why:
When peoples' only perception of "the city" begins and ends at their property lines, communication becomes impossible. Cliques form that consider other taxpaying and homeowner citizens the "foe" that they must be "protected" against. Any step in evolution, growth, improvement is met with suspicion and hostility. Then you see groups of grumpy red shirted-citizens opposed to any change, whatever the reason. The impact of any previous progress is diluted. Focusing your attention on only what you, yourself, "like" and "prefer" pits neighbors against each other and progress grinds to a halt. Focusing on your own likes to the detriment of others who think differently is to write a zoning code based on fear, rather than reality. I dont' know if Denny even realizes this is what he has done.
Speaking of basing code upon fear, my colleagues and others interested in this process love to inform me how home occupations are going to be a "hot button" issue. I can't tell if they're dreading the conflict or thriving on it. I supposed it depends on who's doing the talking. The number of recorded complaints regarding home occupations is minuscule compared to the hundreds of home business owners in Dunwoody. No one believes for a minute that any homeowner should put up with egregious nuisances. There are some little red lizards running around town trying to convince you that home business owners want the right to be a nuisance That is a lie.
Every effort was put into writing the current code to accommodate the majority of home business owners who get along with their neighbors without causing the problems that are the source of the fear. Past incidents of code violations by home business owners were examined and the code written to prohibit those practices. At the same time, the punitive processes were removed. If this code is passed, home business owners will be free to come forward and be permitted by the city to see one customer at a time, without hiding from a months-long process that drags out in the pages of the Crier. Music teachers and other tutors can receive their pupils without their parents whispering nervously about being at someone's home. Neighbors and others can file a complaint where necessary and leave the peaceful owners alone. Peaceful home business owners don't need or deserve to be stigmatized by the few who cannot function in their neighborhoods.
Why has this process taken so long? Because every time this discussion comes up, the first words out of every nay-sayer's mouth is "I'm afraid." The previous code was written in the 1970s and is only enforced because of someone's fear, not the reality of the wide variety of activities that take place in a 21st century home. Home business owners were considered guilty of being a nuisance before proven innocent - and they could never be innocent. The current code draft balances the needs of home business owners and other residents fairly, without a presumption of guilt on either side.
Read it for yourself at zoningdunwoody.com. Nothing in this process or these documents has ever been a secret.
That's just one issue that is going to come up tonight. (We'll see if I can get over my cold in enough time to attend.) The accommodation of bicyclists, standards in the Village Overlay District, "mixed use" districts, are all going to be major. There are advocates both for and against these accommodation, just like for home businesses.
What's going to happen tonight? How many attendees will open their discussion on whatever issue concerns them with "We can't do that because I'm afraid"? How many will look beyond their own property lines and accept the different homes that make up Dunwoody and find common ground? Or at the very least build a fair fence between them?
Take my advice - let the Angel destroy the lizard. It's liberating to let go of the fear of the "different". I did it myself. The entire Sounding Board did. It's OK to let everyone be happy citizens in their own way.
When the Sounding Board was first assembled, Steve Dush cautioned all of us that discussions would be heated and there was a potential for them to get out of control.
That never happened. We each had areas of concern and expertise, but no fights broke out. There were no "hijacked" meetings. Once we got to know each other in the context of the Board and its goals, once we were sure that none of our perspectives would be dismissed or censored, we came together as a group and looked for ways that all of the diverse interests of Dunwoody's many communities could be accommodated. That is, we recognized that not all districts or subdivisions, or businesses were alike. One size fits all wasn't going to happen. We strove to watch a code develop that would accommodate ever-diversifying interests through the next two decades of the 21st century.
We hashed through all kinds of interests. Some of which I believe will become anachronisms in 20 years when the zoning code has to be reviewed again. There were all sorts of groups looking to have their interests codified. There were sloppy displays of Gluteus smoochium to the Atlanta Regional Commission. There were activities and interests I couldn't imagine myself involved with in a million years. There were major conflicts that needed fine lines drawn. When last night's meeting rolled around, the Sounding Board members present and reps from the City and the consultants were sitting around, agreeing with each other (!) that the current draft was comprehensive, consistent, accommodating of various interests when able and most of all, fair to the entire city, not just one segment of it.
