I have lived on Pinehurst No. 6 for only one year, but I have something to say about the manner in which the Ferguson’s swing-set issue is being handled by the Planning and Zoning Board. I understand that rules and regulations are necessary, but the intent of these laws is not being observed. The official problem relates to the relative proximity of a swing set to the setback outlined in the local laws. The intent of these laws is to prevent unsightly sets from detracting from the property values and from the overall look the area.

A tasteful and well-kept swing set is not unsightly. It is the kind of structure that younger couples would like to see when they go looking for houses in a nice neighborhood. We’re not talking about a rusty floral pattern metal pole swing set. Theirs is a handsome wooden set with a roof and sturdy looking posts.

The problem seems to be the attitude of the person making the complaint and the inability of the Planning and Zoning Board to use discretion when enforcing laws of a subjective nature. The lots in #6 are painfully small, seemingly aimed at younger buyers. What kind of logic makes it near impossible to place attractive children’s toys in such an area? The letter of the law is one thing. The intelligent enforcement of those laws is another. And why is it the Planning and Zoning Board’s business to regulate safety and functionality? If there is an issue of how it looks, that is part of the local law, but functionality vis-à-vis safety is not something that can be realistically regulated or enforced.

This will end up with hostile feelings between people living in close proximity. There is no winner. What’s next, house egging at Halloween? I guess I better start looking for a house in the country.

Jason Scribner
Pinehurst