Asheville’s long-simmering anti-displacement strategies came to light when two proposals to increase housing density came before City Council at its Sept. 10 meeting. Council member Sheneika Smith was absent.
The strategies focus on helping homeowners and renters, particularly members of the BIPOC community, from getting priced out of their homes by development and gentrification.
And while city staff works to solidify those strategies, Council tabled until its Tuesday, Feb. 11, meeting consideration of zoning amendments proposed by Barry Bialik, CEO of Compact Cottages.
The first of Bialik’s amendments proposes changes to the city’s cottage development requirements, which allow smaller, single-unit dwellings to be clustered around common open space. Bialik’s amendment would reduce the total number of cottages from five to two and eliminate the required 200-foot separation between cottage developments and guidelines for street-facing designs. As written, the amendment omits the Shiloh neighborhood because the Shiloh Community Association indicated it does not want any zoning changes to its neighborhood, says Stephanie Monson Dahl, director of planning and urban design.
The second amendment concerned regulations for flag lots, which allow two homes to be situated along the same street frontage, with one home behind the other. The lot for the rear home is accessed via a narrow corridor extending to the street – the flag “pole” — which doubles as a shared driveway. Bialik’s petition seeks to allow narrower “poles,” which would make flag lots possible on deep and narrow lots.
If adopted, the amendments would revise Asheville’s Unified Development Ordinance (UDO), which outlines development requirements in the city. Although overhauls have been suggested and amendments have been made to the UDO since it was adopted in 1997, the ordinance hasn’t undergone a wholesale update.
That may change on Tuesday, Sept. 24, when city staff presents to the Council at its work session an overall plan to incorporate anti-displacement policies and changes to the UDO to align with Asheville’s new affordable housing plan, which city officials published Sept. 9.
“That is where Community and Economic [Development] Director Nikki Reid and I will be fleshing out the strategy … where we knit together implementation of our affordable housing plans with our UDO updates projects. And the thing that knits that all together are the pieces around anti-displacement,” Monson Dahl told Council.
Proposed strategies include expanding tenant protections, increasing down payment and mortgage subsidies and home repair assistance programs, and requiring more landlords to accept housing vouchers.
Asheville has been practicing anti-displacement strategies for years, although they’ve not been explicitly called that, Monson Dahl notes in an email to Xpress.
“With new information coming to light, especially in the context of the national housing crisis … the City understands a more intentional effort is called for,” Monson Dahl writes.
“This can involve funding for affordable housing and zoning strategies that seek to maintain affordability and preserve the character of a neighborhood while adding much needed housing supply,” writes Kim Miller, Asheville’s communications director, in an email to Xpress.
Some Council members expressed concerns that Bialik’s amendments might contradict the city’s overall housing strategies.
Bialik countered that his amendments, if approved, would not undermine the city’s efforts.
“We have not really done anything for housing reform. We need action, and you’re not taking the action this community needs,” said Bialik to Council, pointing out that the proposed flag lot amendment would make accessory dwelling units (ADU) easier and less expensive to build.
During public comment, Asheville resident Elyse Marder, one of 14 speakers who supported Bialik’s plans, said she only was able to afford her home in West Asheville because it was on a flag lot.
“Flag lots are a displacement negation strategy,” Marder said, noting that homeowners formerly unable to afford repairs or mortgage payments would be able to do so by selling off part of their land as a flag lot.
“If we’re able to get [our] displacement requirements into place, this could become a very successful tool,” Council member Sage Turner said about Bialik’s amendments.
Despite showing support for the amendments, Council voiced concerns about how they would integrate with the city’s overall strategy involving affordable housing and anti-displacement.
Council tabled both amendments until its Tuesday, Feb. 11, meeting to allow time for more public input.
Progress report
Council reviewed its Fiscal Year 2024 Annual Report at the meeting. The report, presented by Tony McDowell, Asheville’s director of finance, and Lindsay Spangler, Asheville’s budget and performance manager, highlighted Council’s progress on its six key strategic priorities: reparations; equitable and affordable housing and stability; homelessness strategies; reimagining public safety; neighborhood and climate resilience; and improving and expanding core services.
Major accomplishments highlighted in the report include finalizing reparations recommendations, adopting a new affordable housing plan, expanding permanent supportive housing and installing electric vehicle charging infrastructure.
In other news
- After a public hearing, Council voted, 4-2, to approve plans for a 240-unit apartment building in the River Arts District. Council members Kim Roney and Maggie Ullman opposed it, due in part to concerns about the small amount of affordable housing included in the project. Twelve units, 5% of the total, will be designated affordable at 80% of the area median income. The project at 179 and 144 Riverside Drive will result in a seven-floor building where the Asheville Cotton Mill once stood. The revised plans include green features like a solar-ready roof.
- Council members voted to reappoint Geoffrey Barton, CEO of Mountain Housing Opportunities, and to appoint Jane Margaret Bell, a water resources planner, and Anna Zuevskaya, executive director of Asheville-Buncombe Community Land Trust, to the Planning & Zoning Commission.
Why so insistent on having people live right on top of each other? Perhaps, that is a sign that this plan is unsustainable and not well thought out based on the numerous infrastructure issues within Asheville. But, no one seems to care. Because, if you were to articulate concern that perhaps the residents (new or old) wanted to live with some personal space, division between houses, and not in a burgeoning concrete cluster, you would be shouted down as nimby or some other less clever acronym. The model that continues to be pushed here is turning a town with great attributes into a place with every conceivable big city issue without the resources or cohesive plan to resolve any. Just a continuing slog down a path that will eventually burst everyone’s bubble, if it hasn’t already. Enjoy.
How exactly do you propose allowing for affordable housing WITHOUT increasing density? You clearly don’t understand economics 101. The high cost of land requires density to bring down the per square foot cost per unit. Giving people more space than they can afford requires already beleaguered taxpayers to subsidize every unit. I don’t want to pay for you to have a yard and privacy. No one else does either. befocommenting.
Wow, your knowledge of economics and civics far exceeds mine. Let’s see, first we continually raise taxes to force out those long-term residents. Next, we allow developers to take over neighborhoods. Next, we allow ‘elected’ representatives to line their pockets by making concessions to these developers without actually considering the best onterest of their constituents. Then, we overburden infrastructure in ever direction as a means to… Yes, continue to raise taxes and allow unscrupulous corporate utilities to endlessly raise fees. But, overall, you must first ignore basic facts about employment and residency. Not every mundane and non-skilled job is meant to support a living wage. Those types of employment opportunities are meant to be stepping stones to improve and move forward. By constantly chasing a fallacy, the end result is easy to see play out. The cost of housing exponentially explodes and opportunities to exploit are endless. The end of STRs isn’t a perfect solution, but if you don’t negate the factors that have been contrived to artificially distort the housing market then no amount of overbuilding or rezoning will result in the seemingly preferred outcome. But, by all means, stack housing on top of each other until this mountainous set of small towns becomes awash with concrete and strip malls pretending to be communities. This is a place that believes road diets will solve all their ills forgetting that people need to be able to get to and from jobs tgat aren’t right around the corner. It is also a place that hasn’t made real progress in public transportation. The buses and routes are not dependable and a significant portion of bus stops, are simply signs on a weedy patch of ground. If there is a desire to preach sustainable community here, figure out the narrative. But, overall, Asheville is mismanaged, wasting money and resources, and bleeding taxpayers dry. But, sure, in-fill housing will solve that… Oh wait, except most of those will soon become short-term rentals or the property of absentee speculating landlords.
You haven’t offered a single economically viable solution in your rant. Money makes the world go round and that isn’t changing anytime soon, so holier than thou pontificating offers nothing.
Wow, your opinion matters and no one else’s does…. Got it.
We could build vertically along major traffic corridors with sidewalks and bike lanes…Ingles, Steinmart…those are the real roadblocks in this town.
Right on. Every time I drive by where the Fiddlin’ Pig used to be, that great expanse of emptiness, I have to shake my head. There’s plenty of space to infill – we just need to incentivize to get those lots converted for housing.
Amen to that. Look at the strip where Fiddlin’ Pig used to be, or the Sears lot. City needs to incentivize those landowners to infill.
You’re welcome to purchase the parcels Shultz and implement your vision. Same as every other property owner.