Downtown Commission Says Yes To Parkside Condos

Stewart Coleman, developer and a big, big fan of Dwight Butner and Bill Russell, pushed his Parkside Condominium project through Asheville’s Downtown Commission. The project has created a lot of controversy for a lot of reasons. To wit:

1. County Commissioner David Gantt said of the sale of the land to Coleman,

“I had no idea that the land mentioned was in the park when the [Board of Commissioners] voted to sell it. It was billed as the old jail site when presented to us.” He went on to assert, “I have unsuccessfully worked hard behind the scenes since this ill-advised sale took place to correct the situation.”
[...]
““Fortunately, the City Council will have final say on the appropriateness of any development near the park.” But Gantt expressed a view shared by many when he added, “We screwed up when that land was sold.”

2. The illustration provided to the public does not correspond to the plans submitted by Coleman’s group. Barry Summers has been following this issue very closely and said at Mtn. X:

“That illustration does not correspond with the plans Mr. Coleman has submitted to the City Planning Dept, the Conservancy, AND the Downtown Commission. Look at those plans, and then look at the site. The building as proposed sits a good 40-50 feet inside the park space, as the Conservancy’s outside expert confirmed in their review. This illustration shows this building nestling comfortably BEHIND the line along the side of City Hall, which is the park’s southern edge.”

More from Barry after attending a Downtown Commission meeting back in October, 2007:

First: the city staff liaison to the Commission, Alan Glines, said that the developer’s lawyers had just sent a letter requesting that the Commission NOT use the Pack Square Design Guidelines while considering their proposal. Not surprising, since…Second: they circulated the report from the Conservancy Design Review of the Parkside Condominiums. The official verdict:

“The proposed building facade is approximately 45’ into the public space.”

“The placement of the building creates a lack of balance to the public space. The building is pushed into the space and given its size dominates the plaza and visually overwhelms City Hall.”

“The placement of the proposed building partially obstructs the view of City Hall and completely obstructs views of the mountains to the right of City Hall.”

“The location of the building does not comply with the design guidelines.”

“The building appears to be a bit taller than is permitted under the design guidelines.”

The design is three stories taller than City Hall and three stories taller than what is permitted.

3. The Pack Square Conservancy is in the middle of a lawsuit which asserts that the sale of the parkland was illegal due to the terms of the deed. Mountain Xpress:

“The 11-story building would be constructed on property that is the subject of a lawsuit filed Sept. 30 by heirs of George Willis Pack, who conveyed land to the county in two deeds executed in 1901 (See “A Friend in Deed,” Sept. 5 Xpress). One of those deeds stipulated that if the land was ever sold for private use it would revert to Pack family ownership. The county sold land to Coleman last year and maintains its right to do so was based on the second deed, which may have removed the covenants included in the first. Pack’s heirs are seeking enforcement of the first deed and have stated their intent to preserve the land for public use.”

4. Following Coleman’s shady land buy, the Commissioners’ unwillingness to fix the mistake, an Escher-esque retooling of the perspective in the public illustration, the Pack family’s lawsuit, and Coleman’s thousands of dollars of campaign contributions to sitting Downtown Commission members and City Council candidates, the Commission now wants the City to “swap” land for the ill-gotten parkland.

J. Patrick Whalen, Chair of the Downtown Commission, in an email obtained by Mtn. X:

“It is the Commission’s recommendation that given the potential unfortunate long-term effect on the aesthetics and usability of the Pack Square Park, it would be advisable to either close and convey a portion of Marjorie Street or air rights over Marjorie Street, if necessary, to avoid inappropriate construction on the Parkside site.”

In otherwords, Coleman gets Marjorie Street and we get our park back.

City Council will have to rule on this one before it goes anywhere, and I expect there will be a lot of discussion as to whether to proceed with “swapping” City streets for a public park that was likely illegally sold to Mr. Coleman. If the courts find that Coleman bought the land legally, then we’ve got a design debate to have. However, if things are as they appear, the sale by the County Commission was not legal. Therefore, the public parkland will remain public. There will be nothing for Coleman to “swap”. He’s going to need to build something smaller on the land that’s available.

The Pack Square Conservancy has endorsed the idea that Coleman can build something that (1) isn’t on public parkland; (2) doesn’t dwarf our City and County buildings. The Downtown Commission has endorsed an as-is version of Coleman’s plan. Now City Council will have to decide what to do. My suggestion? Wait until the lawsuit is resolved to do anything. Alternately, Mr. Coleman could make do with the land he knows is legally his and resubmit the project for another look.

If you have an opinion about this project that you’d like to share with City Council, you can email all seven of them at this addy: AshevilleNCCouncil@ashevillenc.gov