* Disclaimer - If ad is a click thru and you are having problems please click on link to download latest version of flash player.Flash Player

ON THE WEBSITE:

• GOVERNOR'S RACE: News & candidate info
• PET CORNER: Your home for news & PET IDOL
• DOWN ON THE FARM: News, videos and more
• SWINE FLU: News & info
• T&D DATATRACK: In-depth news and reports

Advanced Search
You are not logged in. | Login | Register

Log in to TheTandD.com

*Member ID:
*Password:
Remember login?
(requires cookies)
  Forgot Your Password?
 

Port Royal residents await development deal

By JIM DAVENPORT, The Associated Press  Monday, April 07, 2008

Leave a Comment | Default | Large

PORT ROYAL, S.C. - The “For Sale” signs are everywhere in this small town clinging to hope and dry land above the Beaufort River as it winds to Port Royal sound and the Atlantic Ocean.

Far from a sign of residents giving up on one of the state’s oldest towns, locals say they’re more the mark of speculation fueled by plans to sell the area’s little-used state port facilities and turn 52 dry acres into an upscale mix of retail and residential property the town sees as key to reshaping its future.

“It’s the opportunity to take an underutilized state asset — the Port of Port Royal — and turn it into the crown jewel of the town of Port Royal,” said Jan Malnowski, a banker who has lived here for about 20 years and who eagerly awaits the transformation. “It was kind of the red-haired step child of the city of Beaufort. Nobody wanted to live over in Port Royal.”

In the works for years, the plans hit their latest roadblock when a would-be buyer couldn’t get backing for the $26 million deal and walked away last month, pointing the blame at a national meltdown in real estate financing.

It was a vindication of sorts for the highest-profile backer of the development plans: Gov. Mark Sanford. A vocal advocate of refurbishing the property, Sanford during private phone calls last year disparaged developer David Staley’s personal and professional reputation and cast doubts on Staley’s ability to come through on the deal.

That behind-the-scenes work is expected to be raised Wednesday by state senators during confirmation hearings for board members of the State Ports Authority, which still owns the land, but it was not the first time Sanford has raised eyebrows by wading into the Port Royal deal.

The governor earned the praise of some residents and officials in this town — and the dismay of some others — in a much more public manner a year earlier when he redrew plans for the port.

The town had hired the same design company that planned Baltimore’s Inner Harbour and its plans were presented at meetings with residents to help finalize the look of what would become the new core of “Old Town.”

For a week, recalled Town Administrator Van Willis, “every single day we had 50 to 70 citizens come in. Sat down and we kind cultivated this kind of vision for the property.”

The plans included open space, up to 500 residential units, about 90,000 square feet of commercial space and a marina.

Real estate prices rose and the “For Sale” signs went up as some longtime residents — in no rush to move — started trolling for buyers willing to pay premium prices. But as the agency and town completed development documents, Sanford balked. While the plans called for smaller parks scattered within the development, the governor wanted a 10-acre park added.

“He actually came in and told us this what he wanted to do. It wasn’t like we had a choice in it,” said Port Royal town council member Mary Beth Gray-Heyward.

Sanford explained that he was looking out for people of modest means.

“We have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to make sure that people from all walks of life have the ability to take their family down to water’s edge for a family picnic after church on Sunday,” Sanford said recently. “Wealthy people from New Jersey will always be able to find their place on the water.”

Restaurant owner Nancy Harris Vista, who calls herself a fan and supporter of Sanford, said she left one of the meetings confused by his approach. Residents had a plan they liked and “then all the sudden he just kind of stomped his foot and said, ’No. This is not acceptable and we need more of this and more of that,”’ she said. “The governor was just seemingly hellbent on getting these numbers that he was seeking” for open space.

Council member Vernon DeLoach saw the governor’s interest differently and considered it “very generous of him to come down” and present his vision to residents during two meetings. “I think Governor Sanford has a perfect right to look into it and get involved,” DeLoach said.

The town already had 11 parks, including a sandy beach on the river next to a boardwalk hugging the edge of the port property. Those who opposed a new park worried about the town having to pay for more upkeep, and Willis noted that preserving open space in the development equaled land that could not be built upon. The 10 acres, Willis estimates, translates to at least $250,000 in potential tax revenue.

But those who favor the extra open space believe increased property taxes will cover the costs.

Bill Scheper, who was on the commission that crafted the town’s redevelopment plans, also said the land set aside for the park was some of the lowest on the site and would have been a problem to develop anyway.

“Sanford had a great deal of passion in making sure there was a legacy of undeveloped land for public use,” Scheper said.

For now, the main road still ends at a chain link fence where buildings near the port mostly sit idle, but most people believe that will change, perhaps soon. The property’s back on the market and there have been a number of inquiries already, said Byron Miller, spokesman for the State Ports Authority, which still owns it.

The governor is still looking forward to the project getting under way.

“This is something that is going to become increasingly precious and rare and unique as the coast of South Carolina continues to fill up just as south Florida did 50 years ago,” Sanford said.

To subscribe to the print edition of The Times and Democrat, click here.

 
Leave a Comment
The following comments are reader submitted. They do not represent the views of The T&D or Lee Enterprises.



» Post a comment Thanks for your comment! Once approved, your comment will appear on the site.

You must be logged in to comment.

Click Here To Sign in

Click here to get an account
it's free and quick
Please note: The Times and Democrat provides our story commenting feature in order to solicit feedback, debate and discussion on topics of local interest. Please keep in mind that civility is a necessary component of productive conversation. All blatantly inflammatory or otherwise inappropriate comments (i.e. vulgarity, marketing, etc.) are subject to rejection and/or removal. Comments will appear if and when they are approved. Thanks for reading, and thanks for participating.




More Business