20020672 Ver 3_Attachment 28 - 07-2014 Union Co Comprehensive Plan_20141124

Union County
Comprehensive Plan
Attachment 28
Prepared for
Union County
Prepared by
LandDesign
In association with
Stantec
Noell Consulting Group
Creativisibility
Updated July 2014
Union County
Comprehensive Plan
Acknowledgements
Thank you to all the organizations and individuals who committed their time, energy and
resources to this effort. This Plan would not have been possible without the support of many
throughout the process.
AdvIsory CommITTee
Bob Cook, Charlotte Regional Transportation Planning Organization
Chris Dugan, Union County Planning Board
Tim Gibbs, Charlotte Department of Transportation, Union County Resident
Mary Jo Gollnitz, Union County Resident
Wayne Hathcock, Union County Power
Liza Kravis, Union County Resident
Greg Mahar, Planning Director, Waxhaw
Dennis Moser, The Moser Group
Jess Perry, Walt Perry Realty
Chris Platé, Monroe-Union County Economic Development
Travis Starnes, Circle S Ranch
Jennifer Stewart, Union County Board of Adjustment
Phillip Tarte, Union County Health Department
Lisa Thompson, Town of Marvin Administrator
Contents
01 InTrodUCTIon
01 | Overview
02 | About the Plan
04 | Planning Process
02 sUmmAry of IssUes And oPPorTUnITIes
07 | Issues
08 | Opportunities
03 GoAls
15 | Goal Statements
04 The fUTUre lAnd Use PlAn
19 | Vision for Union County
20 | Purpose
20 | Development of the Future Land Use Map
22 | Land Use Categories
05 PolICIes And sTrATeGIes
29 | Work
32 | Farm
34 | Live
35 | Shop
37 | Move
47 | Flow
49 | Conserve
54 | Health
55 | Cooperate
APPendIx
Appendix A: Plan Review
Appendix B: Stakeholder Interviewees
Appendix C: State of the County Report
Appendix D: Long-Term Growth Projections
Appendix E: Summary of Public Input
Appendix F: Development of the Preferred Scenario
Appendix G: Endnotes
Appendix H: Maps
Comprehensive Plan Update : 1
From 2000 to 2010 Union County was the
fastest growing county in North Carolina and
one of the fastest in the country, increasing
its population by 5.7 percent annually. A
combination of a healthy regional economy,
low taxes (particularly relative to Mecklenburg
County) and high quality schools fueled this
growth. Like many communities around the
nation, Union County experienced a period of
economic stagnation during the latter part of
the decade. The Great Recession resulted in
fewer people relocating to the area, job losses,
limited access to capital and declining home
values. While growth slowed over this period,
Union County continued to attract residents
to its western jurisdictions. Places like Wesley
Chapel, Weddington and Indian Trail continued
to prosper, albeit at moderated rates.
Today, Union County anticipates continued
growth as one of North Carolina’s fastest
developing counties. From 2010 to 2040,
the project team estimates Union County
will add approximately 190,000 people
(65,600 households), equating to an annual
growth rate of around 3.2 percent. This
rate is well below the 5.7 percent rate
of the booming 2000s, yet above the 1.9
percent recessionary growth rate the county
experienced over the last few years.
Supporting much of this growth over
the next 20 years are major service and
infrastructure projects including the
Monroe Bypass and the recently-signed
water agreement with the Town of
Norwood. In addition, efforts of Monroe-
Union County Economic Development aim
to attract more industry to Union County in
order to create jobs for current and future
residents and help balance the County’s
tax base. Business recruitment and
retention strategies are focused on four
major industries: precision manufacturing
in support of industry growth at the
Monroe Charlotte Executive Airport, agri-
business operations building on Union’s
strong agriculture economy, logistics and
commercial operations.
Recognizing the need to proactively address
growth and development patterns and
support economic development efforts,
County leaders decided to revisit the 2025
Comprehensive Plan and update the Plan
accordingly.
Introduction
Union County is one of the fastest growing counties in the State of
North Carolina. It also happens to be one of the most productive
agriculture areas. From its high growth suburbs to its farms, Union
County provides a unique blend of suburban and rural living. Balancing
these interests while growing the economy to provide for an
increasingly diverse population will be critical to Union County’s future.
2013
2040
PROJECTED POPULATION GROWTH
FOR UNION COUNTy
1 = 30,000 people
217,688 PEOPLE
391,530 PEOPLE
2 : UNION COUNTy
About the Plan
This Plan is intended to provide guidance to County leaders regarding future land use and
infrastructure decisions to support desired development and redevelopment in the County.
PurPose
This planning process addresses the issues and opportunities
generated by Union County’s growth and provides proactive
suggestions to ensure that Union remains a great place to
live, work and visit. The primary objectives of this effort are to:
(1) recognize existing economic development and land use
conditions and adjust future land use policies as appropriate,
and (2) provide an updated future land use vision as input into
the development of the County-wide Transportation Plan.
Orderly growth and development in Union County is more
easily achieved when any decisions affecting the County
are informed by a shared vision based on commonly held
goals. Therefore, this Plan is also designed to convey the
shared vision of residents and other stakeholders, and to
act as a platform to communicate that vision to various
decision-makers within and outside of the County. For this
reason, the planning process is structured to involve the
municipalities and a wide variety of local, regional and state
agencies in the update.
relationshiP to
other Plans
In addition to the 2025 Comprehensive Plan, several plans
have been adopted in Union County over the last decade.
Some contain a land use vision and policies for small areas
and corridors where development pressure is expected
to increase. Others focus entirely on a specific aspect of
growth, such as water and wastewater service improvements
needed to meet future demand. To varying degrees, all
such Plans are relevant to this update, but cobbled together
they do not serve as a comprehensive guide for the County
and its municipalities. Nevertheless, an examination of the
Plans collectively helps to identify conflicts between them
and, more importantly, to reveal issues and opportunities
that should be considered in the course of preparing a
Comprehensive Plan. Therefore, this Plan update builds
on a combination of these recent planning efforts, eliciting
recommendations that are supportive of the community’s
current vision for the future. A summary of existing plans is
located in Appendix A of this document.
study area
Union County is located in the Southern Piedmont region
of North Carolina. While the Union County government is
responsible only for the unincorporated areas of the County,
environmental and infrastructure systems, such as creeks,
rivers and roadways cross jurisdictional lines. Therefore,
the study area also includes the 14 municipalities within
the County. As shown in Map 1, Union is one of 11 North
Carolina counties that comprise a 14-county bi-state region.
Union County lies within Charlotte’s metropolitan area and
the western portion is within commuting distance to the
central business district of Uptown Charlotte. So, while the
study area does not extend beyond the County boundaries,
the context must be considered to better understand
the opportunities associated with—and the impacts of
infrastructure investments made in support of—regional
economic growth.
Comprehensive Plan Update : 3
MAP 1: STUDy AREA
UnIon
CAbArrUs
r owA n
Iredell
meCklenbUrG
lInColn
GAsTon
ClevelAnd
york
UnIon sC ChesTer
lAnCAsTer
sTAnly
Anson
study area context
The study area is located in the south-
western part of the Piedmont region
of North Carolina.
study area
4 : UNION COUNTy
Recognizing the many assets of Union County, the Plan
focused on improvements that would increase business
opportunities, attract more private investment in residential
and nonresidential development, provide transportation and
housing choices and more public amenities. The resulting
Plan includes recommendations for land use, economic
development, infrastructure investments, housing and quality
of life investments.
Phases of Work
The process to update the 2025 Comprehensive Plan was
divided into five phases. The first phase focused on project
initiation tasks, such as data collection, a review of existing
Plans and studies and a study area tour. During Phase Two,
the project team created an inventory of existing conditions
in the County as a step toward an assessment of the County
and the identification of issues and opportunities to be
considered in subsequent phases.
Phase Three led to the development of future land use
scenarios designed to test the likelihood of achieving stated
goals given a range of potential policy directions. Based on
the results of the previous phases, a set of recommendations
and implementation strategies that support the community’s
vision of the future were developed during Phase Four. The
final phase of the process merged all Plan components
into a single, comprehensive document. This report is the
culmination of all five phases of work.
Public involvement
Guiding development of the Plan was an inclusionary public
engagement process. Understanding community values
today ensures that this Plan, implemented in accordance with
the recommendations, supports and advances those priorities
over the long term.
Advisory Committee meetings
The Advisory Committee, made up primarily of residents
and property owners in the County, guided this effort. Also
included on the committee were representatives from
farming, development and real estate communities along
with representatives of the North Carolina Department of
Transportation (NCDOT), Charlotte Regional Transportation
Planning Organization (CRTPO) and the Charlotte Department
of Transportation (CDOT). Regular meetings of this group
were held throughout the process to set goals, provide
feedback and advise the project team on Plan concepts
and recommendations. A list of the Advisory Committee
members is listed in the Acknowledgements section of this
report.
stakeholder Interviews
Stakeholder interviews were conducted to verify and
supplement the data gathered, to explain the conditions
observed and to further understand the issues and
opportunities that affect the study area. The input from
these interviews supplemented the feedback received
directly from citizens and property owners participating in
the process. The stakeholders included key personnel from
County departments as well as representatives of interest
groups who addressed questions about the following topics:
economic development, transportation, neighborhoods,
utilities and farming. A complete list of interviewees is
provided in Appendix B.
Planning Process
In 2013, Union County contracted with LandDesign to develop a Plan that provides a
framework to guide growth and development decisions in the County. The 12-month process
involved a wide variety of stakeholders including representatives from jurisdictions, state
agencies, local businesses and civic groups to establish a clear direction forward for the
County.
Comprehensive Plan Update : 5
ProJeCT InITIATIon
Data Collection, Review of Existing Plans &
Studies, Area Tour
CoUnTy AssessmenT
Assessment of Current and Emerging
Conditions, Identification of Issues &
Opportunities
PlAn develoPmenT
Evaluation of Current Policies and Testing of
Alternatives to Define a New Direction to
Better Achieve Stated Goals
PolICy reCommendATIons &
ImPlemenTATIon sTrATeGIes
Policies and Action Steps to Realize the
Desired Future Land Use Pattern
PlAn doCUmenTATIon
Comprehensive Plan Documents
1
2
3
4
5
Planning Process
Community meetings
Community meetings were held throughout the planning
process to provide an opportunity for stakeholders to come
together and learn about the project and guide development
of the vision for the future of Union County. During the first
meeting, a Project Symposium, elected officials, property
owners and residents met to learn about the project and
refine the goals established by the Advisory Committee.
Symposium participants also participated in a live polling
exercise to set priorities and identify major issues and
opportunities in Union County. The second community
meeting was designed as an interactive work session to
develop the Future Land Use component of the project
and to identify and prioritize transportation improvements.
During the third meeting, participants refined the future land
use vision and suggested ways in which the Plan can be
effectively implemented over time.
website
A website, www.unioncountyonevoice.com, was developed
to provide an online resource for community members.
All materials that were presented at the community
meetings were also translated into an online format so
that community members could participate virtually in the
planning process.
A summary of all the public input gathered during this
process is located in Appendix E.
a Project symPosium
was held on November 7, 2013 to
discuss some of the land use and
transportation issues in the County.
6 : UNION COUNTy
Comprehensive Plan Update : 7
eighty-one Percent of people
drive to work every day in Union
County.
The following set of issues and opportunities were identified in the
State of the County assessment and the Long-Term Growth Projections
memo developed during this process. Findings were further refined by
the Advisory Committee and with feedback gathered during community
meetings. (The State of the County report is located in Appendix C;
Appendix D contains the Long-Term Growth Projections memo)
summary of Issues & opportunities
aPProximately 70 Percent of Union County residents work outside of the County.
issues
lack of employment opportunities
Union County is a bedroom community
to Charlotte. Approximately 70 percent of
residents work outside of the County. Since
2000, Union County has added an average
of 860 jobs annually, about 10 percent of the
total employment in the metropolitan area.
Meanwhile it captures roughly 14 percent of
all household growth. The result is a roughly
.4 jobs/household ratio, one-third less than
the .61 jobs/household ratio of the metro
area. In addition, relative to the Charlotte
metro area, a greater share of jobs in Union
County exists in local-serving, moderate-
paying industries, such as construction,
retail trade and public administration. Largely
missing from the County are higher-paying,
white collar jobs such as those in the finance
and insurance industries and professional and
technical services. There is not only an overall
shortage of jobs, but also a lack of the higher-
paying jobs that residents demand.
Inadequate road Infrastructure
The growth rate in Union County was
estimated at 5 percent per from 2000 to 2010
for an overall increase in population of 62.8
percent. Such rapid growth and the resultant
boom in development can bring substantial
benefits to the community, but also has
the potential to create large infrastructural
problems. Historically, Union County was
characterized by rural and agricultural
development. With this in mind, many of
the highways in the county were originally
intended to be two-lane farm roads. New
development, however, has transformed
many of these once-country roads to major
transportation corridors, creating problems
with capacity and safety.
limited regional Access
Union County has no direct access to an
interstate, and the US and state highways
need improvement in order to provide
adequate service. Inadequate regional
Commuting out54,490Commuting In26,267
living and working in the County 23,867
SOURCE: U.S. Census
FIGURE 1: UNION COUNTy COMMUTERS
8 : UNION COUNTy
the cost of
commuting
81%
of Union County
Residents drive to
work alone every day.
100%
of Union County’s
driving population
is spending more
than 15% of
household income on
transportation
95%
of Union County
Residents Union
County residents are
spending more than
45% of their income
on housing and
transportation.
30%
is the research-
suggested amount
of income that
households should
spend on housing and
transportation costs.
SOURCE: Center for
Neighborhood Technology
H & T Affordability Index
access, and the scarcity of alternative
transportation routes and east-west
connections severely impact the marketability
of the County to potential employers.
Costly Congestion
Eighty-one percent of Union County residents
drive alone to work every day. The County’s
limited road network offers few options for
commuters, leading to congestion along
available routes during both peak and non-
peak hours. The major commuting route,
US-74, is over capacity with more than 57,000
trips per day. Union County residents take,
on average, five minutes longer to reach their
place of work than other North Carolinians.
In addition, almost half of people in Union
are spending more than 30 percent of their
income on transportation. Unchecked, such
costs are likely to negatively affect Union
County as a choice residential location.
Auto-dependent development
Historic and current development practices
in Union County have resulted in separated
land uses, strip commercial corridors and
disconnected neighborhood and commercial
centers. The result is a land use pattern that
forces automobile commuting, especially in
areas where pedestrian and bike facilities
are poorly connected or non-existent. As
preferences shift toward more walkable and
bikeable development patterns, the County
could lose key demographics to adjacent
counties.
lack of Transit options
Public transportation is only available
through CATS service on one route (US-74 to
Monroe), which does not run during nonpeak
hours or on weekends
lack of bicycle and Pedestrian facilities
There are few places Union County residents
can safely bike and walk. Conditions for
cycling are very poor to marginal, favoring
only the most experienced road cyclist,
except in the core downtown areas of the
municipalities. Opportunities for expanding
or constructing adjacent paths, such as
those found along parts of Stallings/Potter
Road, are available but would be both
expensive to construct and poorly utilized
until more development occurs. Pedestrian
accommodations are generally scant, poorly
interconnected, and limited to the frontages
of newly developed properties or inside
municipalities. The same is true for a number
of intersections without marked crosswalks.
loss of Agricultural land
Farming and forestry are a key component of
Union County’s economy. Unmanaged growth
that results in incompatible development
threatens this economy. Potential incompatible
uses such as dense subdivisions, apartments,
condos and commercial strips that can be
negatively affected by the byproducts of
agricultural activities such as dust, odor, noise
or slow moving farm vehicles. Between 2007
and 2012 Union County lost 23,462 acres of
farmland.5 The majority of this loss occurred
in the northwestern part of the County where
there was significant development pressure.
The County needs to safeguard the 1,107
farms that cover 178,193 acres of the County
and contribute $464 million to the local
economy (from 2013 cash receipts).
Inadequate rural Infrastructure
Union County’s agriculture economy depends
on the ability to move product from its source
to a processing facility. Many of the rural
roads and bridges require upgrades to handle
the increased truck traffic resulting from
agricultural operations and to improve safety
on rural roads. In addition, the rural roadways,
such as US 601, NC 200 and NC 218 have
more severe crashes per mile than other
major Union County roadways.
retail Abandonment
Similar to the situation along the Mecklenburg
portion of US-74, there is the threat of long-
term retail abandonment once new retail
centers are developed.
Comprehensive Plan Update : 9
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
HEART DISEASE CANCER CEREBROVASCULAR
DISEASE
ALzHEIMER’S
DISEASE
CHRONIC LOWER
RESPIRATORy
DISEASE
FIGURE 2: LEADING CAUSES OF DEATH IN UNION COUNTy
FIGURE 3: UNION COUNTy RECREATION PREFERENCES
SOURCE: Union County
Community Health Assessment
Access to Public Schools Existing Facilities
Green space & Parks
Sidewalks for Exercise & Connectivity
Trails for Walking, Biking and Running
SOURCE: Union County Community Health Assessment
44%
20%
20%
16%
liquor laws
Union County is a dry county. Commercial businesses such
as restaurants and grocery stores will not locate in the
county’s jurisdiction because of the inability to sell alcohol
to consumers. Without these types of tenants, mixed use
projects are unlikely to develop in County jurisdiction.
lack of diverse Tax base
Approximately 94 percent of the land in the County’s
jurisdiction is devoted to agriculture and residential land uses.
Residential growth continues to outpace commercial growth.
As a result, insufficient market diversity could further strain
County resources.
health Issues
As noted in the 2012 County Health Assessment (CHA),
Cancer, heart disease, Alzheimer’s, Respiratory Disease and
Cerebrovascular Disease were the leading causes of death
for all ages in Union County from 2001-2010.6 According to
the North Carolina State Center for Health Statistics, Union
County has more Alzheimer’s deaths per 100,000 than any
other County in the state.7 The County Health Department
is currently in the process of working with Duke University
10 : UNION COUNTy
A recent survey indicates that Union
County residents want to increase
access to affordable and free exercise
venues.
SOURCE: An Inventory of the Significant Natural Areas of Union County, North Carolina,
North Carolina National Heritage Program, 2012, NCDENR, NC OneMap
Square Miles of Water Supply Watersheds
23
SIGNIFICANT NATURAL HERITAGE SITES
3
SIGNIFICANT
NATURAL
HERITAGE SITES
OF NATIONAL
SIGNIFICANCE
82
87
2541
Miles of Streams
228
Miles of Impaired Waters
Square Miles of Subwatersheds
with Federally Listed Aquatic Species
BY THE NUMBERS
2,400
ACRES OF PROTECTED LAND 1,100
SPECIES OF PLANTS
FIGURE 4: NATURAL RESOURCES IN UNION COUNTy
on a well water study to understand any potential linkages
between arsenic in well water and high Alzheimer’s rates.
According to the CHA, “the well water in Union is known
to have high concentrations of arsenic due to the presence
of the underground slate belt that stretches across the
entire County. Many rural residents and residents in older
subdivisions remain on wells for their drinking water.8 ” The
CHA also found that the majority of Union County residents
understand the linkages between the built environment
and health outcomes. Respondents desired more local
opportunities for affordable exercise including access to public
school facilities, sidewalks, greenways and trails.
need for Additional Parks and open space
Some parts of the County are well served by parks while
others lack access. For instance, areas near towns and near
Cane Creek Park exceed the level of service standards,
however growing areas outside of towns do not. Overall it
is estimated that an additional 1,300 acres of parkland are
necessary to meet current and future needs.9 The majority of
this demand is in the northwestern and northeastern parts of
the County.
Threats to natural resources
Currently there are more than 8,500 acres of wetlands,
2,541 miles of streams and 2,483 acres of protected lands
that combine with other privately owned lands to host
1,100 species of plants and a variety of rare animals. Three
subwatersheds have been identified as critical habitat for the
Carolina Heelsplitter, a freshwater mussel that is critically
endangered. Habitat fragmentation and water pollution from
new development are two of the immediate threats to natural
resources in the County.
water Quality Issues
There are 228 miles of impaired waterways (parts of
22 creeks and rivers), as classified by the Division of
Water Quality, part of the North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources. Major contributors
to water pollution are non-point source pollution from
stormwater runoff associated with increases in impervious
surfaces, and sedimentation from construction and
agricultural activities. Preserving riparian vegetation and
encouraging Low Impact Development (LID) techniques will
be critical to maintaining water quality.
Comprehensive Plan Update : 11
Job Growth
The efforts and results of Monroe-Union
Economic Development will create a
greater potential for people living in the
County to also work in the County. Business
recruitment and retention strategies are
focused on the following sectors:1
Precision Manufacturing: Manufacturing
locally, regionally and nationally was greatly
affected by the recent recession, and
has been in a steady decline for the last
several decades. However, due to rising
transportation costs and the need for
increased product security, the industry
has grown in the last few years and is
forecasted to continue this positive trend in
the coming years. Union County has a long
history of precision manufacturing. Centered
around the Charlotte-Monroe Executive
Airport, it has the “highest geographic
concentration of aerospace companies in
the Carolinas.“ Union has the opportunity
to capitalize on this sector and bring more
high-wage, precision manufacturing jobs to
the County.
Agri-Business: According to the North
Carolina Department of Agriculture
2013 Stat Book, there are 1,107 active
farming operations in the County totaling
178,193 acres of land. These farms made
$464,077,235 in cash receipts in 2012,
ranking the County 3rd in the state. In
addition, Union also ranks 3rd in livestock,
dairy and poultry production.2 Forestry is
also booming industry, especially in the
eastern part of the County. As of 2012,
Union County had 167,167 acres (around 38
percent) of active timberland.3
Forestry operations on these lands resulted
in $4.4 Million dollars in timber sales in
2012. From timber processing and seed
harvesting to agri-chemicals and value-add
processing facilities, there is an opportunity
to increase agriculture-related businesses in
the County.
Logistics: The relatively limited access to
regional interstates (there are no interstates in
the County with I-85 and I-77 being 11 or more
miles away via I-485), tempers the county’s
attraction to firms involved in transportation/
trucking and wholesaling operations. In spite
of this limitation, the rail network, Monroe
Bypass and Charlotte-Monroe Executive
Airport offer advantages that could provide
opportunities for additional logistics-related
industry growth over time.
Commercial: There is a diverse and wealthy
consumer base in Union County. Demand
for shopping options will continue to grow
as more people move to Union County.
Based on growth projections and per capita
expenditures, Union County can potentially
support an additional 6.6 million square feet
of retail space between 2010 and 2035.
This represents a 150 percent increase
in retail space demanded from existing
current space, which was estimated in 2010
to be around 4.1 million. This total growth
is equivalent to the size of nearly four
Southpark Malls in terms of total square
footage.
Office: Jurisdictions within Union County,
such as Weddington and Wesley Chapel,
have large amounts of executive housing.
Proximity to this type of housing is one driver
of office development. By identifying market
potential and employing targeted strategies,
Union County has the opportunity to bolster
the office market and encourage office
development in the County.
oPPortunities
office
financial services,
insurance, real estate
10,357 employees $
DATA SOURCES: U.S. Census,
Noell Consulting Group
retail & services
retail trade, leisure &
hospitality,other services
20,265 employees
institutional
government, education,
health services
10,295 employees
43
%
22
%
21
%
13
%
industrial
manufacturing, wholesale,
trade, logistics
6,339 employees
FIGURE 5: JOB GROWTH
DATA SOURCE: NC Department of Agriculture 2013 Stat Book
UnIon CoUnTy TodAy
178,193
464,000,000
total farm acres in Union County
CASH RECEIPTS / #3 IN NC
farmland
FARMS IN
UNION COUNTy
1,107 MORE THAN
soybeans wheat
layersbroilers
2#
in nC 2#
in nC
3#
in nC
3#
in nC
Comprehensive Plan Update : 13
13 targets
Demand for shopping options
will continue to grow as more
people move to Union County. The
following numbers were calculated
based on the average square foot
of well-known retailers in the
market and the projected retail
growth in Union County in 2040.
reTAIl
demAnd
970,984 square feet of food
service & drinking places or the
equivalent of
140 olive gardens
1,031,666 square feet of
building material & garden supply
stores or the equivalent of
10
424,290
square
feet of
clothing &
accessory
stores
or the
equivalent
of
40 gaps
10
255,956 square feet
of furniture & home
furnishings stores or the
equivalent of
2,327,988 square feet of
general merchandise stores
or the equivalent of
1,126,341
square feet
of food &
beverage
stores or the
equivalent of
22harris teeters
more housing options
Trends suggest that there is growing demand for a
variety of housing types including products that are more
attractive to singles, couples without children, empty
nesters and aging Baby Boomers. In addition, research
shows that people would prefer to live in areas with a lot
of amenities and have access to public transportation,
even if that means living in a smaller home. These type
of products and communities are largely missing from
Union County. Over the next 30 years, more than 100,000
housing units will be added in Union County. While
close to 60 percent of estimated demand potential is
for conventional to larger lots (the dominant product in
Union County today), approximately 30 percent of demand
potential could be for detached homes on smaller lots (e.g.
Traditional Neighborhood Development) or patio homes,
with the last 10 percent or so being for attached for-sale
products such as townhouses or condominiums.
Town Centers
By encouraging the development of new mixed-use centers
and fortifying existing town centers, the County can
help facilitate the creation of viable business locations in
walkable environments. The County largely lacks these types
of developments today, despite the existence of successful
precedents elsewhere in the Charlotte region and a strong
preference for mixed-use communities among those
planning to move within the next five years.4 These places
could be attractive locations not only for retail and office
uses, but for all types of residential products as well.
Joint-Use Agreements
There are currently too few recreation facilities to meet the
demand of Union County residents. However, the County can
work with Union County schools to formalize joint-use agree-
ments so that school facilities can also be used as community
centers and recreation facilities at appropriate times.
recreation economy
Union County has the opportunity to capitalize on a number of
recreation-related economic development opportunities. The
County’s rural landscapes offer low-traffic roadways with scenic
vistas. These characteristics attract long-distance, recreational
cyclists. Likewise, facilities such as the Jesse Helms Sports
Complex could position Union as a destination for lucrative
youth-sports tournaments. Opportunities for expanded equestri-
an activities also exist. A county-wide interconnected greenway
system, and a developed blueway on the Rocky River could at-
tract outdoor enthusiasts. A coordinated marketing strategy to
promote the combination of recreational options could increase
tourism and generate revenue for area businesses.
home goods
lowes
DATA SOURCE: U.S. Census, Noell Consulting Group
trends suggest that there is growing demand for a variety of housing
types including products that are potentially more attractive to singles, couples
without children, empty nesters and aging Baby Boomers. In addition, research
shows that people would prefer to live in areas with a lot of amenities and have
access to public transportation even if that means living in a smaller home. These
type of products and communities are largely missing from Union County.
62%
Close to
shops,
restaurants,
and offices
59%
Shorter
commute
but smaller
home
52%
Available
public
transit
50%
Mix of
homes
47%
Mix of
incomes
FIGURE 6: HOUSING PREFERENCES
Comprehensive Plan Update : 15
A successful Plan depends on a framework of sound, achievable
goals. The goals identified in the 2025 Comprehensive Plan served as
a starting point for this Plan update.
Goals
The Advisory Committee, members of
the public and participants at the Project
Symposium vetted the original goal
statements, which are noted in Appendix
E. Also in the Appendix E are the results
of two surveys, which detail public
opinion of the original goal statements.
These results, along with the issues and
opportunities identified by the project
team during the Plan review and a topic-
specific analysis, all contributed to the
development of the set of final goal
statements for this report. These goals are
listed on the following page.
original goal frameWork from 2025 Plan
uPdated goal frameWork
Project
Symposium
Community
SurveyProject
Team
Analysis
Advisory
Committee
Meeting
FIGURE 6: PROCESS TO UPDATE GOAL FRAMEWORK
16 : UNION COUNTy
• Identify New Sites for Employment Growth
• Coordinate Infrastructure
• Ensure Land Use Regulations Support Economic Development
• Promote New & Existing Businesses
• Improve Multimodal Options
• Support & Expand Bus Transit Service
• Identify Future Rail Service Corridor
• Coordinated Roadway Planning
• Support Appearance & Development Standards for Major Travel Corridors
• Land Use Planning for Monroe Bypass
updated goal framework
The updated goal framework provides the guideposts to inform the development of the
Plan. These refined goal statements will be used to inform the development of the land use
scenarios and supporting metrics later in the process. In addition, the recommendations and
implementation strategies will also be organized around this updated goal framework.
• Ensure Utility Capacity for Future Development
• Fiscally Efficient Public Water & Wastewater Service
• Reserve Capacity for Future Growth
•` Seek Opportunities with Neighboring Jurisdictions to Expand Utility Systems
• Support Agri-focused Infrastructure Investments
• Identify Sites for Future Agri-Business Growth
• Maintain Agriculture Production & Forestry
• Protect Rural Character & Scenic Views
• Foster Cooperative Relationships between Farmers & Residents
• Direct Development Away From Rural Areas
move
flow
work
farm
Comprehensive Plan Update : 17
• Promote Protection of Open Spaces & Environmentally Sensitive Lands
• Protect Water & Air Resources
• Consider Impacts of New Development on Environmental Features and
Endangered/ Threatened Habitats
• Encourage the Development of Retail, Restaurants and Services that meet
Consumer Preferences
• Mitigate Abandonment of Existing Retail Strip Centers
• Provide a Range of Housing Choices
• Strengthen & Enhance Existing Neighborhoods
• Encourage Infill Development / Discourage Leapfrogging
• Support Appearance & Development Standards for Neighborhoods
• Provide Convenient Recreational Opportunities Throughout the County
• Joint-Use of Schools and Recreation Facilities
• Intergovernmental Coordination
• An Active and Involved Citizenry
• County & School District Coordination for Schools
shop
live
health
conserve
cooperate
Comprehensive Plan Update : 19
In 2030, there are a number of mixed-use
developments in the County that offer distinct
living, working and shopping options. Land
suitable for industrial and office development
is preserved, especially around the Airport,
which results in attracting employers that offer
jobs to Union’s workforce.  More industries
take advantage of Union’s rail network.  Fewer
people commute to other places like Charlotte
for work.  In addition, there are a variety
of housing options, including townhomes
and apartments, to accommodate Union’s
diverse population. Older residents are able
to age-in-place in close proximity to existing
downtown services and amenities. Existing
neighborhoods are complemented by new
single-family developments of similar character
and scale. The agriculture areas in the County
remain extremely productive and there are
more agriculture-related businesses leveraging
this asset. 
The Bypass is complete and serves as a main
thoroughfare from downtown Charlotte to
points east. Mainly local traffic uses US-74,
and key arterials have been widened to four
lanes to decrease travel times at any point
during the day. Pedestrian and bike facilities
including sidewalks and greenways connect key
locations throughout the County and serve as
both recreational and transportation corridors
for residents. Local and regional transit carries
residents and visitors in and out of the County.
 Infrastructure supports new development in
appropriate areas throughout the County. All
areas are adequately served by police, fire,
and emergency services.  All residents have
convenient access to a park or recreational
facility, and many schools are used after-
hours as community centers.  There are
plenty of ball fields, community centers
and programmed activities to serve Union’s
growing population.
New development respects the agriculture
areas. The public is keenly aware of the value
of Union’s agriculture industry and actively
supports farming and forestry operations. 
Rural farm-to-market roads and bridges are
improved and farmers have access to the
technology and infrastructure they need to be
competitive.
Low-impact development techniques are
commonly used in new projects. Many new
neighborhoods outside of established urban
areas have been designed in a way that
maintains the scenic quality of the County.
Historic assets are identified and preserved.
Property of historic significance is landmarked
and added to the National Register.
Greenways and sidewalks connect Union’s
historic centers and new centers to a greater
network of community assets.
The future land Use Plan
vision for union county
The Future Land Use Plan envisions a future where Union County will
continue to grow and prosper in a way that promotes a high quality
of life, preserves the agricultural industry and ensures that all Union
residents have access to a variety of housing, transportation and
employment options.
the future land use Plan
outlines a framework for growth to
achieve a more sustainable, balanced
tax base in Union County.
20 : UNION COUNTy
Future Land Use Map
PurPose
The Future Land Use Map depicts the community’s vision for a development pattern that
balances the economic, social and environmental needs of Union County; strengthens the
local economy; and preserves the high quality-of-life for all residents.
The Future Land Use Map is a conceptual rep-
resentation of the development patterns that
leaders and residents of Union County envi-
sion for the future. The map is descriptive, not
prescriptive, conveying the community’s de-
sires for the future and the flexibility needed
to accommodate unforeseen opportunities.
Its features include the following elements:
• Existing uses, including jurisdictional
preferences and publicly owned and
maintained sites and facilities (e.g. Cane
Creek Park), that are likely to remain;
• Clearly defined and delineated
development areas (land use categories)
that reflect the community’s desire to
encourage certain types of growth in
specific geographic areas; and
• Areas identified as important to conserve
for future agriculture-related industry and
production.
develoPment of the
future land use maP
The Future Land Use Map was developed
through a scenario planning process. Scenario
planning encourages stakeholders to think
and make decisions about the impacts of
growth on the region in order to develop a
common vision for the future. For a complete
description of the scenario planning process
to develop the Future Land Use Map refer to
the Appendix F of this report.
Comprehensive Plan Update : 21
Agricultural Area
Farming, forestry and rural residential
single family residential
Detached single family (~1unit/acre)
mixed residential
Mixed residential (detached single family, patio and cottage
homes, town homes and multi-family)
rural Center
Small scale commercial and civic uses
neighborhood Center
Neighborhood-serving commercial uses (retail, restaurant and
services) and mixed residential services)
Community Center - small
Community-serving commercial uses (retail, restaurant and services) including
opportunities for office, civic, institutional and mixed residential uses
Community Center - large
Community-serving commercial centers with a larger footprint and service area
Town Center / downtown
Existing downtown or town center with a range of uses including
commercial, office, civic, institutional and mixed residential uses
employment Center
Industrial and office uses
employment Corridor
Logistics, industrial and agri-business related uses
future land use
concePt
UNION COUNTy
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2014
MAP 2: FUTURE LAND USE CONCEPT
22 : UNION COUNTy
Land Use Categories
Ten land use categories are depicted on the Future Land Use Map. Each category is intended
to indicate a predominant land use—or set of uses—as well as other features that define
the character of the category. A brief description of each category is provided below. Each
description is consistent with the ideas and vision the community has for future development.
These descriptions do not propose a change to existing development within each category;
instead, they suggest future direction and list qualities to be embodied by new and
redevelopment.
agricultural area
The Agricultural Areas are located in the east, south east,
and southern portions of Union County. The predominant
existing land uses in these areas include low density “rural”
residential uses, working forest lands and farms.
These areas are identified to protect prime agricultural lands
and active farming operations while reducing the potential
for conflict from incompatible uses. Potential incompatible
uses include medium- to high-intensity residential and
non-residential uses (i.e. dense subdivisions, apartments,
condos and commercial strips) that can be affected by the
byproducts of agricultural activities such as dust, odor,
noise or slow-moving farm vehicles. Agricultural areas are
also designated in order to acknowledge the presence of
and potential for continued forestry activities. In addition
to their contribution to the County’s economy, timberlands
provide other benefits including protecting water quality and
providing habitat for wildlife.
These areas are marked by noncontiguous low density
residential uses and agricultural homesteads separated
by farmed fields, pasture and forests. The average size of
residential parcels in this area is 8.7 acres, which is more than
three times the County average of 2.55 acres. These areas lie
outside of existing and future sewer service areas and rely on
septic systems for wastewater treatment. The road network is
sparse in these areas (generally less than four miles of roadway
per square mile) and many of the roads have narrow lanes
with little or no shoulder. The lack of utility and transportation
infrastructure, the established low density “rural residential”
communities and ongoing agricultural and forestry activities in
these areas contribute to their rural character. This character
can be enhanced by encouraging only low intensity uses.
single family residential
The Single Family Residential area is a transitional area
from the Agricultural Area to more developed land. It will
be comprised predominantly of neighborhoods of detached
housing units that are rural or suburban in character on
lots smaller than those in the Agricultural Area. Some
low-density commercial uses such as convenience stores,
pharmacies and other light commercial uses may be
deemed appropriate; however, larger commercial centers
like grocery stores and general merchandise outlets will be
encouraged to be developed near designated commercial
/ mixed-use nodes. This area provides a buffer between
the communities of Marvin, Wesley Chapel, Unionville
and Weddington that have demonstrated an interest in
preserving the rural character of their communities from
areas that have been identified for medium-density uses.
Current and planned utility services areas are adequate;
however, sewer service will remain insufficient for some
time. The density of development will vary based on
the presence of utilities, topography and environmental
features.
Comprehensive Plan Update : 23
neighborhood centers incorporate neighborhood-serving commercial uses such as grocery stores, retail establishments, restaurants and other services.
neighborhood center, anchored
by grocery store.
Townhomes provide a transition
between the retail area and
single-family neighborhoods.
single-family
neighborhoods provide
transition to existing
residential areas.
Apartments in close proximity
to retail encourage walking.
FIGURE 7: NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER CONCEPT
mixed residential
Mixed Residential areas are located in areas easily served by
utilities, such as those near town centers, existing and future
commercial centers and where they are compatible with
existing development. These areas are designed to include a
variety of housing types, including medium- and small-lot single
family homes, patio homes, cottage homes, townhomes,
apartments and condos. These areas will have opportunities
for slightly higher density development than Single Family
and Agricultural Areas. Future residential densities are meant
to vary from low to medium/high with higher density uses
clustered near identified neighborhood centers, community
centers and downtowns. Some commercial uses such as
grocery stores and neighborhood services are also appropriate
in mixed residential areas to serve residents. In addition, these
neighborhoods should have a connected street network, short
block lengths and adequate pedestrian and bicycle facilities.
rural center
Rural Centers function as small scale civic and commercial
centers for rural areas of the County. These Centers are
clusters of low-density, non-residential uses located at a
crossroads of two or more major or minor thoroughfares.
Appropriate uses include convenience stores, civic buildings,
gas stations and others. Rural Centers provide limited
commercial and community services while still maintaining
the rural nature of the community.
neighborhood center
Neighborhood Centers are located near concentrations of
existing or planned residences, in areas with access to major
thoroughfares and utilities and where not in competition with
existing centers. These Centers incorporate neighborhood-
serving commercial uses including grocery stores, retail
establishments, restaurants and services.
24 : UNION COUNTy
community centers are similar to neighborhood centers, but typically serve a large population and include not only retail and commercial uses, but a
mixture of residential spaces as well.
Industrial park has quick
access to Monroe Bypass
retail town center developed
around a community green
office park has quick
access to Bypass and
within walking distance
to Town Center.
Townhomes
provide a
transition to
single-family
neighborhood
FIGURE 8: COMMUNITy CENTER CONCEPT
Typical Neighborhood Centers range from 30,000 square
feet to 125,000 square feet of retail space, and have a
service area of one-to-two miles.10 Key characteristics
of a Neighborhood Center include an interconnected
street system that provides access to shopping, services,
housing and amenities, and a well-connected pedestrian
and bicycle network.
Mixed residential densities are appropriate, while higher
densities should be limited and concentrated around
retail and commercial uses. Apartments and townhomes
should be located in close proximity to shopping and
service destinations to provide more pedestrian and
bike-riding opportunities. Single-family homes can ease
transition from the neighborhood center to surrounding
development. Pocket parks and community greens
should be incorporated into new developments and
be connected by an internal network of sidewalks and
greenways. Figure 7 provides a conceptual illustration of a
Neighborhood Center.
community center
Community Centers have been identified in areas near
concentrations of existing or planned residences with utility
service that are adjacent to major thoroughfares and com-
patible with development plans. These Centers incorporate
community-serving commercial uses (retail shops, restau-
rants and services) including opportunities for office, civic,
institutional and mixed residential uses. Civic uses such as
libraries or recreation facilities are also appropriate in Commu-
nity Centers. Where the market permits, housing should be
integrated as part of a mix of uses in the Community Center
core. Parking requirements should be balanced to maximize
land efficiency. As with Neighborhood Centers, apartments
and townhomes should be located in close proximity to shop-
ping and services. All portions of the development should be
accessible by both a convenient road network and a system
of sidewalks and greenways. Likewise, a safe and attractive
pedestrian network should also connect community ameni-
ties such as pocket parks, pedestrian plazas and recreation
facilities. Single-family homes of varying densities, riparian
Comprehensive Plan Update : 25
emPloyment centers use include light industrial, warehouse, office, research, tech-flex and technology, while also incorporating supporting commercial
and residential uses such as restaurants, convenience stores and multi-family residences that serve employees.
Campus-like design
provides welcoming
environment for
employees and visitors.
well connected system of sidewalks and
open spaces prove amenity for employees
Trees and open
space buffer
developed area
from creek and
floodplain
Industrial
building
with potential
rail access.
FIGURE 9: EMPLOyMENT CENTER CONCEPT
buffers and open space should transition from the denser
core of the Community Center to adjacent developments.
small Community Centers
Compared to a Neighborhood Center, a Small Community
Center typically serves a larger population and includes
125,000 square feet to 400,000 of square feet of leasable
space. The typical trade area of a Community Center is three-
to-six miles. Small Community Centers should be anchored
by a commercial use such as a grocery store or retailer like
Harris Teeter or Target.
large Community Centers
A Large Community Center serves a greater population and
includes 400,000- 650,000 square feet of leasable space.
A Large Community Center typically has more than one
large retailer as anchor and should also include between
15 – 40 businesses that include general merchandise stores,
restaurants and convenience services. Figure 8 provides a
conceptual illustration of a Large Community Center.
toWn center / doWntoWn
Town Centers consist of existing downtowns or town
centers with a range of uses including commercial office,
civic, institutional and mixed residential products. These
areas have adopted plans that demonstrate a desire to
promote walkability. Town Centers have the highest street
densities in the County, indicating a connected street
network. They have adequate utilities and other municipal
services. It is anticipated that these Centers will continue to
function as primary hubs of activity in the County. Policies
that reinforce these Centers and prioritize infill development
incorporating a mixture of uses should be adopted. Town
Centers / Downtowns should be accessible by both a
convenient road network and a system of sidewalks, bicycle
facilities and greenways.
26 : UNION COUNTy
WINGATE
MARVIN
WAXHAW
MINERAL SPRINGS
WESLEY CHAPEL
WEDDINGTON
INDIAN TRAIL
LAKE PARK
STALLINGS HEMBY BRIDGE
MONROE
UNIONVILLE
FAIRVIEW
MARSHVILLE
74
74
601
200
200
522
207
218
205
200
601
601
84
16
Industrial and office uses
Logistics, industrial and agri-business related uses
Employment Corridor
Employment Center
MAP 3: EMPLOyMENT CENTERS AND CORRIDORS
emPloyment center
Employment Centers facilitate employment growth in key
areas that have access to transportation and adequate utility
infrastructure and existing viable employment and available
land suitable for employment. Uses encouraged near these
centers include, but are not limited to, light industrial, ware-
house, office, research, tech-flex and technology. Employment
Centers should incorporate a limited amount of supporting
commercial uses, such as restaurants and convenience retail-
ers to serve employees, as well as multifamily residential
uses including conveniently-located apartments. However,
these uses should only be situated where not in conflict with
existing employment land uses and should not be built in
such a way as to jeopardize the use of those lands most suit-
able for office or industrial development. Figure 9 provides a
conceptual illustration of an Employment Center.
emPloyment corridor
Employment Corridors have access to transportation
infrastructure such as railways, airports and major roads,
and have available land within a close proximity to similar
uses. Employment Corridors connect employment nodes
and other large job centers throughout the County and
neighboring counties. A variety of employment uses may be
appropriate along these corridors. Dependent on location and
adjacent facilities, development uses that may be appropriate
include distribution, logistics, aeronautics, industrial and
agri-business. Connectivity and roadway capacity should be
prioritized in these areas to encourage opportunities for job
growth. The following descriptions provide further detail on
the type of employment envisioned along specific corridors in
Union County:
distribution and
logistics-related uses.
Agriculture-related
uses including
processing and
distribution facilities.
office, institutional
and industrial uses.
Industrial, distribution
and logistics uses.
Comprehensive Plan Update : 27
us-74 is the most developed corridor
in Union County, with 52 percent of
the County’s jobs located within a half
mile of it.
Us-74
US-74, also known as Independence
Boulevard, Roosevelt Boulevard and
Marshville Boulevard at different points, is
the most developed transportation corridor
through the County. Fifty-two percent of all
jobs and 69 percent of existing retail jobs in
the County are located within a half mile of
the corridor.11 US-74 is currently characterized
by a mixture of non-residential uses including
business parks, commercial centers and a few
major distribution and industrial uses.
In the future, areas between the railroad and
the future Monroe Bypass that have access
to transportation and utility infrastructure
could accommodate a mix of uses. The
redevelopment of aging retail centers and
other underutilized parcels, as identified in
the US-74 Corridor Study Framework Plan,
should be encouraged. Residential uses
should be developed as a component of
mixed-use town centers. In some locations,
particularly underutilized parcels near the
railroad and along major arterials with
direct access to the future Monroe Bypass,
office, industrial, distribution and logistics
uses are appropriate. Office development,
including financial institutions, corporate and
technology headquarters and aeronautical
development could be accommodated in
the western part of the US-74 corridor, as
well as near employment nodes and town
centers identified on the Future Land Use
Map. Access management techniques,
the provision of pedestrian and bicycle
amenities, as well as landscaping and urban
design standards will assist in maintaining
and improving mobility and cultivating the
aesthetics of the corridor.
Us 601
The US 601 corridor is marked by three
distinct sections. The northern section, north
of the Monroe Bypass to the County line,
provides access to a number of growing
areas in Cabarrus County, and to I-485 via the
proposed bypass. However, much of the land
lacks sufficient access to sewer service, and
a portion of the segment is in the Lake Twitty
water supply watershed. Therefore, this area
is appropriate for distribution and logistics-
related uses. The middle section of US 601,
in the vicinity of the City of Monroe, has
access to utilities and could be appropriate
for a number of employment bearing uses
including office, institutional, industrial,
distribution and logistics. The southern
part of US 601, south of Monroe, does not
have access to sewer, but its location near
concentrations of farming operations makes it
a prime site for agricultural related enterprise,
including distribution and processing facilities.
In all sections of the corridor, commercial
uses are appropriate in the vicinity of the
nodes identified in the Future Land Use Map.
nC 75
The NC 75 corridor, also known as Waxhaw
Highway, runs parallel to the railroad and
has access to utilities in the vicinity of
Monroe and Waxhaw. A new sewer line will
increase availability for most of the property
near Mineral Springs. Areas between the
jurisdictions, along NC 75, could eventually be
served by sewer if gravity lines are extended
upstream from main lines along Ten Mile
Creek, or pump stations and force mains are
constructed. However, there are large tracts
of land adjacent to NC 75 and the rail that are
undeveloped. These areas have the potential
to accommodate a variety to employment
bearing uses. One site in particular, known
as Shannon Farms, has been identified by
the Duke Energy Site Readiness Program.
This site and others that have access to rail
and utilities could be candidates for industrial,
distribution or logistics uses.
us-74 is the most developed corridor
in Union County, with 52 percent of
the County’s jobs located within a half
mile of it.
Comprehensive Plan Update : 29
The following policies and strategies support the goals of the Future
Land Use Plan and the vision of the future for Union County. The
recommendations are organized by theme but are not prioritized.
Policies & strategies
The following set of recommendations support job growth in the County.
work
1.0 coordinate with and support
monroe-union county
economic development
efforts.
1.1 The Monroe-Union County Economic
Development Work Plan outlines a
number of business development
strategies to grow and enhance the
economy. The following list is a subset
of the strategies listed in the Work Plan
that the County can directly facilitate
and/or implement:
1.1.1 The Planning Department should work
with Monroe-Union County Economic
Development, town leaders and private
developers to identify and develop “high
potential” economic development sites
that have the following attributes:
• Transportation infrastructure (rails,
air, roads with capacity)
• Utility infrastructure (or areas easily
served by utilities)
• Available land suitable for
employment use
• Proximity to existing compatible
uses (i.e., existing industrial)
These sites include those identified on
the Future Land Use Plan such as the
Shannon Farms Site in Mineral Springs
and the Charlotte-Monroe Executive
Airport Industrial Development Area.
1.1.2 The Planning Department should work
with Monroe-Union County Economic
Development, town leaders and private
developers to identify and preserve
access to and visibility for large parcels
that could be developed as employment
centers along major transportation
corridors including US-74, I-485 and the
future Monroe Bypass.
1.1.3 Public Works should coordinate with
Monroe-Union County Economic
Development, town leaders and private
developers to prioritize water and
sewer infrastructure investments to
extend and/or upgrade key facilities that
support existing and potential economic
development projects including the
following:
• Mineral Springs sewer line
extension
• Small sewer package plant in
Fairview
• Stallings/Weddington water
pressure resolution
1.1.4 The Department of Community Services
should work with Monroe-Union County
Economic Development, town leaders
30 : UNION COUNTy
and the private sector to develop an Equine Center to
grow the equestrian tourism industry in Union County.
2.0 the county should work with monroe-
union county economic development,
south Piedmont community college and
union county Public schools to develop
an integrated workforce development
strategy that is responsive to the needs
of target industries:
2.1 Develop an apprenticeship program with local
industries.
2.2 Provide a tax credit for target industry employers to
offset training costs.
2.3 Develop a grant program to increase funding
for training programs that deliver workforce
development services to displaced or disadvantage
workforce populations.
3.0 the Planning department should partner
with the city of monroe and monroe-
union county economic development
to develop a master Plan for the vicinity
around the airport to accomplish the
following objectives:
3.1 Delineate the lands that are critical to preserve/
protect, in order to maintain existing and future
operations, and the long-term functionality of
the airport, as well as those that are crucial to the
development of potential employment sites;
3.2 Identify land that should not be converted to
residential development or other incompatible uses;
3.3 Determine the need for zoning amendments, such
as refinements to the Airport Overlay District, to
implement the Airport Master Plan.
4.0 the county should consider developing
an economic development grant
Program to increase employment
opportunities within the county.
4.1 Develop a grant program that results in the relocation
or expansion of a business that would not have
occurred except for the award of the Grant.
5.0 the county should support the monroe-
union county economic development
in land assemblage for economic
development purposes.
5.1 Develop a land assemblage tax credit program that
supports economic development priorities.
6.0 the county should work with monroe-
union county economic development,
town leaders and private developers to
create a strategy to encourage office
development, specifically that which
attracts build-to-suit tenants, in the areas
closest to i-485.
6.1 Identify and preserve acreage targeting build-to-suit
opportunities— those close to I-485 and parallel to
US-74;
6.2 Offer significant property tax incentives for companies
willing to develop their offices in targeted locations in
the County;
6.3 Consider a broker incentive fund that pays higher
brokerage fees for those bringing new office tenants
into the County;
6.4 Utilize enterprise zones to help offset development
costs and/or to enhance office attraction for specific
locations closer to I-485;
6.5 Determine whether a fund or grant program could
help companies and landlords offset costs of tenant
improvements;
6.6 Further tap into the state’s One North Carolina
Fund to attract technology firms into targeted areas
of the County—namely those close to regional
thoroughfares and in higher-income locations that
can compete with sites in Mecklenburg County.
Comprehensive Plan Update : 31
7.0 the county, in support of monroe-union
county economic development, should
investigate the possibility of usda
business and industry guaranteed loans
to promote economic development in
the county. loans may be used for the
following purposes:
7.1 Business and industrial acquisitions when the loan
will keep the business from closing, prevent the loss
of employment opportunities or provide expanded
job opportunities.
7.2 Business conversion, enlargement, repair,
modernization or development.
7.3 Purchase and development of land, easements,
rights-of-way, buildings or facilities.
7.4 Purchase of equipment, leasehold improvements,
machinery, supplies or inventory
For more information refer to:
http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/BCP_gar.html
8.0 the county, in support of monroe-union
county economic development, should
seek ways to coordinate with the state to
maximize potential incentives/tax breaks
via coupling state incentives (tax credits)
with local ones.
the key to unlocking economic ProsPerity in the County is matching industries that have the most potential
for growth (local specialization, adding jobs, and gaining market share) with what makes most sense given local resources
and community values. By focusing on the best opportunities for growth, this effort can maximize local opportunities within
each of the target sectors.
precision manufacturing retail / commercial agribusiness
education / medical logistics
32 : UNION COUNTy
farm
The following set of recommendations support the growth of the
agriculture-based economy in Union County.
1.0 Working with monroe-
union county economic
development and the
cooperative extension, the
county should develop and
implement an agriculture
economic development Plan.
the Plan should address:
1.1 Tools to expand voluntary land
conservation throughout the County.
• Voluntary Agriculture Districts
• Enhanced Voluntary Agriculture Districts
• Agriculture Conservation Easements
• Purchase of Development Rights
1.2 Policies and regulations to protect
farmland and promote compatible
development such as:
• Agriculture Protection Zoning
• Conservation subdivisions and cluster
zoning
• Mitigation techniques
1.3 Funding tools to promote
conservation of farmland such as
the Agricultural Development and
Farmland Preservation Trust Fund.
1.4 A cost-benefit analysis to understand
the fiscal impacts of the conversion of
agriculture (farming and forestry) land
to other uses.
1.5 Methods to raise awareness of
the importance of Union County’s
agriculture industry and promote
the appreciation of agriculture to the
non-farm public through strategies
such as farm field trips, school garden
partnerships, agritourism, etc.
1.6 Strategies to enhance business
development for agriculture
and forestry interests such as a
Countywide agriculture marketing
plan.
future land use Policies should work to protect farmland and promote development that is compatible with
the County’s agriculture and forestry industries.
Comprehensive Plan Update : 33
CASE STUDy
Wake county
agriculture economic
develoPment Plan
The Wake County Agriculture Economic
Development Plan was unanimously approved
by the Wake County Commissioners in August of
2013. The North Carolina Department of Agriculture
and Consumer Sciences also certified the Plan.
The Plan outlines a statement of need for Wake
County’s support of agriculture, an overview of Wake
County’s agricultural impact, challenges to Wake
County’s agricultural economic growth, opportunities
to enhance profitability of Wake County’s family
farms, action steps to ensure economic viability
of the County’s agricultural community, and a
schedule to implement the Plan and reevaluate
as Wake County changes. In addition, the Plan
provides recommendations that integrate economic
development with farmland protection, expand
County voluntary land preservation programs
through conservation partnerships, promote
understanding and appreciation of agriculture to the
non-farm public, enhance business development
programs to incorporate agriculture and forestry
interest and promote opportunities for profitability of
Wake County family farms and agribusinesses.
The plan in its entirety can accessed:
http://friendsofwakeswcd.files.wordpress.
com/2013/07/wake-county-agriculture-economic-
development-plan-final-draft-may-2013.pdf
1.7 Training and educational programs for existing and
future farmers.
2.0 the county should provide grant-writing
assistance to farmers wanting to apply
to the usda’s agriculture marketing
service’s farmers market and local foods
Promotion Program.
3.0 the county in partnership with ncdot
should identify and improve key farm-to-
market roads and bridges to allow safer
and easier transport for trucks traveling
to and from farms. for more information
on transportation strategies refer to the
move section of this report.
4.0 Working with nc broadband and the
department of commerce, the county
should focus on extending technology
infrastructure and network access to
more rural areas in order to help farmers
monitor crop or animal conditions,
operate machinery remotely and
coordinate overall efforts within their
farms.
5.0 Working with monroe-union county
economic development, the county
should investigate opportunities to pair
union’s agricultural industry with the
north carolina research campus in
kannapolis.

