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.

1. 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.
2. 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.
3. 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.
4. 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

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: 28

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