Buncombe to preserve branch libraries

Oakley library signs
SIGNS OF SUCCESS: Oakley residents placed posters outside their neighborhood library celebrating a Nov. 2 Buncombe County Board of Commissioners vote to keep the facility. Photo courtesy of Shannon Watkins

“Grandad, who are the idiots that are proposing we close the library?” Buncombe County Commissioner Al Whitesides recalled his grandson commenting on a recent drive through Oakley.

“I didn’t have the nerve to tell him,” Whitesides continued, that the idea to shutter the Oakley/South Asheville branch, along with the current libraries in Black Mountain and Swannanoa, had come from a master plan commissioned by the county Board of Commissioners. (See “Reading Rooms,” Xpress, Sept. 1, avl.mx/as4.)

Whitesides’ grandson — as well as community groups that have stridently opposed the plan since its presentation in May — can breathe easier after the board’s Nov. 2 meeting. In a unanimous vote, the commissioners directed Buncombe staff to maintain the county’s current library branches and explore other ways to improve the system. The vote also confirmed that Pack Memorial Library will remain at its current Haywood Street location instead of moving to a proposed new building on county-owned land on Coxe Avenue.

The original $81 million library proposal, developed by Dallas-based consultancy 720 Architects, had suggested closing some smaller branches so Buncombe could focus its resources on fewer, larger branches distributed throughout the county. Maureen Arndt, the consulting firm’s principal, had noted the Oakley and Swannanoa libraries were located within 10-minute drives of bigger facilities already.

But residents objected to the elimination of their neighborhood libraries despite their small size and relatively poor physical condition. During an Aug. 10 listening session regarding the Oakley facility, for example, Elizabeth Wallace of the Oakley Neighborhood Association said eliminating walkable branches would disproportionately harm low-income residents without vehicle access.

“When this was first presented to us, I think there were a lot of unique and creative ideas for our libraries that I personally was really excited about,” said Commissioner Amanda Edwards prior to the vote. “After hearing from so many residents across Buncombe County about how closely tied they are to the particular library in their community … it certainly shifted some of my own personal excitement.”

Edwards said that she now hoped to modernize the county’s existing libraries. Commissioner Jasmine Beach-Ferrara added that Buncombe should prioritize addressing safety and accessibility concerns at the current facilities that had been raised through the planning process.

“The consultant looked at data and numbers. And what gets lost in that is the intangible quality of the libraries and what they really mean to people,” concluded Jim Blanton, Buncombe’s library director. “They mean so much to so many folks, and we really need to invest in them to make sure they’re up to par.”

County to consider referendum on affordable housing bonds

In 2016, Asheville residents authorized city government to issue $25 million in new debt to support affordable housing projects. According to county Board of Commissioners Chair Brownie Newman, Buncombe may put a similar spending plan before voters as soon as next year.

Newman said Nov. 2 that the board’s Affordable Housing Committee, consisting of himself, Edwards and Commissioner Parker Sloan, had recently been exploring the idea of a public bond referendum. In an Oct. 5 presentation to that committee, county Finance Director Don Warn outlined a hypothetical repayment schedule for $50 million in affordable housing debt and noted that a referendum could be held during the 2022 midterm elections.

While the board has yet to commit to a bond referendum, its members unanimously approved a letter asking The Trust for Public Land for “technical assistance and research on funding strategies for land conservation and affordable housing.” Newman said the national nonprofit has offered to study “the public’s priorities and the feasibility of funding options” at no cost to the county.

Commissioners also unanimously approved several changes to the county’s personnel ordinance, including an overhaul of its conflict-of-interest policy. The new rules explicitly define a conflict of interest as “when private interests interfere or appear to interfere with the performance of official duties” and provide more detailed guidance on accepting gifts while conducting Buncombe business.

SHARE

Thanks for reading through to the end…

We share your inclination to get the whole story. For the past 25 years, Xpress has been committed to in-depth, balanced reporting about the greater Asheville area. We want everyone to have access to our stories. That’s a big part of why we've never charged for the paper or put up a paywall.

We’re pretty sure that you know journalism faces big challenges these days. Advertising no longer pays the whole cost. Media outlets around the country are asking their readers to chip in. Xpress needs help, too. We hope you’ll consider signing up to be a member of Xpress. For as little as $5 a month — the cost of a craft beer or kombucha — you can help keep local journalism strong. It only takes a moment.

About Daniel Walton
Daniel Walton is the Assistant Editor of Mountain Xpress, regularly contributing to coverage of Western North Carolina's government, environment and health care. His work has previously appeared in Capital at Play, Edible Asheville, and the Citizen-Times, among other area publications. Follow me @DanielWWalton

Before you comment

The comments section is here to provide a platform for civil dialogue on the issues we face together as a local community. Xpress is committed to offering this platform for all voices, but when the tone of the discussion gets nasty or strays off topic, we believe many people choose not to participate. Xpress editors are determined to moderate comments to ensure a constructive interchange is maintained. All comments judged not to be in keeping with the spirit of civil discourse will be removed and repeat violators will be banned. See here for our terms of service. Thank you for being part of this effort to promote respectful discussion.

6 thoughts on “Buncombe to preserve branch libraries

  1. dyfed

    Good. Centralizing the libraries, moving them further from their users, didn’t make sense.

    But the problem of tiny facilities with few services remains, and it’s a serious one. The Oakley library is awful. The Swannanoa and Black Mountain libraries are undersized. I’m sure that Black Mountain would be happy to expand the building.

    Anyway, what’s the new plan?

    • Lou

      How do you suppose the library will “expand”?? Where they gonna go? I am happy that they are maintaining the neighborhood library but sometimes change is a good thing. Sometimes though, it’s not…how about all you “keep our libraries” supporters turn your attention to the huge warplane factory being built on top of our love French Broad and Blue Ridge Parkway?

  2. luther blissett

    At least the consultants got paid. I wish I could get paid for coming up with a plan that showed absolute ignorance of the area and was designed primarily to earn a high-dollar commission for future work. It’d be worth a FOIA request to see which genius decided to hire them.

    I don’t think the Swannanoa library has many friends, and it’s the odd one out because Swanna-nowhere. The Black Mountain library is small but has never felt cramped, and there’s not a huge amount of room around it to expand in place. I think Oakley residents get to put together a laundry list now and the county can pay for it out of the $81 million it won’t spend on new buildings nobody really wanted.

    On the question of housing bonds: if the county wants to buy land, build housing and rent it at affordable rates, it’s a reasonable capital project for bond financing. If it’s to serve as a direct lender to Mountain Housing Opportunities, it’s more marginal but MHO has a good track record. Anything else, no. The “please can we have some affordable units pretty please?” model has failed. It is a failure.

  3. Book Nerd

    How much did the Dallas based consulting firm earn for this job? Curious.

    • Hi Book Nerd, I just heard back from the county regarding my public records request for the library consulting contract. It turns out that Buncombe didn’t contract directly with 720 Architects; the library plan was included as part of the larger Comprehensive Facility Plan contracted to CPL Architects and Engineers. The subtotal listed in that contract for library facilities was roughly $267,000. See https://www.scribd.com/document/539877171/CPL-Comprehensive-Facility-Plan-Service-Contract-Fully-Executed

      • Book Nerd

        Thank you for getting that contract and information from the county for the citizens. It seems like a LOT of money for what the county received in return and especially wasteful when it sounds like the proposed plan is being placed on hold. What next, an entirely new study?

Leave a Reply

To leave a reply you may Login with your Mountain Xpress account, connect socially or enter your name and e-mail. Your e-mail address will not be published. All fields are required.