Supporting W
a
k
e

C
o
u
n
t
y
’
s

f
a
r
m

c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
,

a
g
r
i
b
u
s
i
n
e
s
s
es , and local food pr
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n

for today an
d

f
u
t
u
r
e

g
e
n
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s

Endors ed by the Wa
k
e

C
o
u
n
t
y

B
o
a
r
d

o
f

C
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
e
r
s

on
________, 20
1
3

Photos of Wak
e

C
o
u
n
t
y

a
g
r
i
c
u
l
t
u
r
e

(
c
l
o
c
k
w
i
s
e

from upper le
f
t
)
:

l
o
c
a
l

p
r
o
d
u
c
e

f
r
o
m

H
i
l
l
t
o
p

F
a
r
m
s
,

g
r
a
i
n

f
a
r
m

i
n eastern Wa
k
e

C
o
u
n
t
y
,

equine operat
i
o
n

n
e
a
r

W
i
l
l
o
w

S
p
r
i
n
g
,

tobacco tran
s
p
l
a
n
t
s
in greenhous
e

i
n

Fuquay Varin
a
, installation o
f

b
e
s
t

m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

p
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s

on farm near
W
a
k
e

F
o
r
e
s
t
,

t
o
b
a
c
c
o

f
a
r
m
near Rolesville
,

f
a
r
m
e
r

sprigging coa
s
t
a
l

B
e
r
m
u
d
a
g
r
a
s
s
in southern
W
a
k
e

C
o
u
n
t
y
.

