Response to Post & Courier Editorial on Ashley Landing

The Post & Courier Commentary: After 8 years of Tecklenburg, we need a mayor to actually lead Charleston by Marion Hawkins 

CHARLESTON MAYORAL CANDIDATE WILLIAM COGSWELL WILL OFFICIALLY FILE HIS CANDIDACY

By William Cogswell published in The Post & Courier August 4, 2023 Click here to read article on The Post & Courier website Much has been written about the proposed redevelopment of the old Piggly Wiggly site. With a city election right around the corner in which the residents of West Ashley will provide more than 40% of the vote, the urgency to do something — anything — to fulfill long-neglected promises to revitalize this critical part of the city has jumped into warp speed. For almost seven years, the people of West Ashley have been promised a new gateway to their community. Today, the lack of leadership from the current administration has left residents with a hefty bill from a developer, a sharply divided City Council and a derelict lot with no clear path forward. It doesn’t have to be this way: An iconic entrance to West Ashley can be done, but it requires creativity, pragmatism and experience. Mayor John Tecklenburg claims there is no other way to meet residents’ high expectations for this project than the options already presented. That lack of proactive and creative thinking is why I am running for mayor. There are better options for West Ashley. This spring, I proposed a bold solution combining the expensive 3.3-acre city-owned Sumar Street parcel with the controversial high-density apartment project that’s being presented on the 30-plus acre Ashley Landing site to the south. With leadership, vision and a transparent agreement defining where and how future tax revenues could be allocated, a win-win scenario can be achieved that would be less expensive and far more impactful to the residents. If the option to positively redevelop 35 acres versus 3.3 acres was presented, wouldn’t you want to consider it? It may take longer, but given the current boondoggle we are in, I doubt it. Plus, the city controls the process. A true iconic entrance to the oldest and most neglected part of the city can be done in a more fiscally responsible way — think Avondale coupled with Charles Towne Landing mixed with Windermere and even a touch of the Coburg Cow. It would be a positive and fully viable solution to what has become an increasingly toxic situation. This is a world I know. I have spent the past 25 years redeveloping sites like this (Cigar Factory, GARCo Mill), and I have successfully completed several complicated projects that include workforce housing, green space, creative stormwater solutions and government offices. The scenario I am proposing would only require the city to provide money once the overall development is completed based on a mutually agreed-upon design with ample public input. This is important because digging into what few financial details there are of the mayor’s plan, it looks like the city may be required to commit at least half, if not all, of the proposed $45 million prior to completion, which is a massive risk to taxpayers. I can also say with confidence and from a professional point of view that the mayor’s project, which is 60% publicly funded, will not inspire new investment in West Ashley. Quite the opposite, especially with today’s economic headwinds. What it will do is produce a lot more developers coming to the city with their hands out. Finally, it is not clear that the city actually has the revenue in hand to fund the mayor’s plan without more private projects like the large apartment building at Ashley Landing being built (which is, at best, three years away and has a 1,100-signature petition opposing it). We are told some portion is coming from parking fees and the balance from a tax increment financing district that has seen little to no activity. What are the details? What are the terms? It matters because when heavily subsidized projects like this fail, the burden will be on the city to pick up the pieces. Transparency is vital to building public trust, and it is clear from the past several City Council meetings that both are at historic lows. Just because something has been worked on for years doesn’t always mean it is the right or responsible thing to do. Timing is everything, and when an opportunity like responsibly redeveloping the entire site presents itself, the city needs to lead from the front, have vision and — with public input — give it a serious look. The current deal is not going away. The city owns the site, but the frantic attempt to make good on a long-overdue political promise a few months before an election is not putting our residents first and has resulted in the mess we are in today. I stand firm in my belief that the residents of West Ashley deserve more, both on Sumar Street and in the mayor’s office.

COGSWELL HAS OUTRAISED ALL OTHER CANDIDATES SINCE ENTERING THE RACE

By William Cogswell published in The Post & Courier April 6, 2023

March 2, 2023 (Charleston, SC) - Now, more than ever, our city needs strong, proactive leadership, and Union Pier is but one recent example of this. To date, our city’s leadership has played a passive, reactive role when it comes to the handling of this once in a lifetime redevelopment opportunity. Nearly three years ago, the South Carolina Ports Authority hired Lowe to get the permitting and zoning in place to sell Union Pier. Since then, they have tried to incorporate community feedback while balancing their financial objectives prior to submitting their proposed PUD to the city. This PUD, likely to go before the city’s Planning Commission in the coming months, understandably has citizens incredibly anxious about its high density, limited public space and the economic uncertainty of its infrastructure costs. To me, it is clear that this anxiety is the fault of our city leadership’s negligence over the past three years. During the time that the Ports Authority and Lowe were fastidiously working on their plan, the city was not working on its own plan and objectives , nor were they running any sort of models as to how the expensive infrastructure required would be funded. In failing to craft its own vision, guiding principles, and economic analysis over a nearly three year period, city leadership has allowed itself and its citizens to be backed into a corner. Now, the city is on its heels trying to give a rushed response to meet an arbitrary timeline that it has full control over. From my experience as a developer of historic properties, this tactic will, at best, produce only marginally better results for the city. Our citizens deserve better. A strong, proactive leader would have led with vision , anticipating this potential outcome years before this inevitable juncture at which we now find ourselves. The city must slow down this process to ensure it has time to responsibly address the density and mass issues at hand and conduct independent financial analysis on the infrastructure requirements. From my time in the Legislature and experience in business, I know that there are alternatives that can both support the Port and enhance the public realm and character of Charleston. This is a world I know, and how we respond to this opportunity to redevelop our waterfront in a meaningful way will impact our city for centuries to come. If elected as your next mayor on this and all similar development and revitalization issues across our city - from West Ashley to Daniel Island - I will be the proactive, visionary leader Charleston desperately needs.