Energy Community Status Sways Council - TribPapers
Civic

Energy Community Status Sways Council

Energy Communities. Source: US Department of Energy

Asheville – This story could be written as boilerplate: Another apartment complex is proposed for Long Shoals Road. It would offer ______% of units as affordable to persons living at or below 80% of Area Median Income; and it proposed ______, ______, and ______ in the greenwash. Members of Asheville City Council wanted more, so they demanded ______, ______, and ______ from the developer. He said he could not afford to do that, so the meeting was continued until ______ for further negotiations.

This project, slated for 2 Butler Road, would consist of 279 units next to Lake Julian. It would offer 28 units as affordable and provide at least 40 bike spaces, 20 electric vehicle charging stations, and a bus shelter. For anybody interested in old-fashioned amenities, an outdoor pool and a fitness center were also part of the plan.

Presenter Clay Mitchell, representing the city’s planning department, explained that solar installations in the area would qualify for a 10% bonus tax credit because it was an Energy Community. The designation applied to the site of the decommissioned coal-fired power plant at Lake Julian, as well as the adjacent parcels. Energy Communities are entitled to federal stimulus due to the shutting down of coal-based industries. They were supposedly created to help the unemployed, as coal mining employment dropped from 175,000 to 40,000 between 1985 and 2020, but it remained unclear how any benefits would accrue directly to personnel cut from coal-industry jobs.

This opened the eyes of Councilwomen Kim Roney, Sage Turner, and Maggie Ullman, as they now viewed the property as having tremendous potential for greener developments. Turner said she wished she could make all the adjacent property owners put solar on their homes, even though she knew she couldn’t.

Roney did not like the idea that the developer intended to pay a fee in lieu of replacing felled tree canopy. Tree fees-in-lieu, she observed, were, in practice, “so hard to spend.” City Attorney Brad Branham replied that council would have to keep accepting the fees until they removed that option from their ordinances.

Roney also had “heartburn” from the developers’ failure to provide more infrastructure for bicycles. Council’s lack of passion for creating bike lanes, which she equated to “piling on more vehicular infrastructure without a plan,” also looked to her like a “long-term plan to strand these neighbors without another option.”

Representatives from Flournoy Development Group, the same firm that completed the Aventine in 2015, were present to answer questions. Vice President Tom Burr explained the proposed density for Butler Road resulted from multiple analyses, which included considerations ranging from environmental impacts, construction feasibility, and zoning allowances. Increasing the development’s footprint would require construction on slopes, which would, in turn, require the expensive construction of larger and more complex retaining walls. Further, council would frown on the disturbance of more green space should they build out, and building up was limited by city ordinances. Larger structures would also fail criteria requiring construction to conform with the surrounding architecture. What’s more, more housing units would require more parking spaces. Insufficient parking would jeopardize financing options, and sufficient parking would require a parking garage, which was cost-prohibitive.

Asked by Turner why the project didn’t offer more affordable housing, he again said the numbers had followed considerable research. Construction costs were rising, making financing difficult for starters. Furthermore, 10% affordability was consistent with the allotments of neighboring developments, which were being constructed with and without subsidies. He added, “We are not proposing any subsidies associated with the project, which will mean that we will be paying full real estate taxes, which obviously can be allocated for any number of city initiatives.” He was cut short when Turner asked if he had considered the city’s tax incentives program, which has undergone several iterations because most developers find it unworkable. Burr merely replied, “It wasn’t a great fit for this specific project.”

Roney still found the greenwash lackluster. She wanted a developer who could maximize green energy tax credits. Burr countered that in addition to paying taxes, he had to consider upfront costs, ongoing maintenance costs, installation contracts, having a legal team ensure compliance with the rules for various programs, etc. To this, Roney responded that long-term, the opportunity costs for not being greener would be “profound.”

Afterward, Attorney Chris Justice explained to council that his client had “checked all the boxes” the city ordinances require. The developer couldn’t provide all the numbers because success in business requires a balance between calculating risk and responding to market signals. The point was lost on council, so the hearing was continued to December 12.