How Badly Do We Want Affordable Housing? Not Bad Enough - TribPapers
Civic

How Badly Do We Want Affordable Housing? Not Bad Enough

Staff rendering.

Asheville – Decades ago, it was commonplace at city council meetings for UDO amendments to be presented for adoption right before Paul Szurek, representing Biltmore Farms, would ask council to approve a project that needed them. A lot of great developments, like Biltmore Park Town Square and Biltmore Lake, followed, but citizens did not like the inequity. Zoning, they said, was for commoners like them who could not afford heavies like Szurek to change the rules and make them workable.

While the affordable housing crisis has been a hand-wringing hot topic among councilmembers since Szurek’s heyday, Barry Bialik presented council with some cold, hard facts from the last two years. The city has approved applications for only two of six major subdivisions, five of 14 Level I residential developments, and two of seven Level II residential developments. Over the same period, only 146 of 176 minor subdivision applications have been approved.

Bialik was praised by many at council’s last meeting for his work with affordable housing. He is a former chair of the city’s Affordable Housing Advisory Committee and the founder of Compact Cottages. He self-described as having “built 50% of all the new homes in Asheville that sold for below $375,000 over the past three years and is still trying to do so.” As a builder in Asheville, he was so passionate about creating naturally affordable housing, he opened a factory to manufacture modular cottage homes. Sadly, building codes and the artificially high market values they sustain priced him out of the local market. So, he now manufactures homes in Asheville to ship to Durham.

Bialik was trying to do the Biltmore Farms thing and get council to pass a couple citizen-generated UDO amendments. He only suggested changing a few numbers that might get 200 more families into housing without raining down calamity in the city.

First, Bialik asked that the city reduce the minimum number of houses in cottage developments from five to two. He would also get rid of the 200’ separation distance between cottages, even allowing them to be in the form of a duplex. This way, opportunities for cost-sharing for expenses like utility lines and driveways abounded. The problem with this, explained Urban Planner Vaidila Satvika, was that the city wanted to create community living situations. His description was reminiscent of small, charming European housing clusters dating back to medieval times.

The second recommendation was to reduce the minimum street frontage for flag lots from 20’ to 16’, or 10’ with a shared driveway. This came with several appurtenant changes for setback requirements, sewer line requirements, etc. Bialik emphasized that these changes could save a lot of trees.

Bialik said since 2019, when Durham adopted amendments like the ones he was proposing, permits have been issued for development on 215 small lots and 36 new flag lots. When he began talking about presenting his proposal at a community meeting in Shiloh, he was interrupted by Councilwoman Antanette Mosley, who faulted him for proceeding to give the presentation after he had been told the agenda was already full.

People only spoke in favor of the proposals’ content. Staff spoke against the fact that they were generated outside their systems, and members of council were concerned they might fail findings of a TBD displacement analysis. The analysis is expected to take a long time because, for one thing, “displacement” has yet to be defined. Council would eventually vote to postpone voting on Bialik’s amendments until February 11, to give staff enough time to perform the analysis.

“Y’all amaze me,” said Bialik. The city has been debating how to handle flag lots for 18 months, and dealing with an abstraction like displacement was going to take a lot longer. Answering the suggestion that the hearing be continued, he said, “The reality is we can’t wait that long. I’m sorry y’all don’t feel that. I’m sorry that y’all don’t feel that with a bond coming up that you actually feel like there should be some steps we take to show we took some action on some housing.”

He pointed out that the city’s last significant zoning reform occurred in 2016. “I understand you want the full picture. I understand y’all love consensus, but we need action. You’re leaders, and you’re not taking the action that our community needs.” He then pointed out that the ordinances already exist, just with different numbers, so his proposals should not deform the displacement milieux in any meaningful way.