Register for:
How Shall We Grow?
1970
 

[Aerial View of Asheville] from How Shall We Grow?,
Special Collections, D.H. Ramsey Library, UNCA

Department of Housing and Urban Development

This publication is a report examining the problems connected with the physical growth of Asheville, with emphasis placed upon achieving “desirable patterns of land development.”  The report’s purpose can be summarized as follows: “to examine the major problems and plans for the Asheville area, to discuss the nature of these problems, to establish some fundamental goals and objectives toward which we are striving, and then to determine some procedures, policies and programs for influencing the changes that will take place in the Asheville area during the next 25 years.” The authors argue that Asheville has grown without any particular forethought or planning.

The report begins with a history of the growth of Asheville, tracing how the city has changed over the years. For instance, “That charming area which was Asheville 1886 today contains the worst buildings and housing conditions in the entire city. The Central Business District is seen as shoddy and run-down.” From there, the report addresses the current state of Asheville and the need for a comprehensive city plan as the population continues to grow and the city’s borders continue to expand. The report discusses the state of housing, claiming that 25% of Asheville’s population live in deteriorating or dilapidated homes/apartments. The business district was also a problematic area.  In the Central Business District, 24% of the buildings were in “standard condition,” 43% had “minor deficiencies,” and 33% had “major deficiencies.” Another source of particular concern throughout the report were the overburdened and inadequate water and sewer lines serving the city.

The authors of the report advise communication between the various city departments and at the state and national level, as well. Cooperation and communication are described as vital components of any city plan, as citizens “hope to go forward together in building the kind of community in which we will all enjoy living.” 

How Shall We Grow?  -- FULL TEXT

ASHEVILLE NORTH CAROLINA

PLANS AND POLICIES

HOW SHALL WE GROW? 

CONTENTS

I.  INTRODUCTION
      Purpose of Report ........................................................................................................... 5
      The Planning Program....................................................................................................... 5
      A Note About the Area.................................................................................................... 5

II.  THE TOWN OF ASHEVILLE AND HOW IT GREW
     The Early Years ................................................................................................................ 7
     The New Century ............................................................................................................. 7
     1917: City Annexes West Asheville ................................................................................... 9
     1926: A Boom Town ........................................................................................................ 9
     1948: Return to Normalcy ................................................................................................11
     1960: Only Ten Years Ago ............................................................................................. 11

III.  ASHEVILLE TODAY
     The People and the Economy .......................................................................................... 13
     Transportation System .................................................................................................... 15
     Housing .......................................................................................................................... 16
     Commercial Development ............................................................................................... 17
     The Special Problem of the Central Business District ........................................................ 17
     Industrial Development ................................................................................................... 18
     The Utilities Systems ....................................................................................................... 18

IV.  AND NOW FOR TOMORROW
     A Voice from the Past ..................................................................................................... 19
     Can We Really Plan? ...................................................................................................... 19
     General Principles ........................................................................................................... 19
     The Development Trend .................................................................................................. 20
     Alternative Plans ............................................................................................................. 21
     Goals and Projects .......................................................................................................... 22

V.  CARRYING OUT THE PLANS
     Policies for Future Growth .............................................................................................. 24
     Legal Tools: Zoning, Subdivision Regulations, etc. ............................................................ 25
     Inter-Governmental Cooperation ..................................................................................... 26
     City-County Cooperation ................................................................................................ 27
     Public Housing ................................................................................................................ 27
     New Directions in Planning -- The Planning Process ........................................................ 28
     Toward Regional Planning ............................................................................................... 29
     The Asheville-Buncombe County Continuing Planning Program ........................................ 29

APPENDIX

I.  A List of Publications about Asheville and the Surrounding Region .................................... 30

II. Interim Resolution Concerning Water and Sewer Line Extensions for the City of Asheville . 31

III. Existing (1967) and Projected Population and Land Use for Asheville Study Area ........... 32

IV. Metropolitan Planning Board Studies Proposed for 1970-1971 ...................................... 32

MAPS

Asheville-Buncombe County Study Area ............................................................................... 5

Existing Land Use, Asheville Study Area ....................................... Fold-out (inside back cover)

Future Land Use Trend Map Fold-out ........................................................ (inside back cover)

July 1970
Asheville Buncombe County Metropolitan Planning Board
P.O. Box 7148
Asheville, North Carolina  28807

THE CITY OF ASHEVILLE AND BUNCOMBE COUNTY

CITY COUNCIL
Dr. Wayne S. Montgomery, Mayor
Maj. Gen Webster Anderson, Vice Mayor
Luke Atkinson
Henry E. Colton
Dr. Robert P. Crouch
Reuben J. Dailey
Mrs. Barbara Keleher

CITY MANAGER
Phin. Horton, III

COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Gordon Greenwood, Chairman
John Daniel
Roy Trantham

CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Ernest Beck
Richard O. Covington
J. Gerald Cowan
Mrs. Doris O. Demmon
Rev. W.A. Eason
Phillip R. Elam
George A. Gragg, Jr.
Mrs. Allen Johnson
Judge Harry C. Martin
Mrs. William McMinn
Fred P. Pearlman
James M. Pressley
Dr. Gene Rainey
Dr. Cecil E. Sherman
George M. Stephens, Sr.
Harold A. Talbert, Jr.

