Comments on: All Ears #4

By: Tom Sullivan

Tom Sullivan — Sat, 20 Feb 2010 20:14:30 +0000

The reason for the North Asheville pushback is the MHO project’s density: 60 units (three stories) on 2.3 acres. But there is more than numbers at work. People relate to what they know. Our neighborhood points of reference for comparable footprints are the old Gracelyn Gardens Apts. (40 units/3 acres) or the three-story University Place Apts. (24 units/2.5 acres).

Edgewood Rd. residents organized and fought University Place before it was built ten years ago and (I think) forced the developer to scale it back to 24 units from the original proposal. The Naval Reserve project pushback is not without precedent.

Furthermore, the neighborhood recently watched as the supposed “two-story” Carolina First Bank building (674 Merrimon, across from Asheville Pizza and Brewing) soared to nearly 40 ft over Merrimon Ave., dwarfing surrounding structures.

Rate this comment: 1 1

By: Rob Willow

Rob Willow — Sat, 20 Feb 2010 03:55:10 +0000

Just wanted you to see the updates/ neighbors comments on the Larchmont project at the old Naval Reserve site 785 Merrimon Ave.

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/785-merrimon-ave/

Rate this comment: 1 0

By: Rob Willow

Rob Willow — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 04:47:11 +0000

I appreciate knowing that the ads are free for non-profits you approve. I did not see that anywhere on the site until you made the statement. Thanks for the info Michael Muller.

Rate this comment: 1 0

By: Michael Muller

Michael Muller — Sat, 13 Feb 2010 18:20:22 +0000

Rob,

The advertisement for Mountain Housing Opportunities represents no conflict of interest, if that’s what you’re implying. As a service to the non-profits of Asheville and as a way to strengthen our community, Scrutiny Hooligans puts up these ads for free — and it was my decision, not Gordon’s.

Anyone having a non-profit they’d like to promote can email me directly at mullermail@mac.com.

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Rob Willow

Rob Willow — Sat, 13 Feb 2010 17:36:05 +0000

when you are a representative of ther people and the decisions are made before people can provide input, where would you go with that? You provided your support for the project before any of the meetings on the subject, what am I to believe? Why can’t I call the county or city and get any information? I agree that MHO does great work but does that mean anything they propose will be immediately approved? What about the people that are too intimidated at their presentations to even ask a question, do they deserve to be represented or not?

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Gordon Smith

Gordon Smith — Sat, 13 Feb 2010 16:13:17 +0000

Oh, come on.

MHO does great work all over the city. There’s no deals “cooked up”. Next thing you know I’ll get accused of being part of the great Animal Rights conspiracy.

Disagreeing with me is fine, but accusing me of dishonesty and nontransparency is downright silly.

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Rob Willow

Rob Willow — Sat, 13 Feb 2010 15:49:15 +0000

I should have noticed the MHO advertisement on the page when I first came here, OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOPs. Well I guess the public really does not have any say or rights when all the deals were cooked up before the public knew. Gotta love it! Welcome to Russia er I mean America in 2010. Transparency in City Government? Wonder what the officials in Raleigh and Washington who oversee this area of Federal Grants will say about this process?

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Rob Willow

Rob Willow — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 03:23:50 +0000

My friends tell me when I get angry it just makes it easy to dismiss what I say (they say I make good points). I feel passionate about a project that directly affects me and endangers my family. I am not sure anyone listened when I was calm and provided documentation for the points I made and that is frustrating. Still, sorry if this offends anyone:(

Rate this comment: 1 1

By: Rob Willow

Rob Willow — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 02:44:10 +0000

I am not interested in making anyone mad but an not afraid as so many to be seen as “politically incorrect”. It seems that this project is really more concerned with bringing federal grant dollars into our impoverished state (at any cost). With unemployment at about 10% I doubt this is going to fix that problem. When the good jobs leave, the more qualified workers will take lesser jobs (some at minimum wage).
At the MHO public meeting I attended, the concerns raised were not answered, they were crushed under the weight of a Goliath Corporation and the questioners were called “elitists” or “nimbys” and were accused of being against the affordable housing movement, etc. I qualify to live in these housing developments and may actually move in but this on creates an unsafe condition due to its size. Traffic and Fire Department access are irrelevant. Nobody will consider the objections (it seems), the farm is SOLD and the cattle are slated for slaughter.
The process has NOT been transparent, when I tried to get information from the County and City about this project I got “who are you and what is your business?” Then I got NO information. People I spoke with after the meeting were AFRAID to ask a question. AFRAID? Gordon has declared absolutely for this project, he has not even heard the side of those who may question it, has he? If he has then when and where? I know people right now who have questions and real legitimate concerns and have not spoken to anyone about them, is anyone here to represent them?

Rate this comment: 1 1

By: Rob Willow

Rob Willow — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 02:23:26 +0000

Gordon is on City Council (I believe) and everyone else who is supposed to be a representative of the public, that I have had dialog with, are signed on to this project 100%. The fact that the public has not had a chance to weigh in seems unimportant to them. I can only conclude this project was approved before it was offered. It was begun in May but nobody outside of the inner circle was even aware of it until at least the middle of December. The consensus of people believe “its a done deal”. The committees that make the zoning and approvals are peppered with people either proposing or connected to the project and it seems their decisions have been made. Gordon is sold, is everyone?

