Moore County commissioners unanimously denied a conditional rezoning request on Oct. 20 for a proposed 134-unit apartment complex along N.C. 211 near West End. During the meeting, commissioners and concerned citizens alike voiced concerns about building height, parking, traffic, emergency access, and the project’s compatibility with the county’s land use plan.
The proposal, brought forth by Rhetson Capital LLC, called for two multifamily apartment buildings on an approximately 11.73-acre parcel at 8003 N.C. 211, currently zoned for residential and agricultural use with a five-acre minimum lot size. The developer sought permission to rezone the property for multifamily housing with conditions that would allow greater density, taller buildings, and fewer parking spaces per unit than county regulations otherwise permit.
The Planning Board, which met prior to the commissioners hearing the plan, voted 6-0 to recommend denial after finding the proposal inconsistent with the land use plan.
Developer angles for “workforce housing”
Representatives of Rhetson described the project as an effort to address the need for workforce housing in Moore County. Project manager Joe Greer said the company had spent several years developing its plans and wanted to provide housing options for workers who struggle to find suitable apartments locally.
The proposed development includes 134 units across two buildings: 64 in one and 70 in the other. Plans called for at least 202 parking spaces, or 1.5 spaces per unit, as well as a playground, dog run, picnic area, and grill stations—standard amenities for a large complex.
Greer claimed that concentrating the apartments in two buildings would help preserve trees and open space while also limiting the amount of land disturbed by construction.
The developer requested permission to increase density from the county’s limit of eight units per acre to 11.4 units per acre. The proposal also sought to increase the maximum building height from 35 feet to 54 feet, 6 inches, to accommodate a split-level design that followed the property’s terrain.
Estimated monthly rent would be slightly more than $1,300 for one-bedroom apartments, just under $1,600 for two-bedroom units, and just under $1,800 for three-bedroom units. Those figures remained estimates, and the project did not include a formal affordability program or restrictions guaranteeing that rents would remain at those levels.
Commissioners questioned whether the proposed rents would remain accessible to working residents over time and whether a future owner could raise prices. Developer representatives said market conditions would influence rents and expressed openness to discussing whether a portion of the apartments could remain within specified rent ranges.
A site map as seen in the meeting’s agenda packet.
Commissioners question parking and safety
Parking emerged as a central point of disagreement during the meeting.
Developer representatives defended the proposed ratio of 1.5 spaces per unit and pointed to comparisons with other apartment developments and the project’s planned mix of one-bedroom apartments. They said the site could accommodate additional spaces if needed.
Commissioners, however, questioned whether that ratio would serve households with two working adults, multiple vehicles, or visiting family members. They also worried that adding parking later could reduce the green space the developers said they would preserve.
The proposed buildings’ height also led to questioning about emergency response. Vice Chairman Von Canon asked whether firefighters could maneuver a ladder truck around the buildings if residents filled the parking spaces. The developer’s engineering team said the internal road layout and turnaround areas would provide access for emergency vehicles, provided drivers did not block travel lanes.
Commissioners also scrutinized the project’s single entrance on N.C. 211, which would allow right turns in and out only. Drivers heading in the opposite direction would need to travel farther before turning around. Board members questioned how the entrance would affect traffic on the busy highway and whether the layout would provide safe access for residents and emergency personnel.
The development team said it had met with the N.C. Department of Transportation twice to discuss the project and had incorporated a turn lane into its plans.
Residents oppose rezoning
During the public hearing, residents largely spoke against the proposal and voiced displeasure about the scale of the buildings, the loss of rural character, traffic, and the potential precedent for future development along the N.C. 211 corridor.
Some argued that the requested exceptions would allow too much development on a property intended for low-density residential and agricultural use.
Others questioned whether the county needed additional apartments given the number of rental units they said were available elsewhere in Moore County.
Art Williams, vice chairman of the Moore County Soil and Water Conservation District Board of Supervisors, also took to the podium to voice support for the Planning Board’s recommendation to deny the request.
Commissioners acknowledged the need for housing and continued growth but said the proposal did not fit the site as presented. They accentuated the importance of following the county’s land use plan and considering whether a development’s scale and design suit its location.
The commissioners first voted unanimously to find the proposal inconsistent with Moore County’s land use plan, and then voted unanimously to deny the conditional rezoning request, upholding the Planning Board’s September recommendation.
Watch the full meeting online here.
Feature photo via County of Moore.
Abegail Murphy | Assistant Editor
Written by Sandhills Sentinel assistant editor Abegail Murphy. Abegail has been writing for Sandhills Sentinel since 2021.
Want Moore news that matters? Please click here to sign up for the free Sandhills Sentinel e-newsletter.
Follow Sandhills Sentinel: Facebook | X | Instagram | YouTube | TikTok | Threads | Newsletter
