About the Southmont Sportsplex
Davidson County Commissioners are moving forward with plans to build a 150 acre $65 million sports complex on 358 acres in rural Southmont, NC. The proposed facility includes 3,500 parking spaces, 8 baseball and 8 soccer fields for tournament play, a 4.5 acre water park, a 50,000-square-foot indoor aquatics and basketball center, concessions, and over 60 camping and RV sites.
The scale of the project raises important questions about Southmont’s current infrastructure capacity and the potential long-term effects on the area's traffic patterns, environment, and rural character.
Basic Facts & Timeline
Land Purchase: 358 acres zoned RA-1, RA-2, RS (rural agricultural, residential) purchased by Davidson County in August 2024
Construction funded: $65 million approved March 2025 via reallocation of capital improvement funds from other projects based on preliminary plans
Limited-to-no public input: Other than regular Commissioners meetings there were no public meetings organized by the county. Despite repeated requests to see final plans or be allowed to provide input on design plans, the County Commissioners refused and would not allow the architects and engineers to meet with the public at any time
Zoning change: In April 2025, Davidson County created a new zoning classification: Community Recreational (CR). CR would allow hotels, restaurants, convenience stores, etc on the property.
Failed rezoning attempt: The county attempted to rezone the 358 acres to “CR” in June 2025 but the request failed after significant public opposition
Scale it back!: October 2, 2025 Commissioner Matt Mizell presented a motion to allow the architects and engineers to create a second "scaled back" plan for the park. Commissioners Yates, Watford, and Shell refused to allow it.
Primary election: March 3, 2026, primary elections were held in North Carolina. Commissioners Watford, Shell, Mizell and Elliott’s seats were up for grabs. Elliott chose not to run for re-election but the others were seeking reelection. By overwhelming margins, Watford and Shell lost the primary to candidates who ran on a platform of opposition to the Sportsplex, promises to stop or scale it back, and to exercise fiscal responsibility.
Formal interpretation requested: Early March 2026, and before bids for the project were awarded by the County, an attorney for adjoining property owners asked the Zoning Administrator to provide a formal written interpretation of the zoning ordinance that the Sportsplex is a permitted use as a “Community Center.” The adjoining property owner’s position was that the size and scope of the proposed preliminary plans for the Sportsplex went way beyond the reasonable interpretation of a “community center.” The County Attorney refused to allow the Zoning Administrator to provide the written interpretation. This is important because the formal written interpretation could be appealed administratively or in Superior Court.
Contracts awarded: On March 9, 2026, following the primary elections and the formal legal request on behalf of adjoining property owners challenging the Sportsplex as a permitted use under the zoning ordinance, the County Commissioners voted 4-2 (Yates, Watford, Shell, and Elliott) to award all $65M in bids to build the Sportsplex, despite the clear feedback from voters, a packed meeting with citizens speaking out against the project, and pending legal challenges.
Lawsuit filed: After the County Attorney refused to permit the Zoning Administrator to provide a formal written opinion and the bids were awarded, a lawsuit was filed by adjoining property owners in March of 2026
Permits granted: After the bids were awarded, permits were granted based on the project being allowed on Rural Agricultural land as a "community center"
Appeal filed: Following the permit applications, which included written interpretations by the Zoning Administrator that the Sportsplex was permitted as a “community center,” the attorney from adjoining property owners also filed an appeal of the permits and the Zoning Administrator’s interpretation to the Board of Adjustment, a quasi-judicial board empowered under the zoning ordinances and North Carolina statutes to review zoning interpretations.
Close the "loophole": After the lawsuit and the Board of Adjustment appeal were filed, Davidson County Commissioners (Yates, Watford, Shell, Elliot) requested that the planning department alter the zoning regulations to add a new zoning definition and use "Recreational Facility public or non-profit." This new definition use would be permitted on ALL Rural Agricultural land in Davidson County by right, which means there would be no public hearing and no restrictions on size or scale of any such future projects in Davidson County. The new definition would also solve the dilemma that the court of the Board of Adjustment might find that the Sportsplex is more than a “community center.”
Planning Board: A Public Hearing before the Davidson County Planning board was held in May of 2026 on the proposed "text amendment" to add “Recreational Facility public or non-profit to the zoning ordinance. At first the Planning board seemed very opposed to the change, noting that it felt like they were being asked to clean up a mess the Commissioners and County zoning staff had created, but they took a two week break and came back (with four sheriffs deputies in the room) and approved recommending the text amendment with no additional opportunity for the public to speak. During this meeting the Davidson County zoning administrator Lee Crook stated that the change would "close a loophole" that could impact the lawsuit to stop the Sportsplex.