METROPOLITAN PLANNING BOARD -- ASHEVILLE AND BUNCOMBE COUNTY
William A. V. Cecil, Chairman
J. Bertram King, Vice Chairman
Anthony Redmond, Secretary
Frank Dorato
Dr. John P. Holt
Roger Lyda
Thomas O. McCurry
John McDuffie
Dr. Samuel Robinson
Richard A. Wood, Jr.

PLANNING STAFF
W. Neal Hanks, Executive Director
Nicholas S. Kmecza, Jr., Director of Planning
Charles Cunningham, Planner III
R. Douglas Taylor, Planner III
David H. Quinn, Planner I
Marvin Vierra, Planning Technician II
Larry Ward, Planning Technician II
Robert McDonald, Planning Technician I
Norma Reid, Secretary II
Ann Rumbough, Secretary II

ABSTRACT:

Title: How Shall We Grow
Author: Charles Cunningham, Metropolitan Area
Subject: Plans and Policies for the Asheville Area
Local Planning Agency: Metropolitan Planning Board of the City of Asheville and Buncombe County
Source of Copies: Metropolitan Planning Board of the City of Asheville and Buncombe County, P.O. Box 7148, Asheville, N.C.  28807
HUD Project No.: NA
Number of Pages: 32-2 Maps
Abstract: This report examines problems connected with the physical growth of the Asheville Urban Area. Emphasis is placed on the use of implementation methods in achieving desirable patterns of land development. Goals and objectives for various functional groupings are stated, including:

The Transportation System                             The Central Business District
Housing                                                          Industrial Development
Commercial Development                               The Utilities Systems

A major thesis is that the particular problems of the area have been brought about by attempts to scatter land development with minimal development standards, inadequate and undersized utilities and transportation facilities. More compact development is called for with heavy emphasis on governmental coordination and land use controls. The planning function is pictured as being ineffective in the past, with recommendations for integrating planning as a process with the decision making bodies.

I.  INTRODUCTION

Purpose of Report
     This is a report for the citizens of the Asheville area. As we begin a new decade many have taken looks ahead to the end of the century with attempts to forecast what will be taking place, together with plans and programs for shaping the future. Planners are optimistic enough to believe that the citizens and their private and public leaders can bring about the kind of community they would like to live in.
     It has sometimes been said that the area has had a plethora of planning reports and studies with little implementation. Perhaps then this is the time in which we should take a look at how Asheville has grown, what plans have been made, which ones have been valid, and how we can go about either altering the plans or else shifting the manner of focus.
     The purpose of this report, therefore, is to examine the major problems and plans for the Asheville area, to discuss the nature of these problems, to establish some fundamental goals and objectives toward which we are striving, and then to determine some procedures, policies and programs for influencing the changes that will take place in the Asheville area during the next 25 years.

The Planning Program
     In all candor it can be said that this area has grown without any particular plan for development. The shape of the landscape has often been influenced more by the laying down of a water line or the building of a highway than by any attempt to coordinate the varied components that go into the building of a community. Asheville did have what was called a City Plan in 1922. It would be of interest to historians to review Mr. John Nolen's Plan at that time and compare it with later developments that took place. For example, one of his recommendations was to establish certain definite and distinct land use patterns in the City and to influence the development of those areas by dividing the City into zoning districts. It is interesting to note that it was 26 years later that Asheville established a Planning and Zoning Commission whose function was to recommend such a zoning ordinance and map for adoption by the City Council. About another 10 years went by before a City-County Planning Board was formed and during its first few years a series of federally-assisted planning studies were prepared*.
     The first attempt to prepare a general land use plan was in 1959 and this was considerably updated in 1961 when a comprehensive transportation study was made.
     With the establishment July 1, 1969 of a full-time staff for the Metropolitan Planning Board, attention was redirected toward establishing a continuing planning process, recognizing the fact that plans are never static and must continually be monitored and constantly under revision. A series of planning studies or what might be considered "inputs" to a "Master Plan" have been under way and are scheduled for continued future activity. Many of these reports will be cited in this document as they have made genuine contributions to the planning process. It is our hope that ways and means can be found for follow-through of these reports. With that optimistic note, therefore, the Planning Staff and the Planning Board hope to see continued feedback and day-to-day decisions made in the light of an overall planning process.

