Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
The applicant indicated support for the condition, which was unanimously 226 <br />recommended by the Planning Board. 227 <br />13. The Board reviewed the applicant’s proposal, as contained in the narrative, 228 <br />concerning water capture and reuse. The Board agreed with the self-imposed 229 <br />condition proposed by the applicant. 230 <br />14. The Board reviewed the imposition of a condition limiting the percentage of retail 231 <br />operation(s) allowed in District 2. The condition was intended to address Town 232 <br />of Hillsborough concerns over potential impacts of retail development within 233 <br />Settlers Point on existing re-development efforts within the Town. The Town has 234 <br />suggested/requested a limit of allowable retail in District 2 to 8% or 20,000 sq.ft. 235 <br />The applicant recommended the imposition of a condition relating to a limit on 236 <br />retail in District 2 as follows: ‘Retail – limited to 30% of the allowable floor area of 237 <br />the District (i.e. District 2) not to exceed 78,540 sq.ft. of total cumulative floor 238 <br />area’. 239 <br />The Board indicated that while they have sympathy for the Town’s concerns this 240 <br />area was designated to be an economic development zone and was anticipated 241 <br />by the County to develop at an ‘urban’ level. 242 <br />An 8% limit on retail operations would not be prudent given the County’s overall 243 <br />interest in allowing for services in this area to satisfy local resident and interstate 244 <br />travelers needs. 245 <br />The Board indicated they believed the 8% limit recommended by the Town was 246 <br />inconsistent with the provisions of the Joint Planning Land Use Plan adopted by 247 <br />the County and the Town for the area in question. 248 <br />The Board voted unanimously to recommend approval of the proposed condition 249 <br />limiting retail to 30% of allowable floor area in District 2 as suggested by the 250 <br />applicant and recommended by the staff. 251 <br />15. There was general discussion on a recommended condition limiting the hours of 252 <br />operation for uses developed within Settlers Point. 253 <br />The applicant’s response to this condition was as follows: At this time the 254 <br />developer would like to remain flexible with the potential hours of operation and 255 <br />address this possible condition during the Site Plan approval process. An operational 256 <br />restriction of this type during the early stage of approvals would infringe on the 257 <br />marketing potential for the project. 258 <br />The Board expressed concern such a condition could overlay restrict 259 <br />development opportunities in the project and voted unanimously to reject the 260 <br />imposition of such a condition. 261 <br />16. A Planning Board member recommended a condition requiring the reservation of 262 <br />1% of required parking spaces, exclusive of any hotel development, within District 2 263 <br />to support vehicle charging stations for electric cars. 264 <br />Several concerns were expressed, namely: 265 <br />a. There was no need for the condition and the free market should dictate the 266 <br />development of vehicle charging stations within this project, 267 <br />88