historical and architectural survey of anderson county, south carolina

194 Pages·2008·0.98 MB·English

HISTORICAL AND ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY OF
ANDERSON COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA

TRC
621 CHATHAM AVENUE
COLUMBIA, SOUTH CAROLINA 29205
HISTORICAL AND ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY OF ANDERSON
COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA
FINAL REPORT
Submitted to:

Anderson County
101 South Main Street, Room 217
Anderson, SC 29624
Submitted by:
TRC
621 Chatham Avenue, 2nd Floor
Columbia, SC 29205

Project # 33548

______________________________________________________
Jennifer S. Revels, M.A., Principal Investigator
Authored By Jennifer Revels and Mary Sherrer
August 2002
The activity that is the subject of this report has been financed, in part, with Federal funds from the National Park
Services, U.S. Department of the Interior, and administered by the South Carolina Department of Archives and
History. However, the contents and opinions do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Department of
the Interior.
This program receives Federal financial assistance for identification and protection of historic properties. Under
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and the Age
Discrimination Act of 1975, as amended, the U. S. Department of the Interior prohibits discrimination on the basis
of race, color, national origin, disability or age in its federally assisted programs. If you believe you have been
discriminated against in any program, activity, or facility as described above, or if you desire further information
please write to: Office of Equal Opportunity, National Park Service, 1849 C Street, N.W., Washington DC 20240.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
TRC wishes to thank Catherine Bergstrom and Paula Reel of the Anderson County Museum, and
Donna Roper of the Pendleton District Commission for their assistance in gathering information
on the history of Anderson County. TRC would also like to thank Krista Knaul of the South
Carolina Department of Parks, Recreation, and Tourism for her assistance in identifying possible
heritage tourism opportunities; Jonathan Fowler and C. Preston Cooley of the Williamston Area
Historic Commission for their time in introducing the survey team to Williamston; and Philip
MacArthur for his assistance in preparing this report.

iiHistorical and Architectural Survey of Anderson County
CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS............................................................................................................................ii
FIGURES......................................................................................................................................................v

I. PROJECT SUMMARY.............................................................................................................................1

II. PROJECT OBJECTIVES........................................................................................................................2

III. SURVEY METHODOLOGY.................................................................................................................3

IV. HISTORICAL OVERVIEW..................................................................................................................5
Narrative Summary..............................................................................................................................5
Physical Description of the County......................................................................................................5
Cherokee Occupation, ca. 1500–1777..................................................................................................5
Settlement Before and during the Revolutionary War, 1761–1785.....................................................7
From Pendleton District to Anderson County, 1785–1826..................................................................9
Settlement and Growth of Anderson County, 1785–1860...................................................................9
The Columbia-Greenville Railroad, 1845–1865................................................................................14
Reconstruction and Expansion, 1865–1910s......................................................................................17
Industrial and Infrastructure Development, 1880s–1920s..................................................................20
Economic Depression and the New Deal, 1920s–1940s....................................................................23
1940s to the Present............................................................................................................................23

V. ARCHITECTURE OF ANDERSON COUNTY...................................................................................26
Homes of Log Construction...............................................................................................................27
The I-House........................................................................................................................................28
One-Story Hall and Parlor Homes......................................................................................................33
Queen Anne........................................................................................................................................35
Craftsman Bungalows........................................................................................................................40
Tenant Housing..................................................................................................................................41
Neoclassical........................................................................................................................................42

VI. MILLS AND MILL VILLAGES IN ANDERSON COUNTY............................................................46
Jackson Mill, Iva................................................................................................................................47
Autun Mill, La France........................................................................................................................48
Chiquola Mill, Honea Path.................................................................................................................49
Belton Mill.........................................................................................................................................50
Pelzer Mills 1–4.................................................................................................................................51
Williamston Print Cotton Mill............................................................................................................52
Gluck Mill, Anderson.........................................................................................................................53
Orr Mill, Anderson.............................................................................................................................54
Equinox Mill, Anderson.....................................................................................................................55
Brogan Mill, Anderson.......................................................................................................................55

