221 public parcels scored for stadium and housing suitability. 10 sites score 90/100 or above. The forest does not need to be destroyed.
How to read this page — political feasibility is not analytical feasibility.
The sites listed here are analytic candidates from a public-parcel suitability scan. The scan scores parcels on attributes that can be measured from public data (size, ownership, zoning, slope, floodplain, transit / highway access, current structures). It cannot capture the political, institutional, or community-meeting feasibility of any specific site — some of which is held privately by stakeholders we have not consulted.
Two sites are already excluded on visible public-record grounds (53 Birch St — Riverside Cemetery adjacency; 226 Fairway Dr — 1927 Donald Ross golf course, NRHP-listed). The remaining sites scoring 90/100 should be read as “technically viable on the public-data attributes scored,” not as recommendations to develop any particular parcel. Local groups (Friends of UNCA Woods, neighborhood associations, the City of Asheville, Buncombe County, the developer, UNCA's own facilities planning) hold political-feasibility intelligence from meetings and conversations that this analysis cannot access. Treat any specific site recommendation as preliminary; site-specific feasibility and political viability assessment is the appropriate next step before any actual site selection.
The substantive finding that survives this caveat: multiple viable alternatives exist in the public-parcel inventory at the size, ownership, and zoning required. The forest is not the only option even after stripping any individual candidate from the list.
Multiple public parcels score 90/100 or above for stadium suitability under the algorithmic model. After human review for site-specific constraints not captured in county parcel data, the leading practical candidate is 1568 Brevard Rd (123 acres, Buncombe County). Two algorithmic top scorers were disqualified on review: 53 Birch St (probable Riverside Cemetery adjacency) and 226 Fairway Dr (Asheville Municipal Golf Course — a 1927 Donald Ross design listed on the National Register of Historic Places).
Location: 35.5124°N, 82.5922°W — Buncombe County-owned, south Asheville
This parcel scored 90/100 algorithmically on county-data attributes alone. Site-specific review reveals it is the Asheville Municipal Golf Course, a 1927 Donald Ross design, formally listed on the National Register of Historic Places on April 20, 2005 [Asheville Municipal Golf Course]. Designed by Donald Ross (one of four courses he built in Asheville in the 1920s); opened in May 1927 as North Carolina's first municipal golf course and historically significant as the first municipal golf course in North Carolina — and reportedly the first golf course in North America — to racially integrate. Sustained severe Helene damage to the front 9 in September 2024 (currently a temporary disc-golf use during restoration). Active municipal recreation, not vacant land available for development. Excluded from the candidate list.
| Attribute | 1568 Brevard Rd | UNCA Forest |
|---|---|---|
| Acreage | 123.33 acres (2.7x forest) | 45.0 acres |
| Owner | County of Buncombe | State of NC (UNC System) |
| Flood Zone | Zone X (no flood risk) | 10.6 ac in FEMA floodway |
| Highway Access | 2.54 km to I-26 | 2.5+ km to I-240 |
| Transit | 7.22 km to bus route | Adjacent to Merrimon |
| Structures | None — cleared and ready | 4,500 mature trees, 120+ year forest |
| Ecosystem Services | None (already cleared) | $450K/yr stormwater, cooling, carbon |
| Stadium Score | 90 / 100 | Not scored (forest site) |
1568 Brevard Rd is nearly three times the size of the UNCA forest, already cleared, County-owned, and not in a floodplain. With multiple public sites scoring 90/100, there is no shortage of alternatives that don't involve clearing mature hardwood forest. The only thing the UNCA forest offers that these alternatives do not is a 120-year-old ecosystem.
Note on 53 Birch St: This parcel scored 100/100 algorithmically but has been disqualified from the featured ranking. Review indicates it may adjoin or include Riverside Cemetery, making it unsuitable for stadium development. The scoring model correctly identified its parcel attributes; the limitation is that cemetery adjacency is not captured in county parcel data. With 10 sites scoring 90/100, the core finding — that suitable public alternatives exist — is unaffected.
Blue markers = stadium candidates. Green markers = housing candidates. Red marker = UNCA forest (current proposal site). Click any marker for details.
Scored from 221 public parcels (5+ acres) in Buncombe County. Scoring: area (50 pts), highway proximity (20 pts), flood zone (15 pts), cleared status (15 pts). The UNCA forest was excluded from scoring.
| Rank | Score | Acres | Owner | Address | Hwy Dist |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 90 | 123.33 | County of Buncombe | 1568 Brevard Rd | 2.54 km |
| -- | 90* | 110.97 | City of Asheville | 226 Fairway Dr (disqualified — Asheville Muni Golf Course, 1927 Donald Ross design, NRHP) | 1.66 km |
| 3 | 90 | 313.19 | Town of Weaverville Watershed | 99999 Eller Cove Rd | 2.14 km |
| 4 | 90 | 234.63 | United States of America | 99999 Ox Creek Rd | 4.38 km |
| 5 | 90 | 85.36 | United States of America | 99999 Gashes Creek Rd | 3.15 km |
| -- | 100* | 48.96 | City of Asheville | 53 Birch St (disqualified — cemetery) | 1.91 km |
| 6 | 90 | 72.75 | United States of America | 99999 Elk Mtn Scenic Hwy | 2.04 km |
| 7 | 90 | 64.95 | City of Asheville | 498 Azalea Rd | 2.67 km |
| 8 | 90 | 47.49 | State of NC (UNC System) | 70 Nut Hill Rd | 3.13 km |
| 9 | 90 | 29.21 | City of Asheville | 99999 Alexander Dr | 0.82 km |
10 sites scored 90 or above on the algorithmic model. After human review, two of those scorers were excluded: 53 Birch St (Riverside Cemetery adjacency) and 226 Fairway Dr (Asheville Muni Golf Course, NRHP-listed). The leading viable candidate is 1568 Brevard Rd (123 ac, County) — nearly three times the size of the 45-acre forest, already cleared, outside the floodplain, and offering far more land than the 25–30 acres a stadium actually requires.
