10/11/1982 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Hamilton said that he had voiced his concerns at the Planning Commission - hearing on this matter. He said he could see no benefit for his business in the ordinance. He said that electrical contracting and retailing were not included in the list of acceptable businesses or in the alternative matrix. Mr. Hamilton said that his business was established in 1937 and that it had operated for 40 years at its present location, which was ideally suited to the needs of the firm, since it has easy access to the freeways and is near the firm's three primary distributors and suppliers. He said that the business had paid a significant amount of property taxes to the City and had tried to maintain its properties well and be a good neighbor. He said the firm hoped to grow and expand on properties it owns in the area, but he noted that the firm had been unsuccessful in acquiring adjoining properties and so would be expanding onto non-contiguous property. He said he had received no answer to inquiries made of the Planning Department staff regarding the effect of the proposed ordinance on expansion of his firm onto non-contiguous properties. He said that the proposed MU-R zoning was an experiment and that he did not want to be a part of an experi- ment. He felt that the rezoning would have an adverse effect on property values in the area. He said the ordinance was in direct opposition to the City's economic diversification efforts. Mr. Hamilton did not want to have to move his business elsewhere as a result of the rezoning. He said salaries from his firm supported 35 families in the area. He asked that the zoning in the block between Lincoln and Charnelton streets be left as is and that businesses such as his be allowed to expand in the area. Robert Booth, 10518 SW Hood Avenue, Portland, said he owned the property across the street from Hamilton Elect~ic. He said that the property had been owned by the Booth family for 35 to 40 years. He said that the industrial building on e the property was ideally sited within one block of the railroad, with a connecting spur. He was concerned that wholesaling and distributing firms had been excluded from the matrix in the ordinance. He said that he agreed with Mr. Hamilton's comments and felt that the MU-R designation would lower market values and possibly taxable values of properties in the area. He said the City said it was interested in increasing the stock of industrial land in the area, but he felt that the proposed designation would have the opposite effect. Ms. Smernoff said that no property would be rezoned to MU-R unless requested by the property owner. She said that the round of City-initiated rezonings would only be for properties that had requested such rezoning. Ms. Smernoff referred to the matrix appended to the ordinance as Exhibit A and said that under the ordinance, industrial uses could expand on properties they currently owned. She added that the conditional use permit would be required for future changes in the type of industrial use. Jim Croteau, Planning, reiterated that the Planning Commission had been concerned and had specifically provided that any rezonings to MU-R be completely voluntary. There being no further public testimony, public hearing was closed. Responding to questions from Councilor Hamel, Mr. Croteau and Ms. Smernoff said that properties that were zoned for industrial use but currently used for resi- dences could be changed to industrial use in the future. Mr. Croteau, Ms. Smernoff, and Mr. Gleason said there was, however, little possibility under the adopted Whiteaker Refinement Plan that existing residentially zoned properties e in the area would be rezoned for industrial use. Mr. Gleason said that the MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 11, 1982 Page 3