Never miss an update by signing up for our free Watchdog News Alerts and Watchdog Weekly Newsletter, delivered directly to your inbox.
Show your support for our community by helping us power authoritative, in-depth reporting, and keeping access free for neighbors who need it. Aviation Servo Hydraulic Valve Connector
Nonprofit journalism in the public interest
Subscribe to our free Asheville Watchdog News Alerts and Watchdog Weekly Newsletter.
Perhaps no road project in the Asheville region has been talked about longer than the I-26 Connector, a billion-dollar-plus behemoth designed to connect I-26 north of Asheville to I-26 south of town.
So when Rob Sheeran bought his three-bedroom, two-bath home in West Asheville two decades ago, he knew one day it might be in the crosshairs of eminent domain, the policy that allows the North Carolina Department of Transportation to take property for fair market value for needed road projects.
He and his wife Sarah envisioned a scenario in which the DOT would take their land and their home. They were only half right.
The DOT’s plan calls for leaving the Sheerans in their home but taking a sliver of their land and paying them for two easements — one for utilities and one for construction that comes within 10 feet of their front porch and close to their 12-year-old daughter’s bedroom. That means they potentially would have to live next to heavy construction equipment grading and paving the nearby planned off-ramp and traffic circle for months or even years.
It’s a case that highlights the DOT’s “Right of Way” process in which the department or its representatives negotiate with property owners to compensate them for land and buildings the DOT needs to build a road. The process, in which DOT does not consider quality of life issues such as residents living next to an ongoing construction site, is unfair, the Sheerans contend.
The DOT has been actively acquiring land for more than a year for three sections of the $1.2 billion Connector project, which has five sections total and will affect 175 property owners — 154 residential and 21 non-residential.
As of early February, the NCDOT had made 119 offers, settled 41, and condemned four properties. Condemnation means the NCDOT will take the land, and the owner will have to dispute the payment in court, according to the department’s Asheville office.
Sarah Sheeran said she’d heard of eminent domain and learned all she could about the process at DOT community meetings that stretched back 10 years. And she understood that DOT claimed it would offer fair market value.
“But I think when you’re really faced with, A. Either losing your house or, B. Having an impacted property, it’s hard to conceptualize what that really means for you,” she said. “It’s you versus the government, right? You versus DOT. They have all these resources behind them, and it’s a project you can’t stop.”
Tony Rickman, the DOT’s right of way agent in Asheville, responded to questions about the Sheerans’ case via email. Asked why the DOT wouldn’t simply take the house along with the property and the utility and construction easements, Rickman said it comes down to precisely where the easements will go.
“The main factors that Right of Way assesses if a residence needs to be acquired or not include if any easement line touches a structure or acquisition of a septic tank and/or drain field,” Rickman said. “If this is not the case, then DOT will not pursue purchasing the structure.”
Offers are based on appraisals that use current market values, and include the price of the land, improvements a property owner has made to the land, and “proximity damages when applicable,” Rickman said.
“The inconvenience of a construction project is a non-compensable item, per state law,” Rickman siad. “Owners are guaranteed access to their property throughout the duration of construction.”
That access issue is also a sticking point for the Sheerans, as they say the DOT plans to close their current driveway, which also serves other homes, and relocate it to a very steep hillside farther up Hubbard Avenue.
The Sheerans also contend the DOT’s appraisal did not use comparable nearby properties, even though several have been sold for the project.
For the past year, the Sheerans have negotiated with a DOT Right of Way agent, who is a contractor for the agency. The DOT wants to take or use three sections of their .24 acre — one an outright taking of the land, one sliver for a utilities easement, and another for a construction easement.
That last one, which allows the DOT to use the property during construction of an off-ramp and roundabout for the Connector, would be temporary, but it comes surprisingly close to their home and with no guarantees of how long construction will last.
“You can see that none of those actually touch the house, but it’s really dang close,” Sarah Sheeran said, sitting at her dining room table with a sheaf of paperwork, including a project map. “The temporary construction easement comes within 10 feet, approximately, of our front porch — and outside of our daughter’s room.”