34 : UNION COUNTy
The following set of recommendations support the development of more
housing choices in the County.
live
1.0 in order to accommodate a
mix of residential housing
types (e.g. small lot,
patio homes, townhomes,
apartments) to serve a
growing and increasingly
diverse population, the
county should consider
development regulations
that permit these uses in
areas identified as mixed
residential on the future
land use Plan.
2.0 in order to provide affordable
housing options for a variety
of age and income groups,
the county should amend
development regulations to
permit accessory dwelling
units in areas identified as
mixed residential on the
future land use Plan.
3.0 the county should work
with town leaders and
private developers to
create development design
guidelines that emphasize
walkability, connectivity,
park/greenway creation, etc.,
to encourage development
that provides the desired
lifestyle.
a mix of housing tyPes is appropriate near nodes and in the Mixed Residential areas designated on the Future
Land Use Plan.
Comprehensive Plan Update : 35
The following set of recommendations support retail development
in the County.
shop
1.0 support retail development in
areas identified in the future
land use Plan.
For example, the intersection of NC
16 (Providence Road) and Rea Road
Extension in Weddington in particular
represents a strong potential future
location for a town center-type project
that could accommodate major
retailers.
The County should proactively work
to identify a potential development
strategy for vacant properties in the
area and ensure development that takes
advantage of retail demand potential,
and also furthers a sense of place in
the market.
2.0 the county, in partnership
with town and city leaders,
should develop a county-wide
retail market study.
3.0 the county should work
with town and city leaders
to identify key development
criteria for retail centers
and utilize those criteria in
rezoning decisions.
3.1 Criteria could include proximity to
designated centers on Future Land
Use Map, current and forecasted
traffic volumes, locations along minor
or major thoroughfares (depending
on center size), access to multiple
streets (collectors and a thoroughfare),
distance to other centers, etc.
Walkable, toWn center-tyPe retail development is in demand and under-represented in Union County
36 : UNION COUNTy
4.0 the county should regularly monitor the
supply of retail land available relative to
demand potential. every five years, the
county should conduct an assessment
of total retail space relative to demand
potential and inform decision-makers
of potential retail oversupply and/or
shortcomings.
5.0 Working with monroe-union county
economic development, the county
should create incentives (potential pool
of funds for low-cost loans), or penalties
(if properties become blighted or remain
vacant for too long), to encourage retail
owners to maintain/evolve aging retail
properties.
Other cities and counties have utilized aging retail
centers as public schools, colleges, libraries, or other
government facilities as opposed to building new
construction projects nearby.
6.0 the county, in partnership with monroe-
union county economic development,
should investigate the possibility of using
matching funds for reuse/renovation
of aging retail spaces for potential
technology uses via the state’s one north
carolina fund.
CASE STUDy
one north carolina fund:
The One North Carolina Fund helps recruit and expand
quality jobs in high value-added, knowledge-driven
industries. It also provides financial assistance to those
businesses or industries deemed vital to a healthy
economy that are making significant efforts to expand in
North Carolina. The fund currently consists of nonrecurring
appropriations made by the North Carolina General
Assembly for companies seeking to undertake new
expansion or locate new operations in the state. The fund
is designed to increase the state’s competitiveness, so the
project location or expansion must be in competition with
another location outside the state.
Companies can receive money for:
• Installation or purchase of equipment.
• Structural repairs, improvements, or renovations of
existing buildings to be used for expansion.
• Construction of or improvements to new or existing
water, sewer, gas or electric utility distribution lines,
or equipment for existing buildings.
For more information:
http://www.thrivenc.com/incentives/financial/
discretionary-programs/one-north-carolina-fund
Comprehensive Plan Update : 37
roadWay
The primary set of roadway recommendations consists of a set of cross-sections linked
to the Union County 2040 Roadway Improvements Plan and the Roadway Laneage map.
These maps indicate the location of improvements based on citizen and steering committee
feedback, as well as technical analyses of future travel demands. Improvements as shown
can accommodate site-specific constraints, but should be generally adhered to when
negotiating rights-of-way requirements with future development. A higher level of detail is
included in the Union County MTP, including recommended cross-sections, collector street
improvements, and hot-spot safety improvements, as well as best practices, design and
policy recommendations. The following table highlights recommendations for key roadways in
the County.
move
Please note a companion
document, the Union
County Multimodal
Transportation Plan (MTP),
has been developed to
provide a higher level of detail
related to transportation.
The following set of recommendations support transportation
improvements in the County. The recommendations are organized by
mode of transportation: roadways, pedestrians and bicyclists and public
transportation. Detailed recommendations are included in the Union
County Multimodal Transportation Plan (MTP), which acts as a companion
document to the Comprehensive Plan.
ProJeCT/PolICy desCrIPTIon
Us 74
(Roosevelt Boulevard)
Recommended for improvement through access
management and operational improvement strategies as well
as the provision of a sidepath. Sidewalks are recommended
along US 74 within the city limits of Monroe. A small portion
of this roadway is programmed for access management
improvement through TIP Number R-3329, the Monroe
Bypass.
nC 16
(Providence Road)
Recommended for improvement through both access
management and operational improvement strategies and the
provision of a sidepath along the corridor.
waxhaw-Indian Trail road Recommended for widening from a 2-lane section to a 4-lane
section. Other improvements to this corridor include the
implementation of 5’ shoulders and sidewalks on both sides.
nC 75
(Waxhaw Highway)
Proposed for improvement by widening between from a
2-lane to 4-lane section and providing a sidepath along the
corridor.
nC 84
(Weddington Road)
Proposed for widening from a 2-lane to 4-lane section with
a sidepath from Rea Road Extension (4-lane section on new
location) to West Franklin Street in Monroe
NC 200 south
(Lancaster Highway)
Recommended for improvement through access
management and operational improvement strategies and
5’ shoulders as well as streetscape improvements including
sidewalks along the portions of the roadway in Monroe.
38 : UNION COUNTy
ProJeCT/PolICy desCrIPTIon
nC 207
(South Hayne Street/Wolf Pond Road)
Proposed for improvement through access management and operational
improvement strategies. The portion within Monroe (S. Hayne Street) should
be improved with sidewalks, while a sidepath is recommended along the
Wolf Pond Road section.
north Us 601
(Concord Highway)
Proposed for improvement through access management and operational
improvement strategies and the provision of 3’ shoulders following the
Sikes Mill Road split. From US 74 to the Sikes Mill Road split, the roadway
is recommended for widening from a 2-lane section to a 4-lane section with
sidewalks and 3’ shoulders.
nC 200 north
(Morgan Mill Road)
Proposed for improvement through access management and operation
improvement strategies and the provision of 5’ shoulders.
nC 218
(Fairview Road)
With the exception of the easternmost section of roadway (east of NC 205),
this corridor is proposed for improvement through access management and
operation
stallings road/ Potter road The portion north of US 74 is proposed for a widening from a 2-lane
section to 4-lane section, while the section south of US 74 is proposed for
improvement through access management and operation improvement
strategies. The entire corridor is proposed to include 5’ sidewalks and 5’
shoulders.
weddington-matthews road Proposed for improvement through access management and operation
improvement strategies as well as the provision of sidewalks and buffered
bicycle lanes.
new Town road This route is recommended for widening from a 2-lane to 4-lane section
with a sidepath.
old Charlotte highway Proposed for widening from a 2-lane to a 4-lane section with a sidepath
from the Mecklenburg County border until Rocky River Road and then wide
outside lanes and sidewalks closer to Monroe.
Comprehensive Plan Update : 39
The following maps, from the MTP, illustrate recommended improvements and future laneage for roads in Union County.
MAP 4: UNION COUNTy 2040 ROADWAy IMPROVEMENTS MAP
MAP 5: UNION COUNTy 2040 ROADWAy LANEAGE MAP
40 : UNION COUNTy
bicycle and Pedestrian
Recommendations for bicycle and pedestrian modes of travel fall into four categories: off-road, on-road, policy/program, and
short connections, which are generally centered around the activity centers identified in the and use plan (comprehensive
plan) as well as through bicycle and pedestrian crash location studies. The following maps illustrate the location and type of
improvements that are recommended to facilitate active modes of travel. Additional priority bicycle and pedestrian action
items, including recommendations regarding complete streets, outreach and educational programs; Carolina Thread Trail
priorities; and policies and ordinances are referenced in the Action Plan and Initiatives section of the Union County Multimodal
Transportation Plan (MTP).
MAP 6: UNION COUNTy OFF-ROAD IMPROVEMENTS MAP
Comprehensive Plan Update : 41
MAP 7: UNION COUNTy ON-ROAD PEDESTRIAN RECOMMENDATIONS MAP
MAP 8: UNION COUNTy ON-ROAD BICyCLE RECOMMENDATIONS MAP
42 : UNION COUNTy
transit
The current role of public transportation is, for the vast majority of people in Union County, relatively small. Only one regular,
fixed-route service enters into the County, connecting Charlotte with the northwest side of Monroe. However, the future
role of transit may become much larger, because of the dominance of the single US 74/Old Monroe Road corridor, the high
growth rate of many parts of the County, and the strong travel patterns linking Union and Mecklenburg Counties. The following
recommendations provide a modest set of improvements given the long-term horizon of this Plan, but are considered to be
feasible considering the current starting point of public transportation in the County. Recommendations are separated into
two phases. Phase I provides short-term recommendations addressing the first ten years after plan adoption, while Phase II
offers long-term recommendations occuring thereafter. Descriptions and maps of the Phases are included below. Additional
detail is included in the Union County Multimodal Transportation Plan (MTP).
Phase i: short-term transit recommendations
The initial impetus for public transportation is the US 74 corridor, and enhancing the 74X express route with improved
headways and weekend services are logical next steps. Also within a short-term horizon, the route should be extended into
downtown Monroe, allowing for a longer route to the east in the second phase of development.
MAP 9: PHASE I TRANSIT RECOMMENDATIONS
Comprehensive Plan Update : 43
MAP 10: PHASE II TRANSIT RECOMMENDATIONS
Phase ii: long-term transit recommendations
As development continues to increase in the County, particularly in the high-activity land use nodes, additional services should
be considered. A circulator system in Monroe and the creation of a downtown transit hub are recommended, preferably with
30-minute headways on the circulator system. The extension of the US 74X route at least as far east as Wingate and the
creation of a fourth park and ride location are also recommended. The other area of moderate density is Waxhaw, with the
Providence Road corridor extending out of Charlotte. Ultimately, this second phase of transit improvements would continue
the 61X express route into Waxhaw on NC 16, develop a suitable station/park-and-ride facility in town, and establish either
route-deviated service or a companion circulator service to cover the areas of Waxhaw where lower rates of car ownership
might provide a market for transit services.
44 : UNION COUNTy
The following set of recommendations support future water and
wastewater service in the County.
flow
1.0 ensure adequate water
service in the county.
1.1 Public Works should continue to work
toward developing a long-term source
of raw water through coordination
with the City of Norwood and the
corresponding development of
treatment capacity.
2.0 improve water quality.
2.1 Public Works, in partnership with the
Health Department, should prioritize
the provision of water service in
areas of poor ground water quality
(especially where elevated arsenic
levels have been documented).
2.2 The Health Department should seek
funding sources such as grants to
provide filtration systems to low-
income families in areas where
elevated arsenic levels have been
documented.
3.0 ensure adequate wastewater
service in the county.
3.1 During the next update the Union
County Water and Sewer Master Plan,
Public Works should take into account
the Future Land Use Plan developed
during this process.
Lake Lee
Crooked
Creek
Lake
Twitty
Six
Mile
Twelve
Mile
Camp
Branch
Eastside
Richardson
Creek
City of
Monroe
Iª
Iª
Iª
Iª?ı
?ı
KÌ
KÌ
KÌ
KÌ
A÷
A÷
A÷
A÷
A÷
Aù
Aù
?©
?©
?£
?£
A¾
Aø
Aø
Ah
%&h(
KË
!"b$
Iª
?í
%&h(
%&h(
?í
Ix
L A NES C R E E K
BLYTH
E
C
R
E
E
K
R A YS FO RK
BAR K E R S B RANCH
F LA G BRANC H
CLEARCREEK
P
O
L
E
CAT
CREEK
GLENBRANCH
M O L L Y BRAN CH
W A L L A C E B R A N CH
CAMP BRANCH
LYNCHESRIVER
G O O SECREEK
DAVISB R A N C H
CAROLINACREEK
V
A
RDALAKE
D
R
Y
F
O
R
K
TARKILLBRANCH
BEAVERDA M CREEK
C
U
L
V
ER
T
B
R
A
N
C
H
GRASS Y C REEK
UN D E R W O O D C R E E K
LITTLETWELVEMILECRE
E
K
LITTLE
B
R
O
W
N
C
RE
E
K
B
U
F
F
A
L
O
C
R
E
E
K
BO O G ER BRA NCH
HAW
BRANCH
R IC HARDSON CREEK
A U S T IN BRANCH
L
IT
T
LE
MILL
C
REEK
LACEYBRANCH
GO
L
D
B
R
A
N
CH
M IS S O U RI B R ANCH
CEDARBRANC
H
BRO W NCREEK
M
IL
L
C
R
E
E
K
MCBRID
E
BRANCH
COWH
O
R
N
B
R
A
N
C
H
MACHIN
E
B
R
A
N
C
H
C RISCOBRANCH
ROBINBRANC H
KEE
NERBRAN
CH
TW E LV E MILE C R E E K
WICKERBR
A
N
C
H
PADDLEBRANCH
D
A
V
I
S
MIN
E
C
R
EEK
G R A S S YBRANC H
COWP E N S B R A N C H
B E C K Y B RANCH
GIBBS BRANCH
SILVERRUN
H O R S EPEN BRANC H
MAPLE
S
P
R
IN
G
S
B
R
A
N
C
H
CHIN
K
A
PIN
C
REEK
MCNEELY BR
A
N
C
H
R
A
C
O
ON
B
R
A
N
C
H
C A N E C RE E K
E AS T F O R K T W E L V E M IL E C R EEK
WATER BRANCH
S
T
U
M
P
LIC
K
B
R
A
N
C
H
R O C K Y RIVE
R
J A C K S B RANCHM
A
R
VIN B
R
A
N
C
H
BEARSKINCREEK
REEDYB R A N C H
W A X H A W C R E E K
HANE Y B R A N C H
WATSONCREEK
LONGBRANCH
WESTFORK T W ELVE MIL E C R E E K
LICK
B
RA
N
C
H
DEADPINECREEK
NORTHFORK CROOKED C R E E K
STEWART BRANCH(SOUTHFORKCANECREE K )
G
U
MLOGBRANCH
C A N E C R E E K (N O R T H F O R K C A N E C R E E K)
S MITHBRANCH
LIC K B R ANCH
MILLCREE K
WAXHAW CR E E K
B E A V E R DAM CREEK
G O L D B R A N C H
Yadkin / Pee Dee Basin
Catawba / Santee Basin
C A B A R R U SCABARRUS
C O U N T YCOUNTY
A N S O NANSON
C O U N T YCOUNTY
M E C K L E N B U R GMECKLENBURG
C O U N T YCOUNTY
S T A N L YSTANLY
C O U N T YCOUNTY
Crooked Creek WWTP
Twelve
Mile
WWTP
Grassy
Branch
WWTP
Monroe
WWTP
Tallwood
Olde
Sycamore
C H E S T E RCHESTER
C O U N T YCOUNTY C H E S T E R F I E L DCHESTERFIELD
C O U N T YCOUNTY
L A N C A S T E RLANCASTER
C O U N T YCOUNTY
Y O R KYORK
C O U N T YCOUNTY
Date: 5/29/2014 | LDI #: 1013085
Data Source: NCONEMAP, Esri, Union County U NIO N C OU NTY, NC
Sewer Service Areas
Camp Branch
City of Monroe
Crooked Creek
Eastside
Lake Lee
Lake Twitty
Olde Sycamore
Richardson Creek
Six Mile
Tallwood
Twelve Mile
Other Features
River Basin
Subwatershed
!WWTP
0 2 41Miles
Disclaimer: This map was created with the best available data, however, it is provided "as is"
without warranty of any representation of accuracy, timeliness, reliability or completeness. This map does not represent a legal survey of the land and is for graphical purposes only. Use of this Data for any purpose should be with acknowlegement of the limitations of the Data, including the fact that the Data is dynamic and is in a constant state of maintenance.
¯
IN ASSOCIATION WITH STANTEC AND NOELL CONSULTING GROUP
B A S I N S A N D S E W E R S E R V I C E A R E A S
2 0 25 T R A N S P O RTATI O N P L A N / C O M P R E H E N S I V E P L A N U P D AT E
MAP 11: BASINS AND SEWER SERVICE AREAS IN UNION COUNTy
sewer service Areas
Camp Branch
City of Monroe
Crooked Creek
Eastside
Lake Lee
Lake Twitty
Olde Sycamore
Richardson Creek
Six Mile
Tallwood
Twelve Mile
other features
River Basin
Subwatershed
WWTP
CATAWBA /
SANTEE BASIN
yADKIN /
PEE DEE BASIN
Comprehensive Plan Update : 45
CASE STUDy
forecasting future utility
demand: the Wsacc groWth model
The Water & Sewer Authority of Cabarrus County (WSACC) devel-
oped the Fy 2012-2013 Master Plan (Master Plan) to guide future
investment in regionally significant water and sewer infrastructure.
Forecasted water and sewer demand for the WSACC service area
was developed based on an analysis of existing conditions and the
development of a growth forecasting model. The Master Plan used
a custom parcel level, probability based model to forecast future
utility demand. The WSACC Growth Model was developed with
Geographic Information System (GIS) datasets and software (ArcGIS
and CommunityViz). The Model created disaggregate dwelling unit
and employment forecasts by determining the probable distribution
of future housing units and employment locations based on currently
adopted land use policy regulations and suitability of available land.
Land use specific suitability analyses were conducted that included
economic and environmental variables that contribute to the likeli-
hood of development.
Prior to developing the Model it was essential to determine current
usage trends. An existing land use inventory was created based on
tax parcel use codes and other datasets (i.e. a protected land inven-
tory). Over 50,000 water usage records were collected from the
member jurisdictional retail operators. These records were standard-
ized and geocoded (mapped) based on address. From these two
datasets average usage rates were derived for generalized existing
land use classes. This effort marked the first time a comprehensive
accounting of water usage had been done. It was used to determine
the adequacy of a long term water supply for the region and to vali-
date existing usage trends.
The methodology employed to produce the WSACC Master Plan
represents an innovative approach to utility demand forecasting
that resulted in a more accurate estimate of water and wastewater
demand than traditional methods. The benefit lies in the reliance on
a detailed analysis of existing usage, land availability, land suitability
and adopted land use policy. This type of approach could be utilized
to inform the next water and sewer master plan update for Union
County. A growth forecasting model was developed during the Union
County Comprehensive Plan Update in order to test alternative
growth scenarios. With slight modifications and this model could be
used to produce parcel level utility demand forecasts in order to bet-
ter understand future growth and potential impacts on water supply
and wastewater infrastructure.
• The Planning Department should
encourage Public Works to use the
land use model developed through
this process to refine demand
forecasts used to determine future
utility needs in conjunction with
the update to the Water and Sewer
Master Plan.
3.2 Public Works should prioritize utility
infrastructure investments to support
development and redevelopment
consistent with the Future Land Use
Plan.
3.3 Public Works, in support of
Monroe-Union County Economic
Development, should prioritize
investments to support existing
and future economic development
projects including the following:
• Mineral Springs sewer line
extension
• Small sewer package plant in
Fairview
4.0 address environmental and
health issues associated
with failing septic tanks.
4.1 The Health Department should
develop a GIS inventory of septic
tanks in the County.
4.2 Working with the Health Department,
Public Works should prioritize
the provision of sewer service to
urbanized areas with failing septic
tanks.
4.3 Together, the Health Department and
Public Works should investigate the
feasibility of a Septic Tank Outreach
Program which would include
funding for educational and training
materials related to the operation
and maintenance of septic systems.
46 : UNION COUNTy
IsC > 10%
Streams are considered
“Impacted”
IsC > 25%
Streams are considered
“degraded”
The following set of recommendations support the conservation of
natural resources and rural character of the County.
conserve
1.0 Protect and restore water
quality.
1.1 The County should build on current
efforts to address non-point source
pollution and stormwater runoff by
encouraging Low Impact Development
Techniques (LID) in subwatersheds
with endangered species (i.e. Six-
mile Creek, Goose Creek, Waxhaw
Creek), subwatersheds with impaired
waters due to stormwater runoff
(Crooked Creek), and in water supply
watersheds.
• Urban/suburban LID techniques
should be used near Town Centers
and Neighborhood and Community
Centers and in the Mixed Residential
Area (see Future Land Use Plan)
and include clustering development,
managing stormwater close to the
source, disconnecting impervious
surfaces, and including innovative
stormwater design details in new
development such as raingardens,
infiltration trenches, pervious
pavements and green roofs.
• Rural LID techniques should be used
near Rural Centers and in the Single
Family Residential and Agricultural
Areas and include minimizing
disturbed areas through the use of
cluster/conservation developments
and using bioretention swales and
pervious pavements to encourage
infiltration and groundwater
recharge.
1.2 Monitor impervious surface coverage
(ISC) by subwatershed and determine
steps (policy changes and incentives)
necessary to keep ISC below key
thresholds.
1.3 Work with land owners to identify
opportunities to protect and improve
riparian habitat and wetlands in
headwaters of streams that are
impaired due to stormwater runoff
and sedimentation from construction
activities (Crooked Creek, Goose Creek,
and Twelve Mile Creek). Opportunities
include preserving vegetated riparian
buffers during development and
restoring riparian vegetation along
streams on cleared lands.
1.4 Initiate educational activities that
increase awareness related to water
quality issues in the county.
• Develop an incentive program
for encouraging homeowners to
install rain barrels and rain gardens
throughout the county. (Coordinate
with Extension Master Gardeners of
Union County to expand on current
efforts)
• Develop a stream monitoring
program with citizens and high
schools.
2.0 Protect critical open space
2.1 The County should coordinate with
Catawba Lands Conservancy to
identify priority open spaces and
promote private land conservation
through conservation easements and
set asides with development.
2.3 The County should partner with
local governments, non-profits and
private entities to construct regional
greenways. Priority should be given to
lands that provide multiple benefits,
for instance hardwood forests
FIGURE 12: KEy IMPERVIOUS SURFACE
COVERAGE (ISC) THRESHOLDS FOR
WATER QUALITy
Comprehensive Plan Update : 47
CASE STUDy
mecklenburg
county
nature
Preserves
In addition to active
recreational facilities the
Mecklenburg County
Parks and Recreation
department has
worked with local land
trusts to acquire and
manage 7,000 acres
of nature preserves.
The department is
fulfilling goals from the
Mecklenburg County
Vision 2015 plan by
protecting native plant
and animal species
and natural community
types that are unique
to the county. Active
management and
restoration activities have
helped restore Piedmont
Prairie ecosystems at a
number of parks. Many
of the preserves offer
passive recreational
opportunities such
as hiking, biking and
guided tours. For more
information visit:
http://charmeck.
org/mecklenburg/
county/ParkandRec/
StewardshipServices/
NaturalResources/Pages/
default.aspx
adjacent to Twelve Mile Creek provide
buffers that maintain water quality for
rare mussels and fish and could be
key linkages in the Carolina
Thread Trail.
2.4 The County should conduct a study
of strategic green infrastructure to
identify key natural features including
riparian habitat, viewsheds, areas of
exceptional rural character, habitat
hubs, and wildlife corridors. Particular
attention should be given to areas on
the urban/rural fringe that are likely to
experience development pressure in
the short (3-5 years) and medium term
(5-10 years). The result of the study
should build on the findings of the
Natural Heritage Inventory12 and result
in a spatial dataset and/or guidance
document that ranks habitats or
natural features in terms of priority.
The study should accomplish the
following:
• Identify existing stands of mature
forest that function as potential
habitat hubs
• Identify key riparian habitat that
should be protected in tandem with
development
• Develop/refine strategies to
preserve natural features in tandem
with development and infrastructure
expansion.
• Provide information that will assist
in the refinement of the cluster
development ordinance to ensure
that high quality, connected open
space is preserved.
2.5 The Planning Department should
coordinate with Parks and Recreation
departments and other public
and non-profit entities to identify
opportunities for land acquisition
that preserves key open space and
provides opportunities for passive
recreation (i.e. nature preserves).
2.6 The County should consider
developing a dedicated public funding
source for protecting critical open
space lands.
2.7 The County should protect open
space that is part of and adjacent to
natural heritage areas and natural
communities of national and state
significance.
2.8 The County should coordinate with
NCDOT to document occurrences
of rare species and high quality
remnant habitats in rights of way.
Develop GIS inventory for use in
management activities.
2.9 The County should coordinate with
NCDOT to develop rights of way
management plans for locations
with rare species and high quality
remnant habitats. Conservation
sites could provide mitigation
opportunities. Candidate species
include the Georgia Aster (a Federal
Candidate Species, 17 of 55 current
populations in NC are in Union
County on roadsides) and the
Schweinitz’s sunflower (existing
populations located on roadsides and
at Cane Creek park).
48 : UNION COUNTy
2.10 The Planning Department and the
Parks and Recreation Department
should partner together to conduct
a study of the Rocky River valley
to identify tourism development
opportunities and key natural areas
that need to be preserved. The study
should:
• Determine feasibility and preliminary
location of canoe launches, hiking
trails and other support facilities
adjacent to the proposed Rocky
River blueway and the Carolina
Thread Trail.
• Identify infrastructure needs of and
threats to agricultural operations in
the area.
• Identify habitat critical to the health
of resident populations of the
Septima’s Clubtail dragonfly (Rocky
River macrosite), a federal species
of concern.
3.0 the county should
promote context sensitive
development in suburban and
rural areas.
3.1 The County should encourage
residential developments to be
designed with respect to the natural
and historic features (i.e. historic
structures, vistas, topography, soils,
forested areas, unique habitats,
hedgerows, and meadows).
3.2 The County should work with NCDOT
to preserve viewsheds along existing
public roadways through planted
buffers or maintaining existing tree
cover along road frontage.
3.4 The County should incorporate
available conservation data in the
development review process as
specified in the North Carolina Wildlife
Green Growth Toolbox.
• Require the identification of unique
natural features on preliminary
development plans. These include
rock outcrops, mature forests,
wetlands, streams, non-regulated
hydrologic features (i.e. ephemeral
streams, seeps and vernal pools) on
preliminary development plans.
• Encourage vegetative buffers
near these features and a context
sensitive site plan
3.5 Encourage the use of bridges and
multi-cell or bottomless culverts to
facilitate wildlife movement.
3.6 Discourage dense residential
development in the vicinity of fire
dependent habitats (i.e. Mineral
Springs Barrens, Cane Creek Park,
and Andrew Jackson Ridges) to allow
prescribed burns to take place with
minimal impacts to area residents.
4.0 the county should develop
an awareness campaign
to educate developers and
homeowners of the additional
stream buffer requirements
in the 12-mile creek future
sewer service area that will
be required as a caveat for
increasing treatment capacity
and service area expansion.
georgia holly
Three of only six populations of
Georgia Holly in the state are located
in Union County. Protecting key
forested areas will be critical to the
future health of this species.
Piedmont aster
Creeksides and rocky slopes are
habitat for Piedmont Aster, a Federal
Candidate Species.
carolina heelsPlitter
Carolina Heelsplitter (Federally
Endangered) and Carolina Creekshell
(Federal Species of Concern) mussels
are endangered due to water quality
degradation from development.
Comprehensive Plan Update : 49
Study Area
Protected Lands
Significant Natural Heritage Areas
Priority Working Forests
Water Supply Watersheds
Flood Plain
River Basins
Subwatershed
Federally Listed Aquatic Species
Impaired Waters
MAP 1: NATURAL RESOURCES IN UNION COUNTy
50 : UNION COUNTy
loW imPact develoPment Practices such as cluster subdivisions can help maintain the rural character of Union County. They have the added benefit
of reducing up front development costs and environmental impacts such as sedimentation and stormwater pollution.
Increased open space adjacent to lots
can increase the value of homes
riparian area preserved
for habitat and amenities
such as trails or a future
greenway
Cost savings on infrastructure for roads
and stormwater retention can save
25-30% over conventional subdivsions
Tree cover
maintained
adjacent
to roads to
maintain rural
character
reduced
development
footprint and
impervious
surfaces can
reduce runoff and
help preserve
water quality and
infiltration
FIGURE 13: CLUSTER SUBDIVISIONS
Comprehensive Plan Update : 51
health
The following set of recommendations support a healthy Union County.
1.0 improve water quality.
1.1 Public Works, in partnership with the
Health Department, should prioritize
the provision of water service in
areas of poor ground water quality
(especially where elevated arsenic
levels have been documented).
1.2 The Health Department should seek
funding sources such as grants to
provide filtration systems to low-
income families in areas where
elevated arsenic levels have been
documented.
2.0 address environmental and
health issues associated with
failing septic tanks.
2.1 The Health Department should
develop a GIS inventory of septic
tanks in the County.
2.2 The Health Department should
develop a GIS inventory of failing
septic tanks in the County.
2.3 Working with the Health Department,
Public Works should prioritize
the provision of sewer service to
urbanized areas with failing septic
tanks.
2.4 Together, the Health Department and
Public Works should investigate the
feasibility of a Septic Tank Outreach
Program which would include
funding for educational and training
materials related to the operation and
maintenance of septic systems
3.0 Parks and recreation should
develop joint use agreements
with schools in union
county to allow access to
school recreation spaces and
facilities to provide more
opportunities for convenient,
low-cost options for physical
activity.
Refer to the Promoting Physical
Activity through Joint Use Agreements
Guide for North Carolina Schools and
Communities for additional guidance
and recommendations.
http://www.nchealthyschools.org/docs/
home/use-agreements.pdf
4.0 Promote the development of
on and off-road pedestrian
and bicycle facilities as
outlined in the Multimodal
Transportation Plan.
5.0 Work with transportation
providers to increase access
to healthcare, especially in
the rural areas of the county.
52 : UNION COUNTy
cooperate
The following set of recommendations support Intergovernmental
Coordination.
1.0 establish an implementation
Program.
1.1 The County should devise a
program that oversees and tracks
Comprehensive Plan implementation
activities.
1.2 The program should involve a
Comprehensive Plan Implementation
Team of staff, key stakeholders and
engaged citizens responsible for 1)
coordination and prioritization of plan
efforts, 2) identification of funding
opportunities, and 3) project outreach,
education and advocacy efforts. This
team should meet regularly to monitor
progress and reevaluate goals.
2.0 conduct area planning as
needed to facilitate the
implementation of the
comprehensive Plan.
2.1 In keeping with the Comprehensive
Plan, area plans that provide an
opportunity to further study the
implications of adopted policies
should be initiated by the Planning
Department. The Planning Department
should identify and prioritize areas to
be studied, which may include areas
that are subject to change due to
infrastructure investments (roads and
utilities), particularly where such areas
span two or more jurisdictions and
achieving appropriate development
requires the coordination of the
affected jurisdictions. Potential area
plans include:
• Airport Small Area Plan
• Sutton Park Area Plan
3.0 review all pertinent land
development regulations
to determine how well they
support the intent of the
future land use Plan.
3.1 The Planning Department should
conduct a review of the draft
Unified Development Ordinance
(UDO) to identify and address any
inconsistencies with the Future Land
Use Plan.
3.2 The Official Zoning Map should be
reviewed to identify and address any
inconsistencies between the Future
Land Use Plan and existing zoning
districts.
4.0 to improve coordination and
communication between
the jurisdictions, the
county should partner with
municipal leaders to establish
a consortium of appointed
and elected officials to
meet regularly and discuss
county-wide issues and
opportunities and develop
common priorities related to
shared interests and related
initiatives.
ComPrehensIve PlAn Appendix
Comprehensive Plan Update : 1
Appendix A
Plan revieW
document name adoPtion date
Western Union County Local Area Regional Transportation Plan November 2009
Union County Multimodal Transportation Plan February 2012
Union County Land Use Ordinance May 7, 2001
Monroe-Union County EDC Work Plan July 2013 - June 2015
Carolina Thread Trail Master Plan for Union County and Participating Municipalities September 2011
2035 Long Range Transportation Plan March 24,2010
Union County - 2006 - Update Executive Summary Parks & Recreation Comprehensive
Master Plan Update
December 2006
The Town of Wingate Land Use Ordinance December 18, 2001 amendment June 17, 2008
Strategic Plan for Economic Development: Town of Marshville , Town of Wingate October, 2008
Wingate, NC - Downtown Market Analysis & Strategic Development Plan May 2013
Village of Wesley Chapel Land Use Plan December 8, 2003
Town of Waxhaw Park, Recreation, and Cultural Resources Master Plan August 28, 2012
Waxhaw North Carolina Comprehensive Pedestrian Plan September 2012
Downtown Waxhaw Vision Plan November 2, 2012
Town of Waxhaw Stormwater Design Manual Version 2.0 4/22/2009 April 22, 2009
Waxhaw North Carolina 2030 Comprehensive Plan April 14,2009 amended Sept. 8, 2009
Waxhaw North Carolina 2030 Comprehensive Plan April 14,2009 amended Sept. 8, 2009
Town of Waxhaw Policy for Street Improvements and Maintenance Adopted May 9, 2006 amended through
October 21, 2009
Waxhaw, North Carolina Unified Development Ordinance Adopted Sept. 9, 2004 Amended May 28, 2013
US - 74 Corridor Revitalization Study: Existing Conditions Report March 2012
Town of Unionville Land Use Plan February 2006
Union County: Comprehensive water & wastewater master plan December 2011
Union County, North Carolina Land Use Ordinance May 7, 2001 codified through August 21, 2008
Union County: Development Ordinance Update - Concepts and Direction Report December 2012
Union County 2025 Comprehensive Plan October 18, 2010
Town of Mineral Springs: zoning Ordinance Effective July 1, 2002 -
Amended through June 13, 2013
Town of Mineral Springs: Subdivision Ordinance Effective July 1, 2002 -
Amended through December 2007
Town of Stallings: Standard Design Manual January 23, 2012
City of Monroe Downtown Master Plan February 2008
South / Southwest Monroe Historic District: Design Guidelines August 2000
The Village of Marvin North Carolina - Parks and Greenways Master Plan February 2008
Village of Lake Park Unified Development Ordinance July 2013
Walk it: Indian Trail Comprehensive Pedestrian Plan January 27, 2009
The Village of Indian Trail - A plan for managed growth and livability November 8, 2005
Indian Trail Park and Greenway Master Plan February 2010
Indian Trail Bicycle Master Plan June 14, 2011
These documents were reviewed as part of the project team’s initial assessment of Union County.
Comprehensive Plan Update : 1
grouP attending
Real Estate Professionals
John Loberg, Standard Pacific Homes
Ron Rushing, Realtor and Builder
Mike McGee, McGee Brothers
Jess Perry, Commercial Broker
Dennis Moser, Commercial Broker
Clint Lawrence, Surveyor
Carrol Rushing, Surveyor
Agriculture
Rusty Cox, Farmer
Jim Howie, Farmer
Allan Baucom, Farmer
Everette Medlin, Farmer
Travis Starnes, Farmer
Greg Hargett, Farmer
Economic Development Chris Plate, Monroe-Union County ED
Pat Kahle, Union County COC
Transportation Planning Professionals
Adam McLamb, Indian Trail
Bob Cook, MUMPO
Dana Stoogenkie, RRRPO
John Underwood, NCDOT
Tim Gibbs, CDOT
Utilities
Russ Colbath, Monroe Water Resources
Amy Deyton, UC Public Works
Scott Honeycutt, UC Public Works
Planners
Jordan Cook, Weddington
Lori Oakley, Waxhaw
Lisa Thompson or Donna Cook, Marvin
Lisa Stiwinter, Monroe
Shelly DeHart, Indian Trail
Lynne Hair, Stallings
Richard Flowe, Marshville
Community Groups
Community Health
Jackie Morgan, UC Health Dept.
Dena Sabinske, Stallings Parks and Rec.
Bill Whitley, UC Parks and Rec
Appendix b
stakeholder intervieWees
These stakeholders were interviewed during the planning process to gain
a better understanding of issues and opportunities in the County.
2 : UNION COUNTy
Comprehensive Plan Update : 3
Appendix C
stakeholder intervieWees
Appendix C contains Section 5 from the State of the County Report.
The full Report is located on the Union County website.
4 : UNION COUNTy
Prepared by
In Associate with
Stantec
Noell Consulting Group
CreatiVisibility
UNION COUNTyState of the county 2014
Acknowledgements
Thank you to all the organizations and individuals who committed their time,
energy and resources to this effort. This plan would not have been possible
without the support of many throughout the process.
advisory committee
Bob Cook
Chris Dugan
Tim Gibbs
Mary Jo Gollnitz
Wayne Hathcock
Liza Kravis
Greg Mahar
Dennis Moser
Jess Perry
Chris Plate’
Travis Starnes
Jennifer Stewart
Phillip Tarte
Lisa Thompson
Contents
1.0 Introduction 1
Overview 1
About the Plan 2
Purpose 2
Relationship to Other Plans 2
Study Area 3
Planning Process 4
Phases of Work 4
Public Involvement 5
2.0 About this State of the County Report 7
3.0 Summary of Issues & Opportunities 9
Opportunities 10
Issues 11
4.0 Goals 13
Plan Goals 13
Updated Goals Framework 14
5.0 State of the County Assessment 17
Overview 17
Population and Households 18
Housing 22
Development Activity 26
Economy and Market Conditions 28
Land Use 36
Transportation 42
Water and Wastewater Infrastructure 61
Public Services & Facilities 64
Parks, Recreation, Greenways & Open Space 67
Environmental & Natural Resources 69
Historic & Cultural Resources 71
Comprehensive Plan Update : 1
STATE OF THE COUNTy
INTRODUCTION
Overview
1.0
Over the past few years, Union County has
strategically positioned itself as a destination for
precision manufacturing operations centered at
the airport. Growing this economy to provide for
an increasingly diverse population will be critical to
Union County’s future.
From 2000 to 2010 Union County was the fastest
growing county in North Carolina and one of the
fastest in the country, increasing its population by
5.7 percent annually. A combination of a healthy
regional economy, low taxes (particularly relative
to Mecklenburg County) and high quality schools
fueled this growth. Like many communities around
the nation, Union County experienced a period of
economic stagnation during the latter part of the
decade. The Great Recession resulted in fewer
people relocating to the area, job losses, limited
access to capital and declining home values. While
growth slowed over this period, Union County
continued to attract residents to its western
jurisdictions. Places like Wesley Chapel, Weddington
and Indian Trail continued to prosper, albeit at
moderated rates.
Today, Union County anticipates continued growth
as one of North Carolina’s fastest developing
counties. From 2010 to 2040, the project team
estimates Union County will add approximately
190,000 people (65,600 households), equating
to an annual growth rate of around 3.2 percent.
This rate is well below the 5.7 percent rate of
the booming 2000s, yet above the 1.9 percent
recessionary growth rate the county experienced
over the last few years.
Supporting much of this growth over the next
20 years are major service and infrastructure
projects including the Monroe Bypass and
the recently-signed water agreement with
the Town of Norwood. In addition, efforts of
Monroe-Union Economic Development aim to
attract more industry to Union County in order
to create jobs for current and future residents
and help balance the County’s tax base.
Business recruitment and retention strategies
are focused on four major industries: precision
manufacturing in support of industry growth at
the Monroe Charlotte Executive Airport, agri-
business operations building on Union’s strong
agriculture economy, logistics and commercial
operations.
Recognizing the need to proactively address growth
and development patterns and support economic
development efforts, County leaders decided to
revisit the 2025 Comprehensive Plan and update
the Plan accordingly.
Union County is one of the fastest growing counties in the State of
North Carolina. It also happens to be one of the most productive agricultural
areas, ranking third in the state in agricultural cash receipts. From its western
high growth suburbs to its eastern farms, Union County provides a unique
blend of suburban and rural.
2 : UNION COUNTy
APPendIx C
Purpose
This planning process addresses the issues and
opportunities generated by Union County’s growth and
provides proactive suggestions to ensure that Union remains
a great place to live, work and visit. The primary objectives of
this effort are to:
(1) recognize existing economic development and land use
conditions and adjust future land use policies as appropriate,
and (2) provide an updated future land use vision as input
into the development of the County-wide Transportation
Plan.
This Plan is intended to provide guidance to County leaders
regarding future land use and infrastructure decisions to
support desired development and redevelopment in the
County.
Orderly growth and development in Union County is more
easily achieved when any decisions affecting the County
are informed by a shared vision based on commonly held
goals. Therefore, this Plan is also designed to convey
the shared vision that residents and other stakeholders
throughout the county share for the future of the County,
and to act as a platform to communicate that vision
to various decision-makers within and outside of the
County. For this reason, the planning process is structured
to involve the municipalities and interested County
organizations in the update.
Relationship to Other Plans
In addition to the 2025 Comprehensive Plan, several
plans have been adopted in Union County over the last
decade. Some contain a land use vision and policies for
small areas and corridors where development pressure is
expected to increase. Others focus entirely on a specific
aspect of growth, such as water and wastewater service
improvements needed to meet future demand. To varying
degrees, all such Plans are relevant to this update, but
cobbled together they do not serve as a comprehensive
plan for the County and its municipalities. Nevertheless,
an examination of the Plans collectively helps to identify
conflicts between them and, more importantly, to reveal
issues and opportunities that should be considered in the
course of preparing a Comprehensive Plan. Therefore,
this Plan update builds on a combination of these recent
planning efforts, eliciting recommendations that are
supportive of the community’s current vision for the future.
A summary of existing plans is located in Appendix A of this
document.
About the Plan
This Plan is intended to provide guidance to County leaders regarding future
land use and infrastructure decisions to support desired development and
redevelopment in the County.
INTRODUCTION
Comprehensive Plan Update : 3
STATE OF THE COUNTy
Study Area
Union County is located in the Southern Piedmont region
of North Carolina. While the Union County government is
responsible only for the unincorporated areas of the County,
environmental and infrastructure systems, such as creeks,
rivers and roadways cross jurisdictional lines. Therefore,
the study area also includes the 14 municipalities within
the County. As shown in Map 1, Union is one of 11 North
Carolina counties that comprise a 14-county bi-state region.
Because it borders Mecklenburg County, it is also economi-
cally tied to the region. Union County lies within Charlotte’s
metropolitan area and the western portion is within com-
muting distance to the central business district of Uptown
Charlotte. So, while the study area does not extend beyond
the County boundaries, the context must be considered to
better understand the opportunities associated with—and
the impacts of infrastructure investments made in support
of—regional economic growth.
UnIon
CAbArrUs
rowA n
Iredell
meCklenbUrG
lInColn
GAsTon
ClevelAnd
york
UnIon sC ChesTer
lAnCAsTer
sTAnly
Anson
MAP 1: STUDy AREA
4 : UNION COUNTy
APPendIx C
Planning Process
INTRODUCTION
PROJECT INITIATION
Data Collection, Review of Existing Plans &
Studies, Area Tour
COUNTy ASSESSMENT
Assessment of Current and Emerging
Conditions, Identification of Issues &
Opportunities
PLAN DEVELOPMENT
Evaluation of Current Policies and Testing of
Alternatives to Define a New Direction to
Better Achieve Stated Goals
POLICy RECOMMENDATIONS &
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES
Policies and Action Steps to Realize the
Desired Future Land Use Pattern
PLAN DOCUMENTATION
Comprehensive Plan Documents
1
2
3
4
5
Planning Process
In 2013, Union County contracted with LandDesign to
develop a plan that provides a framework to guide growth
and development decisions in the County. The 12-month
process involved a wide variety of stakeholders including
representatives from jurisdictions, state agencies, local
businesses and civic groups to establish a clear direction
forward for the County.
Recognizing the many assets of Union County, the plan
focused on improvements that would increase business
opportunities, attract more private investment in residential
and nonresidential development, provide transportation and
housing choices and enhance the public realm. The resulting
plan includes recommendations for land use, economic
development, infrastructure investments, housing and
quality of life investments.
Phases of Work
The process to update the 2025 Comprehensive Plan was
divided into five phases. The first phase focused on project
initiation tasks, such as data collection, a review of existing
plans and studies and a study area tour. During Phase Two,
the project team created an inventory of existing conditions
in the County as a step toward an assessment of the County
and the identification of issues and opportunities to be
considered in subsequent phases.
Phase Three led to the development of future land use
scenarios designed to test the likelihood of achieving stated
goals given a range of potential policy directions. Based on
the results of the previous phases, a set of recommendations
and implementation strategies that support the community’s
vision of the future were developed during Phase Four. The
final phase of the process merged all Plan components
into a single, comprehensive document. This report is the
culmination of all five phases of work.
Comprehensive Plan Update : 5
STATE OF THE COUNTy
Public Involvement
Guiding development of the Plan was an inclusionary public
engagement process. Understanding community values
today ensures that this Plan, implemented in accordance with
the recommendations, supports and advances those priorities
over the long term.
Advisory Committee Meetings
The Advisory Committee, made up primarily of residents
and property owners in the County guided this effort. Also
included on the committee were representatives from
farming, development and real estate communities along
with representatives of the North Carolina Department of
Transportation (NCDOT), Charlotte Regional Transportation
Planning Organization (CRTPO) and the Charlotte Department
of Transportation (CDOT). Regular meetings of this group
were held throughout the process to set goals, provide
feedback and advise the project team on Plan concepts and
recommendations. A list of the Advisory Committee members
is listed in the Acknowledgements section of this document.
Stakeholder Interviews
Stakeholder interviews were conducted to verify and
supplement the data gathered, to explain the conditions
observed and to further understand the issues and
opportunities that affect the study area. The input from
these interviews supplemented the feedback received
directly from citizens and property owners participating in
the process. The stakeholders included key personnel from
County departments as well as representatives of interest
groups who addressed questions about the following topics:
economic development, transportation, neighborhoods,
utilities and farming. A complete list of interviewees is
provided in Appendix B.
Community Meetings
Community meetings were held throughout the planning
process to provide an opportunity for stakeholders to come
together and learn about the project and guide development
To supplement information
gathered during community
meetings, a project Web site
(www.unioncountyonevoice.com)
was created.
6 : UNION COUNTy
APPendIx C
of the vision for the future of Union County. During the first
meeting, a Project Symposium, elected officials, property
owners and residents met to learn about the project and
refine the goals established by the Advisory Committee.
Symposium participants also participated in a live polling
exercise to set priorities and identify major issues and
opportunities in Union County. The second community
meeting was designed as an interactive work session to
develop the Future Land Use component of the project
and to identify and prioritize transportation improvements.
During the third meeting, participants refined the future land
use vision and suggested ways in which the Plan can be
effectively implemented over time.
Website
A website, www.unioncountyonevoice.com, was
developed to provide an online resource for community
members. All materials that were presented at the
community meetings were also translated into an online
format so that community members could participate
virtually in the planning process.
A Project Symposium was held on November 7, 2013 to discuss some of the land use and transportation issues in the County.
Comprehensive Plan Update : 7
STATE OF THE COUNTy
An understanding of the conditions of the County today is
critical to the creation of a sound plan that will guide future land use and
infrastructure decisions. The State of the County Report presents the results
of a comprehensive assessment of the current and emerging conditions in the
County to determine the relevance and effectiveness of previously defined
goals, policies and strategies.
ABOUT THE STATE OF THE COUNTy REPORT
2.0
The assessment was conducted on a topic-by-topic
of the following elements:
• Population: Trends & Growth
• Housing
• Economic & Market Conditions
• Land Use
• Transportation
• Water and Wastewater Infrastructure
• Public Services & Facilities
• Parks, Recreation, Greenways & Open Space
• Environmental & Natural Resources
• Historic & Cultural Resources
The report presents a summary of the issues and
opportunities, followed by a discussion of the
goals that were refined as part of this process and
concludes with the topic-specific analysis.
The goal of this effort is to provide an assessment
of Union County today and to identify potential
issues that merit emphasis in our long-term
analysis of the County and recommendations that
should be pursued to maintain a strong level of
growth and create a county that is sustainable in
the long term.
Union County will continue to grow. Where will these people
live, work and go to school? Can existing infrastructure
support additional people, housing and vehicles? These are all
important questions that will be considered over the course of
this project.
Comprehensive Plan Update : 9
STATE OF THE COUNTy
The following set of issues and opportunities were identified for
Union County in the State of the County assessment that follows and clarified
with the feedback received from the Advisory Committee and the public during
the planning process.
SUMMARy OF ISSUES & OPPORTUNITIES
3.0
According to the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Union County ranks third in the state in
overall cash receipts from agriculture. As the area continues to grow, careful consideration must be given to
how to grow in a way that is compatible with existing and potential agribusiness operations.
10 : UNION COUNTy
APPendIx C
Opportunities
SUMMARy OF ISSUES & OPPORTUNITIES
• more housing options: The County has the
opportunity to accommodate a more diverse group
of residents, beyond the traditional families that
characterize the makeup of the population today, by
encouraging the development of a range of housing
products including small lot single-family houses,
townhomes and multi-family units. This includes
housing opportunities that attract empty nesters (also
referred to as “move-down buyers” because they tend
to seek smaller, low-maintenance homes), singles and
couples without children and younger generations
whose lifestyles delay homeownership.
• Town Centers: By encouraging the development of
new mixed-use centers and fortifying existing town
centers, the County can help facilitate the creation of
viable business locations in walkable environments
largely missing today. These places could be attractive
not only as locations for retail and office uses, but for
all types of residential products as well.
• office Growth: Jurisdictions within Union County,
such as Weddington and Wesley Chapel, have large
amounts of executive housing. Proximity to this type
of housing is one driver of office development. By
identifying market potential and employing targeted
strategies, Union County has the opportunity to bolster
the office market and encourage office development in
the County.
• retail Capture: There is a diverse and wealthy consumer
base in Union County. However, in spite of having
higher than average income, retail sales per person are
25 percent lower than state average indicating that the
majority of residents spend their retail dollars outside
of the County. There is an opportunity to accommodate
more retail development in the County and capture retail
“leakage” to Mecklenburg County.
• Agriculture economy: Union County continues to
be a leader in agriculture production in the state.
There is an opportunity to increase cash receipts from
agribusinesses by investing in value-added processing
facilities in the County.
• recreation economy: Union County has the
opportunity to capitalize on a number of recreation-
related economic development opportunities. The
County’s rural landscapes offer low-traffic roadways with
scenic vistas. These characteristics tend to attract long-
distance, recreational cyclists. Additional facilities like
the Jesse Helms Sports Complex could position Union
as a destination for lucrative youth-sports tournaments.
Opportunities for expanded equestrian activities also
exist. A county-wide interconnected greenway and
blueway system could attract outdoor enthusiasts to the
County. A coordinated marketing strategy to promote
the combination of recreational options could increase
tourism and generate revenue for area businesses.
There is an opportunity to capture more retail dollars locally
with the development of new commercial centers that meet
consumer demand
Comprehensive Plan Update : 11
STATE OF THE COUNTy
Issues
• lack of employment opportunities: Union County
is a bedroom community to Charlotte. Approximately
70 percent of residents work outside of the County.
Since 2000, Union County has added 860 jobs annually
on average, about 10% of total employment in the
metropolitan area. Meanwhile it captures roughly 14
percent of all household growth. The result is a roughly
.4 jobs/household ratio, one-third less than the .61
jobs/household ratio of the metro area. In addition,
relative to the Charlotte metro area, a greater share of
jobs in Union County are in local-serving, moderate-
paying industries, such as construction, retail trade and
public administration. Largely missing from the County
are higher-paying, white collar jobs such as those in
the Finance & Insurance and Professional & Technical
Services. There are a lack of jobs overall in the County
and a lack of higher-wage jobs demanded by Union
County residents.
• limited regional Access: Union County lacks direct
access to an interstate, and the US and state highways
need to be improved to provide adequate service.
The lack of regional access, adequate alternative
transportation routes and east-west connections
severely impacts the marketability of the County to
potential employers.
• Costly Congestion: The County’s limited road network
offers few options for commuters, so available routes
are congested in peak and non-peak hours. The major
commuting route, US-74, is over capacity with more
than 57,000 trips per day. Union County residents
take, on average, five minutes longer to reach their
place of work than other North Carolinians. In addition,
almost half of people in Union are spending more
than 30 percent of their income on transportation.
Unchecked, such costs are likely to negatively affect the
attractiveness of Union County as a choice residential
location.
• retail Abandonment: Similar to the situation along
the Mecklenburg portion of US-74, there is a threat of
long-term retail abandonment once new retail centers
are developed.
• lack of diverse Tax base: Approximately 94 percent
of the land in the County’s jurisdiction is devoted to
agriculture and residential land uses. Residential growth
continues to outpace commercial growth. Lack of
market diversity could further strain County resources.
• water supply: The County is dependent upon
neighboring jurisdictions for water supply. As
development continues, a reliable and secure water
supply will be required to meet future water demands
of the County.
• Auto-dependent development: Historic and current
development practices in Union County have resulted
in separated land uses, strip commercial corridors and
disconnected neighborhood and commercial centers.
The result is a land use pattern that forces most trips
to be taken by automobile, especially in areas where
pedestrian and bike facilities are poorly connected or
non-existent. As preferences shift toward more walkable
and bikeable development patterns, the County could
lose key demographics to adjacent counties.
• Inadequate rural Infrastructure: Union County’s
agriculture economy depends on the ability to move
product from source to processing facility. Many of the
rural roads and bridges require upgrading to be able to
handle the increased truck traffic resulting from agricultural
operations and to improve safety on rural roads.
See Section Five for additional details and source
information.
Traffic continues to be a major issue in Union County.
Understanding the distinct goals of
the County today ensures that this
plan, implemented in accordance with
the recommendations, supports and
advances community priorities over
the long term.
Comprehensive Plan Update : 13
STATE OF THE COUNTy
GOALS
4.0
A successful plan depends on a framework developed around
a set of sound, defensible goal statements. The goals identified in the 2025
Comprehensive Plan served as a starting point for this Plan update. The original
goal statements, which are noted in the Appendix, were vetted by the Advisory
Committee, members of the public and participants at the Project Symposium.
The two surveys included in the Appendix of this report detail the original goal
statements and the survey results. In addition, the goals were refined to reflect
current issues and opportunities as identified by the project team through a
review of existing plans and a topic-specific analysis.
Plan Goals
Original Goal Framework from 2025 Plan
Updated Goal Framework
Project
Symposium
Community
SurveyProject
Team
Analysis
Advisory
Committee
Meeting
PROCESS TO UPDATE GOAL FRAMEWORK
goals
• Identify New Sites for Employment Growth
• Coordinate Infrastructure
• Ensure Land Use Regulations Support Economic Development
• Promote New & Existing Businesses
[move]
goals
• Improve Multimodal Options
• Support & Expand Bus Transit Service
• Identify Future Rail Service Corridor
• Coordinated Roadway Planning
• Support Appearance & Development Standards for Major Travel Corridors
• Land Use Planning for Monroe Connector
[work]
Updated Goal Framework
The updated goal framework provides the guideposts to inform the development
of the plan. These refined goal statements will be used to inform the development of the land
use scenarios and supporting metrics later in the process. In addition, the recommendations and
implementation strategies will also be organized around this updated goal framework.
goals
• Ensure Utility Capacity for Future Development
• Fiscally Efficient Public Water & Wastewater Service
• Reserve Capacity for Future Growth
•` Seek Opportunities with Neighboring Jurisdictions to Expand Utility Systems
[flow]
[farm]
goals
• Support Agri-focused Infrastructure Investments
• Identify Sites for Future Agri-Business Growth
• Maintain Agriculture Production & Forestry
• Protect Rural Character & Scenic Views
• Foster Cooperative Relationships between Farmers & Residents
• Direct Development Away From Rural Areas
[health]
[shop]
goals
• Encourage the Development of Retail, Restaurants and Services that meet
Consumer Preferences
• Mitigate Abandonment of Existing Retail Strip Centers
[conserve]
goals
• Promote Protection of Open Spaces & Environmentally Sensitive Lands
• Protect Water & Air Resources
• Consider Impacts of New Development on Environmental Features and Endangered/
Threatened Habitats
goals
• Provide Convenient Recreational Opportunities Throughout the County
• Joint-Use of Schools and Recreation Facilities
[cooperate]
goals
• Intergovernmental Coordination
• An Active and Involved Citizenry
• County & School District Coordination for Schools
goals
• Provide a Range of Housing Choices
• Strengthen & Enhance Existing Neighborhoods
• Encourage Infill Development / Discourage Leapfrogging
• Support Appearance & Development Standards for Neighborhoods
[live]
Comprehensive Plan Update : 17
STATE OF THE COUNTy
STATE OF THE COUNTy ASSESSMENT
5.0
Overview
An understanding of the conditions of the County today is
critical to the creation of a sound plan that will guide future land use and
infrastructure decisions. This section presents the results of a comprehensive
assessment of the current and emerging conditions in the County to
determine the relevance and effectiveness of previously defined goals,
policies and strategies. The assessment was conducted on a topic-by-topic
of the following elements:
• Population & Households
• Housing
• Development Activity
• Economy & Market Conditions
• Land Use
• Transportation
• Water and Wastewater Infrastructure
• Public Services & Facilities
• Parks, Recreation, Greenways & Open Space
• Environmental & Natural Resources
• Historic & Cultural Resources
18 : UNION COUNTy
APPendIx C
STATE OF THE COUNTy ASSESSMENT
Population & Households
The following trends will continue to influence the
characteristics of growth in Union County over the planning
horizon:
• Convenience is becoming a major factor for all
generations, including Gen y (those born after 1978),
Gen X (1964 - 1978) and Baby Boomers (1945 - 1964);
• Included in this is the desire to live in locations with
shortened work commutes, avoiding heavy traffic and
long drives to complete activities;
• This also encompasses issues relative to walkability of
areas to dining, shopping, the park, work, etc.
• Gen X and Gen y in particular value walkable places and
convenience and are the primary generations fueling the
renaissance of inner cities throughout the US (including
Charlotte) as well as town centers in more suburban
locations;
• This includes both new town centers (such as Birkdale
Place, Baxter, and Phillips Place) as well as older,
authentic town centers such as Davidson;
• Baby Boomers are aging and beginning to live for
themselves, focusing in on areas that offer a stronger
sense of lifestyle for themselves and not just for their
children, which have been the driving factors for their
residential decision-making for the last 20 years.
Population - Growth
From 2000 to 2010, Union County was the fastest growing
county in the Charlotte area in terms of population growth,
growing at a 5.7% annual pace, well eclipsing york (3.5%),
Cabarrus (3.4%) and Mecklenburg (3.3%) growth rates. In
terms of total numbers Union only trails Mecklenburg in
Prior to analyzing Union County population growth and impacts, it is
important to understand some larger macro economic and demographic trends in the US
and the larger Charlotte region.
absolute population growth, adding roughly 80,000 people in
the last decade. By 2010 Union’s population had increased to
more than 200,000 people with its household growth rising
to nearly 68,000, more than double its 1990 totals.
Households - Age
As detailed in Figure 1, Union County’s current household
composition is more mature county than the Charlotte
Metro area overall—not surprising given its higher level
of affluence—and somewhat lacking in its attraction to
younger households. This is in part due to the low-density
suburban lifestyle offered in the County today and changing
preferences among younger Generation y (those born after
1978), who increasingly prefer more walkable, mixed-use
environments.
In looking further at household growth by age, Union’s
lack of appeal to Generation y—a generation that is equal
in size to the Baby Boomers—could have an increasingly
significant impact on real estate decisions and growth
in County in the coming decades. As shown in Figure 2,
growth among these younger households accounts for 0%
of Union’s overall growth while accounting for 8% of the
Metro Area’s growth.
It also bears noting that two-thirds of all household growth
in the County has occurred among married couples with
and without children, a group that accounts for only 29%
of growth in the region, while singles, the largest growth
segment in the region and the US (accounting for 38% of all
household growth in the larger Charlotte metro) are far less
prevalent in Union, accounting for only 15% of all growth.
These missing groups—Generation y households and
singles—becomes significant given their share of the market
and growth in the coming years. Both tend to be attracted
to more dynamic, mixed-use environments and both have
Comprehensive Plan Update : 19
STATE OF THE COUNTy
15-24 25 - 44 35 - 44 45 - 54 55 - 64
0%
0.5 %
-0.5 %
1.7 %
5.5 %
18.1 %
13.5 %
32.5 %
25.4 %24.5 %24.9 %
29.4%
24.5 %
5%
-5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Union Charlotte Metro
65+
FIGURE 2: HOUSEHOLDS GROWTH By AGE, 2000-2013
higher propensities to either buy or rent attached or small-
lot for-sale product. As will be discussed later in this report,
Union has largely lacked these products historically and
should consider opportunities to add them in a setting that
maximizes their attraction to these growing audiences.
Under 25 25 to 44 45 to 64 65 and Above
0%
2.7 %4.5 %
Union
41.6 %42.3 %
39.4 %37.1 %
16.1 %
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
Charlotte Metro
Under 25 25 to 44 45 to 64 65 and Above
0%
2.7 %4.5 %
Union
41.6 %42.3 %
39.4 %37.1 %
16.1 %
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
Charlotte Metro
FIGURE 1: 2010 HOUSEHOLDS By AGE, UNION COUNTy & CHARLOTTE METRO
20 : UNION COUNTy
APPendIx C
STATE OF THE COUNTy ASSESSMENT
Population & Households
Union Charlotte Metro
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%84.1%
White African-American American Indian Asian Other / Two or
More Races
69.9%
23.6%
0.4%0.4%1.1%2.5%2.9%3.5%
11.5%
FIGURE 3: 2010 HOUSEHOLDS By RACE
Households - Race
As noted in Figure 3, Union County today has more white
residents than the Charlotte Metro Area overall, with more
than 84% of all households identifying as white (vs. 70% at
the Metropolitan Statistical Area level). Conversely, Union has
a much smaller African-American presence, with only 11.5% of
households being of this race vs. 23.6% at the MSA level.
Finally, Union County has a slightly higher share of Latino
households, with roughly 7.1% of all households in the County
being Latino, slightly above the Metro average of 6.7%. This
may be in part due to the significant agriculture base present in
the County today.
Households - Income
As illustrated in Figure 4, median household income growth
has also been steady during the period, rising from less
than $31,000 in 1990 to more than $63,300 in 2010, an
annual growth rate of 5.2% over the 20 year period; this is a
very healthy rate of growth and evidence of an increasingly
affluent county.
Related to this, more than 42% of Union County’s
households have incomes above $75,000, reflecting its
significant affluence. As detailed in Figure 5, Union has
more affluent households when compared to the larger
Charlotte Metro Area, where 34.8% of all households have
incomes above $75,000. Conversely, Union today has fewer
lower-income households with roughly one-fourth of all
households having incomes below $35,000. This figure is
compared to nearly one-third at the Metro level.
This relative wealth can also be seen in Union’s lower poverty
rates, with only 8.7% of people in the County being below the
poverty line, quite low compared to the overall 13.3% average
in the Metro Area and 16.6% rate in Mecklenburg County.
Comprehensive Plan Update : 21
STATE OF THE COUNTy
1990
43,390
123,677
67,864
201,292
84,211
29,307
$30,957
$50,638
$63,372
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
2000 2010
Persons/Households
Median Household Income
$10,000
$20,000
$30,000
$40,000
$50,000
$60,000
$70,000
Household, Population, and Median Income Growth of Union County
Households Population Median Income
0%
Union Charlotte Metro
Less than
$35,000
$35,000 to
$50,000
$50,000 to
$75,000
$75,000 to
$100,000
$100,000 to
$150,000
$150,000 to
$200,000
$200,000 and
Above
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
24.0%
31.5%
13.9%14.6%
19.7%19.0%
14.9%
12.3%
15.7%
12.9%
5.8%4.7%6.0%4.9%
FIGURE 4: HOUSEHOLD, POPULATION, AND MEDIAN INCOME GROWTH OF UNION COUNTy 1990-2010
FIGURE 5: 2010 HOUSEHOLDS By INCOME
22 : UNION COUNTy
APPendIx C
Housing
STATE OF THE COUNTy ASSESSMENT
Union County’s housing market is overwhelmingly comprised of large-
lot single-family, for-sale residential homes, much more so than the Charlotte metro area.
Roughly 83% of Union County’s 66,700 households are owner-occupied, well above the 67%
ownership rates seen at the larger Metro area. This trend is not too surprising because renters
tend to accept more convenience-driven locations compared to many owners, who are often
driven by factors such as schools, and are more apt to “drive for value”, accepting homes in
suburban counties such as Union, Cabarrus, and york Counties.
FIGURE 6: HOUSEHOLDS GROWTH By TyPE, 2000-2013
1-unit,
detached
1-unit,
attached
2 units 3 or 4 units 5 to 9 units 10 or More Mobile home
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
2%1%1%2%2%
7%
Housing Units - Type
As noted in Figure 6, single-family units make up 85% of
Union County’s entire housing stock. The second single
largest category is mobile homes. Townhouses, duplexes and
apartments combined make up 8% of all housing units.
Since Union County has only emerged as a bedroom
community within the last 20 years, the large majority of its
housing stock was built after 1990, with more than one-third
of that built since 2000.
Housing Units - Sales
As illustrated in Figure 7, Union County has seen a significant
moderation in housing activity from the last decade in which
single-family new home sales rose to as high as 3,400 units
in 2006 and fell to as low as 624 sales in 2010. Home sales
rebounded in 2013 and are expected to continue gaining
momentum. Detailed in Figure 8, Price appreciation has
been solid in Union County since 2000, with new home
sales increasing by 53% over the 12 year period, in spite of a
drop of nearly 30% in value from the market peak in 2007.
Comprehensive Plan Update : 23
STATE OF THE COUNTy
FIGURE 7: SINGLE FAMILy HOME SALES 2000 - 2013
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
20012000
Homes Sold Union County Union County Average Sales Price
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
$378,772
$289,113
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Number of Homes Sold
Average Sale Price
$100,000
$200,000
$300,000
$400,000
$500,000
$600,000
1,577
1,823
1,686
1,793
1,248 760
624
633
646
2,445
3,065
3,411 2,603
$188,338
FIGURE 8: HOME SALE PRICE UNION COUNTy
45%
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%0%
0%
Under
$100,000
$100,000 -
$200,000
$200,000 -
$300,000
$300,000 -
$400,000
$400,000 -
$500,000
$500,000 -
$600,000
$600,000 -
$700,000
$700,000+
8%
42%
27%
36%
22%22%
13%
9%
5%
2%4%3 3%2%1%
In spite of the 30% drop in home prices, foreclosures
in Union County have not been significant. Most recent
foreclosure data from RealtyTrac indicates that Union’s
foreclosure rate is only .02%, well below North Carolina’s
.10% and Mecklenburg’s .16% and another indicator that
home prices should continue rising in the near-term.
As shown in Figure 8, 73% of Union County’s new single-
family home sales are occurring above $200,000 as of 2012,
a very different scenario than resales, of which only 50% are
occurring above that same price point. Clearly the County
is becoming less affordable over time, creating both a need
and opportunity for price alternative products.
Indeed, one can see the differences in value propositions
for ownership housing in the County relative to rental
housing. As noted in Figure 9, roughly 80% of all owners
in the County are paying more than $1,000 per month in
mortgage and housing costs while barely more than 10%
of renters are paying this same amount. Owners value the
24 : UNION COUNTy
APPendIx C
Housing
STATE OF THE COUNTy ASSESSMENT
FIGURE 9: DISTRIBUTION OF OWNER AND RENTER HOUSING COSTS IN UNION COUNTy
Monthly Mortgage
Under $500 $500 - $750 $750 - $1,000 $1,000 - $1,500 $1,500 or More
Monthly Rent
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2.0%
27.2%
6.0%
41.8%
11.2%
20.1%
31.6%
9.0%
49.1%
1.9%
high quality of schools and family environment while many
renters are either seeking lower cost housing opportunities
outside of Mecklenburg or are left with a lack of modern
options available and thus opt to reverse-commute
from Mecklenburg.
Demand potential for new rental product in the County
seems greater than that experienced to date, verifiable
when compared to other counties such as york and
Cabarrus. Indeed recent construction activity in areas such
as Stallings is beginning to reflect this demand potential.
Comprehensive Plan Update : 25
STATE OF THE COUNTy
Indicators of Housing Opportunity
There is a growing demand for more walkable, interactive
“places” in the market and households are willing to pay
to live close to those places. Noell Consulting Group (NCG)
has conducted a number of consumer research efforts in the
Southeast to understand living decisions and preferences
among households at different ages, compositions, and
incomes. The following two graphs summarizes stated
preferences from a recent NCG survey in Raleigh-Durham with
nearly 1,000 Research Triangle Park employees; white collar
employees consistent in many ways with middle-income and
affluent households moving into Union County.
Nearly 75% of surveyed households indicated they would be
willing to make trade-offs to live in areas walkable to stores
and restaurants with more than half seeking a home walkable
to work, even it if meant giving up square feet in the home.
Similarly more than half would give up yard space to be
walkable to a park.
Based on this evidence, Union should think about what
places in the County offer such an environment, and how
these environments can be created to maintain and enhance
market interest in living in the County.
NCG also asked about interest in living in different types of
housing, including more conventional single-family homes
and alternative products. As shown in Figure 11 conventional
single-family homes continue to garner the most interest of
all products, but detached homes on a smaller lot and patio
homes--products potentially more attractive to singles and
couples without children, as well as empty nesters and aging
households--are also products that half or more of households
would somewhat or seriously consider. When combined
with Figure 10--those willing to make trade-offs for the right
location--opportunities for different products and environments
in Union County become more clear. Finally, it is worth noting
that more than 37% have an interest in living in townhouse
units, a product largely missing from Union County.
Creating environments to accommodate increased
demand, including those that appeal to younger singles and
couples as well as maturing households increasingly driven
by lifestyle, will be important to Union County’s continuing
residential growth long-term and should be understood
more thoroughly. Union’s significant amount of executive
housing growth makes possible the creation of these
areas and furthers opportunities for alternative products
as such products not only appeal to people for lifestyle
opportunities, but for price-alternative options to single-
family homes as well.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
Percent Choosing
To be closer to
work, even if it
meant having a
home with less SF
To live where I
could walk to
stores or
restaurants
A home with a small
yard or courtyard
within walking
distance of a park
A home with less
SF if it offered
nicer finishes
inside
55.8%
74.9%
53.4%60.8%
FIGURE 10: NEIGHBORHOOD PREFERENCE TRADE-OFFS
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
% Very / Somewhat Seriously Consider
Single-family on
an average lot
Single-family
on a small lot
Townhouse
with garage
Patio
home
Condominium
81.1%
59.0%49.2%
37.3%
19.2%
FIGURE 11: HOUSING UNIT PREFERENCE TRADE--OFFS
26 : UNION COUNTy
APPendIx C
Development Activity
STATE OF THE COUNTy ASSESSMENT
Union County has grown dramatically
over the past couple of decades. As detailed in
Table 1, nearly 60 percent of all growth in the
County occurred after 1990. Even during the
Great Recession, Union County continued to
grow albeit at slower rates. As illustrated in Map
5, the majority of recent growth continues to
be residential growth along the Mecklenburg
County border and near established towns such as
Waxhaw, Weddington, Indian Trail and Stallings.
Residential development did slow during the Great Recession but has
recovered. Commercial development has been slower to recover. Table
2 and 3 detail residential and commercial development activity in Union
County since 2008.

TABLE 2: RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITy FROM 2008-2013
Building Permit year Permit Type # of permits Sq. Footage Construction Value ($)
2008 Residential 1,652 3,745,428 201,887,244
2009 Residential 1,235 2,168,881 102,941,211
2010 Residential 1,167 1,947,211 92,215,464
2011 Residential 1,254 2,457,200 112,247,654
2012 Residential 1,509 3,385,422 153,497,600
2013 Residential 1,951 3,173,755 143,438,571.3
Total Renovations 8,768 16,877,897 806,227,744.3
TABLE 3: COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITy FROM 2008 TO 2013
Building Permit year Permit Type # of permits Sq. Footage Construction Value ($)
2008 Commercial 254 1,568,048 91,343,924
2009 Commercial 137 457,201 42,775,089
2010 Commercial 118 443,079 42,820,174
2011 Commercial 122 506,528 39,754,160
2012 Commercial 127 844,601 23,748,622
2013 Commercial 140 408599 23,366,242
Total 898 4,228,056 263,808,211
SOURCE: Union County Building Permit Statistics
Timeframe % of Total
1901 - 1990 41%
1991-1995 10%
1996-2000 14%
2001-2005 20%
2006-2012 15%
TABLE 1: HISTORIC yEAR BUILT DATA
SOURCE: Union County Tax Parcel Records
MAP 2: yEAR BUILT
yEAR BUILT
1901 - 1990
1991 - 1995
1996 - 2000
2001 - 2005
2006 - 2012
FEATURES
Major Roads
Railroads
Monroe Bypass
Study Area
Rivers
Lakes
Protected Lands
Cane Creek Park
Wingate University
Charlotte-Monroe Airport
28 : UNION COUNTy
APPendIx C
Economy & Market Conditions
STATE OF THE COUNTy ASSESSMENT
FIGURE 12: EMPLOyMENT GROWTH & CAPTURE OF THE MSA
2000
-6,000
-4,000
-2,000
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
1,302 1,545
580 283
1,412 1,868
4,418 3,843
-923
-4,893
-1,738
1,214
2,315 2,129 1,772 2,180
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Union Capture
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
-40%
-30%
-20%
-10%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
while population and household growth have been strong, job growth has
lagged, with the County capturing only 10% of the region’s job growth, compared to its 14%
capture of residential growth. This equates to a jobs to housing growth ratio of .4, well below
the .61 jobs/household average seen at the Metro level. Job growth in Union has averaged
around 860 net new jobs annually since 2000, with the recession taking a significant toll
on the County, particularly among construction jobs, one of the County’s strongest growth
industries.
When examining the County’s economic base, it becomes
clear that not only are the absolute numbers of job growth
not keeping up with the regional average and the housing
development in the County, but the quality of jobs is not
consistent with those in the region. As shown in Table
4, Union County’s economic base can be found in those
industries shaded in blue-industries in which a greater share
of Union’s total employment can be found relative to that
of the Charlotte Metro Area (any ratio at right above a 1.0
indicates a greater concentration of jobs in Union relative to
the Charlotte area.
Of the net 11,300 jobs added in Union County between 2000
and 2010, roughly 97 percent occurred in industries serving
the local population, such as local government, health care,
retail trade, personal services and food services. Meanwhile,
other industry types accounting for the remaining growth
in the County, such as professional services and finance,
include both a local-serving and potentially regional-serving
component.
This trend of population-driven employment growth will
continue to account for the majority of growth in Union
County in the next three decades, with growth in other
sectors, such as manufacturing, account for a slightly larger
share of overall growth in the coming years.
Much of Union County’s major employment concentrations
can be found in the Independence Boulevard corridor,
including Downtown Monroe. Map 2 (on page 27) provides
an overview of Union County’s major employers (those
employing more than 500 people in the County) and business/
Comprehensive Plan Update : 29
STATE OF THE COUNTy
TABLE 4: JOBS By INDUSTRy SECTOR
Industry Sector Union
County
Charlotte
Metro Area
Union County to
Charlotte Metro
Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting 777 2,455 5.0
Construction 4,872 35,927 2.1
Manufacturing 10,568 70,369 2.4
Wholesale Trade 2,982 51,792 0.9
Retail Trade 5,441 82,343 1.0
Transportation and Warehousing 1,286 29,904 0.7
Information 470 28,811 0,4
Finance and Insurance 898 60,424 0.2
Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 387 12,302 0.5
Professional, Scientific and Technical Services 1,488 52,937 0.4
Management of Companies and Enterprises 89 26,137 0.1
Administration and Support, Waste Management 2,810 62,464 .07
Educational Services 6,417 60,178 1.7
Health Care and Social Assistance 4,603 96,583 0.7
Arts, Entertainment and Recreation 531 14,876 0.6
Accommodation and Food Services 2,904 61,821 0.7
Other Services (excluding Public Administration)1,469 18,931 1.2
Public Administration 1,966 23,794 1.3
Total 49,958 784,048 1.0
industrial parks. Major employers can largely be categorized
into three major sectors:
• Local government;
• Industrial uses, including agricultural processing; and
• Retail uses.
As will be referenced several times in this report, US-74/
Independence Boulevard is the major spine of Union’s
economy yet suffers from significant traffic congestion.
Union’s lack of interstate access to the Charlotte region
and beyond has indeed tempered its office and industrial
attraction. The planned US-74/Monroe Bypass, however,
creates the potential to open up new areas for business and
industrial development and significantly enhance access to
Charlotte and beyond.
Union is noted as being among the most significant
agricultural counties in the state of North Carolina. The
County boasts more than 178,000 acres of farmland,
equating to 44% of the County’s total acreage. Farms in
the County average around 161 acres each and boasts an
average value of nearly $840,000 per farm. Union County
farms are quite productive as well, with the County ranking
third among the state’s 100 counties in terms of total cash
receipts ($436 million in 2011). Other notable agriculture
state ranks the County holds:
• 1st in soybean production;
• 2nd in corn for grain;
• 3rd in broiler production;
• 3rd in livestock, dairy and poultry receipts;
• 4th in turkeys raised;
• 10th in nursery, greenhouse and Christmas tree
production; and
• 10th in heads of cattle.
30 : UNION COUNTy
APPendIx C
Economy & Market Conditions
STATE OF THE COUNTy ASSESSMENT
Union’s agricultural industry is indeed thriving, but is coming
in increasing conflict with residential growth, fueled in large
part by the low density of residential growth occurring in
the County. Farmers report significant increases in conflicts
with neighbors and, more importantly, greater difficulty
in maintaining or gaining land leases (most farms in the
County are on leased land) as owners opt out to sell for new
residential growth. Balancing the needs of residential growth
and agricultural health and needs will be a key issue in the
County in the coming decades. Farmers also report significant
issues with bridges, lane widths and quality of farm-to-market
roads, a lack of sufficient internet infrastructure, and a lack
of processing plants/destinations for their goods within the
County, fueling their transportation costs overall.
Largely missing from the County are higher-paying, white-
collar jobs, such as finance and insurance (a driving growth
industry in the region), real estate, professional services,
and management of companies (executive-level positions).
All of these industries are noticeably absent from Union
County and are office-using industries. Given portions of
Union (Weddington and Waxhaw) are within Charlotte’s
primary executive housing core (which drives office location
decisions), yet aren’t capturing office growth.
Residents of Union County are increasingly seeking white
collar jobs, such as opportunities in the financial services,
real estate and insurance industries. The lack of these types
of jobs creates a noticeable disparity between the ages and
incomes of those living in working in the area, particularly
in western Union County around Weddington and Waxhaw.
Important statistics regarding this trend are as follows:
• 44% of employed residents work in a position that pays
more than $40,000 annually, while only 34% of those
working in the County have positions that pay more
than $40,000 annually;
• Approximately 24% of those who live in the County have
a Bachelor’s or post-graduate degree, while 19% of those
working in the County have similar education levels.
MAJOR BUSINESS PARKS
AeroPointe Industrial Centre
Industrial Ventures I & II
Monroe Corporate Center
Old Hickory
Union West Business Park
1
2
3
4
5
1
A
B CD
E
F
G
H
I
F
2
3
4
5
MAJOR EMPLOyERS (500+ Employees)
Union County Schools (various locations)
Carolinas Medical Center
Tyson Farms
AT Allvac
Union County Government
Walmart
Harris Teeter, Inc.
City of Monroe
Pilgrims Pride
Charlotte Pipe & Foundry
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
MAP 3: MAJOR BUSINESS PARKS AND EMPLOyERS
J
Comprehensive Plan Update : 31
STATE OF THE COUNTy
As illustrated in Figure 13, Union County’s employment
market is recovering, with the area posting an 8.2%
unemployment rate in 2012, below the Metro Area
average of 9.3%. The entire Charlotte area is showing solid
economic growth and should see unemployment rates
declining further in the near future.
As noted in Figure 14, Union County’s job growth has not
compared with that of the region, averaging around .4 jobs
for every household gained since 2000. In the coming
years this ratio will improve, with the County seeing a
burst of job growth while maintaining solid job growth as
household growth returns to the area. As the market settles
down from the Great Recession Union will experience
moderate improvement in the jobs to household ratio from
.4 historically to around .5. This would result in job growth
averaging around close 2,000 jobs and 2,800 households
annually between 2011 and 2030.
FIGURE 13: UNION COUNTy HISTORIC UNEMPLOyMENT RATE
1990
2.9%2.7%2.8%
4.5%
10.0%
8.2%
1995 2000 2005 2010 2012
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
FIGURE 14: EMPLOyMENT AND HOUSEHOLD GROWTH WITH JOBS/HOUSEHOLD RATIO
0
2001 - 2005 2006 - 2010
Employment Growth Household Growth Jobs/Household Ratio
2011 - 2015 2016 - 2020 2021 - 2025 2026 - 2030
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
2,000
4,000
6,000 5,688
0.43
0.06
1.25
0.80
0.50 0.53
706
11,675
9,609
7,687 8,064
10,080
6,775
13,549
6,930
13,20013,352
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
32 : UNION COUNTy
APPendIx C
Economy & Market Conditions
STATE OF THE COUNTy ASSESSMENT
Office Market
Union County is highly affluent, with the County’s executive
housing areas clearly seen in Map 3 (darker greens
indicating high income areas, and yellows and reds indicating
more moderate income and lower income markets). Also
shown on this map are the key southside office cores,
extending from Center City to Southpark, Ballantyne, and
Whitehall. These cores are largely located along Charlotte’s
major freeway network, a network that, while coming close
to Union County, does not extend into Union.
Important to note is the recent shift occurring in the
office market to the west, with Whitehall (west of I-77)
emerging as an alternative to Ballantyne, instead of office
cores shifting east along I-485. This is due to a number of
factors, including regional access (more limited in Union,
particularly in executive housing areas), a lack of sites in
strategic locations in southeast Charlotte/Mecklenburg and
a more industrial/ aging retail character along Independence
Boulevard and other key thoroughfares in the area.
Indeed Union County’s office market is largely local-serving,
fueled by its housing growth and need for services such
as homebuilders, Realtors, small law or accounting firms,
and medical offices. As noted earlier in this report, location
quotients (the measure of the share of employment in Union
relative to the larger Charlotte area) for office-using sectors
such as Finance & Insurance and Professional Services are
very low in the County relative to the larger region, indicating
a lack of employment in these sectors when compared to the
region. Indeed, roughly 85% of all of Union County’s office-
using employers have fewer than 20 employees each, further
indicating both a small office market, and one that is price-
constrained or lease-sensitive as well. Initial NCG research
into the Union office market indicates a market that is quite
soft today, with high vacancy rates and low lease rates.
Addressing these issues and/or creating “locations”
attractive to office developers and users, could help to create
more opportunities for office uses and attract these types of
jobs lacking in the County today.
Industrial Market
Union’s industrial market has also trailed that of the
region, with manufacturing representing a more
significant economic engine for the County than
distribution and warehousing, which are stronger in the
larger Charlotte region.
Overall, manufacturing growth in Union and the Charlotte
Metro Area has seen a reversal in the last three years, with
both areas bottoming out in 2010 and rebounding since. Gas
prices and transportation costs have resulted in “on-shoring”
of manufacturing jobs back into the US. While some
traditional industries such as textile-related manufacturing
have continued to decline, there have been several industry
types showing promising growth including:
• Printing and Related Activities;
• Chemical Manufacturing;
• Machinery Manufacturing;
• Computer and Electrical Products; and
• Transportation Equipment Manufacturing.
Several of these industries fit within the initial agglomeration
of aerospace-related industries into Union and could be
promising prospects for continued growth in the future.
These industries are also import industries, bringing outside
dollars into the County and thus are important to the long-
term health of the community.
Conversely, transportation-related distribution and
warehousing of goods has seen very little growth in the
County over the past decade, not surprising given Union’s
location largely away from the regional freeway, airport and
rail network. However the planned 74 Bypass could enhance
both manufacturing and distribution opportunities in the area,
provided land and infrastructure are in place to support these
industries.
Comprehensive Plan Update : 33
STATE OF THE COUNTy
MAP 4: INCOME RATES AND ACCESS
High incomes, limited
access, policies prohibitive
Improving access, more
moderate incomes
Retail Market
The Union County retail market today is one that serves
local/convenience-based needs, but fails to capture
comparison goods/regional-type needs. Based on
sales data provided by Claritas, Union appears to be
conservatively capturing only around 75% of its retail
expenditure potential, with 25% or more of retail potential
leaving the County, most of it to Mecklenburg. Figure 15
(on the following page) provides approximate captures of
demand among various key store types, with the County
having an oversupply of health and personal care stores,
building materials, and electronics/appliance stores, and a
significant undersupply of retailers such as sporting goods
and book stores, clothing stores, general merchandise (big
box) stores department stores, and furniture stores. Many
of these retailers today are opting to locate in larger retail
centers, including lifestyle-oriented centers that are now
replacing malls.
Union’s retail market today is largely comprised of smaller
neighborhood centers and freestanding big box retailers
(Walmart being one of the largest employers in the County
today), with little to no retail being provided in more
walkable, mixed-use centers that have increasingly gained
favor in the market.
34 : UNION COUNTy
APPendIx C
NCG’s initial scan of the market indicates that most retail
centers in the County are relatively small, averaging
around 50,000 square feet and are either grocery anchored
neighborhood centers, unanchored strip centers, or
freestanding retailers. Vacancy rates in the County today are
rather high, averaging around 17%, and reflect the leakage
occurring to Mecklenburg.
A key issue in Union today, and a growing issue in the
County in the future, will be capturing retail potential while
avoiding retail abandonment. Opportunities appear to exist
in the County for lifestyle-oriented retail, be it in existing
town centers (such as area downtowns) or in newer mixed-
use centers similar to Birkdale Village or even the main
street component of Blakeney. These centers can be solely
a retail endeavor or can be mixed with residential to create
destinations currently lacking in Union today.
Another challenge is retail abandonment, which is already an
issue along Independence Boulevard/US-74, particularly in
Matthews and Charlotte. Retail, more so than any other land
use, is highly cannibalistic, with newer centers capturing
demand away from older centers, particularly those that fail
to create some sense of location and destination. As Union
continues to develop and new opportunities emerge, and as
the US-74 Bypass is developed, temptations will emerge to
overdevelop the retail market, creating the potential for retail
abandonment along aging corridors, such as the existing US-
74. Safeguarding against this is a real issue for Union County
going forward.
Economy & Market Conditions
STATE OF THE COUNTy ASSESSMENT
-100%-50%0%50%
52%
38%
55%
86%
61%
-53%
21%
-65%
-29%
42%
GAFO*
Food Service and Drinking Places - 722
General Merchandise Stores - 452
Sporting Goods, Hobby,
Book, Music Stores - 451
Clothing and Clothing
Accessory Stores - 448
Health and Personal Care Stores - 446
Food and Beverage Stores - 445
Building Material,
Garden Equipment Stores - 444
Electronics and Appliance Stores - 443
Furniture and Home
Furnishings Stores - 442
100%
FIGURE 15: UNION COUNTy LEAKAGE/SURPLUS
A key issue in Union today, and a growing issue in the County in the future,
will be capturing retail potential while avoiding retail abandonment. There will
continue to be opportunities to develop lifestyle-oriented retail that creates a
sense of location and destination for shoppers.
Comprehensive Plan Update : 35
STATE OF THE COUNTy
36 : UNION COUNTy
APPendIx C
Land Use
STATE OF THE COUNTy ASSESSMENT
Union County is a county divided
into two very different places in terms of
land use. The western portion of the County,
closest to the Mecklenburg line, is urbanized
and characterized by small towns, suburban
neighborhoods and strip retail. In stark
contrast, the eastern portion of the County
remains largely undeveloped, characterized
by large farms, rural landscapes and limited
development in pockets typically located at
crossroads.
Existing Land Use
As shown in Figure 16, agriculture and residential land uses
make up around 94 percent of all land in unincorporated
Union County. Of this, 48 percent of the land is used for
agriculture; 46 percent is used for residential purposes.
The predominant residential use is designated “Agriculture
– Homestead”. These homestead parcels are used for
homes and/or agricultural purposes. In addition, around 12
percent of the remaining residential land is in single family
use and 1% is multi-family. Multi-family parcels are mainly
located close to the municipalities and near the JAARS
facility in the southern portion of the County. Commercial
properties make up around 1 percent of County land and
mainly cluster around the edges of municipalities. Map
5 illustrates land use in the County. Figure 16 details the
breakdown of existing land uses in the County.
Vacant 0.64%
Unknown 1.57%
Single Family - Attached 0.12%
Single Family 11.97%
Open Space 0.32%
Office 0.08%
Multi-Family - Institutional 0.01%
Multi-Family 1.12%
Institutional 0.51%
Industrial 0.34%
Common Area 0.44%
Commercial 1.25%
Agricultural - Homestead 33.05%
Agricultural 48.57%
FIGURE 16: EXISTING LAND USE UNINCORPORATED UNION COUNTy
Comprehensive Plan Update : 37
STATE OF THE COUNTy
MAP 5: EXISTING LAND USE
FEATURES LAND USE
Local Roads
Major Roads
Railroads
Monroe Bypass
Study Area
Rivers
Lakes
Wingate University
Charlotte-Monroe Airport
Cane Creek Park
Open Space
Common
Agriculture
Agriculture - Homestead
Single Family
Single Family - Attached
Multi-Family - Inst.
Multi-Family
Office
Institutional
Commercial
Industrial
Mixed Use
Vacant
38 : UNION COUNTy
APPendIx C
zoning
Similar to land use, there is a lack of diversity in zoning in the County’s jurisdiction. Agriculture uses comprise 91 percent
of unincorporated Union. Residential uses make up nearly 8 percent of the area while nonresidential uses comprise the
remaining 1.1 percent. Map 6 illustrates zoning in the County.
STATE OF THE COUNTy ASSESSMENT
Land Use
Agriculture uses make up the majority of the zoning in unincorporated Union County.
Comprehensive Plan Update : 39
STATE OF THE COUNTy
No zoning
B-2
B-4
City
HC
HI
LI
PUD6-R20
PUD6-R6
MAP 6: zONING
FEATURES COUNTy zONING
Major Roads
Railroads
Monroe Bypass
Study Area
Rivers
Lakes
Cane Creek Park
Charlotte-Monroe Airport
Wingate University
R-10
R-20
R-40
R-6
R-8
RA-20
RA-40
40 : UNION COUNTy
APPendIx C
An important step in planning for future growth is the
determination of what land is currently available for future
development, and what portion of that land supply is
suitable for one or more land uses. Typically, land supply
includes any parcels that are categorized as “undeveloped”
(vacant, without a structure) in the data provided by
the County tax assessor’s office. Parcels with existing
residential, commercial/office, industrial, park/recreation, and
institutional/public land uses are excluded. However, parcels
that are developed but underutilized (or underdeveloped)
may be added to the supply, as they are likely to redevelop
over time. (Note: Generally, a developed parcel is considered
underdeveloped if the structure value is less than 50% of
the value of the parcel. Some of the parcels that fit this
definition may be excluded from the supply if specific
circumstances indicate the parcel is not likely to redevelop,
such as designation as a historic landmark.)
Land used for agriculture (pasture or crops) may be
included in the land supply; however, those operations
participating in voluntary agricultural districts, encompassed
by an agricultural conservation easement, and/or benefiting
from present use value taxation (bona fide farms) are
typically not included. Large water bodies and parcels that
are permanently protected, such as parcels that are within
a conservation easement or parcels that comprise state- or
federally-maintained open space (e.g., parks forests, game
lands, etc.) are also excluded from the supply.
For this process, the land supply has been defined through
the CONNECT Our Future (“CONNECT”) project, a regional
planning process being conducted concurrently. The land
supply has been vetted in all participating counties, including
Union. The following categories of parcels are included in the
CONNECT land supply:
• Undeveloped
• Underdeveloped
• Agriculture (currently used for pasture or crops)
As illustrated in Map 7, the Land Supply not including
agricultural lands is made up of 119,380 acres or 30% of
the total land area of Union County. Many agricultural lands
adjacent to urbanizing areas could also be considered as part
of the Land Supply. If agricultural lands are included in the
Land Supply, the total is 319,789 acres, or 81% of the total.
Currently, Union County’s land supply is predominately used
for Agricultural uses (Around 51%). Developed land makes
up around 17% of the land use, 14% of the total is identified
as underdeveloped land. Undeveloped land is around 16%.
Around 2% of the land reserved is in permanent open space
or covered by surface water.
STATE OF THE COUNTy ASSESSMENT
Agriculture
Developed
Undeveloped
Underdeveloped
Open Space
and Water Use
Development Capacity
Land Use
FIGURE 17: DEVELOPMENT CAPACITy
Comprehensive Plan Update : 41
STATE OF THE COUNTy
MAP 7: LAND SUPPLy
FEATURES DEVELOPMENT STATUS
Major Roads
Railroads
Monroe Bypass
Study Area
Rivers
Lakes
Protected Lands
Cane Creek Park
Wingate University
Charlotte-Monroe Airport
Permanent Open Space
Agriculture
Vacant
Underutilized
Developed
Water
42 : UNION COUNTy
APPendIx C
Transportation
STATE OF THE COUNTy ASSESSMENT
As previously mentioned, Union County is one of the fastest growing
counties in North Carolina. Such rapid growth and the resultant boom in development can bring
substantial benefits to the community, but also has the potential to create large infrastructure
problems. The dependence of local commuters on regional routes such as US-74, Old
Monroe, NC 16 (Providence Road), Rea Road, Lawyers Road, and NC 218, coupled with
potential demand for increased development, has resulted in a conflict between current
development, existing neighborhoods, and transportation interests.
Overall, people living and working in Union County has
increased only slightly (by 3.1%), while those people living
in Union County but commuting elsewhere has increased
by 62%, a dramatic change. An additional 4,997 people
commute from places outside Union County to work in the
county, an increase of 21.7% between 2002 and 2011.
Historically, Union County was characterized by rural and
agricultural development. With this in mind, many of the
highways in the County were originally intended to be
two-lane farm roads. New development, however, has
transformed many of these once-country roads to major
transportation corridors, creating problems with capacity
and safety. Developing a transportation system that
adequately serves the vehicular needs of the residents
and workers without compromising the rural heritage and
small-town atmosphere in the area is a major challenge for
Union County.
As part of this Multimodal Transportation Plan / 2025 Com-
prehensive Plan Update, the Multimodal Transportation Plan
(MTP) for the area will be updated. In conjunction with the
communities of Marvin, Monroe, Stallings, Mineral Springs,
Unionville, Waxhaw, Weddington, Wesley Chapel, Wingate,
and Fairview as well as NCDOT, the local transit, and other
transportation and land regulatory stakeholders, this planning
effort will provide a comprehensive view of the current state
of transportation in the region and suggest possible improve-
ments to the transportation network in Union County. This
plan will focus not only on automobile transportation, but
also on walking, bicycling, and transit, looking specifically at
deficiencies in the network for each mode.
Of the 83,179 workers that live in Union County, 57,875 travel outside of the county to work, while 25,304 work in the County.
Some 27,990 people commute to Union County to work.
2002 2011
MAP 8: UNION COUNTy COMMUTERS 2002 AND 2011
Comprehensive Plan Update : 43
STATE OF THE COUNTy
As Union County continues to grow, providing more
choices will become increasingly important. Using data
from the Housing + Affordability Index, a service of
the Center for Neighborhood Technology, generalized
measures of transportation affordability were calculated
for Union County. Areas farther away from major
commuting routes and those with fewer transportation
options represent locations where transportation is
expensive, costing a household more than $4,500
per year. As indicated, much of Union County lacks
transportation options, whereas areas closer to Charlotte
spend substantially less money on transportation,
likely due to the presence of more options and shorter
commutes.
Everyone in Union County spends more than 25% of
their income on transportation, while certain areas in the
County spend between 30 and 35% of their income on
transportation, a figure much higher than in Charlotte.
Providing more options to residents of Union County can
help reduce transportation costs and increase prosperity in
the community.

