S.P. Council to Vote July 25 on Tyler's Ridge
- Print print this page
- Discuss 11 comments, Blog about
Advertisement
BY TED M. NATT JR.
Staff Writer
Now that the arduous public hearing process has finally closed, the Southern Pines Town Council will vote July 25 on the proposed Tyler's Ridge at Sandhills development.
The council listened to almost five hours of testimony Tuesday night during a second public hearing on the 46.2-acre mixed-use project at the corner of N.C. 22 and Airport Road.
"We don't plan to vote on this tonight," Mayor Mike Haney said midway through the hearing.
The council delayed a vote until its monthly work session because it must weigh the evidentiary testimony and a stack of paperwork submitted by proponents and opponents during the hearing.
"I want to be shorter and briefer," said Robert Hayter, principal at The Hayter Firm in Pinehurst, who spoke on behalf of developer Jim O'Malley. "It is, however, my obligation to be thorough."
Hayter then spent an hour outlining plans for Tyler's Ridge, which include a commercial development on the north side, featuring small shops and a restaurant. A multifamily development on the south side includes 216 one- and two-bedroom dwelling units.
The first application for a conditional use permit submitted by O'Malley led to public hearings in back-to-back months at both the council and Southern Pines Planning Board levels.
The board voted 4-2 on Jan. 20 to recommend that the council deny a permit for the project. O'Malley then withdrew the initial application in April after it became clear to him that the application did not comply with the town's Unified Development Ordinance (UDO).
The move pre-empted a vote by the council on whether the application complied.
O'Malley submitted a second application in May, and the board voted 5-0 after a public hearing in June to recommend approval of the revised plan.
In a separate vote last month, the board unanimously approved three conditions - that the commercial development exclude hotels and motels, and bars and nightclubs; and that a review of the project by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) be submitted upon completion.
The primary changes in the new application include the addition of three single-family lots, the reduction of the number of apartments from 232 to 216, the revision of access to N.C. 22 to improve traffic flow and the FAA review.
"The changes in this new presentation are purely cosmetic," said Robert Kroll, a pilot who is opposed to the project. "This project has been sugar-coated over and over throughout the process."
The property is zoned Planned Development (PD) and is on the west side of N.C. 22 between Airport Road and Aiken Road and across from Warrior Woods Road. The site also adjoins property owned by Sandhills Community College and a private property owner, Esther Frye.
Opposition to the project centers around safety concerns, aircraft noise, an alleged glut of apartments in Southern Pines, current commercial space vacancies in Moore County and the project's proximity to the Sandhills Horticultural Gardens.
FAA standards prohibit the construction of any structure that would encourage public assembly in a runway protection zone (RPZ), areas that extend beyond the edge of a runway.
RPZs are trapezoidal zones that have specific land-use regulations to keep runways clear of any obstacles that could hinder takeoff and landing. They begin 200 feet beyond that area usable for takeoff and landing.
The airport is seeking federal funds for expansions that include an extension of the airport's main runway 600 feet toward N.C. 22 and 400 feet toward Hardee Lane in Whispering Pines.
The commercial portion of the project and the three single-family lots would be in the airport hazard overlay zone, but the multifamily residential portion would not.
However, part of the multifamily residential portion is under the eventual departure path for planes coming off the main runway at the airport once the expansion is complete.
Contact Ted M. Natt Jr. at tnatt@thepilot.com.
More like this story
Advertisement














Comments
SuzColeman 1 year, 10 months ago
There is a huge elephant in the Tyler's Ridge room... those three single family home lots. It's a Catch 22. In order to qualify for significant exemptions regarding the apartments' proximity to one another, the project needed to be developed as a PRD - Planned Residential Development. A PRD requires that the development include at least two single family detached homes. When questioned at the hearing as to when building would commence on those 3 homes, the applicant said that would be dictated by "market conditions." Don't think that's gonna' be acceptable... No single family homes? No PRD... No PRD? No Tyler's Ridge. Deliberations on the the 25th should be interesting.
TooHot 1 year, 10 months ago
C'mon. The guy played by the rules and is gonna get approved. So what - you want to change the rules on him mid-stream?
Sean 1 year, 10 months ago
I know it's been rehashed and rehashed but do they really want to turn that area into another area like the 15-501 mess? Any residential so near commercial and in the airport line is going to be a slum in ten years or less.
brflechs 1 year, 10 months ago
Sean - I agree. And sadly it seems that is what they want to do..remember the big grandiose plans Little River had..more importantly look at all the empy retail space at the new Food Lion with yet more space being built at the new Harris Teeter.
What saddens me more is that specific area is so close to the Gardens and Reservoir park... I hate the thought of that turning commercial. If I wanted to live next to commerical strips then I would have moved next to one.
We know what they outcome will be..they will not listen.
TooHot 1 year, 10 months ago
Who's talking about developing those areas? Just you. Relax.
brflechs 1 year, 10 months ago
NOt sure what planet you are on based on the proximity of Tylers Ridge to those areas
TooHot 1 year, 10 months ago
A guy plays by ALL the rules (set up by governmental non-producers BTW) on how to develop his commercial property and people with no skin in the game get to tell him how he can utilize his property? Property zoned commercial (or the like) is worth zero without the opportunity to turn it into something. I wonder what the naysayers would do if they were ever in a position to own a piece of commercial property when others decide for them, what they should or can do with their asset.
Sean 1 year, 10 months ago
TooHot you are fighting a battle that was lost 50 years ago. What they do with their asset is part of the rules. It needs to be more a part of the rules. Long term community developement is kinda important. Make your plans, take your shot; if it doesn't work out try again with something that is more fitting for the area.
If it is commercial and he wants to develope it as such, why doesn't he?
Roorke 1 year, 10 months ago
Anybody out there remember that time the small airplane crashed short of the runway into the Sandhill's Horticulutral Garden. It was a few years back. And then there was that time sombody was going to build something and how Sandhills howled about run-off into the the Gardens. Run off and noise the good folks at Sandhills cried. Now for some reason its perfectly alright. Same people, different outlook. I guess there must be some money involved.
Sean 1 year, 10 months ago
Or different people elected. Growth at any cost is not a good long term plan.
MonkeyJunction 1 year, 10 months ago
Too Hot
Living in close proximity to the proposed project I think I got skin in the game....It's bad community development no matter whether you filed the correct paperwork or not.Needless to say any council member that endorses this project will in turn draw my ire and money in helps of defeating them come November and following elections.