Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Land Use Board approves rezoning for half-acre site on U.S. 601 South
Summary
On Oct. 21, 2025, the Union County Land Use Board voted to recommend approval of a straight rezoning that would change a roughly half-acre parcel on U.S. 601 South from RA-40 to Highway Corridor (2025RZ010), a move applicants say would make the lot usable but which staff warned could set a difficult precedent for roadside development.
The Union County Land Use Board on Oct. 21 recommended approval of rezoning petition 2025RZ010, a request to change a roughly half-acre parcel on U.S. 601 South from RA-40 (rural residential) to Highway Corridor zoning.
The rezoning request, presented to the board by county planner Bjorn, would be a straight rezoning without conditions. Bjorn said the parcel sits next to a wide NCDOT right of way, has no mapped streams or floodplain and is largely cleared, but noted that the site is small and across 601 from single-family homes. Traffic on the four‑lane U.S. 601 was described in staff materials as carrying a little more than 12,000 vehicles per day.
The applicant, Michael Haney, told the board that he purchased the property months earlier and is seeking rezoning to make the lot usable. "My initial plans are just to get it rezoned so that it's usable and then figure out what the next best use is for it," Haney said.
Planning staff said water and sewer are not available to the site, that community meetings are not required for straight rezonings under North Carolina law, and that the Highway Corridor district allows a wide range of commercial and institutional uses. Staff highlighted two concerns: the parcel’s small size makes many types of development impractical without combining adjacent land, and approving small, isolated Highway Corridor rezonings along 601 could create many individual driveways and a fragmented, congested corridor over time. For those reasons staff recommended denial, though they described the rezoning as consistent with the county’s land‑use plan overlay for the employment corridor.
Board members asked about the steep driveway, past structures on the larger original parcel and what by‑right uses the Highway Corridor zoning could allow. Staff explained some uses (including interior, climate‑controlled self storage) would be by‑right while other uses (outdoor storage, certain commercial operations) could require a special use permit. Haney said any development would depend on resolving water and sewer access and that he had no immediate plan beyond obtaining the rezoning.
After discussion a board member moved to recommend approval of the rezoning and adopt the advisory consistency and reasonableness statement; the motion was seconded and the board voted in favor.
The board’s recommendation now goes to the Union County Board of Commissioners, which will make the final decision.
Votes and formal actions taken at the Land Use Board meeting included routine approvals of the agenda and minutes and the advisory recommendation to the commissioners on 2025RZ010.