F IGURE 1 : A NNUAL VMT C OST (WHITE = <$3,200,
B ROWN = > $4,500)
MAP 9: ANNUAL VMT COST
(White = <$3,200, Brown = > $4,500)
MAP 10: PERCENT OF INCOME SPENT ON TRANSPORTATION
F IGURE 1 : P ERCENT OF I NCOME S PENT ON T RANSPORTATION (LIGHT
G REEN = < 15%, D ARK B LUE = > 35%) (Light Blue = < 15%, Dark Blue = > 35%)
95% of residents in Union County spend between 30% and 35% of their income
on transportation and housing costs combined.
44 : UNION COUNTy
APPendIx C
Transportation
STATE OF THE COUNTy ASSESSMENT
Roadway: Existing Facilities
Many of the roadways in Union County are two-lane
roadways with speed limits of 45 to 55 miles per hour. All
AADT (Average Annual Daily Traffic) counts were collected
by NCDOT in 2011. AADT’s are measured in vehicles
traveled per day (vpd) in both directions. This synopsis
details the location of the highest AADT on major corridors
in the study area.
Major Highways
Us-74: US-74 is an east-west United States highway that
runs from Chattanooga, TN to Wrightsville Beach, NC. In
Union County, US-74 crosses the Mecklenburg County
border at Stallings, traverses the City of Monroe, and
continues east through Wingate and Marshville to the border
of Anson County towards Wadesboro. Within Union County,
the US-74 corridor is 25.3 miles long, varying between a
divided four-lane and divided six-lane highway with speeds
ranging between 45 and 55 mph.
Us-601: US-601 is an north-south United States highway
that begins at US Route 321 near Tarboro, SC and ends at
US Route 52 in Mount Airy, NC. It crosses over the South
Carolina border into Union County, converges briefly with
US-74 through Monroe, then continues north to the border
of Union County and Stanley County. Within Union County,
the US-601 corridor is 14.1 miles long. The speed limit is 55
mph in rural areas, but is reduced to 45 mph where it runs
concurrent with US-74 through Monroe.
nC-16: NC-16 is a North Carolina state highway that
originates in Waxhaw, NC, travels north to Weddington,
NC and into Mecklenburg County, NC. This two lane state
highway runs 8.2 miles through the study area. Speed limits
range from 25 mph at its origin to 45 mph as the route
travels out of Waxhaw.
nC-75: NC-75 is a North Carolina state highway also known
as the Waxhaw Highway. This two-lane highway travels from
the South Carolina border through Waxhaw, converging with
NC-84 in Monroe and terminating at its interchange with US-
74. Speed limits range from 55 mph in rural areas down to
20 mph through Waxhaw and Monroe.
nC-84: NC- 84 is a two-lane North Carolina state highway
connecting the Town of Weddington and the City of Monroe.
The speed limit is 45 mph between the two municipalities,
transitioning to 35 mph in Weddington and 20 mph through
Monroe to its interchange at US-74.
nC-200: NC- 200 is a two-lane North Carolina state highway,
originating at the South Carolina State line, traveling north
through the City of Monroe to the Union County line. In Union
County, the roadway is 32.4 miles long with speeds ranging
between 55 mph in rural areas and 20 mph through Monroe.
nC-205: NC- 205 is a North Carolina state highway
beginning in Marshville, Union County, NC and running 14
miles within the study area north to the border of Union and
Stanley County. This rural route is a 55 mph two-lane state
highway that passes through farmlands and rolling hills.
nC-207: NC- 207 is a North Carolina two-lane rural state
highway. This 13-mile long highway starts on the South
Carolina border and runs into Monroe. NC-207 terminates
at its intersection with North Church Street and NC-75/NC-
84. Speed limits range from 55 mph in rural areas south of
Monroe to 35 mph through Monroe to its northern terminus.
nC-218: NC-218 is a two-lane rural highway running east-
west from Mint Hill in Mecklenburg County to Polkton in
Anson County. In the study area, NC-218 is 21 miles in
length with a speed limit of 55 mph.
Slightly more than 80% of people in Union County drive alone to work every day.
Comprehensive Plan Update : 45
STATE OF THE COUNTy
nC-522: NC- 522 is an two-lane North Carolina state highway
running north from the South Carolina border for 5.8 miles in
Union County until it intersects with NC-200 in Roughedge,
NC. The speed limit on this road is 55 mph.
nC-742: NC-742 is located in the northeast corner of Union
County for a distance of 2.7 miles, connecting Wadesboro
in Anson County with Oakboro in Stanley County. The speed
limit on this road is 55 mph.
Roadway: Planned Facilities
Many community and county plans pertaining to future
transportation plans provide detailed recommendations for
connectivity, design, policy, and new infrastructure. The
regional roadways recommended in these plans provide the
foundation for all roadway recommendations in this study.
They also provide policy and design ideas that will be shared
and applied regionally in scenario planning, policy guidance,
and final recommendations. The Plan Review Technical
Memo submitted earlier in the project provides an overview
of the regional multi-modal transportation recommendations
in previous studies.
Union County Programmed / Planned
Roadway Projects (MUMPO 2035 LRTP)
According to the MUMPO 2035 LRTP conducted in 2010 there
are only a handful of roadway projects ongoing and programed
for the Union County study area. The Monroe Connector/
Bypass is the only major roadway project planned between
2010 and 2015. This new freeway is four lanes from I-485 to
US-74 (Wingate). This is a 19.7 mile long roadway, with a toll
road (MUMPO Technical Coordinating Committee, 2010). The
proposed roadway enhancements and new roads shown in
the map (on the following page) reference the Multimodal
Transportation Plan for the Charlotte Regional Transportation
Planning Organization- CRTPO (formerly MUMPO).