There are going to be individual cases to be worked out one at a time. But the framework is in place.
The most interesting thing I learned was that it is not necessary to personally endorse an activity or perspective to accommodate it in the code. That epiphany broke down a lot of barriers. There were some requests and recommendations that I thought were ridiculous. But determining their place in the code wasn't about what I thought personally. It was about making room for as many as possible.
City staff and council members have sat in on these sessions at various times, usually without comment. Last night Denny Shortal visited and offered his personal advice to the team. (Unfortunately, he did so in the bottom of the 6th out of nine innings, bless his heart.) Denny's advice was (paraphrased) to base our decisions of what the code should read based on what we would like to live next to personally.
Denny is wrong and last night's advice was bad for Dunwoody. Here is why:
When peoples' only perception of "the city" begins and ends at their property lines, communication becomes impossible. Cliques form that consider other taxpaying and homeowner citizens the "foe" that they must be "protected" against. Any step in evolution, growth, improvement is met with suspicion and hostility. Then you see groups of grumpy red shirted-citizens opposed to any change, whatever the reason. The impact of any previous progress is diluted. Focusing your attention on only what you, yourself, "like" and "prefer" pits neighbors against each other and progress grinds to a halt. Focusing on your own likes to the detriment of others who think differently is to write a zoning code based on fear, rather than reality. I dont' know if Denny even realizes this is what he has done.
Speaking of basing code upon fear, my colleagues and others interested in this process love to inform me how home occupations are going to be a "hot button" issue. I can't tell if they're dreading the conflict or thriving on it. I supposed it depends on who's doing the talking. The number of recorded complaints regarding home occupations is minuscule compared to the hundreds of home business owners in Dunwoody. No one believes for a minute that any homeowner should put up with egregious nuisances. There are some little red lizards running around town trying to convince you that home business owners want the right to be a nuisance That is a lie.
Every effort was put into writing the current code to accommodate the majority of home business owners who get along with their neighbors without causing the problems that are the source of the fear. Past incidents of code violations by home business owners were examined and the code written to prohibit those practices. At the same time, the punitive processes were removed. If this code is passed, home business owners will be free to come forward and be permitted by the city to see one customer at a time, without hiding from a months-long process that drags out in the pages of the Crier. Music teachers and other tutors can receive their pupils without their parents whispering nervously about being at someone's home. Neighbors and others can file a complaint where necessary and leave the peaceful owners alone. Peaceful home business owners don't need or deserve to be stigmatized by the few who cannot function in their neighborhoods.
Why has this process taken so long? Because every time this discussion comes up, the first words out of every nay-sayer's mouth is "I'm afraid." The previous code was written in the 1970s and is only enforced because of someone's fear, not the reality of the wide variety of activities that take place in a 21st century home. Home business owners were considered guilty of being a nuisance before proven innocent - and they could never be innocent. The current code draft balances the needs of home business owners and other residents fairly, without a presumption of guilt on either side.
Read it for yourself at zoningdunwoody.com. Nothing in this process or these documents has ever been a secret.
That's just one issue that is going to come up tonight. (We'll see if I can get over my cold in enough time to attend.) The accommodation of bicyclists, standards in the Village Overlay District, "mixed use" districts, are all going to be major. There are advocates both for and against these accommodation, just like for home businesses.
What's going to happen tonight? How many attendees will open their discussion on whatever issue concerns them with "We can't do that because I'm afraid"? How many will look beyond their own property lines and accept the different homes that make up Dunwoody and find common ground? Or at the very least build a fair fence between them?
Take my advice - let the Angel destroy the lizard. It's liberating to let go of the fear of the "different". I did it myself. The entire Sounding Board did. It's OK to let everyone be happy citizens in their own way.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)