GAP Report for 3/9/26
URGENT
- 0 Items
PROBLEMATIC
- Asheville considering building massive performing arts center on The Block (updated)
QUESTIONABLE
- Asheville needs anti-displacement guardrails in next year’s budget (updated)
- Buncombe County needs to adopt an anti-displacement policy
- Asheville needs to adopt an anti-displacement policy
POSITIVE
- Long-term affordable housing can ease displacement pressure in Emma neighborhood (new)
NEUTRAL
- Sardis Road rezoning example of “business as usual” in Asheville decision-making for housing (new)
Summary of the Report
Two rezoning proposals come to City Council this week, highlighting the importance of anti-displacement
This week’s City Council agenda highlights two very different sides of Asheville’s housing story. One proposal at 230 Sardis Road would allow construction of a 180-unit market-rate apartment development on a former industrial site. While the project appears to involve fewer risks of displacement than other development in the region, it also does little to address the affordability crisis that many residents face. In the balance, its impact on the anti-displacement issue seems neither positive nor negative.
A second proposal at 383 North Louisiana Avenue offers a more hopeful example. The project would create 89 permanently affordable homes, helping ensure that lower-income residents can continue to live in Asheville. Together, these two items illustrate both the limitations and the possibilities of the city’s current housing approach, which would benefit greatly from a comprehensive anti-displacement strategy to guide future growth.
Updated item: Asheville considering building massive performing arts center on The Block
Last week we encouraged community members to speak out about the proposed downtown 2,500-seat Performing Arts Center on Eagle Street (within The Block, Asheville’s historic Black business district). Our position: before Council commits public land to this project, they should also commit that any negotiations with developers include binding anti-displacement protections for East End/Valley Street and The Block.
33 GAP subscribers have already written to City Council, and there is still time to weigh in before City Council votes on the proposal on March 24. Our template is below. There is also a community meeting on Wednesday, March 11 where local residents and allies can learn more and weigh in. You can learn more about that meeting at The People’s Place’s website.
Budget Update: Early FY27 Projections Show Revenue Pressure and New Fee Increases
At this week’s budget work session, City staff will present early projections showing that Asheville’s FY27 General Fund revenues could be $3.4 million lower than the current year, largely because several one-time revenues will disappear and sales tax growth has slowed. In response, staff are proposing modest increases to several service fees, including solid waste, stormwater, and water rates. For a typical household, the combined impact would be about $67 per year.
While some increases are tied to real cost pressures – including storm recovery and aging infrastructure – the presentation did not include any analysis of how these changes might affect lower-income residents. As the budget process continues, this underscores the need for clear anti-displacement guardrails to ensure that revenue decisions, fee structures, and spending priorities do not unintentionally increase housing instability for Asheville residents.
Ongoing items: Both Asheville and Buncombe County need to adopt anti-displacement policies
We continue to advocate for the City and County to adopt a comprehensive anti-displacement policy to proactively address and prevent displacement from projects and decisions like the items mentioned above. If you haven’t yet sent an email to the City and County with this request, we encourage you to join us in making this call to action.
Templates and Links to More Information
- Here are all active email templates:
- Supporting more affordable housing in Emma
- Urging anti-displacement measures before a performing arts center is built on The Block
- Emailing the Buncombe County Commission and the Asheville City Council about the need for an overarching anti-displacement policy.
- Click here for our “Deeper Dive: What a Performing Arts Center Could Mean for East End and The Block” analysis.
- Click here to read the latest on the City’s budget process.
- Click here to read our full proposed anti-displacement policy proposal.
- Click here to review our responses to some good questions that Asheville City staff posed about moving forward with an anti-displacement policy.
- Click here to read our summary of anti-displacement policies in other North Carolina cities and counties.
Special Note
For most of our history, GAPavl has focused on the full range of issues that come before City Council and County Commission, encouraging timely action on specific agenda items. We’re going to keep doing that whenever the need arises. But we also know that real political change requires a long-term perspective. It requires perseverance. It requires staying with an issue long after it stops being “new.”
As we see it, pushing Asheville and Buncombe County to commit to anti-displacement is of vital importance, which is why we’ve been emailing you about it for over a month now. We know it’s hard – for elected officials and for all of us – to maintain focus on an overarching policy change that will take time to develop and implement. We’re not entirely sure we have the perfect formula for doing that, but we are committed to trying, and encourage you to stay with us.
Long-term affordable housing can ease displacement pressure in Emma neighborhood
POSITIVE
Summary: This proposal would allow construction of an 89-unit apartment development providing 100% affordable housing with long-term affordability protections and voucher acceptance. The project would expand housing options for lower-income households and help address Asheville’s growing housing crisis. We think it represents a positive step toward preventing displacement and supporting inclusive growth.
The Facts: At their March 10th meeting, City Council will consider a rezoning request for 383 North Louisiana Avenue that would allow construction of an 89-unit apartment development providing 100% affordable housing. All units would be reserved for households earning 80% of Area Median Income (AMI) or below, with affordability guaranteed for at least 30 years. The development would also accept Housing Choice (Section 8) vouchers.
City staff recommend approval of the rezoning, noting that the project supports several goals of the Living Asheville Comprehensive Plan, including expanding housing supply and increasing affordable and workforce housing. The site is located near transit routes and the Patton Avenue commercial corridor, giving residents access to jobs, grocery stores, and services.
You can read the staff report here and see the presentation slides here.
Our Assessment: At a time when rising housing costs are forcing many working families out of Asheville, this proposal represents real progress. The development would create 89 permanently affordable homes, expanding housing options for residents who are increasingly priced out of the market.
Affordable housing developments like this are one of the most direct tools cities have to prevent displacement and support community stability. By guaranteeing long-term affordability and accepting housing vouchers, this project helps ensure that residents with lower incomes – including service workers, seniors, and families – can continue to live in Asheville rather than being pushed farther away from jobs and services.
The location also matters. The site is within the Emma Legacy Neighborhood, an area shaped by community organizing around housing and neighborhood change. Building long-term affordable housing in this area can help ensure that the people who have long called this neighborhood home are included in Asheville’s growth, rather than displaced by it.
Things to do: We invite you to join us in calling on the Asheville City Council to approve the rezoning for 383 North Louisiana Avenue and support the creation of 89 new affordable homes.
Email Template: You can send an email to the Asheville City Council by filling out the form below. Our email tool will send an individually addressed email to the recipients, and enable us to track how many emails were sent overall in the campaign. If you prefer to write your own email, you can copy and paste (and adapt) our template text – please cc: or bcc: info@gapavl.org on your individualized email, so we can better track how many emails were sent.
To: AshevilleNCCouncil@ashevillenc.gov
CC: or BCC: info@gapavl.org
Subject: Please support affordable housing in Emma
Dear Mayor and City Council Members,
I am writing to urge you to vote in favor of the rezoning request for 383 North Louisiana Avenue.
Asheville’s housing affordability crisis is pushing many working families out of the city. This proposal would help address this troubling trend by creating 89 permanently affordable homes, reserved for households earning 80% of Area Median Income or below, with a 30-year affordability commitment and acceptance of Housing Choice vouchers.
Affordable housing located near jobs, transit, and services is essential if Asheville is going to remain a city where people who work here can also afford to live here. Projects like this help ensure that the benefits of growth are shared more widely across our community.
Thank you for supporting housing solutions that address mounting anti-displacement pressures in our City, which are particularly pressing in legacy neighborhoods like Emma.
Sincerely,
[Name]
REPORT BACK STATUS
Unresolved
Report Back
Coming Soon!
Sardis Road rezoning example of “business as usual” in Asheville decision-making for housing
NEUTRAL
Summary: This proposal would convert an industrial property on Sardis Road into a 180-unit market-rate apartment development, which city staff recommend approving. Because the project does not replace existing housing, it poses relatively low displacement risk. However, it also does little to address Asheville’s housing affordability crisis. This underscores the need for the City to adopt a clear anti-displacement strategy to guide future development, so that we can strategically address the growth patterns that benefit some while increasing pressures on others.
The Facts: At their March 10th meeting, City Council will consider a request to rezone approximately 9.2 acres at 230 Sardis Road from Industrial to Residential Expansion–Conditional Zone to allow construction of a four-to-five story apartment building with 180 units. The site currently houses a plastics manufacturing facility and would be redeveloped into a multifamily residential complex with parking, sidewalks, and amenities including a pool, playground, and dog park.
City planning staff recommend approval of the rezoning, noting that the project aligns with goals in the Living Asheville Comprehensive Plan to increase housing supply and encourage denser residential development. The site sits near existing multifamily housing and another recently approved apartment project.
You can read the staff report here and see the presentation slides here.
Our Assessment: From a displacement standpoint, this project appears unlikely to cause direct displacement. It does not involve demolishing existing housing, and the surrounding area has not been identified as one of Asheville’s higher displacement-risk neighborhoods.
However, the proposal also illustrates the limits of Asheville’s current approach to housing development. The project would add 180 market-rate apartments with no affordability requirement. In today’s housing market, developments like this are generally priced well above what many working households in Asheville can afford. While increasing housing supply is important, projects like this do little to address the affordability crisis facing many residents.
This proposal highlights a larger policy gap. Right now, Asheville evaluates projects like this one by one, without a consistent framework for addressing displacement risks or ensuring that new development contributes to housing stability for current residents. Without a clear anti-displacement strategy, the city risks continuing a pattern where growth occurs but the benefits of that growth are unevenly shared.
Things to Do: We don’t think any action is necessary for this item, but would encourage you to email City Council about the need for an overarching anti-displacement policy (if you haven’t already).
Asheville considering building massive performing arts center on The Block
PROBLEMATIC
Summary (Updated 3/9/26): There is still time to email City Council about this issue before they vote on it on March 24th (please see the template we’ve included below and send it to the Council if you haven’t already). Local community members and allies will also be meeting about this issue on Wednesday, March 11. (Learn more at https://peoplesplaceavl.com/civic-engagement).
Update 3/2/26: City Council is at a decision point. A vote to hold the “Parkside site” is not a final approval, but it signals intent and begins formal negotiations. Once negotiations begin, leverage shifts. Conditions that are not established early become harder to secure later.
City staff are asking City Council to continue holding approximately 2.4 acres of City-owned land downtown for a potential arts and entertainment complex. The site is located on Eagle Street in The Block, Asheville’s historic Black business district, and is therefore near areas deeply affected by urban renewal and near historic Black institutions. While the project is still exploratory, decisions made now will shape what feels possible later. Large civic developments like this one on public land can significantly affect surrounding property values, small businesses, and housing costs – all of which have displacement implications. Given Asheville’s history of urban renewal and racialized displacement, early guardrails are critical.
The facts: City Council will receive a report on a proposed “land hold” at their February 24th Briefing. The City owns approximately 2.4 acres of land downtown between Eagle and Marjorie Streets that has been referred to as the “Parkside” site. City staff are asking Council to continue holding this land while they further explore the possibility of a public-private partnership that could include arts, cultural, and entertainment uses. Staff have not presented a finalized proposal, but the direction signals continued interest in pursuing a significant civic project on this publicly owned site.
The current request is procedural – extending the “land hold” to allow additional conversations and concept development to move forward.
Why the Land Hold Vote Matters
A land hold:
- Signals to developers that the City is serious about moving forward
- Gives the City leverage to negotiate with a developer
- Creates a window in which the City can establish mandatory conditions the developer must meet
If displacement protections are not named as a condition now, they are unlikely to emerge later.
We are not necessarily opposed to the construction of a performing arts center. However, we are alarmed that the leading site in consideration for this facility is on The Block downtown. The construction drawings from the planned presentation before City Council depict a massive building just steps away from the YMI Cultural Center and the heart of The Block business district. The presentation insists that this site is “not associated with Urban Renewal parcels” – the City has declared a moratorium on development on those parcels as part of its incomplete Reparations process – but then goes on to acknowledge that the area was “impacted by Urban Renewal.”
This strikes us as a significant understatement. Prior to the East End / Valley Street urban renewal project in the 1970’s, there were dozens of businesses on The Block, including the very stretch of Eagle Street that is being targeted for this new development. The City’s decision to tear down hundreds of homes and businesses caused massive ripples throughout Black communities and devastated neighborhoods like The Block and East End / Valley Street, which the City openly acknowledged and promised to amend in its 2020 Reparations Resolution.
Building a massive performing arts center on The Block risks still more damage to the adjacent Black communities. Here are just some of the likely consequences:
- Housing displacement in the East End / Valley Street neighborhood. Large projects like these often increase nearby land values, and that in turn tends to increase rents and property taxes.
- Cultural displacement for The Block. Local Black-owned businesses are at risk for displacement as a result of the expectable rising land values. In addition, these kinds of massive facilities typically dominate and transform the neighborhoods they are located in. For the past few years, the Block Collaborative has been working with the City, through a grant from the Mellon Foundation, on the Boosting The Block initiative, which is supposed to develop a Black cultural corridor from Pack Square to The Block. That work could easily be overshadowed and rendered irrelevant by the placement of a massive arts center in such close proximity.
There is nothing in this proposal that binds the City to a plan to develop a performing arts center here, but momentum is building for it and we think that demands a course correction. Because this involves public land in a historically impacted area, it’s imperative that the City do extensive community engagement and demonstrate meaningful equity protections before advancing further on this project.
Our Proposal (updated 3/2/26): Before extending or formalizing this land hold, the City of Asheville should::
- Require a racial equity and displacement impact analysis (such as the one proposed by GAPavl).
- Require binding anti-displacement protections in any development agreement.
- Fund mandatory community protections through project-generated revenue where possible.
- Include community stakeholders in the development process from the beginning, so that their concerns are reflected in these mandatory community protections.
Things to do: We invite you to join us in calling on the Asheville City Council to commit to community engagement and deeper analysis of the displacement impacts of this proposal.
Email Template (Updated 3/2/26): You can send an email to the Asheville City Council by filling out the form below. Our email tool will send an individually addressed email to the recipients, and enable us to track how many emails were sent overall in the campaign. If you prefer to write your own email, you can copy and paste (and adapt) our template text – please cc: or bcc: info@gapavl.org on your individualized email, so we can better track how many emails were sent.
To: AshevilleNCCouncil@ashevillenc.gov
CC: or BCC: info@gapavl.org
Subject: Commit to anti-displacement protections before performing arts center negotiations begin
Dear Mayor and City Council,
Before the City commits to holding land at the Parkside site for a performing arts center, I am asking you to make a clear public commitment: that any negotiations with ATG Entertainment will include binding anti-displacement protections for East End/Valley Street and The Block.
The risks to these communities are not hypothetical. A project of this scale is likely to increase property values, commercial rents, and tax pressure in the surrounding area over the next 5–10 years.
If protections are not built into the development agreement itself – through mechanisms like development agreement payments, ground lease revenue, and shared cost obligations – they will be extremely difficult to fund later, especially given the City’s current structural budget gap.
Please do not move forward with negotiations to develop a facility in this area, already deeply harmed by urban renewal, without first committing to include meaningful, enforceable anti-displacement measures in any deal. Please honor the promises made in the City’s 2020 Reparations Resolution by protecting these communities from further harm.
Thank you for your leadership.
[Name]
REPORT BACK STATUS
In Process
Report Back
The Performing Arts Center was discussed extensively during the worksession (the conversation takes place at approximately 1:18–1:45 of the linked video). The worksession conversation focused on site control, financing structure, potential partnership terms with ATG, projected economic impact, and next procedural steps. Council members asked questions about cost exposure, risk allocation, and revenue assumptions. Council Member Antanette Mosley suggested that this project was a good candidate for a displacement analysis. In addition, several Council Members (Roney, Ullman, Mosley, Hess) did suggest it was important that community members from those two neighborhoods be included in planning conversations. Chris Corl, Asheville’s Director of Community and Regional Facilities, suggested that those neighborhoods could be included in the deal “if (they) could bring money to the table,” but then also agreed (when asked) that their interests needed to be considered differently than other potential private partners. There was also discussion about how the performing arts center could impact the ongoing “Boosting the Block” initiative, which is a Mellon Foundation-funded effort to amplify the presence of that area in relation to the rest of the city. Director Corl said (when asked by Council Member Hess) there would not be a possibility for any public community engagement before the March 24th vote, but Council Member Ullman offered to lead such a meeting.
Total GAP Supporter Actions Taken: 33
Recipients and Responses:
Asheville City Council
- Mayor Esther Manheimer: No response
- Vice Mayor Antanette Mosley: No response
- City Council Member Bo Hess: No response
- City Council Member Kim Roney: No response
- City Council Member Maggie Ullman: No response
- City Council Member Sage Turner: No response
- City Council Member Sheneika Smith: No response
Asheville needs anti-displacement guardrails in next year’s budget
QUESTIONABLE
Summary (updated 3/9/26): Asheville staff project that FY27 revenues could fall about $3.4 million below the current year, and are proposing modest increases to several city service fees, including solid waste, stormwater, and water. While the increases are relatively small, the presentation does not include any analysis of how fee changes might affect lower-income residents. As the FY27 budget process moves forward, this reinforces the case for clear anti-displacement guardrails to ensure that budget decisions – including fees, taxes, and spending priorities – are evaluated for their impact on housing stability and affordability.
The City projects a $26 million budget gap for next year. Council will likely consider property tax increases, fee increases (e.g. water bills), and service reductions (e.g. fewer bus routes). These decisions directly affect housing stability. Landlords often pass tax increases onto renters. Fixed-income homeowners may struggle with higher costs. And the City might cut services that quietly help people stay housed – like eviction prevention funding, or housing code enforcement – resulting in families that are already on the edge having fewer options to avoid losing their homes. Without safeguards, budget balancing can increase displacement pressure. This moment is exactly the type of circumstance that would benefit from the City’s adoption of a formal anti-displacement policy to guide its decision-making.
The Facts (updated 3/9/26): City Council will receive a budget update at their March 10th work session. You can review the slides here.
At its February 24th regular meeting, the Asheville City Council is opening up public comment on its proposed 2026-2027 budget. City staff have presented preliminary projections showing a structural budget gap of approximately $26 million for the upcoming fiscal year (Fiscal Year 2027). The gap is driven by increasing operating costs (e.g. salaries), debt service obligations, and the fact that North Carolina restricts the sources of revenue for cities, preventing them from creating new taxes or running a deficit. Staff have indicated that closing this gap will require some combination of increased revenues, reduced expenditures, or both.
While no final budget decisions have been made, Council is expected to consider options such as property tax increases, fee increases, and service reductions in the coming months. Staff have framed the situation as a structural challenge, meaning that this isn’t a one-time situation with next year’s budget, but an ongoing challenge that’s likely to keep coming up. They suggest that it will require difficult trade-offs to maintain core services and meet financial obligations.
Our Assessment: Balancing the budget is not optional. The City must close the projected $26 million gap. But how that gap is closed matters deeply — especially in a housing market where many residents are already stretched thin.
Strategies to balance the budget like property tax increases, fee increases, and service reductions do not affect everyone equally. When property taxes go up, landlords often pass those costs on to renters by increasing rents. Fixed-income homeowners – particularly seniors – may struggle to absorb higher tax and service bills. Working-class families living paycheck to paycheck have little room to absorb even modest increases in water fees, transit costs, or other city charges. Service cuts to things like transportation or code enforcement (which ensures safe rental conditions) can also increase instability.
In a city where housing costs are already high, these pressures compound. A small increase layered on top of already rising rents and insurance costs can be the tipping point that pushes a household toward eviction or forces a homeowner to sell. Displacement rarely happens because of one dramatic event. More often, it happens because of cumulative financial pressure.
That is why guardrails are critical.
Before adopting tax increases, fee increases, or major service cuts, Council should understand:
- Who will bear the greatest burden?
- How might costs be passed through to renters and low or fixed-income homeowners?
- Are there neighborhoods or populations at particular risk?
- What mitigation tools can be used within existing legal authority?
Without that analysis, the impacts of the forthcoming budget will likely exacerbate the massive equity gaps in the affordability of living in our communities.
This moment underscores GAPavl’s call for the City and County to formally commit to developing a comprehensive anti-displacement policy. A policy framework could ensure that major financial decisions like these are routinely evaluated for displacement risk, rather than allowing harm to occur and attempting to mitigate it after. It would also create a structured process for collaboration between government staff, community organizations, and residents.
In short: how the budget gap is handled could either stabilize or destabilize hundreds of households. That is why equity guardrails must be built in now, not after impacts are felt.
Our Proposal: In finalizing next year’s budget, the City should:
- Require an anti-displacement impact analysis before adopting tax or fee increases and/or service reductions.
- Direct staff to identify strategies to protect low-income homeowners using existing legal tools (e.g. state-authorized homestead exclusions, payment plans, proactive outreach).
- Allocate funding for eviction and foreclosure prevention as part of the budget package.
- Formally commit to developing a comprehensive anti-displacement policy in partnership with the County and community organizations.
Things to do: Rather than focusing on this project alone, we invite you to join us in urging City Council to move forward with a comprehensive anti-displacement policy, which would guide how the City addresses budget deficits (among other critical decisions).
REPORT BACK STATUS
In Process
Report Back
The projected structural budget gap was discussed during the worksession (the conversation takes place at approximately 0:47:00 –1:18:00 of the linked video), and again at the regular meeting (presentation at 0:46:55 and public comment at 0:54:42 of the linked video). Council reviewed the drivers of the deficit — rising operating costs, debt service obligations, and revenue constraints — and discussed potential responses including service adjustments and revenue strategies. Council members emphasized the need for fiscal discipline and sustainable long-term planning. However, there was no explicit discussion of how service reductions, fee increases, or property tax adjustments might affect housing stability or displacement pressures, particularly for lower-income households. Council did not discuss the relevance of anti-displacement guardrails to their decision-making regarding addressing the deficit, nor did they commit to evaluate budget-balancing options through a housing stability or racial equity lens.
Total GAP Supporter Actions Taken: 20
Recipients and Responses:
Asheville City Council
- Mayor Esther Manheimer: No response
- Vice Mayor Antanette Mosley: No response
- City Council Member Bo Hess: No response
- City Council Member Kim Roney: No response
- City Council Member Maggie Ullman: No response
- City Council Member Sage Turner: No response
- City Council Member Sheneika Smith: No response
Buncombe County needs to adopt an anti-displacement policy
QUESTIONABLE
Summary (updated 2/16/26): On February 17, Buncombe County Commissioners will receive an update on the 2026 property reappraisal process and discuss other tax and housing-related matters. According to the staff report, property values remain well above 2021 levels, and increases are expected. When property values rise, tax bills often rise too. That can make it harder for long-time residents to stay in their homes.
The County is also exploring new funding strategies for land conservation and affordable housing. These decisions affect land values and housing costs. Without a coordinated anti-displacement policy, rising values and public investments can increase pressure on residents rather than protect them.
There are encouraging signs that some Commissioners are open to developing such a policy. Now is the time to turn that openness into action.
(If you want to see the earlier versions of this issue report, you can do so here.)
The Facts (Updated 2/16/26): At the February 17th County Briefing, County staff will present an update on the 2026 reappraisal. A reappraisal is the process of reassessing property values across the county to reflect current market conditions. Staff are reporting that residential property sales prices remain well above 2021 values, and they anticipate significant increases in assessed values compared to the last cycle. Updated property values will be used to calculate tax bills mailed in August 2026. The County will offer clinics and outreach to help property owners appeal and challenge incorrect valuations if they are too high.
At the February 17th County Regular Meeting, one of the consent agenda items is the approval of an engagement letter with The Trust for Public Land to conduct a feasibility study to explore new funding strategies for land conservation and affordable housing. The study will include an assessment of the feasibility of various funding mechanisms available to the county.
Our Assessment (Updated 2/16/26): Buncombe County is making significant structural decisions that affect property values, taxation, and housing investment. The 2026 reappraisal will likely result in substantial valuation increases across the county. While reappraisal is intended to ensure fairness in taxation, large increases can place real financial strain on long-time homeowners, particularly seniors, working-class families, and residents recovering from storm impacts.
Offering property owners exemptions and clinics regarding how to appeal their re-appraised property value are important tools, but they are reactive. They do not address the broader structural reality that rising land values and public investment can contribute to displacement pressures if not paired with proactive safeguards.
