Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Annexation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Fountain Inn council postpones Durbin & Jones annexation after residents voice traffic and zoning concerns
Summary
Public opposition and council questions about removing a 10‑acre commercial tract and how open‑space cluster rules apply led Fountain Inn council to postpone first reading of a 58.53‑acre Durbin & Jones annexation to October for further review.
A majority of Fountain Inn's City Council voted on Sept. 12 to postpone the first reading of an annexation and R‑15 zoning request for roughly 58.53 acres on Durbin (Durbin) and Happy Valley roads after several residents raised traffic, flooding and process concerns.
Residents who spoke during public comment urged the council to deny or delay the annexation. Nancy Garrison told the council she was disturbed by an email she obtained via a public records request and urged officials to be ready to answer how the development would affect schools, road capacity and drainage. Ashley Bridal told council members she supported residents' earlier objections to allowing commercial uses on the site and said removing the previously proposed 10‑acre commercial tract raised the risk the developer could seek commercial approval in Lawrence County instead: "You cannot have your cake and eat it too, at least in Fountain Inn," Bridal said, urging council to vote against the proposal as presented.
Nicholas Myers, who identified himself as a representative of Pulte Group, said the company builds homes only and confirmed the commercial component had been removed: "We have removed the commercial component and are moving forward with an R‑15 zoning for our portion of the property," he said, adding his firm would only be involved with the residential portion.
Council members asked how the change affects the planning process and whether the open‑space residential (cluster) option could be used under current code. Staff explained that annexations cannot be conditioned to prohibit a permitted option and that the R‑15 zoning category allows a maximum density of about 2.9 units per acre under current rules. Several council members said they preferred to align any annexation vote with an imminent text amendment that would revise the open‑space rules and to discuss the item at a scheduled workshop before deciding.
Acting on a motion from council, members postponed first reading to the October meeting to allow further review, including the upcoming workshop and proposed text amendments addressing open‑space requirements. The motion passed on a voice vote recorded in the transcript as 5–1.