Scored on area (30 pts), transit proximity (30 pts), flood zone (20 pts), and neighborhood fit (20 pts). Transit access is weighted higher than for stadiums because residents use transit daily.
| Rank | Score | Acres | Owner | Address | Transit Dist |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 100 | 25.98 | Buncombe County | 211 French Broad Ave | 0.27 km |
| 2 | 100 | 22.35 | Asheville Housing Authority | 100 Atkinson St | 0.01 km |
| 3 | 100 | 21.34 | City of Asheville | 32 Buchanan Pl | 0.44 km |
| 4 | 100 | 20.23 | State of NC (UNC System) | 165 Campus Dr | 0.25 km |
| 5 | 100 | 19.22 | Buncombe County | 125 Hill St | 0.18 km |
| 6 | 100 | 17.82 | Asheville City Board of Ed. | 544 Kimberly Ave | 0.31 km |
| 7 | 100 | 13.46 | City of Asheville | 34 Pearson Dr | 0.49 km |
| 8 | 100 | 11.20 | Asheville City Board of Ed. | 60 Ridgelawn Rd | 0.39 km |
| 8 | 95 | 9.93 | City of Asheville | 336 Hilliard Ave | 0.12 km |
| 9 | 95 | 9.68 | State of NC (UNC System) | 456 Merrimon Ave | 0.10 km |
8 sites score a perfect 100 for housing on the public-data attributes scored. These are transit-adjacent, publicly owned, and not in floodplains. Combined, the top 10 housing sites add up to 171 acres — nearly 4x the UNCA forest. Housing does not need to go on a forest.
Important: the same political-feasibility caveat that applies to the stadium-candidate list at the top of this page applies here. The housing candidates are real parcels with current uses (schools, recreation, existing affordable-housing developments, public works). Several are in active community use today. Listing them as “available for housing” in this analysis means technically viable on the public-data attributes scored — not recommended for development. Treat any specific site as preliminary; site-specific feasibility, neighborhood consultation, and political-viability assessment are the appropriate next steps before any actual selection. The substantive finding that survives the caveat: a viable housing alternative to forest-clearing exists in the public-parcel inventory.
Buncombe County has 221 publicly owned parcels of 5 acres or more, totaling 43,366 acres. The UNCA forest represents just 0.1% of available public land.
| Owner Category | Parcels | Total Acres | Avg. Size (ac) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Buncombe County | 66 | 2,589 | 39.2 |
| UNCA / UNC System | 56 | 4,769 | 85.2 |
| City of Asheville | 47 | 5,257 | 111.8 |
| Federal | 17 | 29,519 | 1,736.4 |
| Other Public (Housing Auth., School Board, Towns) | 35 | 1,232 | 35.2 |
| Total | 221 | 43,366 | — |
UNCA itself owns 56 parcels totaling 4,769 acres in Buncombe County. The 45-acre forest represents less than 1% of UNCA's total land holdings. Many of these parcels are already cleared and infrastructure-served. The claim that the forest is the "only available site" is contradicted by UNCA's own parcel inventory.
UNCA already owns 56+ acres of cleared, infrastructure-served land in the Asheville area. These parcels could accommodate housing, athletic facilities, or mixed-use development without touching the forest.
The largest contiguous cleared parcel under UNCA control. Previously graded for development. Could accommodate 400+ housing units or athletic facilities with minimal site preparation.
Urban infill site with excellent transit access. Previously developed, so no environmental clearing required. Suitable for mixed-use residential or campus expansion.
At the intersection of Merrimon Ave and W.T. Weaver Blvd, adjacent to existing campus. Connected to all utilities. Prime location for student or workforce housing.
Already developed as athletic facilities. Could be redeveloped for a modern stadium complex if UNCA determines athletics infrastructure is a priority, without any forest clearing.
These four sites alone total 56+ acres of cleared, UNCA-owned land — more than the entire 45-acre forest. All have existing infrastructure. None require clearing mature hardwood forest. The question is not whether alternatives exist, but why they are not being considered.
A three-way arrangement that gives every stakeholder what they actually need: UNCA gets revenue and development, the city gets a forest park, residents get housing, and the ecosystem survives.
| Stakeholder | Stadium on Forest (A) | Land Swap (E-H) |
|---|---|---|
| UNCA | Revenue from stadium P3 (+$18.6M NPV) but $204M construction risk, reputational damage | Revenue from land sale/lease (+$15.5M–$24.2M NPV), no construction risk, enhanced reputation |
| City / Public | $29M subsidy + $15M infra costs, $0 land tax (UNC-exempt) with ~$25–30M improvement-tax est., net loss of ecosystem services (-$46M NPV) | Forest park, property tax revenue from housing, ecosystem services preserved (+$43.3M NPV) |
| Developer | $204M construction on difficult site, -$149.5M NPV, floodway complications | Housing on cleared, flat, infrastructure-served sites, +$14.7M NPV |
| Community | Loses forest, gains tax-exempt stadium, 137% increase in heat vulnerability | Keeps forest park, gains housing supply, maintains cooling and stormwater services |
| Ecosystem | 85% canopy cleared, 8,673 Mg CO2 released, 43.7 years to recover | 100% preserved, continued sequestration, habitat connectivity maintained |
The land swap is not a compromise — it is a Pareto improvement. Every stakeholder is better off (or at least no worse) than under the stadium-on-forest plan. The only thing lost is the specific location of the stadium, which is the lowest-value decision in the entire analysis. Where you build matters less than whether you destroy an irreplaceable ecosystem to do it.