A Note About The Area
     The "planning area" of the Metropolitan Planning Board is all of Buncombe County. Within these borders, however, the level -- or degree -- of planning activity varies, ranging from quite detailed analyses and surveys in the more densely built-up sections to rather generalized consideration in the rural and mountainous sections.
     Our area of intensive study for the past several years is that portion of the City and the suburban contiguous land which is considered capable of urbanizing within the next 25 years. This is the "Asheville Study Area" for which information has been developed and presented in previous and current reports. This area is shown along with the location of the Asheville city limits, on the map of Buncombe County on the opposite page.

*See Appendix 1 for Listing of Planning Reports 

II.  THE TOWN OF ASHEVILLE AND HOW IT GREW

The Early Years
     The cross-roads of the Indians and the white settlers in the Western North Carolina mountains in the late 18th century became a place to barter and trade and developed into the small village of Morristown, later to be re-named Asheville. Located on a plateau at the intersection of the Swannanoa and French Broad Rivers, the small settlement became a thriving trading post and a resort area for the low land plantation owners in the hot summer months.
     More important to the growth of Asheville than its charter in 1883  was the coming of the railroad in 1880. Rail access was Asheville's greatest economic generator of the 19th Century. The orientation of life in the new city took a rapid change towards the railroad lines. These new lines reached Asheville via the main valleys of access from the east and south. Along these river valleys the water powered and oriented industries began to take advantage of the location factors of power and transportation. The earliest of these were the tannery and cotton mills. The population rose from 2,616 in 1880 to 10,235 in 1890. With advertising from the railroad, the summer and winter resorts of Western North Carolina grew to national renown.
     Rail service grew and more hotels and boarding facilities were established. Supporting commercial services grew in proportion, and the fame of Asheville's climate, health, and beauty grew to national and international acclaim. George Vanderbilt had purchased a large tract of land and began construction of his country home in Biltmore, furnishing a payroll of $12,000 a week for Ashevillians.
     However, in 1894 and 1895 a detrimental real estate boom, sparked by over-speculation, hindered the healthy growth of Asheville for a brief period of time. With the return to normality, Asheville continued growing in the direction predicted in the mid-1880's.

The New Century
     Asheville, after the turn of the century, experienced a steady increase of population and construction, based on tourism and trades related to health.
     Asheville was unique in that people from the North and South wanted to spend their vacations both during summer and winter in the Asheville plateau. This was a rarity for a location in the South.
     Asheville spared little in advertising the climate, conditions conducive for excellent health and unmatched scenic beauty of the area. The leading industry was centered about the 15 hotels and inns, and the numerous boarding houses. The Battery Park and the Kenilworth Inn Hotels were world famous. The mansion and estate of George Vanderbilt was, and is now, a leading attraction and selling point for Asheville. At this time, if one were lucky, he could receive one of the 50 daily passes from the Vanderbilts to tour the estate.
     The town advertised a rapid transit system via electric street cars, from Pack Square to all parts of town, including the railroad depot, both Overlook and Riverside Parks, the suburbs of Victoria, Montford, Kenilworth, and the nearby town of Weaverville.
     Private and public schools were considered a great asset in attracting boarders as well as permanent residents to the land of health, wealth, and beauty.
     A new City Auditorium had been completed with extended capacity, offering greater space for conventions. Many paved roads, a new water system, and a new passenger depot under construction were all a part of Asheville entering the 20th Century.  

1926: A Boom Town
       1926 saw Asheville amid the greatest period of growth ever experienced in the city's history. During the mid-twenties Asheville reached a climatic peak with the land boom of 1926. The power of the ensuing collapse was not fully felt until the major crash of September, 1929.
     During the 10 year period of the twenties, Asheville's population grew from 28,504 in 1920 to 50,193 in 1930, most of this growth coming in the latter half of the twenties. In the mid-twenties, centering on 1926, great strides were made in development of civic interest. Four new schools were completed, with many additions to existing facilities; and a bond was approved for the construction of a new high school. Pack Library, a new city market building housing the market, fire and police departments, and the city garage on Valley Street were all constructed. Land for an additional city park was purchased between Hominy Creek and the French Broad River, and construction of the new City Building had begun. Street extensions on Hilliard and McDowell had been completed, and the new Bee Tree Reservoir finished. Plans were also under way for the joint city-county Beaucatcher Tunnel. These and many other improvements to the city had been finished or at least begun by 1926.
     The obvious display of rapid growth in population and the physical city was already manifesting itself in traffic problems as early as the mid-twenties. The city plan, written by by [sic] John Nolen in 1922, and adopted in 1924, had offered many solutions to problems of the twenties and beyond, relating to land use controls, transportation planning, and policies governing development of the social and physical environment of the Asheville community.
     Some of the Nolen plans for an improved transportation system and an increase in civic, educational, and recreational facilities for the present needs were undertaken, yet many of the long-range proposals for zoning and subdivision controls, water and sewer extension policies, increased taxation, and the employment of a workable, enforceable planning process were never incorporated or enforced in time to save Asheville from the resulting chaos of today.
     Asheville's first chance to grow and prosper in the present and future in a planned and orderly fashion was lost during the twenties. The money, initiative, and plans were available for about ten years, but the get-rich-quick mentality, and crisis-reaction planning, set Asheville up for the biggest crash and fall, September, 1929.
     1926, isolated from its potentials and shortcomings, was the blossoming of recent prosperity, and yet the beginning of a long drought in which the flower would soon wither and lie dormant for many years. 

