The auto repair shops in and around Henderson are predictably unhappy with the city’s proposed amortization ordinance, which would put a dozen of them out of business and and force at least 20 others to spend some money to comply with zoning rules. As The Daily Dispatch reported today, many plan to fight the proposal when it comes before the City Council.
We’d expect no less. Any businessman would fight to keep his business going, and no businessman should meekly accept government rules that cost him money if he doesn’t see the point.
But before the auto repair businesses prepare for battle at the Municipal Building (the council will have the option Monday night to schedule a public hearing for May 23), let’s get a few things straight about what this draft ordinance is all about.
First, this isn’t some grand plan to drive small-business people out of business or out of Vance County. Few people could fail to recognize the importance of entrepreneurs and small businesses, which Chamber of Commerce President Bill Edwards says are our primary job creators in the largely post-textile county we live in. Business owners have raised legitimate concerns about the zoning ordinance standards they’re being asked to live up to.
We think it’s reasonable to ask the city to drop the expensive paving provision, and there should be room in the ordinance for cars to remain at auto repair shops while under legitimate repair or legal restraints.
Second, this isn’t some wacky scheme cooked up by the Clean Up Henderson Committee or outgoing Planning Director Grace Smith in an attempt to turn Henderson into Cary North, where it’s better to look good than to feel good. Smith, City Attorney John Zollicoffer and the Planning Board took up the issue of auto junkyards at the request of the City Council, which responded to citizen complaints funneled through the cleanup committee.
Third, this is driven by citizen complaints. The auto shop owners who talked to the Dispatch seemed unanimous that none of their neighbors ever complained to them; thus, they’re shocked that the city would even consider forcing them to change.
We’re sure that some shops haven’t received complaints, just as we know that many shops are well-kept and don’t allow the junk to pile up. On the other hand, some others are abysmal; if any of them haven’t received complaints, it’s only because neighbors don’t see the point of banging their heads against a rusted-out wall.
If and when the amortization ordinance has its public hearing (we won’t be surprised if the council sends the draft it’s receiving Monday night to a committee or back to the Planning Board for more work before subjecting itself to a lengthy public deabte), we expect the publicity to bring out more neighbors of junkyards than appeared before the Planning Board. We suspect that the relationship isn’t as sunny as some shop owners would have us believe.
For now, consider the testimony of Christine Hardy, a resident of Temple Hills, Md., who owns a Roosevelt Street house facing Gooch’s Transmission Service; she faxed in her statement for the Planning Board’s hearing April 20: “I have complained to Mr. Gooch in the past and asked if he could at least put up a privacy fence so that we would not have to look at the junk cars each time we walked out the front door. This is a family home that we have taken great pride and effort to maintain. … I ask the committee to please consider our plight to rid Henderson of this and many other sights that are not properly maintained.”
Hardy noted that the house was built before the transmission repair business was there and that many of the junk cars on the site aren’t useful even for parts anymore.
Hardy’s situation is what the amortization ordinance is all about: Too many auto repair businesses have taken advantage of being grandfathered past the zoning ordinance and shown no consideration for their neighbors.
As Andrea Harris has reminded us on several occasions, the two greatest sources of wealth creation are business ownership and homeownership, and those two elements are in conflict when it comes to junkyards. Henderson should not drive hardworking people out of business, but it also shouldn’t allow homeowners to be stuck with properties that are unsellable and thus worthless.
We like Planning Board member Douglas Lumford’s proposed compromise: The amortization ordinance should allow auto repair businesses in residential areas to stay as long as the current owners remain. Once an owner retired or died, the business would have to go.
But there’s a condition: Those businesses would have to comply with the standards of the zoning ordinance for auto repair shops. Primarily, they would have to erect privacy fences and clear out the junk cars.
Again, we’re not talking about the vehicles people are trying to repair in hopes of getting them through the state inspection, and we’re not talking about cars that are subject to litigation after accidents, and we’re not talking about cars that are being held for a fixed period of time after being towed away as nuisance, abandoned or junked vehicles.
We’re talking about the heaps some shops have stockpiled for decades. We’re talking about cars that all the money in NASCAR couldn’t return to driving condition. We’re talking about cars that have been piling up for so long that they’re rooted to the ground. We’re talking about junk that has no business in public view.
With however many weeks they have left until the City Council holds a public hearing, we urge the affected auto repair shops to show their good faith and do what the proposed ordinance intends them to do: clean up. Start hauling away the junk vehicles that have been on site for years. Do your best to make your business a good neighbor, not a nuisance.
If the junk starts to disappear, we’re sure the City Council can make the controversial parts of the amortization ordinance disappear as well, and we’ll move closer to a Henderson that’s clean and business-friendly.