Sardis
Church Road
CONCERNS
|
http://www.macon.com/198/story/215847.html
Posted on Tue, Dec. 18, 2007
Road expansion could threaten Bibb homes,
property
Construction isn't out of the ordinary
at Chandler
Downs.
The subdivision, located in south Bibb County off
Sardis Church Road,
still has vacant lots and unfinished houses. Near a
cul-de-sac that
still hasn't been paved, a sign announces plans for
a new phase of
homes, so talk about the prospect of future
development isn't
necessarily something that would surprise homeowners
here.
However, when representatives from the state's
Department of
Transportation started showing up a few weeks ago
and discussing how
their plans to widen Sardis Church Road would impact
the neighborhood,
residents were surprised - and a little angry, too.
After all, many of them attended a public hearing in
January 2006 and
looked at the DOT's plans for the area. Those plans
didn't show any
impact on their subdivision, a group of 80 or so
homes - priced from
about $200,000 to $400,000 - that have been occupied
for just two or
three years.
"The map (the DOT) showed, didn't show our
properties on there," said
Bernard Sharpe, who has lived on Chandler Drive for
about two years.
"When I didn't see our properties on there, I
thought, 'this thing
isn't going to be close to us.' "
Sharpe and many of the subdivision's other residents
were stunned when
the DOT told homeowners in recent weeks that it
needed to demolish four
homes to build a temporarydetentionpond - to catch
water runoff and
soil erosion during the road project's construction
and help it drain -
and purchase about 20 feet of property from another
10 to 12 homeowners
for rights of way.
"People were like, 'what?' " said Gloria Crockett,
who has lived in
Chandler Downs for almost two years. "All of this
was surprising to
everybody."
Worried about losing their property, angry residents
have since lashed
out at everyone from the county's Planning and
Zoning Commission for
approving their neighborhood for developmentand at
the developer, Tim
King, for building and then selling homes "he knew"
would be affected
by the new road.
King said he specifically developed the neighborhood
with the road
project in mind, because that's what local and state
officials demanded.
"We had to jump through a lot of hoops to develop"
the neighborhood, he
said. "It was unreal how much we had to do. ...
Before we got our final
plat approval, we had to make sure ... everything
was exactly right,
based on what (officials) had set before us from the
road program.
"In fact, we lost several lots because we had to go
by what we were
told we had to do for the road program."
DOT spokesman Mark McKinnon said there are
"discrepancies in where the
property lines are," but he doesn't know who staked
the rights of way
incorrectly - the developer or the state's
engineers.
Moreover, McKinnon said the residents are correct
about what they
remember seeing and hearing at the 2006 public
hearing: Chandler Downs
was not affected by the plans displayed at that
meeting.
The reason the subdivision is affected now is
because the plans have
changed, officials said.
Citing recent changes in environmental laws
regarding erosion and
sediment control on construction projects, McKinnon
said the DOT was
forced to alter the original plans to provide for a
temporary
detentionpond and more rights of way.
"That's what changed. That's what caused the
difference," he said.
Upset about the changes in the project, a group of
about 30 homeowners
recently marched to the Bibb County Courthouse to
complain to the board
of commissioners.
After listening to their complaints, county
officials said they knew
nothing about the homes slated for destruction or
the homes scheduled
to lose chunks of their backyards.
"That was the first time we heard about it,"
Commission Chairman
Charlie Bishop said later.
Commissioner Bert Bivins and county engineer Ken
Sheets have since
traveled to Atlanta to talk with the DOT about the
project's impact on
the residents, but neither was willing to divulge
any particulars after
the discussion.
Bivins, who represents the district where the homes
are located, said
he did not want to talk to the media about the
issue. But he said when
the time is right, he would let the residents know
through official
channels what he learned.
Speaking after the two men came back from Atlanta,
Chief Administrative
Officer Steve Layson said the county is actively
working toward a
solution that favors the residents, but he didn't
want to speak about
it in specifics until the matter is actually
settled.
"I don't want to promise anything that hasn't been
agreed to yet," he
explained.
An update on Chandler Downs is scheduled for
discussion this morning
during the commission's committee meetings.
