Charlotte’s suburbs are tapping the brakes on growth
As areas beyond Mecklenburg County boom, local government leaders are devising new strategies to manage growth — and fierce opposition from constituents
You’re reading Charlotte in Motion, a biweekly newsletter that examines how the Charlotte region is dealing with bumper-to-bumper traffic, rising housing costs, crowded schools and other challenges that come with the ultimate Charlotte story of growth. Charlotte in Motion is produced in partnership between The Charlotte Ledger and WFAE.
Today’s Charlotte in Motion is sponsored by PBS Unspun. Wondering what politicians are thinking but not saying? Watch PBS Charlotte Fridays at 8 p.m. as former Governor Pat McCrory delivers no-spin answers. Stream anytime on demand at wtvi.org/unspun.
After rapid development, some neighboring communities are enacting building moratoriums, as the backlash against new construction spreads farther out; concerns about housing costs, ‘the new NIMBY’
by Ashley Fahey
You can still catch glimpses of old Indian Land driving down U.S. 521, but it’s getting harder as midrise apartments, single-family homes, townhouses and commercial centers increasingly crowd the corridor.
A who’s who of homebuilders have signs along the highway advertising their new homes coming soon to the area. Pulte Homes, underway on its Kinsdale community off 521, touts that its Indian Land homes “combine South Carolina’s unique cost of living and education benefits with Charlotte convenience.”
In some ways, growth and new housing options were what leaders of Indian Land sought when they wrote their land regulations in 2016: They figured that growth into Lancaster County was inevitable, so it made sense to steer development toward Indian Land — which is immediately south of Ballantyne — rather than to less-populated parts of the county with inadequate infrastructure.
But what couldn’t have been anticipated was how much growth would occur in such a short timeframe — or how quickly the backlash to that growth would materialize. It’s a theme playing out throughout the Charlotte region as rapid growth radiates into surrounding counties.
Population in the Lancaster County panhandle — which includes 521 and Indian Land — increased by nearly six times between 2000 and 2020, while the county more broadly grew roughly 60% over the same period, adding nearly 20,000 residents.
In the past five years, in the panhandle alone, Lancaster County has received requests to develop more than 3,470 townhome lots and 2,050 single-family lots, in addition to permit requests for more than 2,830 apartments.
That rate of growth — and the subsequent need to rewrite its development policies and plans — is the major reason why the Lancaster County panhandle is under a temporary development moratorium. And it’s not the only place.
Several local governments in the Charlotte region have responded to rapid growth by passing stringent policies to stem or even outright ban new development.
Moratoriums — arguably the most stringent anti-development policies — are currently in place in parts of Belmont, Troutman, Fort Mill and Indian Land, as one way to get a handle on all the new construction. Even in areas that don’t have moratoriums, local planning departments and elected officials are devising strategies such as land banking, impact fees and multiple layers of review as tactics to manage or slow development.
Those who live and work in communities outside of Mecklenburg tout their area’s quality of life, schools, homes, and charm and character as reasons why so many have moved there — and the things they want to protect as more people move in. That’s prompted a fierce backlash when new projects are proposed, what urban planning types often call NIMBY-ism — shorthand for “Not In My Backyard.”
The populations of some towns, cities and counties circling Mecklenburg have quadrupled in the past 10 to 20 years — outpacing growth rates that even Charlotte and Mecklenburg have experienced, but with fewer government staff members, resources and funds to support that explosive growth.
It’s common now for organized, vocal opposition to pop up against new projects — especially data centers and multifamily housing — at public meetings, both in Charlotte and across the region. Increasingly, elected officials are rejecting those projects, perhaps in part because of political pressure from constituents fiercely opposed to new development.
But if development — especially new housing — gets denied or banned, or if developers shy away from building in places where opposition is likely to be fierce or their project will be rejected, that could drive up housing costs and exacerbate the region’s affordability crisis, even as people continue to move to Greater Charlotte. Already, housing costs across the region — even in exurban counties well outside of Mecklenburg — are skyrocketing.
“The more that we constrain housing, the higher the prices are going to go,” said Rob Nanfelt, executive director at the Real Estate Building Industry Coalition, a trade association for developers in North Carolina. “I think it’s a pretty established fact that we do have a housing shortage within the state. A lot of that has been brought on because, depending on who we listen to, we’re top five in the country for bringing jobs and businesses. A lot of that is centered in the Charlotte region. We’ve got to house the workers that we’re bringing in.”
Booming development across the Charlotte region is creating a new brand of NIMBY-ism that isn’t based as much in concerns about property values, but largely centered on whether infrastructure can support growth, said Liz Morrell, director of public policy research at the Charlotte Urban Institute.
Especially with the popularity of social media, opposition to development has only intensified across Greater Charlotte, Nanfelt said.
“Now it’s not ‘not in my backyard, put it over there,’ it’s ‘put it way over there, two counties over,’” he added.
Opposition varies across region, but remains fierce in most places
It’s hard to pinpoint through data just how much the tide has changed in suburban communities, but developers anecdotally report encountering more barriers to getting their projects approved.