Rate this comment: 1 1

By: John

John — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 01:55:14 +0000

Gordon,

The only meeting MHO had for the community that I was aware of was the one where they showed up, and informed the community as to what they would be building. When asked if the building would be made any smaller, one of the spokespersons replied that it wouldn’t be profitable for the investors if it dropped below 60 units. So, to some of us, it seems that the only driving need for rezoning is to make it profitable. No one understands why there couldn’t be a profitable venture at 30 units.

The county approached MHO in May, and MHO notified the community in Nov. They could have been more forthcoming in seeking community involvement for design purposes.

Furthermore, UNC’s School of Government says that spot zoning is illegal: http://tinyurl.com/ygrhyyq. Considering that there are no other heavy urban residential areas within miles of this small 2 acre area, why wouldn’t this count as spot zoning?

On top of all that, there is only one bus route to the site that comes once an hour. Lengthy delays in bus service pushes people to use cars, which then increases traffic in the already congested area.

I don’t know if you’ve been to the neighborhood, but installing sidewalks would squeeze already tight streets that were not built for today’s traffic demands.

Realizing the significant need for workforce housing, we’re all too happy to see a 30 unit structure go up. 120 or so people in a 60 units on two acres will over stress the area’s infrastructure.

No offense, but the “well 60 is more than 30″ argument seems like an arbitrary defense. If we need more, why stop at 60? Why not do 120? 200? Some people think we need more WalMarts, why don’t we have more of those? The key is finding the right balance. This area was zoned the way it was for a reason, and I am not sure I have heard a compelling reason as to why it should be rezoned.

Your job’s not easy, thanks for doing it.

Rate this comment: 1 1

By: Jim Reeves

Jim Reeves — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 23:47:38 +0000

Sorry I meant to give you a thumbs up but I can’t change it now.

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Gordon Smith

Gordon Smith — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 23:39:34 +0000

Jim,

We decided not to ask for the armored vehicle.

Rate this comment: 0 1

By: Gordon Smith

Gordon Smith — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 23:36:25 +0000

Thanks for commenting, John. The development will be on the old Naval Reserve site over the Post Office on Merrimon. It’s a big lot on an urban corridor. I understand that there’s a neighborhood adjacent to it, and MHO has had community meetings to address concerns.

This city needs affordable housing, and we need it yesterday. If we’re not going to add density to our urban corridors, where will we do it? 60 units of affordable housing is twice as many as 30. Without other developers executing projects right now, it’s critical that we add to our affordable housing on our urban corridors whenever possible.

Cindy’s certainly a go-getter, and she’s always been completely above-board and transparent. I have no concerns.

I’m a big fan of this Larchmont project, and I hope to see many more like it. Without affordable housing options near the city center, we’re going to lose open space, add traffic, add pollution, and lose diversity.

Rate this comment: 2 1

By: John

John — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 22:25:52 +0000

Gordon,

About the MHO project. Cindy Weeks, who I’m sure is a tireless worker, is the head of MHO, who is proposing the project. She is also an appointee of the City of Asheville, as head of its Planning and Zoning Board. She is also an agent of the county for this project, the owner of the property.

So, she is representing the city, county, and MHO in an attempt to purchase the land from the county, have the rezoning approved by the city, and build a structure that investors will make a profit off of.

It is my belief that there is a conflict of interest in regards to that project. I do not know Cindy, and I am not accusing her of being a bad person, but I am a little uncomfortable in regards to one person representing everyone.

I’m curious as to what you mean by “incursion into our well established neighborhoods”. I don’t know if you’ve been through the area, but the development would be going up in well established neighborhood of single family residences. The introduction of 60 units as your next door neighbor doesn’t seem to make a whole lot of sense, especially when they can build 30 as is.

Can you provide a substantial justification as to why it should be 60 units as opposed to the 30 that the comprehensive zoning plan currently allows for?

Thanks.

Rate this comment: 2 2

By: Gordon Smith

Gordon Smith — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 12:06:30 +0000

I’ll see what I can do.

Rate this comment: 1 2

By: Rob Willow

Rob Willow — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 05:29:48 +0000

I would love to see that in writing with a name attached to it.

Rate this comment: 3 3

By: Gordon Smith

Gordon Smith — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 05:03:24 +0000

The Fire Dept. has given their o.k. to the project. My assumption is that they would be very quick to ask for adjustments to the site plan if there were any difficulties.

Rate this comment: 3 1

By: Rob Willow

Rob Willow — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 19:59:27 +0000

Thank for your comments Gordon, I do not have a problem with density loading but this particular site with the N. Asheville Fire Department 20 feet from the Larchmont gate? This speaks to safety when they cannot get to your burning house. The post office may be doomed anyway but block the fire trucks and the issue might be fatal!

Rate this comment: 3 3

By: Gordon Smith

Gordon Smith — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 12:49:17 +0000

Thanks for commenting, Rob. I’ve gotten emails against and in favor of this project.

It’s the sense of this Council that promoting density on our transportation corridor will protect open spaces and offer a range of housing options adjoining main transit routes.

The alternative to density on our corridors is continued flight to the County or incursion into our well-established neighborhoods. Our tax base problems won’t be solved by maintaining the status quo.

I’m in favor of the Larchmont development on Merrimon for these reasons and more.

Rate this comment: 3 4