How Land Use, Zoning, and Housing Policy Protect Territory Instead of Serving People
⚡ Headline Insight:
Housing is being weaponized — not to shelter people, but to keep the structure of power in place.
📈 Anchor Statistic:
57% of Hickory renters spend over 30% of their income on housing. That threshold is considered "cost-burdened" by federal standards — meaning the majority of renters are financially stretched just to stay housed.
🔄 System Overview: What Keeps People Locked Out?
In Catawba County — and especially in Hickory — the housing conversation is framed around affordability, but the real problem is access. Behind the curtain of policy and zoning lies a system that isn’t designed to meet the needs of working families, young adults, or low-income renters. It’s designed to preserve property values, enforce class boundaries, and avoid disruption to those already comfortable.
Housing policy in this region functions like a gated pipeline: it lets in what reinforces stability, and locks out what threatens the existing order.
Let’s break down the key barriers:
🏡 1. Rental Vulnerability: Always on the Edge
Renters are systematically disadvantaged. They lack the protections, leverage, and stability that homeowners enjoy. Yet over 40% of Hickory households rent, and many live one unexpected expense away from eviction.
• Evictions are disproportionately concentrated in lower-income census tract.
• Rental property inspections are inconsistently enforced, often weaponized against the tenant rather than the slumlord.
• Large property ownership groups buy up multi-family units, raise rents, and churn profits without reinvestment in the community.
Imagine living in a house where the floor could collapse at any moment — and the city’s first response is to fine you, not the landlord.
🏢 2. Zoning Exclusion: Built to Keep People Out
Zoning laws dictate what gets built and where. In Hickory, these laws function as invisible fences:
• Vast sections of the city are zoned for single-family homes only, preventing multi-family or affordable developments.
• Accessory dwelling units (ADUs), mixed-use projects, and mobile homes are restricted or heavily regulated.
• Developers seeking to build workforce housing are often stalled by neighborhood resistance or policy gridlock.
This results in a paradox: there’s not enough housing, yet we block the kind we actually need. It’s like watching someone drown and refusing to toss a floatation device because it’s the wrong color.
📋 3. Tax Policy & Speculative Ownership
While homeowners fight rising tax assessments, others are leveraging the system for gain:
• Speculators buy property not to live in, but to sit on it until values rise.
• Corporate landlords benefit from economies of scale, inflating market rent.
• Tax appeals are often successfully navigated by wealthier property owners, while average homeowners foot the bill.
The land becomes an investment portfolio — not a place to live. The goal becomes profit, not community.
⚠ Code Enforcement Imbalance
In theory, code enforcement ensures safety. In practice, it too often targets the powerless:
• Renters in aging properties face violation notices without support for remediation.
• Homeowners in legacy neighborhoods are cited for overgrown grass while high-end developments are ignored.
It’s enforcement for show — not for equity.
🏛 Who Benefits — and Who Pays?
✅ Who Benefits?
• Wealthy homeowners whose neighborhoods remain undisturbed.
• Developers who profit from luxury projects while avoiding affordability requirements.
• Political leaders who appease voters by "protecting home values."
💸 Who Pays?
• Renters facing rising costs and unstable living conditions.
• Young adults unable to find starter housing.
• Seniors aging out of homes with nowhere affordable to downsize.
🧠 Reflective Prompts
1. Why are “starter homes” still being built, yet not affordable?
Yes, starter-style homes—like those in DR Horton’s The Hamptons at Hickory—exist: compact, single-family floorplans on modest lots priced from around $325,990 to the mid-$400Ks. They’re built, sure—but only households in or above the upper middle-income bracket can afford them. So while starter-style homes exist, they are far from starter‑affordable.
2. What happens when the people who work here can’t afford to live here?
That creates two cascading effects:
· Economic drain and commuter fragility: Workers — especially those in service sectors — end up commuting from farther away, increasing burnout and reducing civic ties.
· Talent erosion: Younger, mid-skilled workers leave for more affordable markets, while low-wage immigrants or older residents fill immediate labor gaps, entrenching a cycle of slow decline.
There's precise evidence on other NC regions, but Hickory mirrors this: aging in place and growing immigrant communities fill gaps, while the working middle rushes outward.
3. If every city council member had to rent for a year, would zoning change?
Probably—but unlikely in Hickory. Council members here are predominantly long-settled, homeowners aged 50–80, with deep neighborhood roots. Our ward-based voting system reinforces that comfort, not just in age but in asset protection. It’s unlikely zoning reform happens without an external shift, not a theoretical rental experience.
4. Is your property value truly worth more than your community’s future?
In a word: no.
Especially if you're local-born, you can’t generate the same equity gains someone relocating from NY or CA can, even in a comparable house. In short:
· Out‑of‑staters can build wealth here in a way locals cannot.
· The system rewards relocation speculation over local sustainability.
· That dynamic is more damaging than it looks—because it steals the bridge to generational equity while masking itself as “cheap living.”
✅ Closing Thought:
The housing system we have isn’t accidental — it’s designed. Every policy that blocks access, every permit that delays change, and every budget that prioritizes appearance over need is a decision. If we want housing to serve people rather than territory, we must unlearn the habits of protection and relearn the habits of inclusion. Because a city that boxes out its future can’t grow — it can only shrink.