The "fix" is applied: Davidson County Commissioners (Yates, Watford, Shell, Elliot) voted to approve the "text amendment" they requested to add the new use “Recreational Facility public or non-profit” to the zoning ordinance. This circumvented the problem that the Sportsplex had to be called a "Community Center" in order to be shoehorned into existing zoning. The county had insisted that the project, with 18 ball fields and 3500 parking places WAS a community center and that is what their permits were based on. After the "text amendment" it was suddenly a "recreational facility" and the zoning had no size or scale restrictions. It also has NO noise or light restrictions. The permits, which were applied for and granted with it being a "community center" were allowed to carry forward.
The County attorney then filed a to dismiss the appeal of construction permits arguing, in part, that because of the newly created and passed zoning use “Recreational Facility public or non-profit,” the appeal was moot and that the plaintiff’s had not timely appealed but should have appealed in 2025 when the County Commissioners voted against the rezoning request to change the property from Rural Agricultural to Community Recreational. In other words, the adjoining property owners should have appealed from a decision that was in THEIR FAVOR.
In July, 2026, a quasi-judicial hearing before the Board of Adjustment was held on the County Attorney’s motion to dismiss the adjoining landowners’ appeal of permits awarded based on the Zoning Administrator’s written interpretation that the Sportsplex was a “community center.” The hearing was packed and the attorney for the property owners argued vehemently that the case was not moot and was timely filed. Initially, the Board of Adjustment DENIED the County’s motion to dismiss and said the case would proceed to an hearing on the merits of the case (whether the Sportsplex was a “Community Center”). The Board took a brief 5 minute recess and said the hearing on the merits and facts would start after the recess.
When the board came back from its 5 minute back room break with the County Attorneys, one of the County Attorneys REOPENED the motion to dismiss that had just been decided and said the board needed to hear more on the mootness argument (which had been a large part of the hour and a half arguments from both sides in the motion to dismiss the Board had just decided).
The County Attorney then began rearguing his motion to dismiss claiming that the plaintiffs should have filed their appeal in July of 2025 when he said the zoning administrator said in passing in a County Commissioners meeting to rezone the property from rural argricultural to community recreational, that the Sportsplex could be built under existing zoning rules. The plaintiffs attorney brought up established NC case law that holds a simple statement in a meeting is NOT a formal zoning interpretation that can be appealed, and that at that time, the project was still in the planning phase. Final plans were never brought before the County Commissioners for approval. The project was not officially underway and the lawsuit "ripe" until the county committed to building it with bids and contracts - and the lawsuit was fled at that time. The board debated briefly and then decided to dismiss the appeal.
Preliminary Project Features
8 Soccer Fields – including a showcase field with bleachers and scoreboard
3,500 Parking Spaces (for comparison: Carowinds has 10,000)
8 Baseball Fields
4.5-Acre Outdoor Water Park – slides and 12-ft-wide lazy river
Designed for 1,600 daily visitors (Southmont’s population is under 1,400)
51,000 sq ft Indoor Complex
Olympic-size pool
Basketball courts
Snack bars
60+ RV/Camp Sites (Limited to one week per visitor)
Walking Trails
2 Entrances:
Owen Road (for cars)
Owen Road (for RVs)
Night Games: Fields and parking lots will be lit
Estimated Visitors: 93,000 per year (according to the county, but recent estimates by the community have shown 400,000 to 600,000 visitors per year is more realistic)
(For comparison: Dan Nicholas Park = 700,000/year; a comparable outdoor water park in SC = 90,000 in 4 months)
Concerns
Massive Growth:
Could overwhelm rural Southmont
Risk of uncontrolled residential sprawl
Traffic & Infrastructure Strain:
15+ minute drive from I-85 via winding rural roads
No existing infrastructure to support heavy traffic or large visitor volumes
Closest hotels, restaurants, and emergency services are distant
Light/Noise Pollution:
Night games with 2,000 seat bleachers
Water park with up to 1,600 visitors per day
3,500-space parking lot lighting will affect nearby neighborhoods, especially Riverwood
Homes adjoin the property on all sides
Environmental Risks:
No ecological or environmental impact assessments completed
Land drains into High Rock Lake
Nearby habitat for eagles, foxes, owls, and other wildlife could be lost
Public Priorities:
Reallocated Capital Investment funds took away from needed infrastructure like schools, jails, and sewer upgrades
No public engagement process initiated by county officials
According to Davidson County Parks and Recreation "Master Plan" the sportsplex was supposed to be centrally located so schools in Davidson County could use it. Southmont is not centrally located in Davidson County.
Location
The theme park Davidson County wants to create to promote tourism is not centrally located in Davidson County, it's not convenient to the taxpayers who are paying $380 per person to construct it, and it's in the middle of a residential area.