“And we don’t know how long they will be working on the project,” Rob Sheeran said. “That’s the thing — it could be years.”
The DOT says its goal is to treat property owners fairly, offering “fair market value” for homes and businesses. Appraisers contracted to work for DOT are not encouraged to come in with low bids to save money for the department and taxpayers, said Nathan Moneyham, division construction engineer with the NCDOT’s Asheville office.
The Sheerans dispute that notion. They got their first letter from the contracted Right of Way agent on Feb. 10, 2023.
It generated “a little bit of a sense of doom,” Sarah Sheeran said.
The nut of the issue, said Rob Sheeran, an artist who works at a home studio, is, “What’s fair?”
Rob Sheeran said he paid $151,000 for the house and lot in 2004, and the couple has six years of payments remaining, at a 2.9 percent interest rate, about four points lower than current rates. They do not want to live in a construction zone for several years, and then next to an on-ramp and traffic circle that will require substantial fill in what is now a small gulch next to their home. They’re unsure they could even rent the house with those conditions.
Nearby homes have sold for between $460,000 and $640,000 in recent years, so the Sheerans say they would consider between $450,000 and $500,000 to be a rough fair market value.
“If I had to express our wishes, we want to be paid for the full value of our house, so that we can actually afford a house in Asheville,” said Sarah Sheeran, who works for a nonprofit land conservation organization. “I’ve given up on my pipe dream of having something equivalent to 2.9% (interest) and owing less than 60 grand on a house. I’ve given up on that pipe dream. That sucks — it’s not a fair exchange, not a one-to-one exchange.”
The home and property have an assessed tax value of $359,400, according to the Buncombe County tax assessor. But the online real estate platform Zillow estimates the property value at $505,500, while Redfin lists it as $466,813.
About four months into the process, the Sheerans said, they were irritated that the offer they had received did not include a promised professional appraisal. When the 122-page appraisal arrived later, they were shocked it was based on home sales a few blocks away, near public housing, not on several homes that had sold in their neighborhood.
The DOT’s initial offer of $92,625, which did not include their house, broke down like this:
An updated appraisal tweaked the amount of land that would be used, increasing the offer to $98,825.
Early on, the Sheerans countered with what they acknowledged was a “pie in the sky” offer.
“We said, ‘We actually think you should take the whole house, because you’re effectively condemning us,” Sarah Sheeran said. “So while you’re offering us money for the land, there’s really no accounting for the quality of life that is reduced.”
Negotiations have gone back and forth for months, “with us conceding every time,” she said.
As of Feb. 28, the DOT had not made its final offer based on its adjustments and the most recent negotiations, the Sheerans said.
Asheville Watchdog left phone and email messages for the right of way agent in the Sheeran’s case, Ashley Robertson of AECOM Technical Services of North Carolina Inc., but did not hear back by deadline.
In addition to their daughter, the Sheerans have a 9-year-old son. They don’t want to continue raising their children in a work zone, and then with a large retaining wall, embankment, and exit ramp all within a few dozen yards from their home.
“You can see that none of those (easements) actually touch the house, but it’s really dang close,” Sarah Sheeran said.
Kevin Mahoney, head of the eminent domain practice at the law firm NC Eminent Domain Attorneys, said the eminent domain process can overwhelm homeowners. Mahoney, who is not representing the Sheerans, spoke in general terms and not about their case specifically.
“The legal process is complicated, the DOT construction plans are complicated, and the appraisal reports are complicated,” Mahoney said. “Few landowners have the training and experience necessary to competently evaluate their case.”
“DOT employs hundreds of engineers and many right of way agents and appraisers,” Mahoney said, adding that landowners “often stand alone against the government.”