VII. RECOMMENDATIONS....................................................................................................................57
Townville...........................................................................................................................................57
Starr....................................................................................................................................................58
Iva.......................................................................................................................................................58
Honea Path.........................................................................................................................................60
iiiHistorical and Architectural Survey of Anderson County
Belton.................................................................................................................................................62
Pelzer/West Pelzer..............................................................................................................................64
Williamston........................................................................................................................................66
Pendleton............................................................................................................................................69
Anderson............................................................................................................................................70
Evaluation of Heritage Tourism Opportunities in Anderson County.................................................73

V. BIBLIOGRAPHY..................................................................................................................................78
VI. DATA GAPS………………………………………………………………………………………….84
VII. PROPERTIES LISTED IN THE NATIONAL REGISTER
VIII. PROPERTIES DETERMINED ELIGIBLE FOR THE NATIONAL REGISTER
IX. COMPILED INVENTORY
X. APPENDICIES: MAPS OF PROPOSED AND EXISTING HISTORIC DISTRICTS
A. ANDERSON
B. BELTON
C. HONEA PATH
D. PELZER
E. TOWNVILLE

ivHistorical and Architectural Survey of Anderson County
FIGURES
1. Milwee plantation, Site 0414 …………………………………………………………… 10
2. Smith’s Chapel, Site 0273……………………………………………………………….. 14
3. Obediah Shirley House, Site 0161 ……………………………………………………… 16
4. Cheddar Farm Supply, Site 1108 ………………………………………………………. 19
5. Ebenezer School, Site 0801……………………………………………………………… 22
6. Double pen log house, Site 0530………………………………………………………… 28
7. Pettigrew House, Site 0555……………………………………………………………… 30
8. McAdams House, Site 0217…………………………………………………………….. 32
9. Postell Cater House, Site 0624………………………………………………………….. 33
10. High-style Queen Anne, Site 0431……………………………………………………… 35
11. Vernacular Queen Anne, Site 0322……………………………………………………... 37
12. Tenant House, Site 0538………………………………………………………………… 42
13. Earle House, Site 0472………………………………………………………………….. 44

vHistorical and Architectural Survey of Anderson County
I. PROJECT SUMMARY
TRC, Inc. conducted a historic resources survey of Anderson County, South Carolina. The work
was undertaken on behalf of the County of Anderson and was funded by a matching grant
provided by South Carolina Department of Parks, Recreation, and Tourism (PRT) and the South
Carolina Department of Archives and History (SCDAH). The survey was conducted in order to
identify properties and districts that should be considered for possible local designation or
National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) designation within the county. The information in
the survey will aid the local governments in future planning activities and cultural tourism
development.
The boundaries for the survey were the established boundaries of the county. There were 1,191
properties surveyed within a total area of 718 square miles. The results of the architectural
survey indicate 32 properties are individually eligible for listing in the NRHP in Anderson
County. In addition, there are potential historic districts within the towns of Townville, Honea
Path, Belton, Anderson, and Pelzer.
Fieldwork for the project was conducted from February to June 2002. TRC Program Manager
William Green, M.A., R.P.A. supervised the survey. Preservation Planner Jennifer Revels and
Historian Mary Sherrer conducted the architectural survey as well as the historical research.
Program Manager William Green provided technical editing and Jessica Cox edited and
formatted the report.

1Historical and Architectural Survey of Anderson County
II. PROJECT OBJECTIVES
The historic resource survey of Anderson County was undertaken to compile an up-to-date,
accurate inventory of historic properties located within the boundaries of the county. The
information was compiled in order to identify properties and districts that should be considered
for possible local designation and National Register designation, as well as to aid the local
governments in preservation planning and cultural tourism development.
PRT is currently developing the South Carolina National Heritage Corridor, a project that aims
to promote economic development in rural areas of South Carolina through heritage tourism.
Designated by Congress in 1996 as a National Heritage Area, the Heritage Corridor runs from
the foothills of Oconee County in the northwestern corner of the state, along the Savannah River,
through the Edisto River Basin, to the port city of Charleston. The architectural survey will aid
PRT in identifying possible heritage tourism sites within Anderson County to incorporate into
the Corridor, as well as providing histories of smaller county towns that they can utilize in
brochures and advertisements.
Information gathered during the survey will also be used to evaluate the loss of historic
properties over time and the effects of new development on the historic fabric in the county’s
incorporated municipalities. The survey will aid in future preservation-planning efforts by
identifying historic properties and districts. This information can then be used when creating
future zoning ordinances and local preservation ordinances. By establishing a clear picture of the
history of the county and how its architecture fits into that history, residents and local
government officials will be able to make informed decisions regarding the adaptive reuse or
demolition of historic properties.

