Wednesday, June 5, 2002

Column misinformed about Tyrone annexing

Imagine my surprise to open the May 15 edition of your paper, and once again read a column about Tyrone from someone that obviously had not taken the time to do any research on the statements he made. I always find it amazing when someone expresses his opinion based only on his perceptions, only to find out just how confused that person really is or that he doesn't care enough to do his homework to find the true story.

While I can't speak for the city of Fayetteville concerning their annexations or your statements about them, I will attempt to explain to you about Tyrone's and your charges of annexes, annexes, and more annexes.

First, I want to address your statement about the amount of annexing that Tyrone has done. While you didn't give any figures about the amount of acreage Tyrone has annexed or what time span you are talking about, maybe this information will be helpful to you and your readers.

Since 1992, the town of Tyrone has annexed approximately 250 acres in northwest Fayette County. About one third of that property is land that was already developed under Fayette County for one-acre single-family homes. The surrounding land was also developed under Tyrone's standards of one-acre single-family, which happens to be the standard development lot in Tyrone.

Since 1997, there has only been 32 acres annexed into Tyrone. This property is located in an area northwest of Tyrone that should be serviced by the county; more times than not, the Tyrone Police Department is the first to respond to the scene. So where do you come up with the idea that "Tyrone annexes, annexes, annexes"?

Now if you want to discuss the northern corridor of Ga. Highway 74, maybe I can shed some light on what really occurred to cause Tyrone to take the action to annex almost to the Fayette-Fulton County lines.

Somewhere around the time of 1993, then Mayor Norm Davis became aware of a plan by the Fayette County Commissioners for the development of the north corridor of Hwy. 74. Along with this letter, I am delivering you a copy of a study that was done by the commission from May, 1988 through February 1995 entitled, "The Highway 74 Sanitary Sewer Information."

This study shows how the county wanted to develop Hwy. 74 with commercial, heavy and light industrial, and high density residential in the form of 2,270 apartment units, and a series of spray application sewer treatment plants. Fayette County even took the liberty to place the Tyrone town logo on the cover sheet.

Feeling that this type of irresponsible planning was not in the best interest of not only Tyrone but the rest of the west side of the county, the town sought to annex the property and establish a far superior plan for the future development.

The proof that the annexation was a positive for the county can easily be seen by the way the county ignores the right-of-ways on Hwy. 74. That small area of 1,000 feet that you wrote about in your column is an eyesore for all the commuters that travel that area.

Thanks to the town of Tyrone and Peachtree City, the next 10 miles of highway is a pleasant drive to view. This entrance into Fayette County has often been referred to as the "Gateway to Fayette County" but it continues to be ignored as though it was the county's backdoor.

Let's now move on to yours and others' concern over the sewer service the town is receiving from Fairburn. Now don't try and use that argument that you're concerned about high-density residential development. The county squeals like a pig whenever the sewer line is discussed. It is obvious from the county's "Sewer Study" that 2,270 apartments would be acceptable to them.

As a matter of fact, you will also read in the study that the Fayette County Commissioners also looked at purchasing 5 million gallons of sewer service per day from Fulton County in 1990. Tyrone is only obtaining 250,000 per day from Fairburn and all of it is already spoken for. There is no excess capacity to be had for development.

Even though this was explained over and over to the county and reported in your paper, the point is missed. People also have to remember that the idea of obtaining sewer service from Fairburn was more an environmental issue than a development issue.

The courts ordered the approval of the John Wieland development, along with a spray application sewer system that was going to be operated and maintained by the homeowners association and was located on a creek that fed into Line Creek, the same creek that Peachtree City draws some of its drinking water and possibly even yours, Mr. Beverly.

We didn't feel that this was an environmentally sound idea, so we sought options. Knowing how many spills have occurred in Peachtree City's system, you probably agree that these systems do fail and the consequences can be terrible. But still the county chooses to sue the town of Tyrone. The court costs incurred by the town of Tyrone is in excess of $6,000. I don't know what the county spent for their legal expenses, but keep in mind a portion of their bill was paid with Tyrone citizens' county taxes.

When you referred to the county's concern about more intense development on the northern corridor than is intended on the county's land use plan, it is a fact that the county came to Tyrone and adjusted their land use plan and development standards to a higher level to meet Tyrone's standards.

So here we are, Mr. Beverly, at the end of your article and it seems that you really haven't done your homework. I am even a little confused what brought these fears and concerns out from you.

The last time I even heard about annexation fears was at the last Fayette County Association of Governments meeting when Commissioner Pfeifer raised the issue and was rebuked by the city of Fayetteville.

Commissioner Pfeifer stated he "was going to dig in on this issue." I have to wonder if you are holding his shovel for him.

Since I joined the Tyrone Town Council in 1997, I have not heard any of my fellow councilmen even discuss the possibility of going out and annexing any additional property. If a landowner approaches Tyrone, we will show them the courtesy of hearing their request and acting on it in the best interest of Tyrone. Additional land will require additional equipment and staff to accommodate and provide the necessary services. If it is too burdensome, I will not support the annexation.

As far as your invitation to "start a conversation," I would welcome the opportunity to sit with you and discuss any number of subjects that seem to concern you, including open meetings, open records, tax inequity, future land use, and development, or just to give you some facts for your next article. I was taught in a class once, "Facts convince. Opinions confuse."

Ronnie Cannon

Councilman

Tyrone Town Council

Back to Opinion Home Page | Back to the top of the page