Holding Court is a series by retired Rye City Court Judge Joe Latwin. Latwin retired from the court in December 2022 after thirteen years of service to the City.
What topics do you want addressed by Judge Latwin? Tell us.
By Joe Latwin
While listening to the public hearing on the proposed leaf blower law, I was struck by several residents claiming that the noise of the leaf blowers disturbed them from working at home. I am fairly certain they did not know that they were likely violating Rye’s law. Rye City Code § 197-86, table of regulations: table C residence districts — use regulations Column 3, Permitted Accessory Uses sets forth the permitted accessory uses for properties in residential zones. Among the permitted uses are telephone answering services; dressmaking, millinery, hairdressing, manicuring, laundering, preserving and home cooking, conducted solely by and employing only a person or persons resident on the premises.
The accessory use may not be carried on in an accessory building and shall not occupy more than 1/2 of the area of one floor nor more than 1/2 of the area of one dwelling unit. Except for telephone answering services, only customary home equipment shall be used. The age of this provision of law is evident of its vintage – a time when home dressmaking, taking in laundry, and home millinery was customary. Times changed but the law didn’t.
In the early 1990s when I was a City Council member and a member of the Planning Commission, I proposed amending this law to expand the number of permitted home occupations, My proposal was to include professions regulated by the State Education Department including: (1) Physicians; (2) Chiropractors; (3) Physical Therapists; (4) Dentists; (5) Midwives; (6) Podiatrists; (7) Optometrists; (8) Engineers; (9) Surveyors; (10) Architects; (11) Psychologists (12) Interior designers; and the like. While permitting these occupations in the home, there were other additional requirements limiting the number of deliveries, limiting parking to on- site parking, such that the impact on neighbors was minimal. Unfortunately, parochial interests opposed the proposal because they were not among those licensed by the State Education Department.
All of this was B.C. – before Covid. Since then, the nature of home occupations has changed. Given the new realities, it is time for the City to re-examine what home occupations should be permitted in residential districts and under what conditions. Until then, all who spoke out against leaf blowers because it disturbed your home business, just remember that your statements were taped and can be used against you if and when the City charges you with violating the zoning code by having an illegal use.