1960: Only Ten Years Ago
     Major improvements and changes were a part of the Asheville of 1960. Increasing emphasis was being placed on the improvement of the deteriorating environment of the city.
     For the first time since 1917, Asheville made a major extension of its corporate limits. The only other attempt during these interim years was made in 1929 but was revoked in 1935. The annexation included most of what is known as east Asheville and large extensions of north, south, and west Asheville. With this new increase in total land area, the population grew from 53,000 in 1950 to 60,192 in 1960, an increase due entirely to the city's physical extension.
     The new crosstown expressway was about five years old and was undergoing revision even as it is today. Other major transportation plans were being made to bring two interstate highways and the Appalachian Highway into the Asheville thoroughfare system in the next decade. However, most in-town traffic was being subjected to an increase in chaotic tie-ups, due to poor traffic management and lack of any in-town improvements to existing main arteries.
     The new sewer treatment plant and major truck lines were only a year old in 1960 and had had little effect as yet in cleaning up the Swannanoa and French Broad Rivers, now subject to the worst state of pollution in their history. Until 1959, all sewage from Asheville and surrounding areas had been poured or pumped into the rivers.
     An effort to control land development was introduced in 1959 with the adoption of a subdivision ordinance. Unfortunately it was to suffer much the same importance as the zoning ordinance of 1948. Few, if any, new concepts were introduced, and many of the intended regulations were to be ignored or side-stepped during the sixties. For some developers, the regulations of the subdivision ordinance were never enforced and the entire process of subdivision planning was forgotten or ignored.
     As in 1948, the spirit of improvement was present in 1960 and in many respects stronger than in 1948. However, the instruments to carry out improvement and change were not being enforced or were entirely ignored.
     While the shift from an emphasis on tourism to an emphasis on industry was being undertaken for several decades, the 1960's would intensify this goal by offering an atmosphere of good transportation and cheap labor. Tourism was not dead but was taking on a new look in the Asheville area. Tunnel Road was becoming the center for the automotive tourist who would stay overnight in the Asheville area and travel to points of interest elsewhere in the Western North Carolina mountains.
     Asheville was again beginning to accelerate, but where and how would the acceleration of 1960 occur?

III. ASHEVILLE TODAY    

What has happened to that lovely unspoiled landscape described as early Asheville? Have we developed into the kind of community we've wanted? If not, what has gone wrong? And in what specific ways? Let's take a closer look at the Asheville Area today -- its particular problems, its progress, and see if there's a chance of reshaping the city of today into what we'd like to see tomorrow. A map showing the present City appears in the back of this book.
     That charming area which was Asheville 1886 today contains the worst buildings and housing conditions in the entire city. The Central Business District is seen as shoddy and run-down. The surrounding areas circling the Central Business District* are in need of wholesale rehabilitation or replacement.
     Commercial development has spread to outlying areas, and has followed a wasteful, uneconomic and unattractive "string-bean" type of development, encouraged in no small part by the provisions of a lax and ineffective zoning ordinance.
     Considering the critical shortage of good buildable land, there has been serious waste and misuse[.] Subdivisions have been poorly designed, leaving odd and useless parcels of land growing up in weeds or the repositories for garbage and junk. Streets have been laid out with little regard for their conformance to an overall street system.
     Although not a large city, we have compounded our traffic problems by failing to plan for complementary land uses in cluster developments. Thus in order to carry out our daily routine, our citizens must make numerous trips to other parts of the city.
     A ride around the city on the local streets and into the suburbs will convince one that we have neglected our own physical plant and instead have spread farther into the hinterland. The same is true of our utility systems. Water lines laid down in the past were not planned for future growth, but only for the immediate problem. Lines of inadequate size and pressure are the rule. The sewer system likewise is over-taxed and in need of drastic overhaul.

