Asheville Housing · At a Glance

Same Federal Promise. Different Money.

Two HUD-subsidized buildings, both housing low-income residents. One was just gut-renovated; the other is stuck in a national repair backlog measured in the hundreds of billions. The difference is the funding stream each one can tap, and how much repair money the public has actually put in.

Battery Park

Public Housing

Who it houses

Low-income seniors (age 62+)

Families and individuals, all ages

Ownership

Nonprofit-owned (National Church Residences)

Government-owned (Housing Authority of the City of Asheville)

How it gets HUD money

Project-based Section 8 + Low-Income Housing Tax Credits

HUD Operating Fund + Capital Fund

Can it raise private capital?

Yes: borrows against a guaranteed rent stream

Historically, no, public funding is the only source

Recent investment

$17.6M Freddie Mac recap (2025); ~$13.4M renovated all 122 units

National repair backlog $169.1B; ~$3.2B/yr budget; ~10,000 units lost/yr

Condition today

Just gut-renovated and recapitalized

Deferred repairs nationwide; local agency under financial strain

Capital dollars per unit

Money spent rebuilding vs. money still needed to catch up, shown for scale, not like-for-like.

Battery Park: actually invested per unit (2025)≈ $110,000

U.S. public housing: needed per unit just to catch up≈ $188,090

Battery Park's figure is what was spent fixing it; the national figure is the average unfunded repair need per public-housing unit. One building got its money; the public housing system is still waiting for its share.

The point

One building got its roughly $110,000 a unit. The wider system carries an unfunded repair need closer to $188,000 a unit, and loses about 10,000 homes a year for lack of it. The difference was never the residents; it is which financing platform a building sits on, and how much repair money the public chooses to spend.

Will YOU step up?

Every group in our directory is local, vetted, and doing this work right now. Pick one and back it. →