Planning Board recommends allowing manufactured homes in Highway Corridor Overlay (urban transition) where underlying zoning permits

Moore County Planning Board · November 6, 2025

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Planning Board recommended deleting manufactured homes and accessory manufactured homes from the prohibited‑use list in the Highway Corridor Overlay District — Urban Transition subdistrict. Staff said the amendment would allow such dwellings where the underlying zoning and UDO standards permit them, creating an additional affordable housing

The Planning Board voted to recommend an amendment to the Highway Corridor Overlay District (Chapter 7, sections 7.8.c and 7.8.f) that removes "manufactured home" and "accessory manufactured home" from the list of prohibited uses in the Urban Transition subdistrict. Under the proposed change, manufactured homes would be permitted in the overlay where the underlying zoning district allows them and other UDO standards (setbacks, distances between structures, acreage) are met.

Staff said the amendment would treat manufactured homes consistently with other single‑family uses and would support the Land Use Plan recommendation to accommodate a variety of affordable housing types. In the presentation staff explained an accessory manufactured home is an accessory dwelling unit that can be allowed when parcel acreage thresholds and setbacks are met.

Resident Michael Parker spoke during the public comment period seeking clarification about accessory manufactured dwelling units; staff explained that a principal dwelling plus an accessory manufactured home can be permitted where the parcel meets acreage and separation requirements. A number of board members expressed support for the revision, noting concerns about potential mobile‑home parks were addressed by separate standards that apply to mobile home parks (which would require rezoning and infrastructure discussions).

The board adopted the Planning Board consistency statement (one member recorded opposition on that vote) and then moved to recommend approval of the Chapter 7 amendments. Both motions were seconded and carried.

Next steps: staff will forward the recommendation and consistency statement to the Board of Commissioners for final action; staff noted the amendment would only apply to the Urban Transition subdistrict and that standards for mobile home parks remain distinct and subject to conditional rezoning and site‑plan review.