Greg Wilson/Anderson Observer
The City of Anderson has plans to annex at least one stretch of property, a 22.04-acre field which reaches south to Edgebrook Drive, which fronts the East-West Parkway east of Concord Road, leaving more than a few local leaders and citizens in the community upset by potential changes in zoning, water runoff and traffic issues.
In 2009, when the parkway was proposed, Anderson County Council met with communities along the route to receive feedback and to work to maintain the prevalent state of housing in the area. County council passed resolutions designating the lands bordering the parkway as single-family (R-20) overlay district is intended to provide an environment supportive of existing housing within the district that minimize the impact on residential activities.
Sidewalks, solar lighting, a small park area with public restrooms have been a part of the long-term improvements to keep the area which cut through such neighborhoods as residential-like as possible along the four-lanes that have transformed transportation in Anderson County over the past decade.
Anderson County Council Chairman Tommy Dunn, who, along with the rest of council worked with former Anderson County Councilman Francis Crowder, after whom the park is named to protecting the nature of the land surrounding the parkway.
“Mr. Crowder was instrumental in regulations intended to preserve the natural beauty of the area,” said Dunn. “It was something important to all of us on council.”
Council passed a resolution requiring a supermajority vote from any furture county council to make any changes to the single-family zoning along the parkway.
But Dunn said the future of preserving this goal for the four-lane connector, which stretches for three miles from S.C. 81 North to Clemson Boulevard and has become one of the county’s main traffic arteries, could be in jeopardy.
The City of Anderson is considering annexation in the area, and has met with developers about the potential future of those 22 acres. While no official proposal has been made public, several sources suggest a dramatic rezoning is among at least one of the proposals considered by the city, one which featured more than 400 units, including apartments.
Dunn is not pleased with the thought of such potential development which he sees as a betrayal of the promises to the communities adjacent to the land on which the parkway was built.
“We met with people in these communities and they voted overwhelmingly to restrict any future development of the land along the parkway to R-20,” Dunn said. “That area, with the walking track, lights and park is one of the nicest places in Anderson. You cannot go by there day or night where you don’t see someone enjoying the parkway. We have this beautiful mile stretch of frontage land along the parkway and the city wants to mess that up.”
Dunn said the reason developers turn to the city for annexation is because the county has stricter standards and does not grant such zoning changes as are being considered on the parkway. He said the city has already annexed other areas of the county without any real input from residents who live in areas of the county who cannot vote for the city council members who are making the decisions.
Two areas on or near Midway Road were given among the recent examples of county citizens in the area having no voice in city annexation.
“We need a state law to stop this kind of thing,” said Dunn, who added that as a builder he is not against growth.
“We need development in Anderson County, but we need to have controlled growth,” said Dunn. “The parkway needs to stay the way it is for now. There is no rush for the city to move quickly on annexation there.”
Meanwhile residents who live south of the proposed development, who have already been battling water runoff issues since the parkway was built, even with the green buffer zone surrounding the current road, are concerned.
Gwen Mochak, who has lived with her husband adjacent to the property in question in Old Towne off Concord Road for seven years, says the potential for more development between her property and the parkway would result in even more flooding of her neighborhood.
Mochak said so much water runoff had flooded both her neighborhood and others on its way to swelling Cox Creek as it moved down river.
She said the county has offered some help, including giving her some sand bags to use against rising water, but that a formal hydrology study has yet to be done and getting the various groups and agencies to cooperate in the effort frustrating. She is not optimistic.
“Any time it rains a good downpour we worry,” said Mochak, adding that multiple neighborhoods are affected by the flooding.
Old Towne, Prescott, Canebrake, Thornehill and Bradley Park have put together a joint committee in an attempt to get help with the issue.
A lawsuit filed by one of the homeowners in the area whose house has been flooded multiple times may have also slowed the progress, since litigation can restrict or delay some contact with the South Carolina Department of Transportation and Anderson County.
“(It) flooded the first townhouse twice,” said Mochak. “We have a concrete patio that has been flooded. The water rages down from the drainpipe onto the property.”
Videos sent to the Anderson Observer clearly show the extent of the problems.
Mochak said she had met with most members of city (most of the areas with flood issues are in the city) and county councils, along with other officials who have seen the photos and video of the problem. She added that it takes several days for the properties to dry out after rain, so the problems is prevalent.
“Where is all that water going to go? We have got to get the SCDOT people out here to figure this out. It (the parkway) was just not engineered for growth.”
“The county has been trying to help us, I give them credit, but that unless that big pipe is fixed we are going to continue to have problems,” said Mochak.
Anderson City Councilman Kyle Newton, who represents the district impacted by the flooding, said he has yet to see any official proposal for annexation and a new development on the property.
“I have talked to a lot of people and I know there are a lot of moving pieces, but I have not seen anything,” said Newton. “There still needs to be a whole lot more feedback from the community before there is any movement in that direction.”
“I know that city could be looking at the whole length of the connector, there are no approved plans in place.”
Newton said he has participated in some of the meetings with leaders in those communities south of the parkway off Concord Road, and plans to continue to meet with his constituents in the area.
“I am extremely cautious about all development, but I am especially cautious about development along the East-West Parkway, especially as it relates to water issues on Cox Creek. One thing I know: Water flows downhill,” said Newton. "I know which way Cox Creek flows and that is why I going to represent the will of those in the neighborhoods along Concord Road and their needs.”
He said he is "the most cautious person on council" concerning this right now because it is going to affect his constituents the most.
Newton also said the water issues in the area ones which need to be addressed no matter what future development holds.
“This effects people living in the city right now, and we need to take some kind of action.”
Anderson County Councilman John Wright, Jr., who represents the area, said that the current zoning along the connector was part of a well-considered plan.
“There was a zoning plan and an overlay district put in place when county council secured the parkway, and those things were put there for a reason and we need to honor that,” said Wright.
Wright said while some form of development is likely for the future of the road front along the parkway, any such development needs to be in keeping with the county’s R-20 zoning overlay district, which would not include other options.
He added the county will continue to explore ways to reduce water running off and leading to flooding in the area just south of the parkway to Thornehill.
Wright also agreed it’s also possible Dunn’s conclusions that annexation is driven by developers who may not wish to deal with the county because the city is more willing to make changes the would county oppose.
“There’s only so much we can do,” said Wright. “The county supports development based on what the road was built to handle, including traffic and water, and the need to preserve the R-20 status as part of the infrastructure.”
The city recently held a meeting to discuss ideas for the parkway, but many, including the Anderson Observer and other members of the media, were not made aware of the event. Future meetings hosted by the city are possible.
But in the meantime, many who live in the city south of the parkway along Concord Road await solutions and progress on flooding and water damage issues, as the county leaders continue to be disappointed over what some citizens have called the city’s continuing “annexation without representation.”
The chairman of county council is among this group.
“There’s nothing we can do to stop the City of Anderson from doing what they want to do, but changing the zoning in that area would probably put a strain on their relationship with the county,” said Dunn.