Nanfelt said even in places that don’t have moratoriums, review cycles are becoming more extensive, and elected officials across the region are also refusing to meet with developers.
“If the first meeting is at a public meeting, that’s a problem,” Nanfelt said. “You’re not going to end up with a project that is going to be great when all is said and done because you’ve started from an antagonist perspective.”
The flavor of opposition varies a bit, depending on what part of the region someone is in. Apartments and higher-density housing are especially repelled in the outer areas of the region — Iredell County is “very anti-apartment right now,” Nanfelt added.
One of the earliest counties outside of Mecklenburg to experience rapid growth — which has since altered its land-use policies to address that boom — is Union County. Residential growth in that area, southeast of Charlotte, boomed particularly in the 2000s and 2010s — in fact, it was among the fastest-growing counties in the country for a time.
The Covid pandemic also accelerated growth in suburban counties like Union, as more workers who previously faced long commutes to the office were able to work from home. Although some of those workers may be back in the office on a full- or part-time basis now, households in the early 2020s left Mecklenburg for more space, the chance to buy a single-family home with a yard and proximity to schools and amenities.
Union updated its comprehensive plan in 2021 to address issues it said arose from its previous planning process in 2014, which encouraged a range of housing types, including higher-density projects in some areas. Developers responded to that during Charlotte’s boom period in the 2010s, with rezoning applications growing from one or two per year to one or two per month in Union County.
Among other things, Union’s updated plan reduces the number of places where builders and developers can build higher-density projects.
‘Drinking water out of a firehose’ in suburban counties
Allison Hardin, Lancaster County’s development services director, told The Ledger the moratorium for the Lancaster County panhandle is to pause new residential development as the county rewrites its unified development ordinance, or UDO.
The moratorium went into effect in November. It’s set to run for nine months but can be extended for three more months.
Hardin said Indian Land residents, in particular, are frustrated by the number of subdivisions being built off 521, the county’s main artery. A committee of council members, planning commission members, and members of the public has been formed to review the UDO and ensure it addresses public questions and concerns.
As of late January, the number of permit requests has fallen by 20% annually, according to Hardin.
One of the measures being considered in the unified development ordinance is to be more specific about which areas in the panhandle should allow higher-density development, similar to what Union County did in its rewrite of development rules.
Nearby Fort Mill, in York County, also has a temporary moratorium in place for residential development. It went into effect last summer and was originally set to expire in December, but town council members voted to extend it.
Fort Mill Mayor Guynn Savage told The Ledger the moratorium is in place to allow the town to complete its comprehensive plan updates, a similar basis for Lancaster County’s moratorium. (South Carolina law allows temporary moratoriums if a municipality is updating its land-use regulations.)
“We have been drinking water out of a firehose for some time,” Savage said.
Fort Mill has employed other strategies that, Savage said, are intended to manage growth, including buying land for public uses like parks and recreation, using a grade system to assess expected congestion rates for new development — and being more likely to reject those that score a “D” or an “F” — and impact fees, which are charges imposed on new development to help pay for additional public infrastructure. The town has also eliminated one zoning designation that would allow much higher-density residential.
Town councilors recently approved a $7.8M purchase of about 50 acres in Fort Mill that was owned by Novant Health. It was originally being considered for a new hospital. Savage said the town isn’t sure yet how the property might be used, but it’s intended to be some type of park or recreation facility. The town also recently purchased 7.6 acres adjacent to Doby Bridge Park for future park expansion.
Savage said it’s important for the town to land bank properties that may be “beneficial” for the town before they get redeveloped with homes or apartments.
Even with moratoriums in place, planning departments are often limited by state law in what decisions they can make. A bill in the South Carolina Senate would give local governments more authority to reject development projects if infrastructure isn’t in place, such as a school system reviewing a project and saying it lacked capacity for the expected new students.
“It would allow us to say ‘no’ if there is no infrastructure,” Hardin said.
The next ring of growth for Greater Charlotte
An Albemarle resident at a City Council meeting last year said the quiet part out loud ahead of a vote about a proposed annexation: “We don’t want to be another suburb of Charlotte.”
But areas that at one point would barely be considered part of the Charlotte region, including Albemarle, are starting to contend with the growth that used to be associated with closer-in suburbs and bedroom communities like Indian Land, Fort Mill and Waxhaw.
Now, places like Locust and Albemarle — the latter of which is 40 miles from uptown — are, in fact, the new Charlotte suburbs.
Real estate agents who work in the Charlotte metro area say that the kinds of houses popular with today’s buyers — like a large, new single-family home with a backyard — can oftentimes only be found affordably in exurban counties like Stanly County in North Carolina or Chester County in South Carolina. And especially as builders have run into opposition — and competition — in closer-in suburbs, locking down tracts of land for a new subdivision farther out becomes more compelling.
For Albemarle and other exurban counties, the growth is actually reversing population declines in those areas recorded only a couple of decades ago. The city of Albemarle’s population grew 4.2% between 2023 and 2024, while Stanly County grew 6.7% in that timeframe.