The People and the Economy
       Today the city of Asheville and the surrounding study area comprise a population of about 78,000. The City is regarded in many ways as a major business, financial, and governmental service center for Western North Carolina. Whereas in the old days most of the people lived in the areas immediately surrounding the central part of town and came "downtown" to do their shopping and carry on their other business affairs, this picture is rapidly changing. People are shopping closer to home for convenience goods and business establishments are losing trade to the outlying parts of the county. The trend was reported in the recent Planning Board report on Population and Economy. Covering the period 1954-63, the city of Asheville's retail sales gained 51.3%, while sales for the area of the county beyond the city limits gained 119.2%, showing the growing decentralization of retail activities. Another trend is the failure of the city to provide sufficient recreation and amusements for the lucrative tourist trade, as well as its own citizens. This is revealed in the actual declines that took place in receipts as well as employment in Amusements, Recreation, and Motion Pictures.
     Another significant trend is the growing decentralization of industry in the area. While the early industries established themselves along the railroad line and the river, decreasing dependence on rail for many types of new industries, plus the desire to have larger tracts of land on which are located single-floor plants -- all have contributed to the scattering of industry outside the city itself, and in many separate parts of the county.

*This area now designated as The "Model Cities" area.

Industrial Development
     In the Asheville study area, most of industry is located near the railroad track and the rivers. For those plants which need rail service, the limitations of topography have virtually dictated their location. However, the large majority of these establishments date back some years for their beginnings and for many the toll of the passage of time is much in evidence. Restricted by topography, the very real danger of flooding, and the need for greater land areas, these areas have not attracted many new industries. New industrial growth has taken place in areas outside the city with no consistent pattern of development. New industries have located in the recent past to the north toward Weaverville, northwest up Bingham Road, south toward the airport, and east toward Swannanoa.
     In an attitude survey of selected industrial plant managers conducted by the Planning Board staff in 1969, it was generally agreed that those industries located in older areas were somewhat cramped and could not consider expansion in their present locations. Most of those located in the newer outlying areas had adequate sites with room for expansion. A significant observation from those who were considering relocation was their desire to be near an interstate highway.
     There thus appears a genuine need to find better locations for industry and to attempt planned industrial districts offering all services and utilities. The possibility of securing large tracts of land in advance and enlisting the cooperation of private and public agencies in developing such areas is being explored. A mammoth upgrading of areas bordering the rivers, now being used in many cases as the dumping place for commercial and industrial wastes, is needed.

The Utilities Systems
     Instead of using the utility systems as a means of planning and controlling the location and rate of development, in the past we have responded to demands for extensions purely on the basis of revenue potential and have reduced the effectiveness of utility extensions as a positive land-use control.
     The major utilities -- those which are the most costly and have the most effect on the development of land are water and sewer. It is with these two that we will therefore be primarily concerned.

Water

     Blessed with an abundance of rain-fall Asheville has little fear that its reservoir will run dry. There is plenty of water all right, but the big problem is getting it distributed to the places where it is needed. The present system is spread too thin -- it is in need of major improvements in main distribution lines and many residential services lines. In addition, as pointed out by the National Bureau of Fire Underwriters, substantial improvements for the purposes of adequate fire flow are needed in a number of places.
     In many residential areas to the north, south, east and west, small inadequate lines exist and under present city policy, cannot be extended since they would further compound the problem. Whereas in the past, as indicated in the first paragraph above, small lines were extended piece-meal to individual water customers based purely on the profitability of selling water, the present interim policy* will insure that no future problems are created while we are trying to solve the problems of today.

Sewer

     Sewer lines in general have been laid down in the same manner as water lines. In fact, about the only sewer lines which could safely be considered adequate for today and for reasonable anticipated growth are the large interceptors recently installed by the Metropolitan Sewerage Commission. Providing for sewerage service is a special bugaboo in that an option is sometimes taken by a developer to install the cheapest system in the shortest possible time. This has meant that septic tanks have gone into areas which later became so developed that public sewerage had to be provided, thus causing a double expenditure of money.

*This policy, adopted by City Council appears as Appendix II.

IV.  AND NOW FOR TOMORROW

     As we look forward tomorrow and those tomorrows to come, we see the Asheville Area breaking through the 100,000 population mark in slightly over 20 years. We see a community desperately striving to create a new "image". Economists have predicted even better times ahead -- more leisure time, more people seeking recreation and amusement areas in our midst. The increasing number of "foot-loose" industries means that the Asheville area more than ever has an opportunity perhaps to become somewhat selective in enticing industry to the area.

A Voice From the Past
     Let us take a look at a message from the past that is just as appropriate today in planning for tomorrow. City Planner John Nolen forwarded his report to the city government with this message February 21, 1923:
     "The purpose of general city plans should not be misunderstood. While their practicability in general has been carefully tested, they are not to be regarded as final plans to be executed without additional study; nor is it expected that all of the recommendations will be carried out at one time. Some of these demand early action. Others can wait. The economy, however, to be secured by the early acquisition of land for public open spaces should not be lost sight of, and it should be remembered that the purchase of land is an investment that fully justifies the use of long term bonds.
     "Asheville has the location, climate, and environment that should lead to a steady growth. Such growth, however, needs to be guided by careful planning. The city government and the people of the city are now awake not only to Asheville's resources but also her present needs, and they are resolved to meet them. The city, therefore, is ready for a far-reaching development, based upon sound planning."

