Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
101 East Orange Street • P. O. Box 429 • Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 <br />919-732-1270 • Fax 919-644-2390 <br /> <br /> <br />March 10, 2017 <br /> <br />Craig N. Benedict <br />Director, Orange County Planning and Building Inspections <br />P.O. Box 8181 <br />Hillsborough, NC 27278 <br /> <br />RE: Courtesy Review Comments – Settlers Point <br /> <br />Dear Craig, <br /> <br />Thank you for providing an opportunity for the town to comment on the proposed Settlers Point rezoning <br />application. The planning department offers the following comments for your consideration. Despite the <br />lack of support for this particular project, the town does support the pending interlocal agreement to <br />extend utilities into the Hillsborough EDD area. <br /> <br />General comments and policy concerns: <br />1) Application materials are inconsistent. Parcel 3 does not show on all of the exhibits. It is unclear how <br />many dwellings are proposed. The land use map indicates 930, while the tax statement indicates 690 <br />and the traffic study indicates 760. <br />2) The assemblage is awkward, wrapping around existing developed lots. This will lead to conflicts. <br />3) The residential portion of this request is located outside the urban services area for the town and <br />would require an amendment to the WASMPBA. <br />4) Committing water to this new area would take water capacity away from properties already within the <br />boundary. <br />5) Opening 30 acres of retail up for development while the town is still trying to recruit retail for Daniel <br />Boone and Waterstone will flood the market. The Waterstone properties have the added cost of the <br />Special Assessment District and limited visibility while Daniel Boone has additional redevelopment <br />time and costs. This site will appear easier and take away from these two higher priority sites for the <br />town. <br />6) For more than 10 years the town has focused its policies and actions on more compact development to <br />follow smart growth principles. The eastern portion of this site is premature and inconsistent with our <br />adopted policies. The light industrial portion is acceptable due to the potential need for large floor <br />plates to accommodate significant non-residential users. <br /> <br />Specific comments: <br />1) The application materials are very general in nature to vest the project with staff level approvals <br />moving forward. This is significantly less information that the town requires in order to vest staff <br />review in a project. As the proposed use table simply shows “x” under uses, it is my understanding <br />that no further board review would be needed if this rezoning is approved. <br />2) The materials do not include a proposed street network/internal circulation plan. <br /> 281