We have no objection to the County’s planned engagement with The Trust for Public Land – it’s important that we develop strategies for funding land conservation and affordable housing. But once again, we see gaps here. The engagement letter, which calls for research and recommendations, does not indicate proactive measures to mitigate any impact on residents. It does not make a priority of any of the following important conditions: anti-displacement protections, preservation of existing naturally occurring affordable housing (NOAH), protections for renters, or geographic targeting for high-displacement-risk areas.
In a nutshell: if we are studying land conservation and affordable housing funding without an anti-displacement framework, we risk funding projects that could actually increase land values and accelerate displacement. What is missing right now is a comprehensive anti-displacement framework that connects these efforts and ensures that rising values, tax policy, and public investment are guided by a clear strategy to prevent involuntary displacement.
There are encouraging signs of leadership openness. Commissioners Drew Ball and Jennifer Horton have expressed interest in exploring next steps and have requested that staff present possibilities for moving forward. Because development of an anti-displacement policy is a significant undertaking, we are asking that this be made a formal priority, with a defined timeline, cross-department coordination, and a community-informed process.
Buncombe County has an opportunity to act before reappraisal increases for property values and continued market pressures further destabilize vulnerable residents. A comprehensive anti-displacement policy would provide the guardrails necessary to ensure that growth, recovery, and reinvestment strengthen – rather than displace – our communities.
Our Proposal (Updated 2/2/26): We are calling on Buncombe County to adopt a clear anti-displacement policy that applies whenever County actions are likely to affect land values, housing costs, or neighborhood stability. The policy we are proposing has four core components, each designed to make displacement prevention a routine part of public decision-making rather than an afterthought. You can read our full proposed policy here.
- Clear Triggers for When the Policy Applies
The policy should apply to County actions that are known to increase displacement risk, including major infrastructure investments, economic development incentives, financing programs, rezonings, land-use changes, and recovery or resiliency initiatives. The goal is to ensure that displacement risk is assessed before decisions are made, not after harm has already occurred. - Required Displacement Impact Analysis
When a policy trigger is met, staff should be required to analyze who may be affected and how. This includes identifying populations at heightened risk of displacement–such as low-income residents, renters, seniors, and communities of color–and assessing potential impacts on housing stability, commercial affordability, and neighborhood continuity. This analysis should be clearly presented to the Commission and the public as part of the decision-making process. - Concrete Mitigation Strategies
When displacement risks are identified, the policy should require the use of specific mitigation tools rather than relying on general intentions. These may include affordability requirements, tenant protections, support for small businesses and nonprofits, property tax relief mechanisms, right-to-return commitments, or targeted housing investments. The appropriate tools will vary by action, but mitigation should be expected–not optional. - Accountability and Transparency
Finally, the policy should ensure accountability by documenting how displacement risks were addressed and by making this information publicly accessible. Decision-makers and residents alike should be able to see whether mitigation commitments were made, what strategies were chosen, and how the County will track outcomes over time.
Taken together, these four components create a practical, workable framework. They do not stop investment or recovery efforts–they ensure that public action strengthens communities without pushing long-time residents out.
Our full proposed policy is here.
Things to Do (updated 2/16/26): We invite you to join us in calling on the Buncombe County Commission to commit to the development of an anti-displacement policy as a top priority for this year, with a defined timeline, cross-department coordination, and a community-informed process.
Email Template (Updated 2/16/26): You can send an email to the Buncombe County Commission by filling out the form below. Our email tool will send an individually addressed email to the recipients, and enable us to track how many emails were sent overall in the campaign. If you prefer to write your own email, you can copy and paste (and adapt) our template text – please cc: or bcc: info@gapavl.org on your individualized email, so we can better track how many emails were sent.
To: alfred.whitesides@buncombecounty.org, amanda.edwards@buncombecounty.org, drew.ball@buncombecounty.org, jennifer.horton@buncombecounty.org, martin.moore@buncombecounty.org, parker.sloan@buncombecounty.org, terri.wells@buncombecounty.org
CC: or BCC: info@gapavl.org
Subject: Will the County commit to a comprehensive Anti-Displacement Policy?
Dear Chair Edwards and Members of the Buncombe County Commission,
At this week’s briefing, staff are presenting updates on the 2026 reappraisal, noting that residential property values remain well above 2021 levels and significant valuation increases are expected. While reappraisal ensures equity in taxation, large valuation increases can also significantly raise property tax bills, creating challenges for long-time homeowners, seniors, and working families.
At the same time, the County is exploring new funding strategies for land conservation and affordable housing, which is a positive step, but which highlights the need for a comprehensive anti-displacement policy to ensure that rising values and public investments do not unintentionally push residents out of their homes.
I understand that Commissioners Drew Ball and Jennifer Horton have expressed interest in exploring how the County could move forward on such a policy and have requested that staff present possible next steps. I urge the Commission to make development of a comprehensive anti-displacement policy a formal priority, using a process where government staff and local organizations work together to craft solutions with community members at the table.