Western Union County
mUmPo 2035 lrTP Programmed Projects for 2010-2015
• The Monroe Connector/ Bypass will be the longest and
largest roadway project planned and funded for Union
County between the years 2010 and 2015. This new
Bypass will be a 19.7 mile 4 lane bypass from I-485
to US-74 (Wingate) and will be a toll road. The bypass
runs from Stallings to Marshville and has a cost of
$813,500,000.
• The project named Charles Street is a 0.6 mile long road
widening project (3 lanes) from Sunset Dr. to Franklin
St.. This project will be located in Monroe, NC and has
an expected cost of $7,336,000.
• Another road-widening project is, Indian Trail Road.
Indian Trail Road is a widening (4 lanes) from Old
Monroe Rd. to Independence Blvd. (US-74) for 1.4 miles
in Union County. This project is located in Indian Trail, NC
with an expected cost of $5,900,000.
• Stallings Road is a road-widening project (4 lanes) from
Monroe Rd. to Independence Blvd. (US-74) for 1.4 miles.
This project will run from Matthews, NC (Mecklenburg
County) to Stallings, NC (Union County) and has an
estimated cost of $14,271,000.
mUmPo 2035 lrTP Programmed Projects for 2016-2025
• John St../ Old Monroe Rd.. is a road widening (4 lanes)
project from I-485 to Indian Trail Rd.. This project is 2.76
miles in length and runs from Matthews (Mecklenburg
County) into Union County.
• Airport Road is another road-widening project (4 lanes)
from Goldmine Road to NC 84 and runs 1.12 miles
(MUMPO Technical Coordinating Committee, 2010). This
project is located between Wesley Chapel and Monroe.
It has the estimated cost of $23,145,000.
Eastern Union County
Many state roads, including US-74 and NC 205,
throughout the County lead directly to the Town
of Marshville. US-74 runs directly through this small
town, while NC 205 and Old Highway 74 are a few.
There have been recommendations for a freeway to run
south of the city to connect the east side of Marshville
at US-74 and the west side of Marshville at US-74.
Many of these recommendations can be found in the Union
County Multimodal Transportation Plan (Union MPO, 2012).
46 : UNION COUNTy
APPendIx C
Transportation
STATE OF THE COUNTy ASSESSMENT
MAP 11: 2010 AM BASE NETWORK VOLUME TO CAPACITy
Roadway: Capacity Analysis
Based on our capacity analysis of the current conditions
and the 2035 “no build” scenario, in which all currently
funded projects are constructed without any new projects
and traffic volumes are extrapolated to the future year,
congestion will increase substantially in Union County
by 2035, particularly in the areas closer to Charlotte. All
information pertaining to the volume to capacity analysis
was derived from the Regional Travel Demand Model for
Union County. Maps 11-14 illustrate the various Volume to
Capacity conditions by scenario.
Comprehensive Plan Update : 47
STATE OF THE COUNTy
MAP 13: 2010 PM BASE NETWORK VOLUME TO CAPACITy
48 : UNION COUNTy
APPendIx C
MAP 14: PM EXISTING + COMMITTED NETWORK VOLUME TO CAPACITy
TABLE 5: HIGH CRASH INTERSECTIONS, AUTOMOBILE CRASHES, 2010 - 2013
Intersection Name Crash
Frequency
Highway 74 (Roosevelt Boulevard) and Williams Road 65
Highway 74 (Roosevelt Boulevard) and Dickerson Boulevard 54
Highway 74 (Roosevelt Boulevard), Morgan Mill Road, and Purser Avenue 53
Highway 74 (Roosevelt Boulevard) and McLarity Drive 41
Weddington Road and Providence Road 35
Old Monroe Road and Wesley Stoudts Road 33
Highway 74 (Roosevelt Boulevard) and Forest Park Drive 29
Highway 74 (Roosevelt Boulevard) and Blenheim Road 28
North Charlotte Avenue and Dickerson Boulevard 26
Highway 74 (Roosevelt Boulevard) and Old Pageland Monroe Road 25
Highway 74 (Roosevelt Boulevard) and Aurora Boulevard 24
Old Monroe Road and Woodland Road 23
Stevens Road and Idlewild Road 23
Comprehensive Plan Update : 49
STATE OF THE COUNTy
Transportation
STATE OF THE COUNTy ASSESSMENT
Crashes for vehicles as well as for pedestrians and bicyclists
are addressed in the following section.
Roadway
Using automobile crash data for Union County from August
2010 to July 2013, a series of maps were produced for the
entire County, which display the crash density, location of
high frequency crash points, and the locations of serious
injury or fatality crashes.

