BY ANDREW PAUL AND TIM WATKINS
In response to the tragedy of Tropical Storm Helene, we’ve seen an impressive flurry of action by governments, community leaders, nonprofits and neighbors. We hope that some of that energy will now be directed toward Asheville’s long-simmering tragedy: the housing shortage.
Simpy put, there’s not enough housing for everyone who lives, works or goes to school here, and the shortfall has fostered sprawl, displacement, increasing homelessness and a higher cost of living for everyone from service workers to teachers to nurses to artists. All of this was only exacerbated by Helene.
When a disaster wipes out homes, one factor in determining the severity of the displacement is the area’s vacancy rate. Unfortunately, Asheville’s has been terribly low for a decade or more. And when residents have to fight over scarce housing options, landlords and landowners can pit renters against one another to drive up housing costs — which was already happening even during the good times.
Notably, we saw how anxiety about housing supply factored into the recent presidential election. Far-right candidates exploited this understandable concern to scapegoat some of the least advantaged working people in our society. Regardless of whether or not we’re in crisis, however, Ashevilleans don’t want to be fighting one another for scarce resources in what is wrongly assumed to be a zero-sum game.
In the short term, we need rental assistance and an eviction moratorium. But in the long term, we need more homes.
A fork in the road
Asheville could choose to continue keeping most of the city off limits for infill housing. (According to official city statistics, less than 18% of land in the city is zoned for multifamily housing.) But this pushes most new construction outside the city limits, where it sprawls across mountainsides and clusters around interstate exit ramps. It puts more homes in flood plains or tucked alongside highways and other undesirable locations.
Conversely, the city could choose to incentivize building more multifamily and small-lot housing in the places best suited for it: our most resilient and sustainable neighborhoods.
They’re the ones closest to amenities such as greenways and schools. They’re the ones near job centers such as downtown and UNC Asheville. They’re the neighborhoods where you don’t have to get on a highway to get around town. They’re the ones that most enable residents to walk and bike to their destinations, empowering those who can’t drive due to age, ability or socioeconomic status. According to Federal Highway Administration figures, roughly one-third of the U.S. population fits that description.
These core neighborhoods are sustainable because they offer more climate-friendly ways to get around. (No economic sector contributes more to greenhouse gas emissions than transportation.) And building infill housing in these areas is also fiscally sustainable because it grows the tax base while incurring lower infrastructure maintenance costs compared with single-family homes.
Neighborhoods such as Malvern Hills, Falconhurst, Grace and Five Points are resilient because they stand on high ground. They’re the ones left standing after the storm ravaged homes in and near Biltmore Village, the River Arts District and along the Swannanoa River. They also foster better connections with neighbors and offer more nearby resources than outlying, isolated areas.
These are the neighborhoods that are most in demand. But because of their outdated, exclusionary zoning codes, they’re also the ones that are most segregated by income.
Expanding the tax base by adding more multifamily and small-lot homes would provide more money for maintaining community amenities. Having more people living in these areas would support local businesses, meaning fewer shuttered storefronts on Merrimon Avenue. And creating a greater variety of housing options would mean that more city residents’ children and friends could afford to stay nearby as their housing needs grow and change.
Plans to address this already exist
We both write from firsthand experience with living in such neighborhoods. When one of us moved to Asheville, he landed in a fourplex just north of Chestnut Hill, within walking distance of both Trader Joe’s and Asheville Pizza & Brewing. There were only two parking spaces on the small lot, but that was fine: He parked on the street. And the rent was just $800. During the 2015 snowstorm, amid dangerous driving conditions, he simply continued walking to work downtown the way he always had.
Homes like this are more desirable — and more expensive — than ever. But current density limits and costly parking mandates make it harder to build more of them.
Both of us now live near Haywood Road in West Asheville where, after the storm, you didn’t need to walk far to find water distribution stations or food trucks serving free meals. We’d be happy if our friends who are now struggling to afford housing could join us here.
The good news is that Asheville has already developed plans to make these neighborhoods more accessible to everyday people: City Council just needs to vote on them.
In policy circles, this is known as “middle housing reform.” It argues that neighborhoods with predominantly single-family homes could use more small to medium-sized apartment buildings. High-rises are important for downtowns, and large apartment complexes have their place too. But in our residential neighborhoods near the city’s core, simply allowing the middle ground in building sizes and heights — duplexes, town houses and modest two- to three-story buildings featuring four to 12 homes each — would make a big difference. These apartments could be rentals or owner-occupied. And though small-lot homes aren’t technically considered middle housing, they’re often part of the same reform package.
These kinds of homes are quicker to permit, finance and build than larger developments. This is important given the urgency of our housing shortage. Plus, their more modest scale means they can appeal to a wider variety of local builders, not just the really big developers.
Now’s the time
In the wake of Helene, Ashevilleans are understandably concerned about disaster-induced land speculation. But research shows that allowing a little more housing in every neighborhood, rather than concentrating more intense housing growth in one or two places, is one of the best ways to fight speculation in residential neighborhoods where demand is rising. Creating a small amount of positive change will make our neighborhoods more resilient, not less so, in the face of market pressures.
In recent years, the city has spent more than $100,000 on a Missing Middle Housing Study; it included a “displacement risk assessment” that highlighted middle housing’s important role in protecting Asheville’s vulnerable communities. The authors went so far as to warn that “choosing to not permit” middle housing in core neighborhoods would have “exacerbating effects on displacement pressure.”
And that was before the storm. But here’s even more good news: It won’t cost the city a dime more to implement middle housing reforms: All it takes is political will.
Andrew Paul is a founding member of Asheville for All. Tim Watkins is a founding member of Strong Towns Asheville.
If more housing is needed, then now is the time to SALVAGE LOG ALL THE WINDTHROW TO BUILD HURRICANE RESISTANT TIMBER FRAMES from a free source of wood. The salvaging will also eliminate the risks of leaving too much timber. Work with timber framer guilds because they know how to make timber frames faster than stick built with less wood, enabling the demand for housing to be met. Simple solution that requires only coordination of local people without dependence upon govt funding delays.