2Historical and Architectural Survey of Anderson County
III. SURVEY METHODOLOGY
Field survey of the towns of Anderson County was undertaken after an initial public meeting was
held. The first area of the county to be surveyed was the northwestern corner followed by Iva,
Starr, Honea Path, Belton, Williamston, Pelzer, Pendleton, and the city of Anderson respectively.
The intensive field survey began in February 2002.

Before the survey began, the Survey Coordinator for the SCDAH assigned a block of survey
numbers for the county. Each surveyed property received a number that was noted in the top
right hand corner of the final survey forms. A surveyable property is defined as any property that
is at least fifty years old and retains a good level of historical integrity. The National Register
Criteria deals with “the quality of significance in American history, architecture, archaeology,
engineering, and culture that is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that
possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association.”1
Any property eligible for listing in the NRHP must be significant under one or more of the
following criteria:

Criterion A. Any property that is associated with events that have made a
significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history.

Criterion B. Any property that is associated with the lives of persons significant
to our past.

Criterion C. Any property that embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type,
period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that
possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable
entity whose components may lack individual distinction.

Criterion D. Any property that has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information
important to our nation’s prehistory or history.

For a property to qualify for listing, it must meet at least one of the National Register Criteria
listed above and retain historic integrity of those features necessary to convey its significance.

During the course of the field survey, all roads within the proposed survey areas were walked or
driven, and all existing, surveyable, aboveground structures were recorded in a Survey Database
in Microsoft Access 97 format. In addition, black-and-white photographs were taken of every
surveyed property and any related outbuildings. The film rolls and frames were logged, and the
location of each property was noted on a USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Quadrangle map. At the
conclusion of the field survey, all properties were entered into a Geographic Information System
(GIS) database to be added to the cultural resource information center located at the SCDAH.

1 United States Department of the Interior, National Register Bulletin 15: How to Apply the National Register
Criteria for Evaluation, National Park Service, 1995, p. 2.
3Historical and Architectural Survey of Anderson County
The GIS database includes the location of each recorded property as well as its historic name,
historic use, and National Register eligibility.

All properties that were recorded were assessed for National Register eligibility using the
Criteria established by the U.S. Department of the Interior and the National Park Service as set
forth in 36 CFR 60.4 (listed above). When possible, the owners of the house/business were
consulted regarding any relevant history of the property in question, including old photographs
and records pertaining to the structure. All information from these interviews, including
photographs and records, was recorded and included either on the final survey forms or in the
final report.

Once the NRHP eligibility of individual properties had been determined, recommendations were
made regarding possible designation of historic districts. According to the National Register
criteria, for a district to retain integrity as a whole, the majority of the components that make up
the district’s historic character must possess integrity even if they are individually
undistinguished. In addition, the relationships among the district’s components must be
substantially unchanged since its period of significance. A component of a district is considered
non-contributing if the structure has been significantly altered since the period of the district’s
significance or the structure does not share the historic association of the district.

All survey maps were clearly labeled with appropriate legends and depict the survey area
boundaries, the locations of the surveyed historic properties (with survey numbers noted), and
inaccessible areas. National Register eligibility maps were prepared separately and identify the
location of properties recommended eligible (draft stage) and determined eligible (final stage) on
topographic maps. Boundaries for eligible districts are also noted and include the location of
both contributing and non-contributing resources within each district.

At the conclusion of the field survey, Mary Sherrer of TRC accompanied Brad Sauls and
Andrew Chandler from the SCDAH on a field visit to the surveyed areas. At that time, all
recommendations for National Register eligibility were examined and substantiated. All
recommendations made by the SCDAH have been added into the final report. Potential threats to
historic resources in the survey area were identified, and recommendations made for future
preservation activities. These recommendations were developed in conjunction with the SCDAH.

4Historical and Architectural Survey of Anderson County