Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Planning Board recommends allowing, not requiring, owners to combine nonconforming lots

November 06, 2025 | Moore County, North Carolina


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Planning Board recommends allowing, not requiring, owners to combine nonconforming lots
The Moore County Planning Board voted to recommend a text amendment to Chapter 9, section 9.9.c of the Unified Development Ordinance that changes the code language from requiring owners to combine contiguous, sub‑minimum lots in single ownership to giving them the option to do so.

Staff member Ms. Orloff said the current UDO reads that “such lots shall be combined,” and the amendment changes that phrasing to “such lots may be combined” and removes language that “strongly encouraged” landowners to seek adjacent transfers. She told the board the change is intended to avoid forcing property owners to buy adjacent land when a lawfully established nonconforming lot is already able to meet applicable setbacks and other UDO standards.

Board members asked whether the county would still ensure setback and development standards were met; staff responded that a lot slightly under the zoning minimum (for example, 0.9 acres in a 1‑acre RA district) would be reviewed against setback and other requirements and could be allowed to develop without combining lots if standards are satisfied.

The board opened a public hearing; there were no public speakers. A board member moved to adopt the Planning Board land‑use plan consistency statement and then moved to recommend approval of the proposed text amendment to Chapter 9, section 9.9.c. Both motions were seconded and carried on voice votes.

The amendment was presented to align with Action 4.1.1 of the 2025 Moore County Land Use Plan and, according to staff, is intended to clarify the UDO rather than expand substantive development rights. The board did not specify additional conditions or implementation steps beyond the normal review standards.

Next steps: the Planning Board recommended the amendment to the Board of Commissioners for final action; the record of the Planning Board’s recommendation and the consistency statement were authorized for signature during the meeting.

View full meeting

This article is based on a recent meeting—watch the full video and explore the complete transcript for deeper insights into the discussion.

View full meeting

Sponsors

Proudly supported by sponsors who keep North Carolina articles free in 2025

Scribe from Workplace AI
Scribe from Workplace AI