Can We Really Plan?
     Those involved in the planning process are optimistic enough to believe that a community does have the ability to shape its future. The logic used is that sensible people, provided with sufficient information and the opportunity to decide will, in the long run, make the decision that will bring about the type of environment they want. The problem sometimes has been that, in making those decisions, insufficient information was available, there was really no concensus as to which direction the community wanted to go, and no meaningful mechanism was established by which these goals can be carried out.
     Let us therefore attempt, for the first time in our history, to establish first some guidelines around which we'd like to plan, build -- even rebuilds our city.

General Principles
     As a commodity, Asheville accepts the responsibility of providing living conditions for all citizens which meet basic human needs and are commensurate with individual human dignity. These fundamental requirements include: decent housing, clean air and water; superior educational, recreational, and health programs; and a broad pattern of public and private social welfare services.
     The people of Asheville should conserve the natural beauty and unique character of their city. Historical buildings and sites should be preserved and new construction or renovation should be in harmony with the character of the city.
     To insure a stable and prosperous economic base, the city must work with private enterprise to maintain a balanced economy with diversified manufacturing, commercial, and service industries. Jobs and job training should be readily available to people of varied ages, abilities, and education.
     Community pride and morale must be maintained so that all citizens accept their responsibility to the community. Broad participation in identifying and solving community problems is essential, and all citizens should be willing to contribute their full share of the effort and financing for all community services.
     All future planning and development should be carried out on the assumption that Asheville is the focal center of an expanding and changing region, and that the city limits as such will have less and less significance. The city should recognize and accept a shared responsibility with neighboring communities for the economic and cultural leadership of the region.

Residential

     It was assumed that slightly more apartments would be built and that the proportion of multi-family dwellings would increase from 5% to 10%. Relatively low densities for single-family units are seen (four dwelling units per acre in the suburban areas -- 2.7% in the mountainous area.)
     Multi-family development was seen as medium density -- 10 units per acre.

Commercial

     The trend shows continuation and extension of strip commercial development along major thoroughfares. Larger clusterings should take place at interstate interchanges.
     The total land devoted to commercial is expected to double in size.

Industrial

     The industrial classification includes manufacturing, trucking, warehousing, and mining industries.
     It was assumed that small light industries would predominate in future industrial expansions.
     The Trend sees the major portion of new industrial development taking place along or close to the French Broad River. Other possibilities for developing new industrial areas are shown on the map and are:
          I-26 and I-40 interchange
          South of the interchange between I-26 and Brevard Road
          South of Sand Hill Road & State Highway NC 112
          West of US 74 between the Swannanoa River and proposed I-40
     The Trend anticipates scattered development of both small and large industries.

Public and Semi-Public

     This category of land includes schools, churches, governmental offices, hospitals, parks, golf courses, non-profit organizations and cultural facilities.
     As seen from the map, this represents a broad and mixed type of land use, each with different characteristics. These areas are naturally spread over the entire area, following no particular pattern or plan. In the short time since the publication of our report on future land use, some major events have occurred which affect this plan: The decision of the County Commissioners to develop a large scale recreation complex in the Leicester area with the following decision by the city to forego plans for the construction of the new golf course in the northwest part of the area. A further change in projections of this type of land use comes about from the retrenchment of the Veterans Administration Hospital area. The VA has released a great portion of their land for other purposes -- not fully decided at this writing.

Street and Rail Right-of-Way

     This category of land use accounted for about 25% of all developed land at the time of our survey. Only a small increase is expected, the assumption being that as new land area is developed, streets and street rights-of-way would account for about 25% of the new area. As for rail and rail rights-of-way, it was assumed that virtually no extensions would be made.
    

     In preparing comprehensive plans, statements of goals toward which we are striving must be made. Goals define what is intended to be accomplished, what we look towards in the preparation of a comprehensive plan. With the setting of general goals, next come specific courses of action to be followed in striving for these goals -- the projects around which we can develop programs.
     What do the people of Asheville want their city to be? A sedate, residential community with a campus atmosphere? A tourist mecca where neon signs compete with ferris wheels and honky-tonks? Or should Asheville be a well-balanced, diversified community with well-planned industrial districts, delightful visitor attractions and pleasant residential areas. Which is it to be?
     ...if a well-balanced city, it must have a composite of numerous elements -- elements which appeal to the several "publics" who visit, use, work or live in the city.
     Thus, the image will be made of factors which are attractive to industry: good, clean, water; schools and training facilities, cultural and recreational activities.
     Certain aspects should reflect the preferences of retired people: quiet, shady streets; unhurried shopping areas; easily accessible and congenial leisure-time activities. To attract or retain the younger population, Asheville must provide outstanding educational facilities, good shopping, and a sense of excitement; it should be a place of "happenings."

THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM

Goals:
     A more efficient and economical transportation system.
     A high degree of coordination among all transportation forms: highways, streets, public transit, trucking, air, rail, and taxi-cabs.
Projects:
     Provide a north-south, four-lane thoroughfare with parking prohibited at all times -- Merrimon - Broadway - Biltmore Avenues.
     Create a loop connecting Charlotte - north to Murdock - Weaver Boulevard - Montford Avenue - North French Broad - Hilliard - Market - Valley
     Establish a Metropolitan Transportation Commission.
     Combine streets, highways, parking, taxis, airports, transit and terminal facilities.
     Establish Liaison Committee with State Highway Commission.
     Establish zoning controls 1,000 feet both sides and at interchanges of all interstates, the Appalachian Highway, and designated scenic highways.
     Remove bus stops on approach legs of all signalized intersections.
     Include in Capital Improvements Program yearly proposals for repaving major traffic carriers.

COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT

Goals:
     An adequate variety of goods and services
     A choice of sites suitable for a variety of outlets.
     Functional, safe, and attractive facilities.
     Minimum conflict with other metropolitan activities.
     Effective use and development of old centers.
Projects:
     Control and limit the extension of "strip" commercial development along major traffic arteries.
     Encourage the establishment of planned business districts of optimum size in which commercial activities are grouped. Establish and enforce development standards for commercial uses.

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT

Goals:
     A diversified industrial base.
     An adequate supply of suitable industrial sites.
     Efficient and harmonious groupings of industries.
Projects:
     Establish a Buncombe County Industrial Development Authority.
     Develop Cane Creek and the old airport into large Planned Industrial Districts.
     Develop and enforce performance standards (noise, odor, heat, pollution, etc.).
     Establish minimum size for industrial sites and development standards.
     Renew inefficient and obsolete industrial and mixed industrial-commercial areas that have a high industrial potential.

Goals:
     A more compact Central Business District.
     A more attractive area.
     A center of culture, finance, government and trade.
Projects:
     Organize the Central Business District interests.
     Determine the market potential of the Central Business District.
     Develop a Central Business District plan.
     Try out the "Town Lift" program.
     Encourage relocation of incompatible uses.

HOUSING

Goals:
     Safe and sanitary housing for all area residents.
     A broad choice of housing types.
     Housing choices within neighborhoods.
     Identity and individuality in housing.
     Convenience to facilities and activities.
     Safe, healthful, and blight-free residences and neighborhoods.
Projects:
     Encourage design and planning innovations in both housing structures and land development.
     Revise Zoning Ordinance to encourage higher densities.
     Develop "Half-Way Housing" using mobile homes for immediate, temporary relocation needs.
     Convert Hillcrest Apartments to housing for the elderly.
     Encourage development of condominium apartments.

UTILITIES

Goals:
     Establish minimum standards for service to all populated areas.
     Upgrade deficient water and sewer systems.
Projects:
     Update the maps that show the location and sizes of water and sewer lines.
     Use public utilities -- water and sewer and services to influence location, intensity, and timing of land development.
     Establish fair method for sharing costs of utility extensions between the developer and the utility system.
     Encourage utility companies and developers to bury distribution systems.
     Combine districts, systems, and commissions into an overall Metropolitan Water and Sewerage Commission.
     Produce a joint City-County Plan of Improvement.
          Determine levels of service and costs.
          Reduce overlapping functions.
          Extend costs to areas benefitted.
          Develop policies on annexation.
     Establish working committee to carry out land development standards and policies: County Health Department, State Highway Division Engineer, County Sewer Department, City Water Engineer, City Building Inspector and Planning Staff.

PLANNING AND DOING

Goals:
     A good living and working environment for all citizens.
     Planning incorporated into decision-making activities --
     A "continuing planning process."  
Projects:
     Anticipate and show on maps where and how much land will be needed for new development -- shopping centers, subdivisions, industrial development....and in turn, what types of public facilities and services will be required to serve that development.
     Modernize planning legislation, organization, and administration.
     Establish forums with the governing bodies for resolution of goals, plans, and projects.
     Use Citizens Advisory Committee as sounding board for planning proposals. "
     Simplify communications -- streamline reporting methods.
     Establish a Regional Planning Process.
     Establish an Information System.
     Initiate Capital Budgeting for City and County governments.
     Revise City Subdivision Ordinance.
     Adopt County-wide Subdivision Ordinance.

     A review of past plans and recommendations made indicates that something more is needed in Asheville. Those pretty pictures John Nolen painted in 1922 of the future city at that time were not followed up with plan implementation. In the months -- and perhaps years -- to come we must insure that we use all measures we can to carry out our plans. A variety of means is suggested.