You can review a draft recommended policy proposal at GAPavl.org – http://gapavl.org/anti-displacement-policy-proposal-for-asheville-and-buncombe-county/
Buncombe County has the opportunity to proactively protect its residents before displacement pressures intensify further. Please commit to moving this policy forward.
Sincerely,
[Your Name]
REPORT BACK STATUS
In Process
Report Back
On February 13th the GAP Strategy Team met with County Commissioners Jennifer Horton and Drew Ball. Both expressed interest in the development of a community-led process for developing an anti-displacement policy. They have already asked staff to present on this issue at an upcoming County Briefing.
Total GAP Supporter Actions Taken: 49
Recipients and Responses:
Buncombe County Commission
- County Commission Chair Amanda Edwards: No response
- County Commissioner Al Whitesides: No response
- County Commissioner Drew Ball: Met with GAP Strategy Team on February 13 and March 6
- County Commissioner Jennifer Horton: Met with GAP Strategy Team on February 13 and March 6
- County Commissioner Martin Moore: No response
- County Commissioner Parker Sloane: No response
- County Commissioner Terri Wells: No response
Asheville needs to adopt an anti-displacement policy
QUESTIONABLE
Summary: Asheville’s current approach to growth addresses displacement in a piecemeal manner, if at all; we are proposing a consistent anti-displacement policy — modeled on precedents in Mecklenburg, Wake, and Durham Counties — to ensure routine City decisions do not cumulatively push residents out of their homes and communities.
Update (2/16/26): We have updated our email template to call on the Asheville City Council to commit to the development of an anti-displacement policy as a top priority for this year, with a defined timeline, cross-department coordination, and a community-informed process.
(If you want to see the earlier versions of this issue report, you can do so here.)
The Facts: The following items were on the January 27 Asheville City Council agenda. While distinct in purpose, each involves public decisions and information that shape land use, housing demand, economic activity, or access to public space – factors that directly influence displacement risk.
- ADUs in Nonconforming Structures: Proposes allowing accessory dwelling units (ADUs) in legally-existing buildings that no longer conform to zoning regulations without having to ask for a “variance” (exception). City staff is recommending adoption of this policy without exclusions, citing the benefits of reduced procedural barriers to increased housing options.
- Rezoning: 22 Broad Street: Proposes changing the zoning of a parcel of land from residential multi-family (RM-8) to Community Business I to align with corridor planning. City staff is recommending approval.
- Economic Development Incentive – “Project Vessel:” Proposes a performance-based grant of up to $35,000 over three years to support a manufacturing expansion creating 40 jobs at an average wage of $26/hour. Staff recommends approval.
- Downtown Improvement District Report: An informational report detailing downtown cleanliness, ambassador activity, and public space management. No action is required.
Our Assessment: Individually, City Council agenda items like these appear modest or technical. Taken together, however, they reveal how displacement often occurs — not through a single dramatic decision, but through a series of incremental actions made without a shared framework for assessing cumulative impact. Without an overarching anti-displacement policy, Council is left to evaluate each item in isolation, if they do so at all, when the combined effect may be to increase housing pressure and instability.
Community leaders have emphasized that displacement is not merely an economic or technical issue, but a social and cultural one. As Sekou Coleman of the Legacy Neighborhoods Coalition has written, decisions about land use and development often unfold without headlines or political noise, yet they determine whether long‑time residents are able to remain rooted in their neighborhoods. Coleman underscores the importance of focusing not just on process, but on whether those with power are willing to use it to help residents remain in their communities – a framing that helps clarify why a comprehensive anti-displacement policy is necessary.
Here are our concerns with each item we are highlighting for this week’s City Council meeting:
ADUs in Nonconforming Structures: Allowing accessory dwelling units (ADUs) to be automatically permissible in buildings that are no longer compliant with zoning has the potential to support existing homeowners and aging in place. But it also carries a risk of speculative investment and increased displacement pressure in legacy neighborhoods if not accompanied by safeguards.
Rezoning: 22 Broad Street: This rezoning aligns with broader corridor planning goals but would reduce residential zoning capacity in an area near downtown. Over time, such changes can contribute to cumulative displacement pressure by prioritizing commercial (over residential) uses and increasing nearby rents.
“Project Vessel” Economic Development Incentive: The proposed incentive would support job creation at living wages, which is a positive outcome. However, without complementary housing strategies, new employment growth can increase demand in already constrained housing markets, exacerbating displacement risks for nearby residents.
Downtown Improvement District Report: While focused on cleanliness and management of public space, downtown improvement strategies can result in the spatial displacement of unhoused residents if enforcement-oriented approaches are not balanced with services and housing pathways.
Taken together, these agenda items underscore the limits of addressing displacement on a case-by-case basis. A consistent anti-displacement policy would provide Council with the tools to evaluate cumulative impacts, apply proportional safeguards, and ensure that growth and investment advance racial and social equity rather than undermine it. Precedent for this approach already exists in Mecklenburg, Wake, and Durham Counties, where similar frameworks have been integrated into land use, housing, and economic development decision-making.
