Divisions remain as legal kinks in the controversial annexation of more than 61 acres into the City of Orangeburg are being hammered out.

The area being proposed for annexation is largely near and around Longwood Road, Sparkleberry Hill Road and Spring Valley Circle along Columbia Road. More than 75 percent of the landowners representing more than 75 percent of the assessed value in the area have asked to be annexed.

Orangeburg City Council gave two votes of approval to an ordinance that would add the acreage, which includes 115 people in 33 residences, a nursing/assisted living complex and six duplexes, to the city. Nine parcels are vacant. Also, third reading had been scheduled for an ordinance to place the annexed property in City Council District 2.

Council, however, tabled the ordinances following a 30-minute legal briefing held in a closed session on Nov. 4.

"We just have to have a chance to work through some of the things that came up from the legal counsel. When it was tabled, it was tabled without a timetable. I really think that it'll be something done sooner rather than later," Assistant City Administrator Kevin Bronson said.

"We don't want to have things in limbo any longer than we have to, but in order to make sure we take full account of the legal advice counsel has given, it's going to take some time to get through it," Bronson said.

Orangeburg Mayor Paul Miller and council members Charles "Buddy" Barnwell, Charlie Jernigan and Joyce Rheney originally supported the ordinance, while council members Bernard Haire, Trelvis Miller and Sandra Knotts were opposed.

The annexation issue has largely pitted single-family residents against multi-unit developers.

The area under consideration for annexation includes property owned by developer Steve Patel of Courtesy Management. Patel had planned to construct a $3.5 million townhouse complex on Columbia Road just outside the Orangeburg city limits, a plan that drew the ire of some residents in the predominantly single-family residential area.

"I don't know what the Patels are doing. I rode by there ... and it looks like it's some land-clearing going on. But, what I see is the same thing you see when you ride by," Jernigan said. "There's not a whole lot I can add to it at this point."

Jernigan said the majority of residents, however, have made it clear they don't want multifamily residences in their single-family residential community. He said he's interested in preserving the community as it is.

"My main interest is keeping the communities safe. I realize that there are already some things in there that we can't change, like the nursing home and the condos, but that area seems to be developing mainly with single-family homes. I like to protect the community and try to pretty much keep it the same way it is.

"I think it's our responsibility to listen to them (residents) and try to keep it that way. We're going to be annexing other areas in the city, and we want everybody to feel like they're gaining something when the come into the city," Jernigan said.

Hema Patel, Patel's wife, has said, however, that her family had already been given a permit to build by the county before it got taken away and that her family's business could lose money as a result of the annexation.

She has since referred any further comment to the family's attorney, Jim Meggs of the Columbia-based Callison Tighe & Robinson law firm.

"We will have no comment at this time," Meggs said.

Bronson said, "Their attorney did send a letter requesting that the zoning be something different, but if their name was not on the petition, then they really were not petitioners in the annexation process. So, they forfeited their right to request alternate zoning."

Where is the Patels' property?

"Right now, it's in the county. The Patels own quite a few pieces of property in the annexation area, and the different pieces of property are zoned differently in the county," Bronson said. Some are zoned the equivalent of the city's A-1 residential designation. Some are zoned the equivalent of the city's A-2 residential, and some are zoned the equivalent of the city's commercial.

"It is very confusing," Bronson said.

Bronson said the holdup on the Patels' plan to build multifamily housing units is being caused by the Department of Public Utilities' ordinance that states the utility will not provide water or sewer services to new customers living outside the city unless they first agree to become part of the city.

Patel has said there is no guarantee their property would be zoned for multifamily housing even if Courtesy Management signed an annexation agreement.

"In that respect, that would prohibit the Patels from building on that property because they wouldn't have water and sewer to go with the structure they'd build. They could apply to DHEC for a well and septic tank. Depending on DHEC's provision for density, location, property size ... there are a lot of things they take into consideration," Bronson said.

Orangeburg County District 6 Councilman Clyde Livingston said the property on which the Patels want to develop is in his council district.

"I think it's an issue involving the courts, and I think it's between the city and the investors that own the property. I'm not saying that permits that were issued prior to it being annexed would not have an impact. We don't have any lawyers working on it. I can tell you that. I would say at this point that the county has no plans to make any moves. We got enough lawsuits going on on our own."

Bronson said 75 percent of the community has already spoken clearly on the intention to keep multifamily dwellings out of the neighborhood.

"They have been very vocal about not wanting apartments right in front of their neighborhood," he said.

T&D Staff Writer Dionne Gleaton can be reached by e-mail at dgleaton@timesanddemocrat.com or by phone at 803-533-5534. Discuss this and other stories online at TheTandD.com.

You must be logged in to comment.