Albemarle recently adopted a 2045 comprehensive plan. One of its key strategies is to steer growth to places where infrastructure can support it — what Alysia Steadman, the director of planning and community development for Albemarle, called “nodal intensity,” which is creating new activity centers in the city.
“We have a history of being a mill town, so we have strong infrastructure around land, water, sewer,” she said. “There are some [new] residential units that are creating that live-work environment, that after-5 environment for our residents. It’s locating along some of our major thoroughfares and major boulevards. That’s where the infrastructure can support it.”
The city of Albemarle is next looking to create its own unified development ordinance, to ensure new development character and form “respects the context of Albemarle.” She said a UDO can also try to address housing affordability as that becomes a bigger challenge for the city.
“You can’t build your way to affordability,” Steadman said. “As you intensify, can you provide affordable units as a part of that? We haven’t started that conversation yet, but as we talk about growth, I’m sure it will come up.”
Is a regional planning approach the solution?
Although Charlotte today is much more of a region than a single city or even county, its growth strategy has largely not been regional in nature, beyond transportation planning.
But it may be time for Charlotte and neighboring towns, cities and counties to take a regional approach to planning, especially for housing, Morrell said.
Easier said than done. Regional planning efforts are not politically popular.
“People sometimes like a more fragmented model because they feel like decisions are more localized,” Morrell continued.
Charlotte’s unified development ordinance moved the city to a by-right review process for a lot of projects. That means if a developer is compliant with certain requirements, their project is approved instead of having to go through a discretionary process, which is where “the whole political realm” tends to come into play, Morrell said.
“That [approach] makes more sense if it can be uniform across the region rather than what we’re seeing now, which is that every town and municipality has their own process,” Morrell said.
Savage said that in certain aspects, a regional approach could make sense — traffic is something shared across the region, and “knowing that we’re not building highways to nowhere” is useful for tax management and those who commute across county borders to get to work. Environmental impacts, including waterways and air quality, are also felt regionally, she added.
“I think regional planning is important, but I also think it’s important to recognize that one size does not fit all, and we have unique identities,” Savage said. “In Fort Mill, we’re going to work hard to preserve our history and our sense of community.”
Steadman said understanding how others are dealing with growth has been important in shaping Albemarle’s planning strategy. Regional growth planning has typically been around transportation, she continued, adding that transportation and housing go hand in hand, and approaching housing regionally could be beneficial for the region.
Nanfelt said he “would love for [a regional approach] to be successful.” He said he thinks the Charlotte area could take steps toward that, but added each community is a little bit different, even within Mecklenburg County.
Still, he said, a regional approach to planning might help better address issues like water and sewer capacity. Sewer capacity is the cited underpinning for the moratoriums in Belmont’s South Point area and in Troutman, something Nanfelt said has been politicized amid anti-growth sentiments there.
Small towns around Charlotte don’t have the bandwidth to do what Morrell called “mid-level manager type tasks” — including proactive planning measures. A regional strategy would allow leaders of these towns to perhaps lean on bigger cities that have bigger staff to help produce plans or other measures, she said.
“I understand the impulse that, ‘Hey, we don’t have the infrastructure to support this, so we’re going to block that,’” Morrell said. “Understandably, they have to make sure they’re serving the existing residents. I get that. I think a better way is to coordinate, look at assets across the region and how all of these things can be balanced.”
Ashley Fahey is The Charlotte Ledger’s managing editor. Reach her at ashley@cltledger.com.
In brief…
Worst bottlenecks: A new national report ranks three Charlotte-area interchanges — I-77 near Lake Norman, I-85 at I-485 (University City) and I-77 at I-485 (Pineville) — among the country’s top 50 freight bottlenecks, with worsening congestion slowing trucks and cars alike and driving up costs that industry leaders say are ultimately passed on to consumers. (Fox 46)
East Charlotte data center concerns: Residents and officials in east Charlotte are raising concerns about environmental, infrastructure and energy impacts after a rezoning request was filed for a proposed data center on Hood Road, amid broader warnings about rising electricity demand across North Carolina. (WCNC)
S.C. considers data center guardrails: South Carolina lawmakers are weighing a bill that would impose new state oversight, permitting requirements and infrastructure cost obligations on rapidly expanding data centers to protect utilities and water resources, though critics warn it could drive investment to other states. (WFAE)
West End development: As Charlotte continues rapid growth, leaders and longtime residents are debating redevelopment in historically Black West End neighborhoods, with some seeing opportunity for renewal while others warn of displacement, rising costs and echoes of past gentrification. (WCNC)
Job growth and declines: Professional and business services, health care, and leisure and hospitality led Charlotte’s job gains last year while manufacturing and information sectors declined — yet overall the city still ranked No. 2 nationally in job growth, underscoring both its economic momentum and a broader shift toward service industries. (Ledger/WFAE)
Charlotte in Motion is a production of The Charlotte Ledger and WFAE. You can adjust your newsletter preferences on the ‘My Account’ page.
Did somebody forward you this newsletter and you need to sign up? You can do that here: