Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners deny down‑zoning request at Patons Ridge; Planning Board had recommended denial
Summary
The board denied a request to change 20.36 acres in the Patons Ridge area from Residential-15 to Rural Agriculture after the Planning Board recommended denial and commissioners expressed concerns about diverging from the comprehensive plan.
The Onslow County Board of Commissioners on Feb. 17 rejected a request to down‑zone about 20.36 acres near Patons Ridge from Residential-15 to Rural Agriculture.
Planning staff described the property as cleared and vacant, located on a projected segment of Aria Lane within the Peyton’s Ridge (Patons Ridge) subdivision area. Staff noted that the county’s future land-use map places the parcel in the suburban growth category, that the site lies in a flight‑path overlay near Camp Lejeune and that both Swansboro Elementary and Swansboro Middle were projected to be over capacity under existing estimates; the high school had capacity. The request would have been a down‑zoning (increasing minimum lot size from 15,000 to 20,000 square feet) and staff outlined reasons both for and against the change in their presentation.
The Planning Board reviewed the request on Feb. 6 and voted 5–1 to recommend denial, citing deference to the adopted comprehensive plan and future land-use map; the Planning Board chair summarized the board’s view that it should follow the plan and leave broader changes to the Board of Commissioners.
The applicant’s representative, Josh Edmondson of Tidewater Associates, said the southern portion of the larger ownership was being proposed as a buffer to nearby extraction and intensive uses and that Rural Agriculture could accommodate other agricultural or low‑intensity uses.
During the commissioners’ discussion several members said the Planning Board’s role is to follow the comprehensive plan and that changes to the plan should come through the Board of Commissioners; other commissioners said conditional rezoning options should be explored in future workshops. On a subsequent vote the board denied the rezoning request: commissioners approved a motion to deny the requested ordinance change; the board recorded four votes in favor of denial and two opposed.
Because the Planning Board had recommended denial and commissioners declined the rezoning, the property’s future land-use designation would remain unchanged absent a separate action to amend the future land-use map.
Votes at a glance: Rezoning PRIZ2024-34 (Morton Minerals Inc.), R-15 to RA for 20.36 acres — Denied (board voted to deny; recorded 4–2 in favor of denial).