Map 17 (p. 51) and Table 5 (left) provide information about
the number of crashes by intersection for Union County.
Using ArcGIS, a buffer of 200 feet was created around
each intersection point in the County and the crashes that
occurred within this buffer area were totaled. Overall, thirteen
intersections were identified as “high crash”, indicating they
had more than twenty crashes occurring within a 200 foot
buffer of the intersection center point. Not surprisingly,
the main corridor from Monroe into Charlotte, Highway 74
(Roosevelt Blvd..), carries a large number of commuters
and has the most frequent accident rate (between Monroe
and the Union County line) at slightly more than 84 crashes
per mile, using data from 2010 to 2013. The North Carolina
average crash rate is 6.472 crashes per mile of roadway, using
data from 2009 to 2011 (Brenneman et al., 2011; NCDOT,
2013). The top four high frequency crash intersections occur
along on Highway 74 (Roosevelt Blvd..). It is notable that no
high crash locations occur outside of municipal limits in Union
County and high crash intersections are more frequent in
proximity to the Union County /Mecklenburg County line and
near the center of the City of Monroe.
Using the kernel density analysis tool, which calculates the
number of points in a specified unit area in order to identify
clusters, it is clear that crashes occur with the highest
frequency along Highway 74. Some other areas that have
notable crash densities are along Providence Road and in
Weddington at the intersection of Waxhaw Indian Trail Road
and Weddington Road.
Map 18 (p. 51) illustrates those locations where fatal and
serious injury automobile crashes occurred. Overall, 11,959
crashes occurred in Union County during this three year time
period (2010 – 2013). Of these crashes, only 71 resulted in
a fatality and 70 resulted in a serious injury, accounting for
only 1.2 percent of all crashes. While crash concentrations
are centered on those areas within municipal boundaries,
Map 18 (p. 51) indicates a different trend. Crashes that result
in a fatality or serious injury are much less frequent and are
likely to occur across the County and not overwhelmingly
within jurisdictional boundaries. Also, fatal or serious injury
crashes are most likely in locations where higher speeds
are prevalent. One constant, however, is that Highway 74
still accounts for a significant concentration of crashes, both
fatal, serious injury, and otherwise.
It is important not only to examine crashes by frequency,
but also to normalize crash data by mile and by severity.
The crashes by mile analysis yielded similar results to
the frequency analysis, namely that US-74 and NC 16
have higher crashes per mile than other major Union
County roadways. However, when normalizing crashes
by severity using the NCDOT Severity Index calculation,
the analysis provides substantially different results. More
rural roadways, such as US 601, NC 200, and NC 218 rank
much higher per this metric, indicating that more severe
crashes occur more frequently on these roads relative to
others in the County.
Corridor Operations: Safety
50 : UNION COUNTy
APPendIx C
MAP 15: UNION COUNTy CRASHES – CRASHES PER MILE
MAP 16: UNION COUNTy CRASHES – SEVERITy INDEX By ROADWAy
Comprehensive Plan Update : 51
STATE OF THE COUNTy
MAP 17: HIGH CRASH INTERSECTIONS, AUTOMOBILE CRASHES, 2010 - 2013
MAP 18: CRASH ANALySIS, AUTOMOBILE CRASHES, 2010 - 2013
Marvin
Lake Park
Monroe
Stallings
Marshville
Waxhaw
Mint Hill
Fairview
Hemby Bridge
Unionville
Wesley Chapel
Mineral Springs
Weddington
Charlotte
Indian Trail
Wingate
Union County Crash Analysis
for Crashes Occurring between
August 2010 and July 2013
0 5 102.5
Miles$Union County Crashes
Local Roads
Railroads
NC Counties
Municipal Boundaries
Automobile Crash Frequency
Very Low
Low
Medium
High
Disclaimer: This map was created with the best available data, however, it is provided "as is"
without warranty of any representation of accuracy, timeliness, reliability or completeness.
This map does not represent a legal survey of the land and is for graphical purposes only.
Use of this Data for any purpose should be with acknowlegement of the limitations of the Data,
including the fact that the Data is dynamic and is in a constant state of maintenance.
Created by Max Bushell on October 18, 2013
52 : UNION COUNTy
APPendIx C
MAP 19: KERNEL DENSITy ANALySIS, FATAL AND SERIOUS INJURy AUTOMOBILE CRASHES, 2010 - 2013
MAP 20: KERNEL DENSITy, PEDESTRIAN AND BICyCLE CRASHES 2007 - 2011
Comprehensive Plan Update : 53
STATE OF THE COUNTy
MAP 21: FATAL CRASHES, SERIOUS INJURy CRASHES, AND OTHER PEDESTRIAN AND BICyCLE CRASHES 2007 - 2011
Pedestrian / Bicycle Crashes
Pedestrian and bicycle crashes are also examined in this
section. Crash data was retrieved from the NCDOT Division
of Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation for Union County for
the years 2007 through 2011.
Just as with automobile crashes, pedestrian and bicycle
crashes occur with a greater frequency within municipal
boundaries. Using crash data from 2007 to 2011, Map 20
and Map 21 show the locations where pedestrian and
bicycle crashes occurred as well as the severity of those
crashes. Monroe has the most pedestrian and bicycle
crashes, while Unionville, Waxhaw, and Indian Trail also have
significant clusters of crashes.
Over the five-year period, relatively few pedestrian and
bicycle crashes occurred overall. However, a much greater
percentage of these crashes resulted in an injury or fatality
as opposed to automobile crashes. For bicycle crashes, there
were two bicycle crash fatalities and two bicycle crashes
resulting in serious injuries of the 49 total bicycle crashes,
accounting together for eight percent of all bicycle crashes.
For pedestrians, there were 13 pedestrian fatalities and
14 pedestrian serious injuries among 130 total pedestrian
crashes, accounting for 20.1 percent of the total.
54 : UNION COUNTy
APPendIx C
The following is a brief, graphical summary of that data.
FIGURE 18: PEDESTRIAN AND BICyCLE CRASHES By HOUR
20
15
10
5
0
12
a
m
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
no
o
n
1
p
m
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11
Pedestrian
Bicycle
Cycling crashes often happen after working hours; many pedestrian crashes occur mid-day or late in the evening.
Cycling crashes tend to follow male/female and white/black trends; Hispanics are disproportionately represented in pedestrian
crashes.
Asian
White
Hispanic
Black
0 50 100
Bicycle
Pedestrian
Pedestrian
Bicycle
Female
Male
0 50 100 150
FIGURE 19: PEDESTRIAN AND BICyCLE CRASHES By RACE AND GENDER
FIGURE 19: PEDESTRIAN AND BICyCLE CRASHES By SEVERITy 2007-2011
= Bicycle Crash
= Fatal Bicycle Crash
x = Pedestrian Crash
x = Fatal Ped. Crash
Cycling crashes at left and pedestrian x crashes at right from 2007 to 2011 tended to occur in downtown areas and along a few
major corridors, particularly US-74; however, a number of fatal pedestrian crashes happened in rural areas to the south and east.
There is not a “typical” bicycle or pedestrian crash victim; but we can say the following about many of these crashes looking
at this data as well as individual crash records:
• While alcohol did not play a role in a large number of
crashes, one high-activity center along Charlotte Avenue
northwest of downtown Monroe involved a cluster of
crashes that were related to alcohol consumption;
• Crashes often occurred for unexpected reasons: parents
backing over their children, attempted (or successful)
homicide, or domestic disputes;
• Minorities and Hispanic populations were
disproportionately represented, although a study of the
effects of income did not reveal a particular correlation
to bicycle/pedestrian crashes;
• The US-74 corridor and some of its cross-streets
stands out strongly as a place where both cycling and
especially pedestrian crashes occur with regularity;
• There were actually more fatal pedestrian crashes in the
sparsely populated rural parts of Union County (7) than
in urban and suburban areas (6); and
• Downtown areas as well as some school areas were
locations where crashes happened more often than
other locations.
Comprehensive Plan Update : 55
STATE OF THE COUNTy
Transportation
STATE OF THE COUNTy ASSESSMENT
Bicycle and Pedestrian:
Existing Facilities
The pedestrian and bicycle network of facilities in Union
County is by no means extensive. However, there are
some sidewalks, mostly in the downtown areas of the
municipalities, as well as bicycle facilities, though these
represent signed bicycle routes, i.e. low traffic roadways
suitable for biking, but without bicycle infrastructure.
While this network does not particularly support using
non-motorized modes of transportation due to a lack of
connectivity, there are plans to implement a connected
greenway system, which would include existing facilities
as well as utility corridors, riparian areas, and existing road
right-of-way. Map 22 provides more information.
Bicycle and Pedestrian:
Planned Facilities
Many plans for communities across Union County already
provide recommendations for bicycle, pedestrian, and
greenway infrastructure. Map 22 presents the existing and
proposed pedestrian and bicycle facilities in Union County.
These plans differentiate facility types and emphasize a
regional vision by including connections across jurisdictional
boundaries. The regional network collectively recommended
by these plans will provide the starting point for pedestrian
and bicycle facility recommendations in this study. They also
provide policy and program ideas that can be shared and
applied regionally through this study, along with other best
practices from around the state. Existing plans covering
bicycle and pedestrian issues are discussed below.
MAP 22: EXISTING AND PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN AND BICyCLE FACILITIES, UNION COUNTy, NC CRASHES 2007 - 2011
56 : UNION COUNTy
APPendIx C
Transportation
STATE OF THE COUNTy ASSESSMENT
bicycle
There are two general classes of bicycle facilities: on-street
(bicycle lanes, wide outside lanes, wide shoulders) and off-
street (greenways and multi-use paths).
on-street bicycle facilities: Bicycle facilities usually require
bicycle lanes and wide shoulders for bicycle use. For those
wanting to bicycle as an alternative transportation it is a
challenge. Most two-lane roads in the County have narrow
shoulders and higher speed limits making it impossible for a
commuter to ride safely.
According to the Western Union County Local Area Regional
Transportation Plan (LARTP) it is anticipated that on-street
bicycle lanes/ wide outside lanes will be included as part
of the NC 16 and NC 84 widening projects and the Rea
Road Extension project that are part of the Transportation
Improvement Program (TIP). There are also other smaller-
scale widening projects in the TIP and MUMPO LRTP that
would likely have on- street bicycle facilities, both within the
study area and nearby.
off-street bicycle facilities: Most municipalities have the
desire for greenways and multi- use paths. Ultimately, they
desire connectivity among the municipalities and in the
future hope to connect all trails with the Carolina Thread Trail.
village of marvin: The Village of Marvin adopted its Parks
and Greenways Master Plan in March 2008, identifying
trails as either Tier I (8 miles of trails), or Tier II (16
miles of trails). Tier I trails serve as the backbone of the
proposed greenway system, whereas the Tier II trails
would serve as connectors and loop trails. The greenway
trail widths recommended by this plan range from 8’ to
12’ to accommodate bicyclists, pedestrians, and horses.
The Village of Marvin, recently participated in the Western
Union County LARTP. This plan included recommendations
for multi-purpose paths, bicycle lanes and sidewalks on
certain roads within the study area (MUMPO Technical
Coordinating Committee, 2010).
village of wesley Chapel: The Village of Wesley Chapel
Master Plan included concepts for a greenway system.
While not a formally adopted greenway plan, the concepts
are useful in planning for potential future facilities.
Carolina Thread Trail: The Carolina Thread Trail is a plan for
a regional, 15-county greenway trail network, centering on
Charlotte and Mecklenburg County. The concept is to link
regional parks, green space, and attractions by a series of
greenway trails.
Pedestrian
In general, Union County lacks the offerings of sidewalks to
enable residents to walk between destinations. Below is a
snapshot of the municipalities existing plans.
Town of fairview: The Town of Fairview is almost entirely
residential, therefore sidewalks are not currently required
for residential development and commercial development
would require rezoning and a site plan review by the town.
Sidewalks are usually requested as part of the development
review process.
Town of Indian Trail: The Town of Indian Trail has 85 miles of
existing sidewalk. According to the LRTP study the citizens
of Indian Trail are especially interested in sidewalks in close
proximity to schools within the downtown district. Sidewalks
are prioritized by the need for connectivity and destinations
and new pedestrian facilities will be implemented as the
town recently adopted several new plans. Based on the
type of development and roadway classification the Unified
Development Ordinance requires sidewalks. The Town of
Indian Trail Utilizes Powell Bill Funds, and grants, as well as
allocating $350,000 annually to put towards the construction
of sidewalks.
Comprehensive Plan Update : 57
STATE OF THE COUNTy
village of marvin: The Village of Marvin has only recently
participated in the LRTP, which resulted in a CTP document
for Marvin, Wesley Chapel, Weddington, and Waxhaw. The
CTP included recommendations for multi-purpose paths,
bicycle lanes, and sidewalks and very specific roads within
the study area, dependent upon the development and
growth of the town.
Town of mineral springs: There are no current sidewalk
programs or requirements for sidewalks in the Town of
Mineral Springs. The town is a low-density rural residential
area. According to the town, they are much more focused
on greenway development, which it believes to be more
appropriate for its land use pattern.
City of monroe: There is a sidewalk program managed
by the City of Monroe Department of Transportation that
is submitted to the City Council for approval every year.
Priorities are based on safety issues and pedestrian traffic.
The citizens of Monroe have a large interest in the provision
of sidewalks and greenways within the community.
Monroe has a $30,000 budget for sidewalks each year
in addition to the Powell Bill funds; however the City
of Monroe has no current pedestrian plans according
to the 2010 LRTP (MUMPO Technical Coordinating
Committee, 2010).
Town of stallings: Stallings requires sidewalks as a part
of most of their new developments, so they are currently
working to complete the identified gaps in their pedestrian
network system.
Town of Unionville: Sidewalks are not currently required
in the Town of Unionville. The town is almost entirely
residential. With commercial development there are
requirements for rezoning and a site plan review in which
sidewalks can be requested.
Town of waxhaw: The Town of Waxhaw Unified
Development Ordinance requires that sidewalks be installed
throughout private development.
The Waxhaw 2030 Comprehensive Plan set goals for
pedestrian facilities. The town recognizes a need and a
plan will be developed for the future. Sidewalk projects are
primarily based on priority on a request-driven process; older
requests have a higher priority over newer requests.
Town of wingate: The comprehensive land use plan in 2010
was focused on enhancing their downtown and linkages to
Wingate University. The Monroe Bypass will reorient access
to the town from the south to the north. Sidewalks are a
requirement for any new development.
Town of weddington: Weddington, as of 2010, had
no requirements for pedestrian facilities. The town did
not have a sidewalk construction program, and has no
requirements or codes that require sidewalk for any new
development.
village of wesley Chapel: The Village intends to implement
a plan that includes recommendations for multi-purpose
paths, bicycle lanes, and sidewalks on certain roads within
the study area.
Town of marshville: The Town of Marshville has
very little opportunity for pedestrian use. The area has many
two-lane roads with narrow shoulders which
make foot travel difficult and unsafe. However, the town
does have plans to incorporate more connectivity for
pedestrian access.
58 : UNION COUNTy
APPendIx C
Transportation
STATE OF THE COUNTy ASSESSMENT
Transit: Existing Facilities
The only fixed-route transit service currently in Union County
is that of the 74X Regional Express route operated by the
Charlotte Area Transit Service (CATS). Service is limited to
weekdays, and only during peak morning and afternoon
periods running on 20- to 30-minute headways. The base fare
is $3.50 per one-way trip, and the trip length from the K-Mart in
Monroe to the Charlotte Transportation Center is approximately
50 minutes (about 17 minutes longer than using a private
automobile). The most recent transportation plan describes the
route performance as having an average of 19 passengers per
hour in the AM peak period and 16 passengers in the PM peak.
About 182 people ride the service each weekday. There was at
one point in 2011 discussions of terminating service to Union
County, although this action was not taken.
Union County also operates human service transportation for
trips within and without the County, at fares ranging from $2
to $10 (Charlotte). A two-day advance notification is required.
Participants must prove that they are senior citizen at least 60
years of age; a developmentally disabled adult; Medicaid client;
veteran eligible for medical treatment at a VA Hospital or clinic;
or physically disabled.
Rail: Existing Facilities
There are two railways that cross in the City of Monroe. The
first is a CSX Transportation rail line that is coming to/from
Charlotte and the second is a Norfolk Southern line, also
known as the Seaboard Coast Line, coming from the South
Carolina border into Waxhaw to Monroe and on to either
Charlotte or towards Rockingham. There are no plans to
expand service on these rail lines at the current time.
Airport: Existing Facilities
The Charlotte-Monroe Executive Airport is located just
northeast of the City of Monroe just along US-74. The City
of Monroe, as the primary developer of the airport, is also
the operator of the facility, with the goal of providing general
aviation service to corporate and private jets. With a 7,000
foot runway, the Charlotte-Monroe Executive Airport can
handle almost any type of corporate or private aircraft.
The airport is accessible by car via Airport Road and is
conveniently located close to both US-74 and NC-84. The site
itself contains both the airport as well as a parcel designated
as a aerospace industrial area (Charlotte-Monroe Executive
Airport, 2013).
Comprehensive Plan Update : 59
STATE OF THE COUNTy
MAP 23: CATS TRANSIT ROUTES, UNION COUNTy, NC
MAP 24: RAIL LINES, UNION COUNTy, NC
60 : UNION COUNTy
APPendIx C
MAP 25: CHARLOTTE-MONROE EXECUTIVE AIRPORT LOCATION, UNION COUNTy, NC:
Comprehensive Plan Update : 61
STATE OF THE COUNTy
Water & Wastewater Infrastructure
STATE OF THE COUNTy ASSESSMENT
Water Supply
Union County lies within the Catawba and yadkin Pee-Dee
River watersheds and is served by two water treatment
plants: the Catawba River WTP (CRWTP) in Lancaster
County, SC, and the Anson WTP in Anson County, NC.
The CRWTP provides the majority of the water (15.1 MGD)
to Union County (about 75%) from the Catawba River
basin. The County’s primary water supply and treatment
is delivered from the Catawba River WTP (CRWTP) in
Lancaster County, SC.
The CRWTP is a regional treatment facility with a permitted
operating capacity of 36 MGD with the County having
ownership of 18 MGD of capacity. With the County’s
ownership stake in this plant, issues of reliability and water
quality are proactively addressed by direct negotiation and
funding of necessary improvements.
The Anson WTP serves the remaining 25% of the supply
from the yadkin River basin. The County has an existing
agreement with Anson County for 4.1 MGD of maximum
day capacity. This is bulk water purchase, as the County has
no ownership rights in the Anson WTP. A pending agreement
awaiting Anson County execution is for an additional 2 MGD
for a total of 6.1 MGD. Additional transmission capacity
upgrades are needed to make the additional supply available.
As a wholesale customer of Anson County, Union County
has experienced multiple periods of unstable water quality
and insufficient supply, which has impacted the reliability
and dependability of water supply from this source.
MAP 26: RIVER BASINS
Catawba
Upper Pee-Dee
Lower Pee-Dee
Union County and the City of monroe are the only public providers in
the County of water and sewer services. The following summarizes existing services
provided across the County as well as current system capacities and strategies for future
service as outlined in the adopted plans.
62 : UNION COUNTy
APPendIx C
Water & Wastewater Infrastructure
STATE OF THE COUNTy ASSESSMENT
Wastewater Treatment
The County owns five wastewater treatment plants
(WWTP), including two water reclamation facilities (WRF).
The following table (Table 6) lists the facilities and, for each,
indicates the type of facility, maximum capacity and the
basin to which treated effluent is discharged. Capacity is also
purchased from Charlotte-Mecklenburg Utilities (CMU) at the
McAlpine WWTP (1.0 MGD is being purchased presently,
but by agreement, up to 3.0 MGD may be purchased),
which serves development in the Six Mile Creek basin in the
County. The County is also purchasing capacity from the City
of Monroe WWTP (2.65 MGD). This serves the east side,
including the communities of Marshville and Wingate.
TABLE 6: UNION COUNTy WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANTS
Facility Facility Type Maximum Monthly Treatment Capacity Discharge Basin
Twelve Mile Creek WRF 6.0 MGD Catawba River
Crooked Creek WRF WRF 1.9 MGD yadkin Pee Dee River
Olde Sycamore WWTP 0.15 MGD yadkin Pee Dee River
Tallwood Estates WWTP WWTP 0.05 MGD yadkin Pee Dee River
Grassy Branch WWTP WWTP 0.05 MGD yadkin Pee Dee River
MAP 27: WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES
Comprehensive Plan Update : 63
STATE OF THE COUNTy
Future Water and Wastewater Service
One of the major issues the County faces is facilitating
development with the limitations imposed by the existing
inter-basin transfer (IBT) regulations. Water supply withdrawal
and wastewater discharge must be in accordance with
the provisions of IBT permits issued by the State of North
Carolina or the State of South Carolina; generally, withdrawals
and discharges are restricted to the same basin unless
otherwise permitted. Union County straddles two basins:
the Catawba River to the west and the yadkin-Pee Dee
River to the east. The ridgeline between these two basins
runs predominately north-south along the alignments of Old
Monroe Road, Rocky River Road and NC-522.
In addition to capacity, the limits established by the existing
IBT permits present challenges for serving the heavily
populated and growing western portion of the County.
In January, 2007, the State of North Carolina put in place
a sewer moratorium to address the lack of capacity at
the County’s Twelve Mile Creek WRF on the west side.
However, as a result of the planned improvements to the
Twelve Mile Creek and the Crooked Creek WRFs, the
moratorium has been lifted.
To help address the County’s water supply issues, the
County and Town of Norwood in Anson County entered into
an inter-local water intake and transmission agreement that
would allow both jurisdictions to improve their respective
infrastructure and obtain a long-term secure source of raw
water for each of their customers in the yadkin-Pee Dee
River Basin. According to the press release issued on May 6,
“Under this agreement, Union County will build and pay for
a new raw water intake for Norwood on Lake Tillery that will
replace an aged existing intake facility. Union will also build
and pay for a water treatment facility in Union County. Union
will also install and pay for a raw water transmission line
through Stanly County to move water to the new treatment
facility in Union. Permitting, design and construction are
expected to take 7 to 10 years. Union will make annual
payments to Norwood up to a total of $1 million for their
cooperation in the partnership and input into the project.
Upon project completion, Union will make a monthly payment
to Norwood based on the amount of water transmitted to
Union’s water treatment facility.”
The recently completed Water and Sewer Master Plan
(2010) provides a range of key recommendations to address
future service needs. The following generally summarizes
some of those recommendations.
water:
• Increase water storage, which includes identifying
a location for a new elevated water tank in the
southwestern area of the County to increase “effective
storage” needed to serve higher elevation customers
with better water pressure, particularly for fire
emergencies.
• Improve distribution by making specific improvements
that address both high and low pressure deficiencies
in identified pressure zones in the central and western
portions of the County.
• Regularly update GIS data to ensure the information
about the system is current, and maintain the hydraulic
model to facilitate better decision making going forward.
wastewater:
• As part of an IBT strategy, minimize the quantity of flow
from transferred from the Catawba River basin to the
yadkin/Pee Dee River basin.
• Increase treatment capacity to serve existing and
future development, particularly in high growth areas.
Specifically,
○Expand the Twelve Mile WRF to double capacity
(from 6 MGD to 12 MGD) in two stages.
○Pursue an equity partnership with the City of
Monroe to “advance a financially responsible
relationship with the City for both the additional
capacity that is needed and to accommodate the
connections to the existing City gravity collection
system.”
• Implement remediation strategies to address infiltration/
inflow (I/I) issues in the system that affect capacity,
particularly during significant peak flows.
64 : UNION COUNTy
APPendIx C
Public Services & Facilities
STATE OF THE COUNTy ASSESSMENT
Schools
many factors contribute to the quality of life in Union County, including a
system of excellent schools. Families with school-aged children move to Union County to take
advantage of these facilities.
Public Schools
Union County’s public education system offers 53 facilities
that include high schools, middle schools, elementary schools,
magnet schools, college prep, and other facilities to meet the
needs of the community. As of the 2012–2013 school year, the
Union County Public Schools system had a student population
of 40,958, which was a 1.5% increase from the previous
school year (40,359). There has been a growth in student
population every year since the 2002 – 2003 school year.
According to the Enrollment vs. Capacity worksheet produced
by the school system, ten of the schools exceed 110%
capacity, including four of the nine middle schools. Twenty-
three percent of elementary schools, 50% of middle schools
and 18% of high schools exceed 100% capacity. Map 28 (on
the following page) illustrates the location of these facilities.
Private Schools
Union County has 10 private schools including seven
religiously affiliated schools and three charter schools. A list
of these schools can be found in Table 7.
College & Universities
Union County is home to two post-graduate institutions.
These institutions are the South Piedmont Community
College and Wingate University.
south Piedmont Community College (sPCC)
South Piedmont Community College has four campuses,
two in Union County and two in Anson County. As of the
fall 2012 enrollment, SPCC had 2,597 students registered
for classes for credit and 6,880 for students not receiving
credits. The campus located in Monroe is playing a
significant role in strengthening the local economy. The
workforce training program partners with local employers
to develop Union County’s workforce to meet the needs
of the growing aerospace and precision manufacturing
industries. In the past four years the Aerospace and
Advanced Manufacturing Training Center has graduated
more than 300 highly skilled industrial technicians and basic
CNC machine operators. (source: http://www.developunion.
com/pro-business/training)
wingate University (wU)
Wingate University is a private university with nearly
2,700 students on three campuses in North Carolina.
Campus Locations include Wingate (Main Campus),
Charlotte, and Hendersonville. The university was
founded by Baptists in 1896 as Wingate School. It later
became a four-year college in 1977. In 1996, Wingate
College became Wingate University. Today it offers 35
undergraduate majors, 37 minors and numerous pre-
professional programs, as well as seven graduate and
professional degrees. In 2013, Wingate University School
of Pharmacy graduates scored above the state and
national average on licensing exams. In 2012, the most
popular major (22%), was in Business, Management,
Marketing, and related support services.
Private Schools
Fellowship Christian
First Assembly Christian
Metrolina Christian
Monroe Christian Academy
Shining Light Christian
Sunset Park Christian
Tabernacle Christian
Union Academy Lower
Union Academy MS
Village Park Traditional
TABLE 7: UNION COUNTy PRIVATE SCHOOLS
Comprehensive Plan Update : 65
STATE OF THE COUNTy
Libraries
As illustrated in Map 28, Union County has four regional
libraries: the Union West Regional Library in Indian Trail,
Waxhaw Branch Library, Lois Morgan Edwards Memorial
Library in Marshville, and the Monroe (Main) Library
located in the City of Monroe. The library operates with
the assistance of a Board of Trustees appointed by the
Board of County Commissioners. The library system also
relies upon public support through the Friends of the
Library program.
Public Safety
Combined, police and fire provide a full range of services
to County residents and businesses. Departments of each
respond to mutual aid calls in support of each other.
Fire
Union County operates 25 fire stations and 18 volunteer fire
departments. The Fire Marshal’s office provides a number
of services including enforcing the fire prevention code,
responding to emergencies, conducting fire investigations
and leading numerous public safety and outreach programs.
Police
The Sheriff’s Office employs approximately 189 sworn
law enforcement personnel, 32 non-sworn personnel (i.e.,
detention officers) and 29 support staff (i.e., IT, administration,
accounting, etc.). The four divisions of the Sheriff’s Office,
operations, investigations, services and detention provide
a variety of functions to ensure the public’s safety including
full service patrols, neighborhood watch programs, animal
services, investigations and detentions.
MAP 28: PUBLIC FACILITIES IN UNION COUNTy
Union County provides a full range of public services to its residents. These include regional and branch libraries, as well as
fire and police departments for public safety.
66 : UNION COUNTy
APPendIx C
As the population changes in terms of total size, average
age, health, activity levels, or lifestyle and leisure time
preferences, the system offerings will need to be expanded
or modified. The following inventories the existing and
planned facilities, including parks, trails, and various types of
publicly-accessible open space.
County Parks
Union County manages three parks: Cane Creek Park, Jesse
Helms Park and Fred Kirby Park. These three facilities offer
a variety of active and passive recreation options. Jesse
Helms Soccer Complex and Fred Kirby Park are heavily used
for organized team sports, including regional tournaments.
According to stakeholder interviews, Jesse Helms and Fred
Kirby are continually booked for organized youth sports. The
amount of use indicates a need for additional field space to
accommodate Union County’s growing youth recreational
sports leagues and additional facilities in underserved
portions of the county. While the three existing parks have in
combination a large service area, the eastern portion of the
The County’s parks and recreation system is comprised of a few facilities
intended to serve County residents. These facilities are also enjoyed by residents of the
municipalities and neighboring counties. Much of the current demand is met by complementary
municipal and private facilities. All are shown on the Recreation Facilities Services Map along
with planned facilities that are intended to meet current demand and some of the anticipated
future demand.
Parks, Recreation, Greenways & Open Space
STATE OF THE COUNTy ASSESSMENT
MAP 29: RECREATION FACILITIES DRIVE TIME
Comprehensive Plan Update : 67
STATE OF THE COUNTy
County is not currently served, as shown on Map 29. Service
areas extend into neighboring counties to the south and west.
The parks are therefore more accessible to a high number
of nonresidents as well. Cane Creek serves as a regional
park destination for the larger metro area. The three facilities
shown on the map are described in more detail below.
Cane Creek Park
Cane Creek Park is located in the southwest area of
Union County. This park is a family-oriented facility that
encompasses 1,050 acres. Inside this park there is a 350
acre lake that is accessible to the public. There are a variety of
activates available for park goers. Park activities include mini
golf, camping, playgrounds, mountain bike trails, horse trails,
hiking, picnic facilities, boating, swimming, and fishing (with
a permit). Largemouth bass, bluegill, crappie, and catfish can
be found in Cane Creek Park’s lake, which attracts fishing
enthusiasts each year. Park visitors can also rent canoes,
rowboats, and paddle boats.
Jesse Helms Park
Jesse Helms Park Soccer Complex was opened to public
use in July 25, 2009. This complex houses six full size soccer
fields, picnic sites, a covered picnic site, paved walking trail,
playground and public restrooms.
Fred Kirby Park
Located in the Western part of Union County, Fred Kirby
Park is located in the Lake Park Community. This park was
developed for both baseball and soccer. Currently the
facility has two baseball fields, one full size soccer field, two
gazebos, a playground, walking trail, and restroom facilities.
Proposed Facilities
Currently, there are plans to build two proposed parks in Union
County. These projects are currently referred to as the West
School Park and the North District Park. While these projects
have been identified in the 2009-2013 Capital Improvement
Plan for Parks and Recreation, they are not yet funded.
Cane Creek Park
Jesse Helms Park
Fred Kirby Park
68 : UNION COUNTy
APPendIx C
Municipal Parks
The lack of county parkland is addressed to some
degree by the municipal parks in the County. Park
facilities are available in each of the municipalities in
Union County. The location of each listed in Table 8 is
depicted on Map 29 on page 66.
Town of Indian Trail: The Parks Master Plan for the
Town of Indian Trail is currently under development
and the Plan will call for the development of trails in
the community. Currently there is a 140 acre and a
51 acre park design for the Town of Indian Trail (Indian
Trail, 2013). Both parks will have walking trails, fields,
and multi-purpose areas for park users to enjoy. There
is potential for greenway development via private and
public partnerships. The town has many trails and parks
within subdivisions, which are owned and managed by
their local homeowners associations (Union County,
2011).
Town of wingate: The Town of Wingate has Wingate
Community Park which is a 20- acre park with ball
fields and walking trails. Wingate is also home to
Wingate University. Wingate University is developing
a two-mile nature walk through a wooded area of its
campus.
Trails, Greenways,
and Blueways
There are numerous planned greenway facilities
in the jurisdictions within Union County. Stallings,
Indian Trail and Monroe all have proposed and
planned greenway facilities connecting key
locations such as schools, parks and commercial
areas. In addition, the Town of Mineral Springs
has developed a 1.7 mile natural surface trail
that connects a number of existing subdivisions
within its jurisdiction. The Carolina Thread Trail, a
15-county regional greenway initiative identifies
36 miles of greenways throughout the County.
TABLE 8: MUNICIPAL PARKS IN UNION COUNTy
Municipal Parks Location
Belk-Tonawanda Monroe
Creft Park Monroe
Don Griffin Park Monroe
Edna Love Park Indian Trail
Marshville Municipal Park Marshville
Parks Williams Athletic Center Monroe
Stallings Municipal Park Stallings
Sunset Park Monroe
Sutton Park Thomas Latimer, Center Monroe
Lakeland Memorial Park Monroe
Weddington Optimist Park Weddington
Carolina Thread Trail
The Carolina Thread Trail has developed a master plan
that identifies potential locations for future, trails,
greenways and a blueway (kayak and canoe route) along
the Rocky River throughout the County. According to the
Master Plan for Union County the proposed “network
of trails spans 100 miles across the County, much of
it utilizes existing infrastructure and greenways so as
to help realize recreational and transportation potential
within Union County. Roughly 40 percent of the
proposed conceptual route was derived from existing
trails and plans, and 60 percent consists of trail routes
that are new to the County and its municipalities. Of
those new routes, over half would travel along road
rights-of-way and a third would follow streams.” (source:
Carolina Thread Trail Master Plan for Union County and
Participating Municipalities, May 2011).
Comprehensive Plan Update : 69
STATE OF THE COUNTy
Environmental & Natural Resources
STATE OF THE COUNTy ASSESSMENT
Union County lies within the southern outer Piedmont, a transition area
from the mountainous Appalachians to the relativity flat coastal plains. The rolling hills,
woodlands and rich soils of Union County contribute both to its beloved rural character and
agrarian-based economy.
Topography
Originally this region was covered with dense forests or
open woodland but now is mostly agricultural crops, pasture
and housing. The topography still includes rolling hills that
fall into streams with rocky bottoms. The highest elevation
in the County is 770 feet and the lowest elevation (275 ft.) is
located along the Rocky River.
Climate
Union County experiences four distinct seasons each
year. The area is encompassed by humid southwestern
airflows during spring and summer and dry northwesterly
cold front alternating with easterly rainy spells during late
fall and winter. Fall and spring are the driest seasons.
The average temperature during winter is 43 degrees
Fahrenheit.
Water Resources
Union County collects water from surface streams, lakes/
reservoirs, and ground water. The major sources of drinking
water for the County come from the Catawba River and the
yadkin Pee Dee River. The 2013 Annual Drinking Water Quality
Report notes that both sources are moderately susceptible
to potential contaminant sources. Other water resources in
the County are the Rocky River in northern Union County, and
Cane Creek Lake in the southwest part of the County.
The Rocky River, which empties into the yadkin Pee Dee
River. East of US-52, is a moderately-paced, navigable river.
The 25-mile stretch located in the County has steep slopes
and is un-dammed its entire length. The majority of streams
in the County flow northeast into the Rocky River but in the
western portion of the County Six-mile Creek, Twelve-mile
Creek, and Waxhaw Creek flow southwest into Catawba River.
In addition, there are numerous wetlands throughout the
County. These wetlands provide critical habitat to a variety
of plant and animal species. As development continues,
attention to the conservation of these habitats is critical
to sustain aquatic species and protect water quality in the
County.
Soils & Farmland
Agriculture and farming operations are a key component
of the economy in Union County. According to the North
Carolina Department of Agriculture 2013 Stat Book, there
are 1,107 farms in the County totaling 404,160 acres of
land. These operations brought in $464,077,235 in receipts
in 2012, ranking 3rd in the state. In addition, the County
ranks 3rd in livestock, dairy and poultry production. Key
to promoting and sustaining the agriculture economy is
protecting the prime farmland soils that farmers rely on for
crop production. Prime farmland is defined as land that has
the best combination of physical and chemical characteristics
for producing food, feed, forage, fiber, and oilseed crops and
that is available for these uses. It has the combination of soil
properties, growing season, and moisture supply needed
to produce sustained high yields of crops if it is managed
according to acceptable farming methods. As detailed in
TABLE 9: SOIL CLASSIFICATIONS
Farmland Soil Classification Acres %
Prime farmland 93,621.29 22.9
Farmland of statewide
importance
212,574.24 51.9
Prime farmland if drained and
either protected from flooding or
not frequently flooded during the
growing season
20,158.51 4.9
Not prime farmland 82,953.10 20.3
70 : UNION COUNTy
APPendIx C
Table 10 there are approximately 93,000 acres of prime
farmland in Union County (approximately 23% of all soils)
and 212,000 acres of farmland of statewide importance.
As development continues into areas of agriculture
production, measures are needed to mitigate the potential
conflicts between active farming operations and residential
development.
Significant
Natural Heritage Areas
A Significant Natural Heritage Area is defined either an
area of land or water that contains significant populations
of rare plants and/or of animals, or an area containing one
to several exemplary natural communities that function
in a natural manner and that form a distinct geographical
unit, the boundary of which can be natural (a watershed)
or artificial (a road or a property line). During a recent study
of the area, 23 sites were identified as Significant Natural
Heritage Areas. Of these sites, three were identified as
having national significance. These include Goose Creek
Aquatic Habitat, Mineral Springs Barrens, and Waxhaw
Creek Aquatic Habitat.
Habitats
Union County has a moderate diversity of habitats. It is
estimated that there are well over 1,100 species of plants
in the County including dangleberry, butterweed, and
slender flat-topped goldenrod, among others. In addition,
a variety of rare animals have been documented in the
County. These include the eastern fox squirrel, loggerhead
shrike, timber rattlesnake, coachwhip, mole salamander,
Carolina darter, and robust redhorse. In addition, there are
a collection of mollusks that can been seen in many rivers
that cover the area. These including the Atlantic pigtoe,
eastern lampmussel, Carolina heelsplitter, creeper, savannah
Lilliput,eastern creekshell, Carolina creekshell and notched
rainbow.
Carolina Heelsplitter
Union County has identified that 30,795.87 acres are
Carolina Heelsplitter Critical Habitat. The Carolina Heelsplitter
is a freshwater mussel. It is named the “Carolina
Heelsplitter” because of its sharp edges that can cut the
foot of someone walking on the river or stream bed. This
species is only found in North and South Carolina. It is
currently listed as “Critically Endangered” which means that
the species is facing an extremely high risk of becoming
extinct in the wild in the immediate future. Recently the
Heelsplitter has made headlines for its role in curbing
development in certain parts of the County.MAP 30: ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES
Comprehensive Plan Update : 71
STATE OF THE COUNTy
The first inhabitants of the area were the waxhaw and Catawba tribes.
European settlers, mainly from Scotland and Ireland, moved to the region in the 1700’s and
established productive farms and homesteads. The settlers also brought smallpox which
nearly decimated the indigenous populations. The North Carolina gold rush in 1799 also drew
a diversity of settlers to the region. To this day, privately owned gold and gem mines are still
operating in Union.
Historic & Cultural Resources
STATE OF THE COUNTy ASSESSMENT
Over time and with development of the railroad, Union
grew as a productive and prosperous County. Many of
the historic buildings and sites that remain reflect this
golden age of Union County. The first Belk Store opened in
Monroe in the late 1880s. Wingate University, founded as
a school for Baptists, opened in 1896. Many of the homes
on the National Register were also built during this period.
Preserving this historic sites ensures that as Union County
continues to grow, the story of its history is well-preserved.
National Register Sites
There are currently 12 National Register sites and four
National Historic Districts in Union County. There are an
additional 91 potential National Register sites including four
potential historic districts still in consideration. Most of
the Historic Districts and National Register sites are within
incorporated municipalities.
Culture Resource Sites
There are a number of cultural resources in Union County
including a variety of museums and art galleries.
Museums & Facilities
• museum of the waxhaws: This regional museum is
dedicated to the Native Americans who called this region
of North Carolina home. This facility covers the history of
the Waxhaws, The Civil War, and the American Revolution.
• JAArs museum of the Alphabet: This museum
presents several tours and provides a unique
perspective on writing systems. This location has
exhibits about ancient and modern alphabet makers
and walks a visitor through the history of the written
language.
• JAArs mexico-Caradenas museum: This museum
features exhibits of Mexican culture with folk, art,
photos, artifacts, and clothing. This museum offers
