Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Abandoned Structures topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council adopts ordinance to address abandoned structures after debate over Helene‑damaged properties
Summary
Council adopted a new article authorizing repair, closure or demolition of abandoned structures deemed health or safety hazards; staff said demolition is rarely city‑initiated and the ordinance provides clearer authority to seek compliance while protecting owners actively pursuing repairs or grants.
The Asheville City Council adopted an ordinance inserting a new article in Chapter 4 to provide tools for repairing, closing or demolishing abandoned structures that pose health or safety hazards.
Mark Mathede, director of development services, told council the language is drawn from North Carolina general statutes (presented as "160 d dash 12 o 1" in staff remarks) and is intended to fill a regulatory gap for nonresidential properties that are nuisances but may not meet current unsafe‑building definitions. Mathede said demolition is not the only remedy and emphasized the city’s compliance team will continue to work with owners; staff will prioritize cases through a risk‑based inventory and a scoring/prioritization system.
Speakers during the public‑comment period included business‑community representatives who asked for clearer guardrails, timeframes, and assurances that properties damaged in Tropical Storm Helene or under active reconstruction would not be swept into enforcement. The council discussed those concerns and staff said the ordinance would include procedures to account for active remediation and federal or other assistance, and that the compliance process is designed to exhaust owner remedies before city action.
Council approved the ordinance in a roll‑call style process; a recorded result was cited in the meeting as a 6–1 vote. A council member voting against said the measure felt like a “performative” step without funding for additional staff positions needed to implement a robust program.
Next steps: staff will maintain an inventory of properties, apply a priority/risk score, and provide follow‑up guidance on how federal recovery efforts (Helene‑related) will factor into enforcement decisions.
