|
Wednesday, 30 November 2005 01:42 |
By DAVID FORBES
Instead of a vacant Burger King, those driving along Merrimon Avenue can expect to see a new office building with a bank drive-through at the intersection with Fenner Avenue in the coming year.
Asheville City Council on Nov. 22 unanimously approved conditional use zoning necessary for the project to proceed.
The developer, Fred Edney, and the Grace Neighborhood Association previously had reached an agreement on the conditions for construction of the 14,400-square-foot building.
Patsy Brison, a local attorney representing Edney, said that the development would set a standard for future building on Merrimon.
?®This is definitely setting a higher bar for design on Merrimon Avenue,?∆ Brison said. ?®We believe this is an example of good development. Sometimes, if you give a developer the opportunity to make a good design, then they will run quickly to that design. Here, that??s what??s been done.?∆
However, representatives of the owners of two adjacent properties that include locally owned shops claim the
project will be out of character with the neighborhood and harm their businesses.
Attorney Louis Bissette, speaking for the owner of a shopping center that includes Lord??s Drug Store and Photo Quik, claims that the design will hamper his clients?? business and that the current zoning should not be changed.
?®Banks are great things to have,?∆ Bissete said.
?®But we have some people here in the shops who are also important and
contribute to the community. We??re not opposed to development on this
property. All we??re asking is that the developer play by the rules. The
existing zoning permits a building of 12,000 square feet. The existing
zoning does not allow a drive-through.?∆
Bissette added that the plans, which position the bank next to the road, allow for another ?®Staples-like structure
on Merrimon Avenue.
We think that this is totally out of context with the neighborhood.
Coming south, it??s going to be very hard to see our shopping center.
It??s right in front of our building.?∆
In addition, he contended that the already-congested traffic on Merrimon will increase.
Brison added that a bank drive-through means it will be quieter and
less disruptive for near-by residents than a drive-through for a fast
food restaurant, such as Burger King.
The conditions agreed to by the developer and the neighborhood include
limiting the drive-through operating hours from 8:30 a.m. to 6 p.m.,
widening the sidewalk and minimizing light and noise from the building.
Gene Brewery, representing the neighborhood association, said at the
public hearing prior to the vote that the conditions ?®are the result of
our extensive meetings with the developers?∆ and praised Edney for being
?®very
forthright in addressing our concerns. This is certainly a development
we can abide by. There??s a point where you say ?¥Ok, let??s negotiate.
Could you make the development like this and help to improve the area???
?? and he??s done that.?∆
Moreover, she added that the building is ?®a good first step in establishing what kind of building we want to see on Merrimon.?∆
While the property owners opposed to the project filed a valid protest
petition, which requires a super-majority of six votes, all members of
council ended up voting in favor of the project.
In separate remarks at the hearing, resident Gera Wrightmeyer said she was initially opposed to the project,
but later changed her mind.
?®We??ve gotten a lot of support from that, and we??d much prefer it to a
Burger King,?∆ Wrightmeyer said. ?®Traffic is crazy already. I don??t
think it??s going to increase much more.?∆
Vice Mayor Carl Mumpower noted that it is unusual for developers and the neighborhood to reach an agreement.
?®This may be the first time, certainly it??s one of the few times, that
a developer and a neighborhood have come to something positive for both
sides,?∆ Mumpower said.
Despite that agreement, some members of council ?? including Mumpower ?? still question some of the
conditions the neighborhood and developer established.
Specifically, Mumpower said that the restrictions on the operating
hours are a matter with which he has some ?®personal concerns.?∆
?®I??m not very comfortable when we get into talking about restricting
operating hours like that,?∆ he noted. ?®But it certainly is not my job
to be the advocate for the developer. ?∆
Brison told Mumpower that the developer is agreeing to abide by those
hours to address neighborhood concerns about the impact of the
drive-through.
However, Mumpower noted that the building seems to be of a different sort than many of those along the rest of Merrimon.
?®That concern does seem to resonate with me and this really is not like
anything along Merrimon,?∆ Mumpower said. ?®You don??t see a lot of
development like this along Merrimon.?∆
Planning Director Scott Shuford replied that many of the buildings
along Merrimon would not have been built if they were proposed under
the current standards, and that zoning for buildings like this are part
of bringing a ?®more urban edge?∆ to the area.
?®This is more appropriate to the zoning than what exists now,?∆ Shuford
said. ?®The current zoning makes those situations with the building set
back from the road non-compliant.?∆
He added that ?®what you have before you tonight is a pretty good model
for what we??re looking at ?? a multi-story design. I think this area is
going more in that direction.?∆
City staff is currently conducting a survey on the future zoning of Merrimon.
Despite the general agreement between the neighborhood and developer, when Councilman Brownie
Newman proposed that the project be approved with a mix of the list of
conditions set by staff and those agreed upon by the neighborhood and
the developer, which differ on technical matters and overlap in some of
their recommendations, council could not decide on the exact wording of
the motion.
After a 30-minute break, during which Shuford consulted with the
neighborhood and developer representatives, he returned with a
recommendation that compiled many of the conditions from both. That
motion was swiftly approved by council.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