an exhibit on Lazaro Caradenas who was Mexico’s
President from 1934 – 1940.
• Jesse James historical society: Waxhaw is home to
a historical society dedicated to the memorial of Jesse
James.
• Jesse helms Center foundation: The Jesse Helms
Center provides educational programs and information
about Senator Jesse Helms and values he prioritized
during this life. This center offers lectures and has an
interactive museum dedicated to the work Senator
Jesse Helms.
• Cold blooded encounters: Cold Blooded Encounters is
a reptile zoo located in Monroe, NC. It has large exhibits
of reptiles, amphibians, and bugs. This facility also
incorporates an outreach program where they bring the
zoo to the community.
72 : UNION COUNTy
Name Address Description National
Register year
Union County Courthouse Courthouse Sq.1888, 1926 Italiante, Neo-classical brick courthouse.1971
John C. Sikes House 1301 E. Franklin St.1926 Colonial Revival 1982
Piedmont Buggy Factory 514 Miller St.1910 3 story brick buggy factory, textile mill 1919-1956 2004
Pleasant Grove Camp Meeting
Ground
NE of Waxhaw on SR 1327 1830 & Later arbor & Ground 1974
Malcolm K. Lee House Address Restricted 1919 Colonial Revival 2 story brick house 1988
North Carolina / South Carolina
Cornerstone
1813 stone marker at state boundary corner 1984
Monroe City Hall 102 W. Jefferson St.1847 3 story brick building 1971
United states post office 407 N. Main St.1913 Neoclassical federal 1985
Waxhaw-Weddington Roads
Historic District
Jct. of NC 75, NC 34 & W.
Franklin St.
20th Century Residential District 1988
Monroe Downtown Historic District Roughly bounded by
Jefferson, Church, Windsor
& Stewart St.
1875-1930 Commercial / Residential District 1988
Waxhaw Historic District Portions of Main,
Broad, Church, Broom,
Providence, Old
Providence, Brevard and
McKibben Sts.
1888-1940 Commercial / Residential 1991
Monroe Residential Historic District Roughly bounded by
Hough, Franklin, Jefferson,
McCarten, Windsor,
Sanford, Washington.
Braden, Church & Hudson
Sts.
1870 – 1940 Residential District 1988
TABLE 10: NATIONAL REGISTER SITES & DISTRICTS
Arts
Union County supports the Arts through the Union County
Community Arts Council. Their mission is to lead, cultivate and
promote the arts as an essential component of community
life and education. This organization awards grants to
organizations, schools, and artists to increase available
resources for enhancing community arts and arts education.
In addition, Wingate University offers 2 art galleries on
campus, the Helms Gallery and the Griffin Gallery. The Helms
Gallery features guest artists, faculty exhibits, and senior
exhibits, while the griffin Gallery features Masters Collection
of art work. The George A. Battle, Jr. Fine Arts Center and the
Austin Auditorium on the Wingate Campus offer a variety of
musical and theatrical events open to the public.
Comprehensive Plan Update : 1
Appendix d
As noted earlier in this plan, Union County has not only been
among the fastest growing counties in the state, but in the
nation as well, boasting a 5.7 percent annual growth rate since
2000. Over the last several years, growth in the County and
region has slowed as higher unemployment rates and lower
mobility levels have tempered migration, with growth in the
County averaging around 1.9 percent annually. Residential and
employment growth in Union County has largely been driven
by the employment growth occurring primarily in Mecklenburg
County, which has fueled housing demand in Union and other
suburban counties near Charlotte. This household growth has
also been driven by Union’s high quality of life, quality schools,
and suburban lifestyle, as well as its relative value proposition
(including taxes) to Mecklenburg.
However Union County remains a bedroom community to
Charlotte. Roughly 70 percent of employed people living
in Union County work outside of the County (most in
Mecklenburg), with around 24,000 (30 percent) of residents
also working in the County and an additional 26,000 workers
flowing into the County from adjacent counties.
Of the net 11,300 jobs added in Union County between 2000
and 2010, roughly 97 percent occurred in industries serving the
local population, such as local government, health care, retail
trade, personal services and food services. Meanwhile, other
industry types accounting for the remaining growth in the
County, such as professional services and finance, include both
a local-serving and potentially regional-serving component.
This trend of population-driven employment growth will
continue to account for the majority of growth in Union
County in the next three decades, with growth in other
sectors, such as manufacturing, account for a slightly larger
share of overall growth in the coming years.
As such, this analysis of growth in the County is focused
foremost on population and household growth in the coming
years, with an analysis of economic growth stemming from
an increasing number of households in the County, as well as
new employment opportunities which will potentially serve
populations beyond the Union County line.
This tempered growth rate is reflective of both moderating
growth in the Charlotte region and the changing demographics
and preferences of the market, particularly of Generation
y. Indeed, the last few years have shown a dramatic shift
of growth away from suburban areas to more walkable and
convenient locations. While Union County offers a high quality
of life, opportunities for such locations will become increasingly
Commuting out54,490Commuting In26,267
living and working in the County 23,867
long-term groWth Projections
2 : UNION COUNTy
APPendIx d
important in order to maintain that quality of life and provide a
wider variety of housing.
As Union County’s population continues to grow, an increase
in its ability to support a growing variety of retailers, service
providers and office spaces will diminish the County’s
dependence on Mecklenburg County. Likewise, Union’s
efforts in growing its manufacturing base will create a greater
potential for those living in the County to also work in the
County. The result is an improvement in the County’s jobs to
housing ratio between 2010 and 2040.
To date, this ratio has averaged around .64 jobs for every new
household added between 2000 and 2007, the period before
the Great Recession hit the market. This ratio will gradually
increase in the coming years, as the County provides more job
opportunities and its manufacturing base returns. Therefore,
this analysis estimates an average jobs-to-household ratio of
approximately .7 on average for the next 30 years.
The result is annual job growth of around 1,700 net new jobs
during this period, a factor well above the average annual job
growth of 890 net new jobs from 2000 to 2010, but slightly
less than the rate of job growth occurring during the booming
period prior to the Great Recession between 2000 and 2007.
As shown in the table one the following page, the greatest job
growth is estimated to occur in local government, retail, and
leisure and hospitality. While these industries are still local-
serving in nature – and generally moderate-paying – they now
only account for roughly 75 percent of estimated future job
growth, a considerable decrease from the 97 percent of job
growth in these sectors during the 2000s.
These job growth projections are based on projections
provided by Moody’s Analytics and then adjusted based
on demand for key land uses, including retail, office and
industrial spaces.
Key notes from the employment projections above include:
• Government, mostly local, accounted for 56 percent
of job growth in the 2000s, and will drop to around 23
percent going forward – a ratio of roughly 5.6 net new
households per one net new government job for in the
County;
○This ratio is largely consistent with the 6.0 new
households per every new government job ratio in
Union County from 2000 – 2012, and the regional
ratio of 5.5 net new households per every new
government job during that same period.
• One in 5 jobs created in Union County in the
future will be in the retail sector, as the County’s
growth continues to create more significant retail
opportunities and dependence on Mecklenburg
gradually decreases;
• Manufacturing jobs, which sharply decreased in the
2000s, are reemerging in the County and showing
positive growth through the next 30 years. This
reemergence of jobs reflects a national trend by which
more goods are manufactured in the US because of
higher transportation costs;
• Similarly, construction jobs show positive growth over
the next 30 years, as the housing market recovers and
stabilizes.
1990
290,597
325,699
359,551
391,530
262,475
232,459217,688
123,677
201,292
84,211
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
350,000
400,000
450,000
2000 2010 2013 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
Households Population
Union County Population and Household Growth (1990 - 2040)
29,307 43,390 67,864 73,348 78,288 88,367 98,045 122,240 133,460
110,362
FIGURE 1: POPULATION AND HOUSEHOLD GROWTH 1990 - 2040
Comprehensive Plan Update : 3
LONG-TERM GROWTH PROJECTIONS
The numbers above reflect the numbers of jobs, which
is different from the number of employees. In a number
of positions, particularly in the retail and food services
industries, multiple employees may perform one job, i.e.
three part-time people filling one position.
Therefore, an analysis of Union County employment sectors
estimates approximately 1.39 employees for every job in the
County. Applying ratios identified by industry type (construction,
retail, personal services, and food services being higher), there
are an estimated 72,000 employees in the County as of 2010,
growing to around 145,000 employees by 2040.
TABLE 1: JOB GROWTH ESTIMATES By INDUSTRyFIGURE 1: POPULATION AND HOUSEHOLD GROWTH 1990 - 2040
Industry 2000 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Change
2010 - 2040
Natural Resources and Mining 197 155 157 228 272 319 371 419 264
Construction 7,292 6,172 6,193 7,029 7,461 7,980 8,560 9,088 2,916
Manufacturing 13,127 10,522 10,692 11,516 11,709 12,267 12,867 13,436 2,914
Wholesale Trade 1,071 1,346 1,418 1,823 2,163 2,573 3,013 3,431 2,085
Retail Trade 4,892 6,026 7,297 8,910 10,799 12,695 14,801 16,719 10,693
Transportation, Warehouse, and Utilities 1,059 1,233 1,288 1,483 1,660 1,864 2,083 2,291 1,058
Information 435 577 629 709 776 856 946 1,027 450
Financial Activities 1,022 1,324 1,730 2,457 3,113 3,849 4,814 5,654 4,330
Professional and Business Services 2,259 4,257 4,463 4,791 5,103 5,415 5,791 6,103 1,846
Education and Health Services 2,098 4,130 4,592 5,211 5,880 6,546 7,288 7,973 3,842
Leisure and Hospitality 2,727 3,961 5,292 6,375 7,168 8,461 9,904 11,219 7,259
Other Services (except Public Administration)1,427 1,848 2,078 2,397 2,773 3,124 3,540 3,891 2,043
Government 5,787 10,742 11,426 13,666 15,883 17,956 20,269 22,377 11,635
Total 43,394 52,293 57,255 66,595 74,759 83,906 94,249 103,629 51,336
TABLE 2: EMPLOyEE GROWTH ESTIMATES PER INDUSTRy
Industry 2000 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Change
2010 - 2040
Natural Resources and Mining 229 180 182 265 315 370 431 486 307
Construction 14,365 12,159 12,201 13,848 14,697 15,721 16,863 17,904 5,745
Manufacturing 15,227 12,206 12,403 13,359 13,582 14,230 14,926 15,585 3,380
Wholesale Trade 1,242 1,561 1,644 2,114 2,509 2,985 3,495 3,980 2,419
Retail Trade 8,072 9,943 12,039 14,701 17,819 20,946 24,421 27,586 17,643
Transportation, Warehouse, and Utilities 1,518 1,768 1,847 2,125 2,379 2,672 2,986 3,284 1,516
Information 518 687 749 843 924 1,019 1,126 1,223 536
Financial Activities 1,126 1,575 2,059 2,924 3,704 4,580 5,729 6,728 5,153
Professional and Business Services 2,688 5,066 5,311 5,701 6,072 6,444 6,891 7,262 2,196
Education and Health Services 2,895 5,699 6,336 7,190 8,114 9,832 10,056 11,001 5,302
Leisure and Hospitality 4,227 6,139 8,203 9,881 11,110 13,115 15,352 17,390 11,251
Other Services (except Public Administration)2,203 2,853 3,208 3,701 4,282 4,823 5,466 6,007 3,154
Government 6,887 12,783 13,596 16,263 18,900 21,368 24,121 26,629 13,846
Total 61,288 72,619 79,779 92,916 104,408 117,305 131,863 145,066 72,448
4 : UNION COUNTy
APPendIx d
for-sale housing Growth and demand
Over the next 30 years, Union County is estimated to add
an average of 2,200 units annually. A number of statistical
factors determined demand potential for different types of
housing product, including both rental and for-sale residential,
as well as different for-sale products. These factors include
not only data from the US Census and local home sales
statistics (via MORE), but also research findings from a
large survey conducted in 2012 with 1,000 employees in
the Research Triangle Park; these employees are mostly
white collar workers with incomes similar to those of Union
County residents. The survey respondents included those
less willing to make trade-offs, such as fewer square feet in
their residence, to live closer to work. These responses were
relevant given the distances from much of Union County to
Charlotte’s major employment cores.
As shown in the table below, there are nearly 52,500 owner-
occupied housing units in Union County as of year-end in the
base year, 2010. The overwhelming majority of these units
are detached single-family homes, with approximately 1,000
others as either single-family attached, such as townhouses,
or attached for-sale condos.
Based upon the growth estimations highlighted earlier, total
for-sale housing units in the County are estimated to almost
double from 52,500 units in 2010 to more than 101,000 units
in 2035.
Demand Type
2010
Base
(Est.)
2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
Total
Change
2010 - 2040
for-sale residential demand 52,489 57,477 65,641 73,480 83,457 93,078 102,166 49,677
Patio Home
51,503
612 1,860 3,059 4,584 6,055 7,445
43,182Single-family on small lot 600 1,823 2,998 4,493 5,934 7,296
Single-family on average lot 2,337 7,106 11,685 17,512 23,132 28,441
Townhouse 728 1,071 1,770 2,441 3,295 4,119 4,897 4,169
Condominium 258 368 593 809 1,083 1,348 1,598 1,340
TABLE 3: HOUSING DEMAND ESTIMATES
Likewise, demographics and homebuyer preferences are
shifting. Walkable locations, and more convenient housing
types, such smaller-lot single-family homes, patio homes
and townhouses and condominiums, are becoming more
attractive to future and aging Union County households.
Based on modeling efforts, there is greater potential in the
County for these alternates to average or larger lot communities.
While close to 60 percent of estimated demand potential is for
conventional to larger lots, which are the dominant products
in Union County today, approximately 30 percent of demand
potential could be for detached homes on smaller lots or patio
homes, with the last 10 percent being for attached for-sale
products such as townhouses or condominiums.
People buy these alternative products, particularly patio
homes, townhouses and condominiums for two major
reasons: as price alternatives to single-family homes on
average or larger lots, or as a lifestyle product such as
walkable communities, or a park-oriented location. Home
prices in Union County, particularly in Weddington and
Waxhaw, are quite high. Therefore, alternative products
may be attractive to residents seeking lower-priced
housing options. The opportunity also exists to create
locations offering the lifestyle proposition, in areas around
existing town centers as well as new, walkable town
centers.
Based on demand, and the density assumptions provided
in the table below, new for-sale residential development
in Union County between 2010 and 2035 will require an
estimated 17,000 acres of land.
Comprehensive Plan Update : 5
LONG-TERM GROWTH PROJECTIONS
rental Apartment Growth and demand
A combination of US Census data and growth models estimate
a demand potential for nearly 6,000 new rental apartments in
the County between 2010 and 2035. This equates to an average
of approximately 300 units annually, or roughly one new
community each year, and is reflective of both the continuing
suburbanization of the County as well as fundamental tenure
shifts that have taken place in the last five years.
Indeed, several municipalities in the County have already
experienced an increase in permit applications for new
rental apartments. These towns are well-suited for such
development, particularly in locations that may be within
walking distance of their downtowns.
Type of Housing Unit Total Number of
Housing Units
Density
Assumption
Total Acreage
Demand
Patio Home 7,445 4 units / acre 1,861
Single-family on small lot 7,296 4 units / acre 1,824
Single-family on average lot 28,441 2.25 units / acre 12,640
Townhouse 4,897 8 units / acre 612
Condominium 1,598 14 units / acre 114
TABLE 4: DENSITy ASSUMPTIONS
retail Growth and demand
Union County is “leaking” nearly 25 percent of all
expenditures excluding auto sales to Mecklenburg County.
Much of this leakage occurs in larger retailers, such as
department stores, discount retailers (e.g. Target or Kohl’s),
other clothing and furniture chains, etc. Many of these larger
format retailers have captured Union County’s demand
either in South Mecklenburg County, in centers such as
Blakeney Heath, or in regional malls such as Southpark or
Carolina Place.
A demand model was created that incorporates demographic
growth projections and per capita expenditures for Union
County residents (estimated to be around $9,875 in 2013
dollars). Utilizing other key data sources and metrics, the
model converted that growth into supportable square feet
of retail space over the next 25 years. As shown above, the
County can support an estimated additional 6.6 million square
feet of space between 2010 and 2035. This represents a 150
percent increase in retail space demanded from the estimated
nearly 4.1 million square feet that existed in 2010. This total
6.6 million square feet of growth is equivalent to adding four
Southpark Malls in terms of total square feet of space.
Included in this estimate are an assumed 70 percent capture
rate of retail space going forward, which is similar to today’s
rate, and a 10 percent vacancy factor, one that is highly
consistent with the historic rates of the local market.
Roughly one-third of this demand will be for general
Demand Type
2010
Base
(Est.)
2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
Total
Change
2010 - 2040
Apartment Demand 1,898 2,640 3,590 4,524 5,714 6,861 7,966 6,046
TABLE 5: RENTAL APARTMENT GROWTH AND DEMAND
6 : UNION COUNTy
APPendIx d
merchandise stores, a category that includes department
stores such as Belk’s or Nordstrom, as well as retailers such
as Walmart or Target. While some of these retailers are
already or will soon be located in Union County, others, such
as a number of regional department store brands are missing
from the market today and represent future opportunities.
Much of the retail demand provided above will be delivered in
a mix of freestanding stores, such as a Walgreen’s, grocery-
anchored neighborhood shopping centers or Community/
Power Centers. There is a real potential to create one or more
sizable lifestyle or town centers in the County, like Birkdale
Village or the Main Street component of Blakeney, particularly
given the high incomes found in the western portions of the
County. Such a center could capture the mall-type tenants
currently found in Mecklenburg County today, who may
consider a Union County location in the future.
Assuming development at around 10,000 square feet per
acre—a typical suburban development intensity—Union
County can support approximately 604 net new retail acres
between 2010 and 2035. Should Union capture an even greater
share of retail demand currently leaking to Mecklenburg
County, this acreage need would increase over time.
office Growth and demand
Moreover, while Union County, particularly western Union
County, offers the high incomes and executive housing that
are attractive to larger-scale office users, the County has yet
to see significant regional-serving office growth. This is due
to a disparity between the locations of executive housing,
which are located far from the region’s freeway network along
NC 16, and the areas with better access, such as those with
a more moderate income base that are somewhat removed
from south Charlotte’s other office cores, such as Southpark,
Ballantyne and Whitehall. Given this disconnect, and the need
for larger offices with strong regional access, demand for office
space in Union County will continue to emanate from smaller
entities serving the County’s residents and other businesses.
These include medical offices, attorney and accounting firms,
Realtor offices, etc.
A model was created to estimate demand potential for
local-serving office uses. Like the retail demand model, this
local-serving office model is based on population growth likely
to occur in the County between 2010 and 2035. It focuses on
those firms with fewer than 20 employees—firms that are
typically focused primarily on serving the local market.
Demand for these local-serving office uses is estimated to
grow from around one million square feet today to close to
2.5 million square feet by 2040. Union County currently has
an oversupply of office space, vacancy rates among examined
office properties are close to 30 percent, and thus short-term
demand through 2015 actually shrinks slightly to account for
this oversupply. Between 2015 and 2020 this oversupply will
TABLE 6: SUPPORTABLE SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL SPACE By INDUSTRy
Retail Category 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Total Demand
Growth
Furniture and
Home Furnishings
212,852 231,857 270,476 306,656 351,818 395,372 436,516 223,663
Electronics and Appliances 84,487 96,723 121,587 144,881 173,957 201,999 228,488 144,001
Building Materials,
Garden Equipment
511,989 588,591 744,248 890,078 1,072,111 1,247,660 1,413,494 901,504
Food and Beverage 351,701 447,407 641,886 824,085 1,051,517 1,270,850 1,478,042 1,126,341
Health and Personal Care 177,961 209,225 272,755 332,274 406,569 478,217 545,900 367,939
Clothing and
Clothing Accessories
305,381 336,885 400,902 460,877 535,741 607,939 676,140 370,759
Sports, Hobby,
Book and Music
155,894 170,204 199,284 226,527 260,534 293,330 324,311 168,417
General Merchandise 1,031,241 1,204,095 1,555,341 1,884,411 2,295,173 2,691,307 3,065,515 2,034,275
Miscellaneous Store Retailers 381,604 415,000 482,862 546,440 625,801 702,336 774,634 393,031
Food Service and Drinking 897,090 969,186 1,115,688 1,252,940 1,424,266 1,589,490 1,745,569 848,479
Total 4,110,200 4,669,173 5,805,029 6,869,169 8,197,488 9,478,500 10,688,608 6,578,408
Comprehensive Plan Update : 7
LONG-TERM GROWTH PROJECTIONS
be eliminated and the County will then be able to support
demand for new office space.
The greatest demand for this space will develop along key
thoroughfares in western Union County around Weddington,
Waxhaw, Wesley Chapel and closer to Independence
Boulevard near the smaller towns. Assuming development
intensities of approximately .4 FAR (or 17,500 SF per acre),
then nearly 82 acres of office land will be needed over the
next 25 years.
Total Demand 2010
Base (Est.)2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
Total
Change
2010 - 2040
Office Space 1,099,764 1,012,222 1,281,111 1,527,778 1,894,444 2,179,444 2,488,333 1,388,539
TABLE 7: OFFICE SPACE GROWTH AND DEMAND
Total Demand 2010
Base SF 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Net Demand
2010 - 2040
Industrial Space 15,617 19,775 21,418 22,327 23,236 24,145 25,053 9,435
TABLE 8: INDUSTRIAL SPACE GROWTH AND DEMAND
Industrial Growth and demand
Union County’s industrial market has historically focused on
manufacturing, with much of that related to agriculture, such
as food processing. More recent manufacturing development
has centered on aerospace-related manufacturing. However,
the County’s limited access to regional interstates – there are
no interstates in the County, and I-85 and I-77 are located 11
or more miles away via I-485 – has tempered its attraction
to firms involved in transportation/trucking and wholesaling
operations. Nevertheless, Union has been able to increase
its capture of industrial jobs from roughly 12.8 percent of
the Charlotte Metro Area in 2000 to nearly 14.2 percent of
regional industrial employment in 2010.
Manufacturing locally, regionally and nationally was greatly
affected by the recent recession, and has been in steady
decline over the last several decades. However, due to rising
transportation costs, the industry has grown recently and is
forecasted to continue this positive trend in the coming years.
Industrial employment in the County is estimated to grow
from around 20,000 employees in 2010 to approximately
33,000 by 2040. Included in this estimate are increases
in manufacturing, as well as moderate increases in
transportation and utilities and wholesale distribution. It
represents a projected regional capture of between 17 to
18 percent of industrial jobs by 2040. In addition, while
other positive outcomes could occur from the creation of a
high-speed, limited access roadway into the county, such
outcomes were not considered in this report.
Square feet utilization varies significantly, with approximately
1,000 SF/employee being utilized as an average across all
types being around 750 SF/employee. This ratio results in
industrial demand growth of nearly 9.4 million square feet
over the next 30 years.
The industries included in this growth estimate include
manufacturing, namely aerospace-related, regional
transportation/utilities, and wholesale.
Agricultural Promotion
Union County has one of the state’s largest agricultural
economies, which should be preserved and enhanced.
Among the strategies Union should consider are:
• Improving key farm-to-market roads and bridges to allow
safer and easier transport for trucks traveling to and from
farms;
• Focusing on extending technology infrastructure and
network access to more rural areas of the County to
help farmers monitor crop or animal conditions, remotely
operate some machinery and coordinate efforts within
their farms;
• Investigating opportunities to pair Union’s agricultural
industry with the North Carolina Research Campus in
Kannapolis;
• Working with the State or enacting local legislation to
tighten and adjust existing Right-to-Farm laws that protect
farmers from approaching suburban development;
8 : UNION COUNTy
APPendIx d
• Toughening standards and notification processes
occurring in the closing process for homes within close
proximity of farms or agricultural areas important to
Union County’s agricultural industry.
• Considering implementation of North Carolina
conservation easements to protect area farmlands from
being developed. These could include additional credits
at the county level in conjunction with maintaining
agricultural uses.
Comprehensive Plan Update : 1
Appendix e
symposium survey results
Question 1
If Union County had a professional sports team, what should be its name? (Multiple Choice)
Percent Count
The Heel Splitters 28%7
The Cane Creek Largemouths 24%6
The Fightin’ Boll Weevils 20%5
The Reverse Commuters 28%7
Totals 100%25
Question 2
Union County is poised to see significant growth over the next 20 years and beyond.
How should this growth occur? (Multiple Choice)
Percent Count
In a manner similar to the last decade 7%2
Focused around new and existing city/town centers 64%17
Clustered along existing corridors 11%3
Located along new corridors 7%2
Somewhere else – growth need to be largely halted.11%3
Totals 100%27
Question 3
How high of a priority should the preservation of Union County’s agricultural community be in this plan? (Multiple Choice)
Percent Count
A very high priority 50%13
Definitely a priority, but not a top priority 46%12
Not really a priority 4%1
Totals 100%26
Question 4
Which of the following policies would you most like to see in this plan to maintain or strengthen Union County's
agricultural base? (Choose your top priority). (Multiple Choice)
Percent Count
A targeted pool of funds to upgrade farm-to-market roads and bridges?20%5
New industrial properties targeting agriculture-related industries and manufacturers?50%13
Growth policies to protect large areas of farming in the County?30%7
Totals 100%25
survey results
Two surveys were administered during the analysis of existing conditions to update the Union County Comprehensive Plan. One
survey was issued at the first public meeting, the Project Symposium. The second was an online survey administered over the
course of 3 months. The results of each survey are highlighted below.
2 : UNION COUNTy
APPendIx e
Question 5
young singles, childless couples, aging singles, and couples are growing populations in the Charlotte region and are
candidates for housing other than larger lot single-family homes. How important is it that this plan provide for growth
policies that addresses housing needs and preferences among these groups? (Choose one) (Multiple Choice)
Percent Count
Very Important 68%17
Somewhat Important 20%5
Not Particularly Important 12%3
Not at all Important 0%0
Totals 100%25
Question 6
Rank in importance each of the following in terms of appropriateness in Union County? (Choose 1 thru 4 with your first
choice as highest priority and your last choice as lowest priority) (Priority Ranking)
Percent Count
Small-lot single-family homes 28%242
Townhomes 26%226
Apartments, condos 24%206
Multifamily above retail 22%196
Totals 100%870
Question 7
Is there a housing affordability issue in Union County? (True / False)
Percent Count
True 56%14
False 44%11
Totals 100%25
Question 9
Which of the following would you support Union County looking into further to stimulate a larger employment base?
(Choose 1 thru 5 with your first choice as highest priority and your last choice as lowest priority) (Priority Ranking)
Percent Count
Working with developers to create office or industrial parks with below-market land prices?23%230
Investing in new roads and other infrastructure to improve access to the County?23%234
Loosening existing development, zoning and permitting regulations and policies?16%164
Offering significant tax incentives to new employers in order to compete with South Carolina?20%193
Loosening liquor laws to encourage more sit-down restaurants in the County?18%176
Totals 100%997
Comprehensive Plan Update : 3
SURVEy RESULTS
Question 10
Which of the following is the most important? (Multiple Choice)
Percent Count
Housing Choices 0%0
Mobility 37%9
Agriculture 0%0
Economic Development 50%12
Environment 13%3
Totals 100%24
Question 11
How do we improve our current roadway system? (Multiple Choice)
Percent Count
More connectivity 10%2
Widen major arterials (US 1, 401, 96, 97, etc.)42.5%9
Build “Complete Streets”42.5%9
Improve Operations (signals, ITS, etc.)5%1
Protect what we have (access management, traffic calming, retrofits) 0%0
Totals 100%21
Question 12
Would you give up travel lane space for a busway or fixed-guideway transit? (Multiple Choice)
Percent Count
yes 29%7
No 46%11
Not in my lifetime…25%6
Totals 100%24
Question 13
Which of the following best supports your vision of Livability? (Multiple Choice)
Percent Count
Healthy Jobs-to-housing balance 33%8
Access to great shopping and restaurants 8%2
Robust highway system that connects me to everything 21%5
I can walk/bike to my employment and recreational areas 25%6
High quality schools, parks and community facilities 13%3
Totals 100%24
4 : UNION COUNTy
APPendIx e
Question 14
What makes a community bicycle friendly? (Multiple Choice)
Percent Count
Bike lanes on major arterials 27%6
Greenways 55%12
Signed bike routes 14%3
Safe intersections 4%1
All of the above 0%0
Totals 100%22
Question 15
What are the highest priority infrastructure concerns? (Choose one) (Multiple Choice)
Percent Count
Aging system 13%3
Septic system failures 4%1
Water pressure 4%1
Long term water supply 75%17
Other 4%1
Totals 100%23
Question 16
Union County (including jurisdictions) has 14,062 acres of land available with water and sewer service.
Where should we grow next? (Choose one) (Multiple Choice)
Percent Count
Grow at higher densities where infrastructure already exists 70%14
Continue to grow at current densities into undeveloped areas 20%4
Grow in areas not in conflict with agriculture operations 10%2
Totals 100%20
Question 17
If Union County were to receive funds for community facilities, where should money be spent? (Choose one)
(Multiple Choice)
Percent Count
More libraries 4%1
More parks 29%6
More sidewalks that connect 29%6
More running paths and multi-use trails 29%6
Other 9%2
Totals 100%21
Comprehensive Plan Update : 5
SURVEy RESULTS
Question 18
What types of recreational facilities are most needed in Union County? (Choose one) (Multiple Choice)
Percent Count
Fields (soccer, lacrosse, baseball, softball)32%6
Kid-friendly parks with playgrounds 5%1
Passive recreation facilities (picnic shelters, open space)10%2
Trails (e.g., Carolina Thread Trail)16%3
yMCAs or other private facilities 5%1
Another large recreation area like Cane Creek 32%6
Other 0%0
Totals 100%19
Question 19
Union County could become a premier destination for ________ if investments were made. (Choose one) (Multiple Choice)
Percent Count
Road bikers 10%2
Horse enthusiasts 24%5
youth sports tournaments 33%7
Outdoor recreation 33%7
Other 0%0
Totals 100%21
Question 20
Union County does a good job at protection of environmental resources. (Choose one) (Multiple Choice)
Percent Count
Strongly Agree 24%5
Agree 14%3
Neither Agree nor Disagree 24%5
Disagree 24%5
Strongly Disagree 14%3
Totals 100%21
Question 21
Union County does a good job at protection of historic resources. (Choose one) (Multiple Choice)
Percent Count
Strongly Agree 10%2
Agree 32%7
Neither Agree nor Disagree 29%6
Disagree 24%5
Strongly Disagree 5%1
Totals 100%21
6 : UNION COUNTy
APPendIx e
survey monkey results
Question 1
How important are the following GROWTH/ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT goals to future of Union County?
Very
Important Important Neutral Unimportant Very
Unimportant
Promotion of New and Existing Businesses 64.71%29.41%5.88%0%0%
Orderly and Predictable Growth 68.75%31.25%0%0%0%
Question 2
How important are the following PRESERVATION OF AGRICULTURE AND OPEN SPACE goals to future of Union County?
Very
Important Important Neutral Unimportant Very
Unimportant
Maintain Agricultural Production and Forestry 76.47%23.53%0%0%0%
Protect Rural Character and Scenic Views 76.47%23.53%0%0%0%
Foster Cooperative Relationships Between
Farmers and Residents 58.82%41.18%0%0%0%
Direct Development Away from Rural Areas 47.06%23.53%23.53%5.88%0%
Promote Protection of Open Spaces and
Environmentally Sensitive Lands 64.71%29.41%5.88%0%0%
Question 3
How important are the following PUBLIC FACILITIES (WATER AND SEWER SERVICE, SCHOOLS) goals to future
of Union County?
Very
Important Important Neutral Unimportant Very
Unimportant
Ensure Utility Capacity for Future
Development 80%20%0%0%0%
Fiscally Efficient Public Water and Wastewater
Service 80%20%0%0%0%
Seek Opportunities with Neighboring
Jurisdictions to Expand Utility Systems 53.33%26.67%20%0%0%
Reserve Utility Capacity for Future Growth 40%40%20%0%0%
County and School District Coordination for
Schools 66.67%20%13.33%0%0%
Joint-Use of Schools and Recreational
Facilities 53.33%33.33%6.67%6.67%0%
Comprehensive Plan Update : 7
SURVEy RESULTS
Question 4
How important are the following ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION goals to future of Union County?
Very
Important Important Neutral Unimportant Very
Unimportant
Protect Water and Air Resources 73.33%26.67%0%0%0%
Consider Impacts of New Development on
Environmental Features 64.29%35.71%0%0%0%
Question 5
How important are the following TRANSPORTATION goals to future of Union County?
Very
Important Important Neutral Unimportant Very
Unimportant
Support and Expand Bus Transit Service 33.33%33.33%20%13.33%0%
Identify Future Rail Service Corridor 26.67%33.33%26.67%0%13.33%
Land Use Planning for Monroe Connector/
Bypass Corridor and US-74 66.67%20%13.33%0%0%
Coordinated Roadway Planning 73.33%26.67%0%0%0%
County and School District Coordination for
Schools 66.67%20%13.33%0%0%
Joint-Use of Schools and Recreational
Facilities 53.33%33.33%6.67%6.67%0%
Question 6
How important are the following HOUSING AND NEIGHBORHOODS goals to future of Union County?
Very
Important Important Neutral Unimportant Very
Unimportant
Provide a Range of Housing Choices 40%46.67%13.33%0%0%
Strengthen and Enhance Existing
Neighborhoods 60%26.67%13.33%0%0%
Encourage Infill Development/Discourage
“Leapfrogging”40%33.33%26.67%0%0%
8 : UNION COUNTy
APPendIx e
Question 7
How important are the following ATTRACTIVE COMMUNITy APPEARANCE & IMAGE goals to future of Union County?
Very
Important Important Neutral Unimportant Very
Unimportant
Appearance and Development Standards for
Major Travel Corridors 46.67%46.67%6.67%0%0%
Appearance and Development Standards for
Neighborhoods 40%53.33%6.67%0%0%
Question 8
How important are the following INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION AND COOPERATION goals to future of Union
County?
Very
Important Important Neutral Unimportant Very
Unimportant
Intergovernmental Coordination 66.67%33.33%0%0%0%
An Active, Involved Citizenry 80%20%0%0%0%
Question 9
What, if any, goals are missing from this list?
COMMENT 1
Support and Expand Bus Transit Service - I hope this statement includes bus service other than the bus that comes from
Charlotte. Transportation within the County has been an identified "need" for as long as I've worked in Union County, 12
years. Efforts towards this goal are past due.
COMMENT 2
Water and sewer for rural citizens and townships.
COMMENT 3
There should be a goal about freight rail service in the County.
Comprehensive Plan Update : 9
SURVEy RESULTS
Question 10
Please feel free to add any additional comments.
COMMENT 1
I did not understand this statement: "Encourage Infill Development/Discourage “Leapfrogging”
COMMENT 2
I know most of our citizens live in major incorporated areas with water and sewer but do not forget the rest of us.
COMMENT 3
Do not forget to include the needs of those who do not drive, the disabled and elderly, those who can contribute but need
affordable housing and public transportation and meaningful employment.
COMMENT 4
This could be listed under the Economic Development or Transportation goals, but a reference to utilizing the CSX freight
corridor as a means of promoting existing infrastructure and/or economic development should be considered.
Comprehensive Plan Update : 1
develoPment of the Preferred scenario
Appendix f
scenario Planning Process
One method to help communities learn about the potential
impacts and trade-offs of future growth and development is
through a process called scenario planning. Scenario planning
encourages stakeholders to think and make decisions about
the impacts of growth on the region in order to develop a
common vision for the future. The scenario planning process
begins with an analysis to understand the impacts of growth
if the region maintains its current course of development and
operates business-as-usual. This Business-As-Usual (BAU)
scenario represents how communities would develop given
current policies and trends. “Indicators” or performance
measures are developed to determine how well the scenario
achieves goals and objectives. Alternative scenarios are then
developed based on an attempt to maximize the performance
of key indicators.
The development of the Future Land Use Map coincided with
and built upon the CONNECT Our Future regional scenario
planning effort. CONNECT is a 13-county effort that joins
residents, local governments, non-profits and businesses to
develop a growth framework meant to guide the type and
location of growth in order to accomplish regional goals. The
CONNECT process included many public meetings in Union
County as well as the construction of a GIS-based land use
model using CommunityViz, a software extension to ArcGIS
created by Placeways LLC. Participants customized the
regional CONNECT land use model during the development
of the Union County Comprehensive Plan. Additional factors
and unique indicators were developed in order to ensure that
the modeling was suitable for the local level. The scenario that
the team used as a starting point for the development of the
Future Land Use Map was based on the Community Plans
Scenario (CP) utilized in the CONNECT planning process.
Toward a Preferred scenario
The project team presented impacts of the CP Scenario, as
well as preliminary alternative scenarios developed through
the CONNECT process, at the Advisory Committee meeting
in December of 2013.
Attendees participated in an exercise to identify priority
indicators. These included increasing dwelling units and
jobs inside utility service areas, reducing farmland impacted
by new development and lowering impacts on congested
roadways. Feedback received from the Advisory Committee
and at the Project Symposium informed an Alternative Land
Use Concept (the AC Scenario).
The impacts of the CP Scenario and the AC Scenario were
presented at the 3rd Advisory Committee Meeting and at the
public meeting in the spring of 2014. Key findings indicated
that, with minor changes in land use policy, agricultural lands
impacted by new developed could be significantly reduced,
and could result in a significant reduction in agricultural lands
impacted by new development and homes in congested
areas and increases in homes in areas served by utilities.
Comments from the public and advisory committee
members precipitated a revision of the AC Scenario to ensure
consistency with existing municipal planning efforts. These
revisions resulted in the Preferred Scenario, which the Future
Land Use Map represents.
2 : UNION COUNTy
APPendIx f
rePort card
*1 Based on 1/2 buffer for MTP Transit for CP Scenario and Proposed Transit for
Alt Scenario
*2 CP Scenario based on MTP network and existing land use plans. AC Scenario
based on MTP network and Alternative concept
*3 Utility Service Areas include currently served areas and those portions of
subwatersheds (catchments) that can easily be served with minimal extension
of infrastructure
*4 Small Lot Style Family as defined by CONNECT. Average 3-4 Units / Acre
*5 Growth in areas along heavily congested roadways like US-74
cP ac % ∆
from cP results
move
Number of New Homes Near Transit *1 12,411 25,936 +109%
Per Capita Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)*2 24.38 23.34 -4%
Work
Number of New Jobs in County Jurisdiction 17,259 22,275 +29%
floW
Utility Demand Inside Utility Service Areas Million Gallons Per Day (MGD) 12,064,300 12,756,340 +6%
Utility Demand Outside Utility Service Areas*3 (MGD)4,387,330 3,763,270 -14%
Number of New Homes Inside Utility Service Areas 39,310 42,328 +8%
live
Dwelling Unit Density Near Commercial Center 0.42 0.64 +52%
Number of Small Lot Single Family Homes in County*4 3,441 8,969 +161%
Number of New Homes within a 10-Minute Response Time of Police and Fire Station
(Staffed)26,784 31,508 +18%
Housing Growth In Congested Areas*5 22,583 19,786 -12%
farm
Acres of Agricultural Lands Impacted 32,250 27,090 -16%
Urban Footprint (Acres)70,590 62,680 -11%
conserve
Acres of New Impervious Surface in Water Supply Watersheds 671 529 -21%
Acres of New Impervious Surface in Watersheds with Federally Listed Species 554 507 -8%
health
Number of New Homes within a 10-Minute Walk of an Existing Park 1,994 2,048 +3%
Scenario Key
cP Community Plans
ac Alternative Concept
r eSultS Key
= Worse Than Community Plans
= Less than 10% change from Community Plans
= Significant Improvement Compared to Community Plans
Comprehensive Plan Update : 3
DEVELOPMENT OF THE PREFERRED SCENARIO
The following set of issues and opportunities were identified
for Union County in the State of the County assessment
and further refined by the Long-Term Growth Projections
developed for this effort. (Appendix C contains the State
of the County report; Appendix D contains the Long-Term
Growth Projections memo.)
Phases of Work
The process to update the Comprehensive Plan was divided
into five phases. The first phase focused on project initiation
tasks, such as data collection, a review of existing plans and
studies and a study area tour. During Phase Two, the project
team created an inventory of existing conditions in the
County as a step toward an assessment of the County and
the identification of issues and opportunities to be considered
in subsequent phases.
PurPose
The Future Land Use Map depicts the community’s vision
for a development pattern that balances the economic, social
and environmental needs of Union County; strengthens the
local economy; and preserves the high quality-of-life for all
residents.
Comprehensive Plan Update : 1
endnotes
Appendix G
1 Refer to http://www.developunion.com/areas-of-focus for additional information.
2 http://www.ncagr.gov/stats/
3 2012 Income Estimates by County for Timber Harvesting in North Carolina, NC Cooperative Extension,
www.ces.ncsu.edu/forestry/pdf/income12.pdf
4 America in 2013: A ULI Survey of Views on Housing, Transportation, and Community. Urban Land Institute. P. 14.
5 2012 Census of Agriculture, USDA, National Agricultural Statistics Service.
6 http://co.union.nc.us/Portals/0/Health/Documents/CHA2012.pdf
7 http://healthstats.publichealth.nc.gov/indicator/view/AlzheimersDth.County.html
8 http://co.union.nc.us/Portals/0/Health/Documents/CHA2012.pdf
9 Based on existing needs and those from additional population growth using 10 acres per 1000 people standard from
National Recreation and Parks Association (NRPA).
10 International Council of Shopping Centers.
http://www.icsc.org/uploads/research/general/US_CENTER_CLASSIFICATION.pdf.
11 According to 2010 Traffic Analysis zone data provided by CRPTO.
12 An Inventory of the Significant Natural Areas of Union County, North Carolina, North Carolina National Heritage Program, 2012.
2 : UNION COUNTy
Comprehensive Plan Update : 3
concePt maPs
Appendix h
4 : UNION COUNTy
Comprehensive Plan Update : 5
concePt maPs
Appendix h
6 : UNION COUNTy
Comprehensive Plan Update : 7
concePt maPs
Appendix h