Our Proposal: We propose a comprehensive anti-displacement policy for both the City of Asheville and Buncombe County to adopt. You can read our more detailed proposal here. The policy would include:
- Displacement Risk Screening: Early-stage evaluation of potential displacement for all major actions.
- Tiered Response Framework: Categorization of actions by low, moderate, or high displacement risk, with proportional mitigation requirements.
- Required Mitigation Tools: A menu of strategies, including permanent affordability, right-to-return provisions, tenant protections, property tax relief, anti-speculation measures, local hiring, workforce housing contributions, mixed-use requirements, short-term rental limits, and community benefit agreements.
- Monitoring and Accountability: Annual public reporting on displacement indicators, disaggregated by race, income, tenure, and geography, with authority to adjust policies if outcomes indicate increased risk.
This framework would ensure that growth and development in Asheville and Buncombe County can proceed responsibly, preventing avoidable displacement and advancing racial and social equity while drawing on proven precedents in other North Carolina counties.
Our full proposal can be reviewed here. You can read a summary of what other North Carolina cities and counties have implemented here.
Things to Do (updated 2/16/26): Join us in calling on the Asheville City Council to commit to the development of an anti-displacement policy as a top priority for this year, with a defined timeline, cross-department coordination, and a community-informed process.
Email Template (Updated 2/16/26): You can send an email to the Asheville City Council by filling out the form below. Our email tool will send an individually addressed email to the recipients, and enable us to track how many emails were sent overall in the campaign. If you prefer to write your own email, you can copy and paste (and adapt) our template text – please cc: or bcc: info@gapavl.org on your individualized email, so we can better track how many emails were sent.
To: AshevilleNCCouncil@ashevillenc.gov
CC: or BCC: info@gapavl.org
Subject: Encourage City Staff to Develop an Anti-Displacement Policy
Dear Mayor and City Council Members,
I understand that there is growing openness among City and County leaders to explore a comprehensive anti-displacement policy. I urge the City to formally commit to a structured, community-informed policy development process and to coordinate with Buncombe County so that both governments adopt complementary protections.
As Asheville continues to grow and invest in housing and redevelopment, we need a clear framework to ensure that existing residents — especially renters, low-income homeowners, and historically marginalized communities — are not displaced. If you haven’t already reviewed it, GAPavl.org has prepared a comprehensive anti-displacement policy proposal that you can read here – http://gapavl.org/anti-displacement-policy-proposal-for-asheville-and-buncombe-county/.
With new investments in housing and infrastructure moving forward, now is the time to establish anti-displacement guardrails that ensure public funds benefit long-time residents and small businesses rather than accelerating displacement pressures.
I respectfully urge you to make development of a comprehensive anti-displacement policy a formal priority, using a process where government staff and local organizations work together to craft solutions with community members at the table.
Thank you for your leadership and consideration.
[Your Name]
REPORT BACK STATUS
In Process
Report Back
Recent City Council meetings have underscored why an overarching anti-displacement policy is so necessary: without it, displacement risks remain largely invisible in Council deliberations, even in the accumulation of decisions that shape who can afford to live and stay in Asheville. Our work remains to press Council to move from shared values to explicit policy commitments that address displacement proactively rather than one agenda item at a time.
We plan to continue meeting with City staff to work toward the development of a community-led process for developing an anti-displacement policy.
Total GAP Supporter Actions Taken: 34
Recipients and Responses:
Asheville City Council
- Mayor Esther Manheimer: No response
- Vice Mayor Antanette Mosley: No response
- City Council Member Bo Hess: No response
- City Council Member Kim Roney: No response
- City Council Member Maggie Ullman: Replied, asking for more information
- City Council Member Sage Turner: No response
- City Council Member Sheneika Smith: No response
PREVIOUS REPORTS
GAP Report for 3/2/26
0 Items Asheville considering building massive performing arts center on The Block (updated) Asheville needs anti-displacement guardrails in next year’s budget (report back) Buncombe County needs to adopt an anti-displacement policy Asheville needs to adopt an...
GAP Report for 2/23/26
0 Items Asheville considering building massive performing arts center on The Block (updated) Asheville needs anti-displacement guardrails in next year’s budget (new) Buncombe County needs to adopt an anti-displacement policy Asheville needs to adopt an...
GAP Report for 2/16/26
0 Items 0 Items Buncombe County needs to adopt an anti-displacement policy (updated) Asheville needs to adopt an anti-displacement policy (updated) 0 Items Asheville considers building performing arts center next to The Block Updated item: Buncombe County needs to...
GAP Report for 2/9/26
0 Items 0 Items Buncombe County needs to adopt an anti-displacement policy Asheville needs to adopt an anti-displacement policy 0 Items Special note: For most of our history, GAPavl has focused on the full range of issues that come before City Council and County...
GAP Report for 2/2/26
0 Items 0 Items Buncombe County needs to adopt an anti-displacement policy (updated) Asheville needs to adopt an anti-displacement policy (report back) 0 Items Updated Item: Buncombe County needs to adopt an anti-displacement policy This week, Buncombe County is...