Proposed Parking Deck Fact Sheet

Question: Why is it better to find another location for the parking garage and nullify the plan to build a large parking deck and private development on property near the Basilica and Battery Park Apartments?

EXPENSE: 20.8 million or $32,000 per space. This is over TWICE THE TYPICAL COST of a parking space. The expense is escalated, according to the City engineering dept, due to the extra construction of roads & infrastructure needed for the adjacent private, for profit development plans. Let'’s focus on the need for parking and transportation and not underwrite the costs of private development.

THE FUTURE: We must be forward-thinking and utilize other strategies that would reduce the need for parking garages and dependence on oil. erhaps if a smaller parking garage is built, monies saved could be used to provide free bus shuttles from satellite parking areas spread around town. This would fulfill the needs the parking consultant studies pointed to.

NOT THE SOLUTION TO GROVE ARCADE'S PROBLEM: Studies have found that people are not willing to walk more than a block from where they park. One HUGE parking deck on the far side of the City could never resolve this issue. One mega-large parking deck on the edge of town would not be the best use of City funds nor will it make much of a difference to the Grove Arcade merchants. According to the parking consultant, most people will only walk so far to get to the shop, office or restaurant they want to get to. If we have a free shuttle service people can pick up the shuttle at numerous locations right at the street corner.

Structural, VISUAL & HISTORIC Threat: to surrounding historic buildings. The proposed parking deck's proximity to the historic St. Lawrence Basilica, Battery Park Apartments and the Grove Arcade put these buildings at high risk for structural damage, visual obstruction and damage their historical value. The Basilica has already sustained damage from past nearby construction and is now seeking grants to secure its structural integrity.

LOCATION: The City of Asheville designed the new parking garage to butt up against (15 feet from) and wrap around two sides of the historic Battery Park apartments. This building is not only historic but houses low income elderly residents. Asheville already struggles with poor air quality. What health implications/risks are in store for these residents? Many residents will actually be looking outside of their windows directly at a parking garage where they now see mountains. Could you imagine the City of Asheville voting to do this around one of our luxury condominium buildings downtown?

GREEN SPACE: The City has made it a goal to increase the density of downtown. Many new or newly renovated condominium projects have been completed in recent years and many are under construction now. In addition, new office and retail buildings are being constructed downtown. This concept of “infill” seems to be filling Asheville’'s every square inch. As we increase density, we must increase green space downtown. It is as much for visual beauty as it is for emotional well being. A small park would provide shade and respite for tourists & residents alike and afford a beautiful view of the Basilica. Planting trees would help with air quality issues we face.

EMINENT DOMAIN: The City threatened to take the lot belonging to the Basilica of St. Lawrence by eminent domain. This would be an improper use of eminent domain, since much of the land under consideration would be for private development. A far better location for the parking garage would be the BellSouth lot. A parking deck there would be close to residential buildings but not fifteen feet away, as in the current plan.