Asheville – In the interest of transparency, Asheville City Council now broadcasts its agenda briefings. At the last briefing, City Attorney Brad Branham updated council on bills of interest moving through the General Assembly, several of which pertained to limitations on municipal authority to regulate land use.
The first, S317, was described by its authors as incentivizing workforce housing development. Branham said, in effect, the housing it would encourage would be “not terribly affordable.” He explained the bill as municipalities forfeiting all authority to zone parcels to get six months and a day of rents affordable to persons earning 80% to 100% AMI. The bill only applies to parcels of at least 10 acres, and it would control rents for only 20% of the units.
Branham said Asheville has been lobbying against the bill with other municipalities and the League of Municipalities. Consequently, the bill was “losing steam.” That is, a lot of its original sponsors had withdrawn their names, and leadership in both the House and Senate were “moving away.” Responding to Councilwoman Sage Turner, Branham called attention to the fact that the bill had 32 sponsors, the primary ones being Majority Leader Paul Newton (R-Cabarrus), Tim Moffitt (R-Henderson), and Paul Lowe (D-Forsyth). Former Asheville City Councilwoman Julie Mayfield (R-Buncombe) was also among the original sponsors.
Mayor Esther Manheimer told how Branham and others from the city had done a great job compiling data for lobbying groups like the Metro Mayors’ Coalition. Included in this was a survey of 10-acre parcels remaining in the city. She said that besides several golf courses, there wasn’t much.
H409 would make accessory dwelling units (ADUs) a use-by-right on any property with a residential zoning. Branham would reiterate the talking point that those who live in the city are better acquainted with peculiar knowledge that might make special zoning advisable. Currently, the City of Asheville allows ADUs on residential properties, but it also publishes an eight-page booklet of regulations.
The backers of H332/S275 say they want to expedite the design review process for large buildings. The bill would give municipalities 21 days to approve or deny applications for large projects that require a professional seal from an architect or engineer. Branham said such attempts to rush plans through can have “negative effects.” To illustrate, he referenced the collapse of a condominium complex in Florida. Florida, he said, was less strict in its permitting and design review processes.
The Floridian condominium made infamous for its collapse was the Champlain Towers South in Surfside. The building was 40 years old, and reasons for its collapse included a leaking pool over the parking garage, a shifting foundation, and various forms of corruption that allowed the building to sail through permitting processes and inspections.
Branham described the bill as “concerning” and said he was working with the League of Municipalities to develop a response. The bill, he said, promised minor benefits in exchange for a great deal of risk, and he asked Assistant City Manager Ben Woody, who has been working on the legislative response, to field questions.
Woody said the delays about which developers complain are not the result of a municipal process. They are caused by the development teams submitting poor plans with, for example, faulty engineering or insufficient information. The amount of time required to complete a technical review is a function of the quality of the submission.
Then, Woody said there are other variables. One is staffing, which has been problematic since the pandemic, when, in addition to the causes driving staff shortages throughout the economy, the city lost several senior members. This matters because staffers must hold certain credentials in order to review certain types of plans. Normally, staff tries to complete reviews of minor commercial alterations in less than 10 business days, small commercial additions or minor renovations in 10–21 business days, and hotels or hospital additions in 21–45 business days. The latter, he said, involve plans that have “hundreds and hundreds” of pages.
Residential plans are usually processed in about five business days, but there are always outliers. Woody leaned into the microphone and said, “If somebody’s listening, yes, your deck may have taken more than five business days, but generally we do better than that.” Woody added that processing times vary depending on the volume of applications submitted, and right now, the local construction business is booming.
Of short-term rentals (STRs), Branham said, “We knew we were going to see bills, and we have seen a flurry.” Asheville City Council wants to regulate STRs with the hope they will be rented monthly to mitigate the city’s affordable housing crisis.
With one bill, S290, he said the city had no qualms. “It targets party houses.” He said some small houses were being rented to parties of as many as 20 people, creating a nuisance for neighborhoods. The bill would require STRs to advertise occupancy limits. S325 would prevent local authorities from regulating online marketplaces advertising STRs, like Airbnb and Vrbo, as some jurisdictions have placed the burden of enforcing local codes on these platforms. S667 was not included with the agenda materials because, Branham explained, it had been filed only hours before the meeting. It proposed invalidating every local attempt to regulate whole-house and homestay rentals.
Branham said every year since he has been Asheville’s city attorney, bills to regulate STRs have been filed in the General Assembly. They have all died, but the amount of lobbying, both for and against, continues to intensify. He assured members of council that the city’s lobbyist, Philip Isley, “works tirelessly” on the issue.