Late last summer and into early fall, members have been sharing the significant hurdles they’ve been encountering when navigating the City and County’s permitting and inspections system. We immediately began working with staff, behind the scenes, to resolve what challenges we could. Along the way, some improvements were made, but the broken system continues to bog down projects in process, wasting valuable time and money.
Many of these recurring problems boil down to two main issues: (1) the passage of the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) has created additional regulatory barriers and significantly elongated the processes, and (2) the County’s version of Accela — the IT platform used to manage workflow — doesn’t communicate with the City’s version of Accela making the process almost impossible to follow. Both of these problems keep our industry stuck in limbo and builders unable to orient themselves as to where they are in the process. This triggers the need for many additional contacts with staff members who are already scrambling to prop up a system that’s proven to be failing.
This brings us to last week, when the Home Builder’s Association of Greater Charlotte (HBAGC) hosted its monthly Custom Construction Council meeting and welcomed several key staff members from the City of Charlotte. They represented some of the departments that have been the most difficult to navigate such as trees and stormwater. What ensued was a passionate discussion about specific problems these small business owners continue to suffer through as they navigate Charlotte and Mecklenburg’s permitting and inspections gauntlet.
When we run into issues dealing with local government regulatory requirements, our industry is often asked to give specific examples of pain points, which we’ve shared on many occasions. But this meeting laid bare many of those key concerns. The outpouring of angst translated into real life stories of consequences for our members. Consequences that have also adversely affected their clients, the end users.
We generously acknowledge that there are many good people both at the City and County who have, for months, been working to resolve this situation. However, things are not appreciably better. As such, we have asked the City and County Managers to weigh in and take immediate action to resolve the situation.
This letter, sent last week following the HBAGC meeting, articulates our concerns and need for action. Here are the key points:
Technological Inefficiency: The ongoing issues with both the City Accela system and County Accela system have shifted from a transition hurdle to a permanent barrier. The frequency of broken workflows and technical submission errors has made it nearly impossible for contractors to reliably advance permits.
City-County Jurisdictional Friction: The fragmentation between City zoning/planning and County code enforcement continues to roadblock projects. The “City Hold” mechanism—often triggered by storm drainage or urban forestry reviews—frequently stalls County permit issuance for months with insufficient cross-agency coordination and customers being punted back and forth between the City and County to identify someone who can remove the roadblock.
UDO and LDIRL Complexity: While we support the intent of the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO), the new Land Development Individual Residential Lot (LDIRL) application process has added unnecessary layers of bureaucracy that have pushed standard residential permit times to between four and six months.
Staffing and Consistency: Despite high application volumes, our members face a lack of consistency in code enforcement. Differences in interpretation between inspectors and reviewers are leading to costly, mid-project design changes that further delay completion. We do not believe the solution is adding more staff.
 |
My report on last night’s Charlotte City Council meeting is full of bad news for Charlotte. Especially if we want to prosper. Testy debates followed by numerous attempts to score political points paired with the avoidance of problem solving has me very worried about our economic health. Here’s a quick recap.
Beginning at 4:00 pm, the council was already in the process of adopting the consent agenda when council member Mayfield asked that two items be removed for individual discussion.
Over the course of the next 30 minutes, the council debated whether to provide funding to two crucial Charlotte Water projects, even though minority, women, and small business enterprise (MWSBE) benchmarks had not yet been met. This can happen when there are not enough certified entities to perform the work. Charlotte Water’s CEO, Angela Charles, brought this to the attention of the council and ultimately the funding was approved overwhelmingly for the projects, but not until valuable time had been used on a night with an already packed agenda.
They then moved to the topic of data centers. Following a presentation by Assistant City Manager Alyson Craig, and following lengthy discussion from council members, action was taken to set a public hearing for May 26th. The hearing will allow for public comment on whether or not the City should impose a 150-day moratorium on data center approvals. The vote is expected to take place June 8th. It’s still debatable whether or not the City has the authority to impose such a moratorium as any action that results in a downzoning without the written consent of the landowner is currently prohibited. We’ll see what transpires, but it’s yet another example of the council reacting and giving into fear.
Following a brief recess and change of venue as the council moved to Council Chambers, a hearing was held on the City’s FY 2027 Budget. Numerous speakers came forward, asking for additional funding either for their city department or other projects and causes.
Then the discussion turned to the I-77 expansion project. Councilmember Owens has been working behind the scenes for several weeks on a resolution to provide additional information to the public and also enhance the communication, and opportunity for input. A lengthy discussion ensued and the resolution passed overwhelmingly. Then, council member Johnson offered an additional motion to rescind the City’s support of the I-77 project entirely.
As a reminder, the current project cost is somewhere between $3.2 and $4 billion. The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) has about $600 million dollars in funding allocated for the project. The shortfall would be covered under a public/private partnership (P3) whereby the contractor would expand the highway by adding additional lanes, rebuild the many bridges over the highway, and provide additional community benefits.
Additional council conversation took place and finally, after 10:00 pm, an affirmative 6 to 5 vote, which looks to effectively terminate the whole expansion project, was stunning to witness. This will have massive negative and long-term effects on our city for decades to come.
Those voting to support the resolution aimed at killing the project were:
Johnson, Mayo, Mazuera Arias, Mayfield, Watlington, and Graham.
Those opposing the resolution to keep the conversation going were:
Mitchell, Anderson, Owens, Driggs, and Ajmera.
As a reminder, the Charlotte City Council voted unanimously in October of 2024 to support a P3 to expand I-77. Councilmembers Johnson, Mayfield, Watlington, and Graham were all serving on the council at that time.
We should also make you aware that another big issue facing the council is the renewal of the airport lease with American Airlines. Those negotiations are ongoing and have been impacted by controversy related to a large union attempting to gain ground in North Carolina. Our state is a ‘right to work’ state, and laws don’t favor unions as they do in other places. As such, this group is working to use the current negotiations to leverage its ability to gain membership and sway council on certain matters. American Airlines has been a strong partner for many years and its hub presence at Charlotte Douglas International Airport has been an unquestionable asset to the region and an impetus to our economic development.
Are we beginning to see an unraveling that eventually puts us in the category of dying and poorly run cities such Portland, Seattle, St. Louis and others? Are you okay with that? Please send me your thoughts.
BACK TO LATEST NEWS