Many simply take the DOT’s initial offer, or engage in little negotiation, which can result in leaving a lot of money on the table, Mahoney said. His firm’s brochure cites a 2015 study by the North Carolina General Assembly that “showed that property owners who did not accept the NCDOT’s condemnation deposit — the final offer — ended up getting, on average, 85 percent more for their property.
Mahoney is upfront about how attorneys make money by handling eminent domain cases.
Typically, attorneys usually take about a third of what they get for the client that is over and above what the DOT offered. Property owners should be aware that they typically will also have to pay for costs such as additional appraisals.
Sometimes appraisers lack all the documents they need to evaluate the effects of a land acquisition, Mahoney said, including utility plan sheets showing where the utilities will run, or documents regarding new driveways showing how steep they will be after the taking.
Mahoney pointed out that North Carolina landowners have to bear their own costs and attorneys’ fees, so in some cases “they may never receive full and complete just compensation in an eminent domain case.”
In some states, such as Florida, the state pays landowners’ attorneys fees and expert fees, Mahoney said.
Nathan Moneyham, division construction engineer with the NCDOT’s Division 13, which covers Buncombe County and six others, said he could not comment directly on the Sheerans’ case. But he did give an overview of the Right of Way process.
It begins when the DOT identifies the need for a road project. The DOT starts work on the project design, and it holds public meetings. Typically, when the project’s design phase is about 75 percent complete, the DOT has zeroed in on the Right of Way, or the amount of land it needs for the project.
The right of way plans have to be approved from an engineering and technical standpoint, with the limits of properties needed clearly defined. Next comes securing the Right of Way funding through the state Board of Transportation.
“And then from the public’s perspective, the first step after that’s done is what we would call first contact,” he said. “Right of Way agents — either consultants or DOT-managed out of our roadway office here in Asheville — would make first contact with a property owner that is affected.”
Often agents reach out by phone, then arrange an in-person meeting.
“When they do that they go to them, they show them the plans as they are, what the needs will be of the project, explain to them why the project’s coming — all those things,” Moneyham said. “At this point, if there’s been any public engagement, folks are normally probably already aware of the basics of a project. And after that initial conversation, we would trigger the appraisal process for us.”
An appraisal works for the DOT the same way it would if you are buying a home, “in that it’s based (on) market conditions and comparable properties in the same area,” Moneyham said.
“The difference in the process for us is we do an appraisal of the existing value of the property, and then we do a second appraisal in the after condition, meaning, ‘What’s the value of the property with the road constructed?’” Moneyham said. “The difference between those two appraisals is what informs the initial offer that will be made.”
The value of the property could decrease, which is “most commonly the case,” Moneyham said, but in some instances it actually increases because of improved accessibility or other factors.
Some appraisers work exclusively for the DOT, but Moneyham was adamant that the agency does not incentivize appraisers for coming in with low appraisals, saying, “We look at fair market value.”
Once the appraisal is done, the right of way agent goes back to the property owner to make an initial offer.
“That includes damages,” Moneyham said. “So if the use of the property is changed, or if potentially a structure that’s been affected, a shed or those kinds of things, values and improvements that the people have made to the property that would be affected — things like signs, landscaping and things like that, all that gets accounted into that.”
After the initial offer, negotiations can go back and forth multiple times before an agreement is reached. This typically takes six to nine months, he added.
If no agreement is reached, the condemnation process begins. The North Carolina Attorney General’s Office starts that process by filing for condemnation through the court system, a process that can last years.
The money from the DOT’s official offer goes to the county clerk in the respective county, so the property owner can petition to have access to those funds during the condemnation process. As this is the minimum the property owner will get, they can use the money for relocation or other needs.
The Sheerans remain skeptical of the process, particularly the appraisal. In a September 12, 2023 email, The Sheerans told the Right of Way agent they felt their offer was unfair.
“The market value of our house is undervalued and the comparable real estate sales used to calculate the value of our property are not reflective of this neighborhood,” they wrote. “None of the homes that have sold within a half-to-1 mile of our home within the past two years were used…”
“The temporary construction easement and utility easement are grossly undervalued,” the Sheerans wrote.
They also pointed out how close the construction will be to their home, and that they’ll inevitably have to deal with trash thrown from vehicles and copious amounts of exhaust, if they even stay.
“Living in such close proximity to a major road construction project is an enormous disruption to our lives and decreases the quality of life for our family, especially our two young children and a parent who works from home,” they wrote. “This offer is abstract and does not account for the very real people who are impacted by this project.”
In response, the Right of Way agent wrote back that some of the homes were sold after the appraisal was done, and “a few of them are half the size” of the Sheerans’ home.
“I can’t speak to why the appraiser used the comps he used but based on what I am looking at, it’s homes that are most comparable to yours in all aspects,” Robertson wrote. “Ultimately it is the land being valued as it’s the land being impacted by the project and not the home, physically.”
The Sheerans have requested a new Right of Way agent, and they’ve hired an Asheville attorney, Ron Payne, to handle their case. Payne declined comment, as the case is ongoing.
The Sheerans say they’re disheartened by the whole experience.
“What I’ve learned is DOT is not here to help you,” Sarah Sheeran said. “They are not your advocate. And so the responsibility falls solely on the landowner to navigate this.”
Asheville Watchdog is a nonprofit news team producing stories that matter to Asheville and Buncombe County. John Boyle has been covering Asheville and surrounding communities since the 20th century. You can reach him at (828) 337-0941, or via email at jboyle@avlwatchdog.org. The Watchdog’s reporting is made possible by donations from the community. To show your support for this vital public service please visit avlwatchdog.org/donate.
Show your support for our community by helping us power authoritative, in-depth reporting, and keeping access free for neighbors who need it.
This is absolutely shameful on the part of DOT. It shouldn’t even be legal. I strongly support the Sheerans.
Best wishes for a fast solution for all. Please continue coverage on this case.
“What a screw job!” DOT is probably taking away $200-300 thousand from the property value including the house. I’m sure they won’t get $250 thousand without the land now.
This happened to black families for decades all over the US. I am so sorry for this couple. I hope they can afford to hire an attorney.
What a hardship, displacing and shortchanging…I hope public awareness improves DOT’s approach.
I have hired Kevin Mahoney with great recommendation for my affected property right across I240 from this subject property.
People do not understand what is about to happen to West Asheville because of this project. It’s going to be painful. It doesn’t seem that people really understand that this is all going to happen. What a horrible plan for Asheville – the flyover bridges alone are just an incredible waste.
I have not had an offer yet for the portion of my land that will be used for utility easement. Thinking about construction, I dread it. I guess I am leaving this life at just the right time.
My guess is that given the pace of this project that by the time the bulldozers show up these folks will be retired to Florida and their kids will be off somewhere having kids of their own.
But they will never get the value of their house. They will never be able to sell it and “move to Florida “.
That is rediculous!!! Eminent Domain is Eminant Domain….but reimburse these folks for upending their lives!!! Who wants to live that close to an interstate???? Buy their land and home!!!!!
This is why citizens are voting for Trump.
The government is either absent from the daily lives of people like the Sheerans or casually destructive of their hope for a better life for their children.
I expect the DOT purchase offer would be higher if the property were owned by Biltmore or a private equity firm with the money and connections to hire expert legal representation.
That’s why you are voting for trump? That makes no sense whatsoever. Think about what he did to that poor Scots lady when he wanted her property for the golf course. Despicable behaviour.
You think that Trump or anyone in the GOP would change this? The General Assembly has been dominated by the GOP since 2010 and they certainly have not done anything to change the law, not even when they also had a Republican governor.
The current market value of this home is chump change for an agency with such deep pockets as DOT. The project is likely headed back to the legislature anyway, since all three developers’ bids came in over the target. Tony Rickman — there is plenty of time for you to make the proper recommendation — DOT should purchase the house and land for fair market value. DOT can sell the house later (after the massive retaining wall is in) and test the assumption that this property’s market value has not been diminished due to the project. Do the right thing!!
It is a total embarrassment for the State of NC that this heartlessness and negligence is even allowed. Yes, chump change for DOT to make it right and to stop ruining these people’s lives. But maybe not chump change for corrupt DOT individuals somehow personally pocketing what should be getting fairly paid to these homeowners?
Perhaps the Sheerans should consider moving their septic tank and drain field to an area that is part of the construction easement, forcing DOT to have to acquire the house. It’s shameful what these people have to go through.
Call all the local TV stations and have them do in depth aired pieces on this sham!!
Imagine the impact to value on a home located next to an interstate on-ramp?
Sending best wishes to the Sheerans for a better outcome. If the project can’t move forward without compensating families adequately, maybe the project shouldn’t move forward.
We’re in the same situation. We bought our house in 2021 while out of state and had no idea about the construction project or its potential impact on us. We were blindsided when we got letters from DOT right after returning from the hospital after the birth of our son. They’re coming right up next to our house but won’t take it. It’s awful. No idea how we’ll ever sell (which we’ll have to because it isn’t a safe environment for our toddler). We’re working with an attorney to get the best possible offer, but our hands are tied.
The appraisal was not included, but she says that homes within .5 to 1 mile away were not included. It is my understanding that in an urban setting, the appraisal includes homes within blocks of the home being appraised and that have sold within the past year. The value of homes in that area have been impacted for at least 10 years as everyone knew those homes could be affected by I26. Actually, looking at the MLS, I found that DOT has been buying property in that area for several years. In fact, the home immediately in front of them sold for $300,000 in 2021 to DOT and is the same size. The home next door is the same size on same size lot and sold for $376,000 in 2021 (not to DOT). The home across the street is smaller and sold to DOT for $190,000 in 2017. Homes further down Hubbard are selling for more, but they are also further from the interstate. I feel for the Sheerans and hope that an acceptable solution is found. If I had met them in 2009, I would have encouraged them to move. As a realtor, I had buyers exploring that area in 2009/2010. At that point, homeowners knew they could be impacted, but no one knew anything definitive as the I26 plan had not been finalized.
The DOT started buying land and houses for this project in 2005 I believe. They are right to ask to get a true DOT Right of Way agent and not a contractor! I knew the agents working West Asheville then and what was being offered back then was generous and renters were given ludicrous amounts to relocate and even down payment money to buy their own house. Probably from the top down the order is coming to under cut as just a couple of years ago the Head of DOT “misunderstood” the amount of pay raises and gave them to everyone when in actuality it was meant to be an amount divided up amongst all, check that story out. The DOT appraisal office was next to the Right of Way office at that time in Turtle Creek. Keep up the fight. You should be paid for damages and impact on future value of your home when the project is completed which most likely will be years and years. Good Luck!
This is beyond shameful and disgusting. It is embarrassing to see through this window of how our government agencies that we pay for have no regard for the very real and life changing impact this has on citizens. This family has worked hard to create a life in this community and I can’t even imagine the additional burden beyond the insulting offer. To have the stress of being displaced, to have worked hard to pay down a mortgage for over 20 years only to have your land and sense of home destroyed. I keep thinking about all the things that they’ve poured into this home and community to create security and safety for their children and their future, how scary and traumatic this must be for the kids and their parents trying their best to protect them. The absurdity to ignore the explicit deterioration of their quality of life has caused this negotiation to be the catalyst of that loss eons before the project will even begin. To be in ongoing litigation with the very entity that is supposed to be the support and protection for you and your family blows my mind and I am so sorry for the emotional distress and draining that this experience is insufferably causing. For us, this is just an article of another really sh***y thing in the world, for the family this is their every day reality. This is the type of thing that breaks a person and causes mental, emotional and physical harm. Shameful. Beyond shameful. I hope when this is resolved they can still find a safe home in their community, there is no monetary value to make up for this at this point, DOT needs to fix their mistake, acknowledge that their offer was wrong and apologize.
“And they wrote it all down as the progress of man”. Seems like I’ve heard these words before.
This is a travesty. NCDOT should be ashamed. Ask Mr. Moneyham what he would do if he were in the Sheerans situation. How would he be treated by NCDOT? Show your support for the Sheerans and all others affected by this multi-billion dollar spend of our tax dollars!!
It sounds like it’s about time to start quietly planting some arrowheads, pottery and even human remains back in the woods. That will shut the DOT down.
Sooooo this family BANKED on the idea that they could get rich and retire off their house and property when they purchased it MANY years ago??? Why would anyone in their right mind think that’s ok?
Whoa, Nelly…I think they’d be happy to receive compensation enough to move to a comparable home where construction vehicles aren’t passing a mere 10 feet away.
So tired of the forces that are ruining our small cities and towns – everywhere- Asheville has a target on its back. When are we going to rise up and say no more? We citizens should be out on every street corner fighting for our homes and cities – Boulder; Gainesville fl; St Pete, FL; the list goes on and on; and Beautiful AVL is next .
This is ridiculous. I’m pretty sure they and their attorney can jack up the DOT offer although likely not to the fanciful figure they would like. They can certainly stay in the house until construction starts which will probably be some time and they’ll have enough for a down payment elsewhere at that point. Somebody will rent their house given the shortage of affordable housing and they’ll have a paid off rental property. Stop making a big deal of it and look at the substantial upside.
If the Sheerans have been paying property taxes based on the county’s higher valuation, then perhaps they can file a complaint that the county’s and state’s “fair market” valuations are not aligned. They paid taxes on a property that the state says was not worth that amount? There’s another re-evaluation due this year. Looks like this would be good data to support a valuation dispute.
No, but it sure will take their privacy! Make them pay for full value of the entire estate for that little bit. That way you can buy a back up home and rent that one your in!🤣😜
It has taken so long to get anything done with this plan, they are probably safe until the kids go to college. It’s ill conceived and any future relief should be balanced by the horrible traffic for anyone who uses the existing road. At least they would get a retaining wall, I guess.
Having an interstate exit or giant wall within 10′ of your home WILL seriously devalue it.
Getting a lawyer on your side is key. We once owned rental house/land that would be taken by this project but bailed out years ago. Our lawyer had told us, though, not to accept the DOT offer and turn it over to him. As Mr. Mahoney indicated, our lawyer told us he would take 30% of whatever he negotiated over the DOT offer. Our lawyer was not part of an eminent domain firm, simply a real estate lawyer with decades of experience. We feel the Sheehans’ pain and wish the best for them.
It’s appalling how local government authorities are treating landowners while seizing their properties for supposed public good. The blatant disregard for the rights and livelihoods of taxpayers is nothing short of disgraceful, as it devalues everything these hardworking individuals have built and worked for.
This injustice is not limited to one area but is spreading like wildfire. In Transylvania and Henderson County, property owners around “The Ecusta Trail” are feeling the brunt of this callous approach. Now, Buncombe County is set to follow suit, as landowners around creeks face the looming threat of losing their land to the installation of public greenways.
The government’s actions not only strip landowners of their property but also erode the trust and respect that should exist between citizens and their elected representatives. It’s disheartening to witness how easily the government can disrupt and upend the lives of hardworking taxpayers without adequate compensation or consideration for their sacrifices.
This trend of government overreach and disregard for property rights must be challenged and condemned. Landowners deserve better treatment and fair compensation for any land taken in the name of public projects. It’s time for accountability and transparency in these matters, ensuring that taxpayers’ rights and contributions are respected and protected.
We've recently sent you an authentication link. Please, check your inbox!
Sign in with a password below, or sign in using your email.
Get a code sent to your email to sign in, or sign in using a password.
Enter the code you received via email to sign in, or sign in using a password.
Sign in with your email
Sign in with a password
Cable Gland By signing up, you agree to our Terms and Conditions.