Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Planning board recommends denial of Peach Orchard rezoning, citing safety and access concerns
Loading...
Summary
The planning board voted to recommend denial of H2026‑01, a conditional rezoning for a 149‑lot Peach Orchard community, because of unresolved safety, access and environmental questions, and will send that recommendation to town council for final action on May 11.
The Town of Harrisburg Planning & Zoning Board on April 21 voted to recommend denial of a proposed rezoning and map amendment for the Peach Orchard property, a conditional plan for up to 149 single‑family lots on about 175 acres.
Planning staff presented H2026‑01 as a conditional rezoning to Residential Low that would allow a conservation‑design neighborhood of 149 lots with roughly 30% open space (about 52 acres), including a dedication of just over 20 acres of public parkland. Staff said the applicant proposed transportation mitigations (turn lanes and other off‑site improvements identified in a transportation technical memorandum), and that NCDOT had reviewed site‑distance analyses. Staff also noted constraints: remnant conservation easements and two creeks across the site, a Piedmont Gas 60‑foot easement along the north boundary, and a condition proposed by staff limiting the northeastern portion to 30 lots until a second access point is built.
Multiple residents urged denial. Speakers cited dangerous sightlines and a history of accidents at the Peach Orchard intersections, inadequate emergency access if a single crossing were blocked, concerns about previously filled trench silos or on‑site dumping on the park parcel, and recent voluntary water conservation as evidence that town utilities face constraints. "If something happens, we have a flood, that bridge is out... you cannot get a fire truck in there," one neighbor said. Others asked the applicant to provide additional soil sampling and stronger assurances about park security and lighting.
The applicant and consultants responded that they have performed soil borings and a wetlands and environmental walkover that did not find nesting or protected species; they said Pulte (the applicant) is offering substantial public benefits, including dedicating and building two soccer fields, parking, playgrounds and utility extensions. The developer also said some off‑site road improvements would be required as conditions.
Board members focused on the northeastern portion of the site where more than 60 lots would be served by a single access point. Several board members said that, as presented, the plan created unacceptable safety risk because the code’s two‑access requirement could not be met on that portion without disturbing conservation easements or building an additional creek crossing. Staff said the fire code permits alternatives (such as requiring sprinklers on lots) if other measures meet life‑safety standards, and that detailed construction plans and permitting would come later if the rezoning were approved.
After extended discussion the board voted to recommend denial of the zoning map amendment, citing concerns over public safety, access and unresolved site‑specific environmental and sightline issues. The staff packet and the board’s minutes will accompany the case to town council, which is scheduled to consider the rezoning on May 11 at 6 p.m.