Policies for Future Growth
     Policies: simply defined -- systematic and consistent ways of doing things. Missing in Asheville is a set of written policies concerning many areas of activities of the two governments. It is not intended here to detail these areas, but rather to concentrate on several which have had the most serious impact on the physical development of the city.
     The description of inadequacies in the physical plant of the community (most notably the water, sewerage, and street systems) has suggested that revision, or perhaps, initial establishment, of certain basic policies is needed. Simply stated, the city tax-payer has assumed too large a proportion of the costs of developing new land areas. In an attempt to maximize profits, minimum and below standard utilities and streets have been installed. The result? Costly up-keep or replacement.
     The city should adopt a policy of refusing to provide any of its services to land areas which are planned to be developed below the minimums set forth in the zoning ordinance an the subdivision regulations.
     In an attempt to prevent substandard development as well as arrive at a more equitable method of financing water and sewer extensions, the City Council in late 1969 adopted an interim policy which, among other things, limits extension of water lines which would be inadequate for the future growth and fire protection. This policy is good as far as it goes. The cooperation of other public agencies must be forthcoming, however. At the same time that the city is attempting to set some minimum standards for development, other agencies, which are concerned only with their particular functional activity, are sometimes assisting in the development of substandard neighborhoods.
     The Metropolitan Planning Board should delineate on a map those particular areas in which utility systems are so substandard that extensions cannot possibly be made. A clearinghouse of public agencies concerned with construction and land development should be established, composed of the representatives of the County Health Department, the State Highway Division Engineer, the County Sewer Department, the City Water Engineer, the Building Inspector, the Electrical Inspector. It should be a policy of this group to refuse to issue the appropriate permits of each individual agency represented where such anticipated development falls below the stated minimums.

     In addition to the deficiencies in the Ordinance, land use problems continue to form by means of various practices of developers who have seemed to find loop-holes or ways of avoiding city codes and ordinances. Specifically:
     1. Private roads or streets are built with substandard provisions.
     2. Houses are constructed on these private streets in disregard of setback standards, yards, and parking requirements.
     3. Land is being subdivided by the simple device of cutting off a lot by metes and bounds description.
     4. Land is also being subdivided by drawing up plats which are filed in disregard of the subdivision ordinance.
     5. Curb cuts and driveways are constructed along major thoroughfares in excess number and width.
     The weakness in the present subdivision ordinance stem not only from the wording of the ordinance but also from the fact that a substantial number of subdivisions manage to evade the provisions of the ordinance.
     The planning staff has long wrestled with this problem and has begun a series of meetings with interested developers to come up with a more workable ordinance and also a simplified administrative procedure. The present ordinance is based on a special local act dating back to 1921. The General Assembly in 1969 removed the exemption feature of the general enabling legislation, authorizing the City to come under the provisions of the more modern act. This should be accomplished as rapidly as possible. In the meantime, the violators of the ordinance should be informed that the city will not take part in providing any of its services to those subdivisions which have not conformed to its standards. In addition, the possibilities should be investigated of arranging a clearinghouse by means of periodic round-table reviews of subdivision proposals. This team should consist of those directly involved in reviewing and processing subdivision plats. This includes representatives from the offices of the State Highway Commission District Engineer, the County Health Offices, the County Sewer Department, the City Public Works Department, the City Engineer, the County Sanitarian, the Register of Deeds, and the Planning Staff.

     Another ordinance badly needed by the City should cover minimum standards for curb cuts and driveways. The State Highway Commission has a set of standards which are honored more in the breach than the observance. Their "Manual on Driveway Entrance Regulations" prescribes standards for the number, the location, and the widths of driveways bordering state highways. A ride up most any thoroughfare, Merrimon Avenue, for example, will demonstrate that these regulations are being ignored. An interesting excerpt from this manual concerning 

Inter-Governmental Cooperation
     Increasingly, those in government who work at the local level -- i.e., in delivering services to the citizens -- are being called on to coordinate their efforts one with the other. In many ways the federal government, and more lately state government, has recognized that much federal legislation has brought about a multiplicity of programs each designed in some way or other to provide assistance. Coordination of the programs was left to local efforts. The problem manifested itself by the manner in which contact -- communications, if you will -- vertically worked very well. E.g., the County Home Agent's dealings upward to the State and thence to the U.S. Department of Agriculture were excellent. "Horizontal" communication, however, was weak. On the local scene, for example, the plans for a new Farmers Home Administration-financed water system did not necessarily have to be reviewed by others concerned with land development and utilities systems.
     Recent federal legislation has stressed inter-agency cooperation and coordination. This cuts across political boundary lines, brings together single-purpose authorities, municipal commissions, state operating departments, regional economic development districts.