Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Affordable Housing topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Council approves $2.05 million of housing trust loan and conditional zoning for Pine Lane 126‑unit affordable project

2390466 · February 25, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Asheville City Council approved $2,050,000 of a previously authorized $3,879,000 housing trust loan for land acquisition and granted conditional zoning for the Pine Lane affordable housing project, a 126‑unit, 60% AMI development deed‑restricted for 30 years.

The Asheville City Council on Feb. 25 approved two linked actions to advance a 126‑unit affordable housing development known as the Pine Lane project: (1) authorization to use $2,050,000 of a previously approved $3,879,000 housing trust fund loan toward land acquisition, and (2) approval of a conditional zoning (CZ) permitting the proposed multifamily development with conditions including a 30‑year affordability restriction at 60% of area median income (AMI) and an added requirement for a fence on the southern portion of the site.

Sasha Bertinsky, representing city housing staff, told council that council previously approved a $3,879,000 loan in April; the developer requested use of $2,050,000 of that allocation to fund the land purchase because the property owner was not willing to extend their contract. Bertinsky said land acquisition is an eligible expense for the housing trust fund and that the city would hold a deed restriction and remain in first position on the land until other financing closes. She said the purchase price for the parcel is $2,250,000 and that the remainder of the loan ($1,829,000) will be applied to construction.

Bertinsky and staff noted Buncombe County is a project partner with $6,500,000 and that the development team expects 4% low‑income housing tax credits and to leverage roughly $18,500,000 in additional financing. Staff said due diligence and legal documents are in place and recommended approval.

Sam Starbaum, planner with the Planning and Urban Design Department, presented the conditional‑zoning application and the project site plan. He summarized the development as four residential buildings totaling 126 units, deed‑restricted at 60% AMI for 30 years per the CZ. Starbaum provided a unit breakdown: 14 one‑bedroom units, 28 two‑bedroom units, 62 three‑bedroom units and 22 four‑bedroom units.

Neighbors raised concerns about access and impacts to privately maintained Oak Lodge Road and asked whether Pine Lane and Oak Lodge would be improved. Starbaum said Pine Lane is a city‑owned, paved street and that transportation staff did not support exercising eminent domain to bring Oak Lodge up to city standard; improvements or a dedication would require property‑owner actions and potentially road upgrades to meet city standards. Starbaum also said the applicant requested two technical modifications: a five‑foot internal sidewalk (rather than the 10‑foot standard of the residential expansion district) and a waiver of the sidewalk requirement on Oak Lodge Road; staff and the applicant proposed signage and design features to encourage use of Pine Lane instead of Oak Lodge.

Developer representatives, including Derek Allen (land‑use attorney) and Warren Sugg (Civil Design Concepts), said they would work with neighbors on landscaping and could add a fence along the southern boundary of the site on their side of the property so long as the fence did not interfere with landscape requirements or tree preservation. The chair of the Planning and Zoning Commission had recommended approval on Sept. 5, and staff recommended council concur.

Council voted to (1) approve the $2,050,000 transfer of housing trust funds for land acquisition and (2) approve the conditional zoning as amended to add a condition requiring a fence on the southern portion of the development site along Pine Lane, constructed in a manner that does not disturb the approved landscape plan. Both actions passed on voice votes with no recorded opposition.

Public commenters at the hearing included a nearby resident who asked for buffering and a fence adjacent to a planned clubhouse and others who urged that the project include renewable‑energy considerations; the applicant said the project is at the construction‑document stage and that they will follow requirements in the tax‑credit application (QAP/CHFA) and any CHFA or program guidelines. Staff and the developer also discussed maintenance, parking, landscaping and noise mitigation.