"We can't speak out ahead of time," Layson added,
"but we feel like it
can be resolved and some progress can be made on
it."
Bishop went even further.
"We're not going to let two-year-old houses get torn
down," he said.
"That would be ridiculous."
The DOT said it's not negotiating with any residents
about destroying
their homes, because state officials are looking for
alternate
engineering solutions, such as moving the
detentionpond to the other
side of the proposed construction or using a pond
the developer already
has built in the neighborhood.
"We feel pretty good about the fact that we can
engineer our way around
this," McKinnon said.
To contact writer Keich Whicker, call 744-4494.
Posted on Tue, Dec. 18, 2007
http://www.macon.com/198/story/215845.html
Sardis Church Road proposal actually consists
of two
projects
The Sardis Church Road proposal
actually consists
of two projects.
The first one comprises an interchange, a new
four-lane bridge across
Interstate 75, the relocation of Nowell Road and the
addition of a new
lane on I-75 in both directions between the
interchange and the
I-75/I-475 split.
The second portion would widen Sardis Church Road
from two lanes to a
four-lane divided highway with bike lanes and extend
it from I-75 to
Ga. 247.
The route would veer away from the existing Sardis
Church Road just
past Goodall Mill Road and continue southeast,
passing south of the
Middle Georgia Regional Airport.
Although there has been enthusiasm about the
prospect of smoother
traffic flow, many residents question the project's
route, which could
destroy 24 homes and increase traffic noise
substantially in five
neighborhoods. Some community leaders say the
project might decrease
the chances of attracting new business in south Bibb
industrial parks.
Road noise would "exceed residential noise criteria"
in three areas,
and five areas would see a big increase in noise
levels, according to a
Department of Transportation environmental
assessment. The state is
proposing to build one noise barrier.
The I-75 interchange also would destroy five homes
to limit harm to the
historic Hudson farmstead, a Georgian-style house
and land owned by
developer Oney Hudson on both sides of the
interstate.
Some residents have questioned the legitimacy of
Hudson's property
being designated as historic.
But Todd Hill, a senior environmental planner for
environmental
engineering firm Jordan Jones & Goulding that is
working for the
DOT on the project, said an architectural historian
evaluated all the
homes in the road's corridor. Historians look at not
only the age of
the home but its architectural style, he said. The
entire Hudson
farmstead was protected - not just the house -
because it had been a
farm since 1900.
Information from The Telegraph archives was used for
this report.
|
Sardis
Church Road
CONCERNS
|
|
To: Telegraph
Letters
Sent: Friday,
April 07, 2006 9:38
AM
Subject: Issue
bigger than
roundabouts and drainage
In yesterday’s mail was the Georgia DOT’s
11-page response to 84 comments received from citizens
concerned about
the Sardis
Church
Road
extension
project. None of the comments received a favorable
answer, and none of
the 22 homes and 3 businesses scheduled for demolition
will be spared.
But, what really bugs me is this from the
report: “The State Historic Preservation Officer
considers the Hudson
farmstead eligible for listing on the National
Register of Historic
Places. The historic resource survey was completed in
1999.
“As the Hudson Farmstead is a privately-owned
parcel of land (located at the proposed I-75/SCR
interchange), the
property owner has the right to develop it or preserve
it as he or she
sees fit. The only area that is anticipated to convert
to commercial
type use is the area immediately around the proposed
interchange.”
Since the farmstead has not been placed on the
historic list after a lapse of seven years, one has to
wonder what the
heck is going on. My guess is the farmstead will
quietly disappear from
the list after the interchange is completed, and, just
as the DOT said,
it will “convert to commercial type use.”
Meanwhile, preservation of the “historic
farmstead” will require the construction of a
non-traditional
interstate interchange and the rerouting of Nowell
Road—probably at
additional cost—and the destruction of seven homes.
Just as it did with the Forest
Hill
Road
project, The Telegraph’s editorial board must weigh-in
on the use of
the NRHP as a means to a commercial end. This is a
bigger issue than
roundabouts and drainage.
Lee Ballard
Macon
|
|
