ASHEVILLE, N.C. (828newsNOW) — The Meadows at Haw Creek is a go — at least the zoning for the property targeted by developers has been changed, clearing the way for a project that includes 49 single-family and 35 townhome dwellings.

Dozens of people — some for, many against — jammed the city council meeting at Harrah’s Cherokee Center – Asheville on Tuesday to speak about the project at 767 New Haw Creek Road.

City planner Sam Starr-Baum said some of the biggest changes to the Haw Creek plans included tree canopy preservation and open space. The tree canopy preservation is now at 5.65 acres and open space is at 11 acres.

The project went through several changes with the latest happening Tuesday when two townhome units were designated affordable or low-income housing. Other changes included decreasing the number of homes, preserving a wooded area and moving the access road so fewer retaining walls would be needed.

“There is a preponderance of evidence that supports this plan for approval,” Starr-Baum said, while some in the packed banquet room grumbled their displeasure.

REZONING FOR HAW CREEK PROJECT UP FOR COUNCIL VOTE

Council member Kim Roney, who was the lone dissenting vote, expressed concerns about infrastructure in the area.

The neighborhood’s transit time is the worst in the city, she said citing a two-hour route.

“Haw Creek is still waiting on the sidewalks we promised,” Roney said.

But, transit routes and long-awaited sidewalks were not on the council’s agenda.

“We are here to hear the zoning request,” Mayor Esther Manheimer said as other questions began popping up.

The property was zoned Residential Single-Family Medium Density District (RS-4) and abuts RS-4-zoned land. The request for conditional zoning to Residential Expansion CZ was because of the proposed 84 residential units.

The project, which has been in the works for more than a year, caused an uproar in the community and sparked numerous conversations between residents, city leaders and developers.

“I think this is the first time I’ve ever been asked to convene, if you will, meetings between the developer and representatives from the neighborhood and not for me to weigh in but to just facilitate that discussion,” Manheimer said.

SECTION OF JOHNSTON BOULEVARD TO GET SIDEWALK

Derek Allen, the attorney for developer L.B. Jackson and Co., described it as a series of compromises and fine-tuning the conditions of the project.

“We’re here to ask you to approve us with these conditions,” Allen said Tuesday night. “This is the plan. The time is now. This is the place. We’d ask for your vote of approval.”

But, the city council had scheduled a public hearing on the project before the vote, and 42 people signed up to speak.

“We’re eager to hear from you all this evening,” Manheimer said. “We want to make sure that you have the opportunity to be heard on this.”

Comments ran the gamut from those who were hopeful to those who were angry about the prospects.

Jared Wheatly offered council members a brief history lesson about the Haw Creek area — from the Hopewell Treaty that took the land from the Cherokee in 1785 to the Trail of Tears to the present day.

“Housing is desperately needed and it is a human right,” Wheatly said. “When I look at land use across time and the highest and best use of the current land, housing might be it.”

Several people took shots at the Haw Creek Community Association, which gave its support to the amended project.

Happy Valley resident Lee Kruse said HCAA did “not represent our interests in any way.”

“We weren’t involved in the negotiation and only through the attorney for the developer tonight have finally after repeatedly asking learned who apparently did the negotiating for Haw Creek Community Association,” Kruse said.

CITY COUNCIL CANDIDATES OFFER AFFORDABLE HOUSING SOLUTIONS

Kruse said they had created the Happy Valley Property Owners Preservation Association “for the purpose of getting a voice here today to actually be heard.”

John Appleby said 2,500 valley residents signed a petition against conditional rezoning of the land.

“If you approve, you will be going against their wishes,” he said.

The community, Appleby said, was not part of the negotiations with the developer.

“The negotiations referred to repeatedly is basically between two men — Chris Pelly and Kevin Jackson. The community was slowly and deliberately cut out of meetings. The meetings have occurred behind closed doors,” he said. “There has been no community vote on the proposal. It would fail overwhelmingly.”

In the end, council members voted 5-1 to approve rezoning the property.