Former Piggly Wiggly site remains a slab of concrete after City Council fails to pass development plan
by Jenny Peterson | Staff Writer
Getting anything done by consensus in West Ashley has been a struggle.”
That line, said by Charleston City council member Peter Shahid at the June 20 council meeting, perfectly described the hours-long discussion about whether to greenlight a $45 million investment for a public-private development project with a civic center, green space, fountains, commercial area and underground parking garage on a three-acre triangular parcel of land on Sumar Street.
Following a heated discussion, the council ultimately voted it down 6-6 (a tie goes against) and sent the entire project to a committee for further review, keeping the former Piggly Wiggly grocery store site three acres of concrete until further notice.
The city purchased the Sumer Street site, situated along highly-visible Sam Rittenberg Boulevard and Old Towne Road, in order to keep it from being turned into a gas station. Six years later, the city has so far only torn down the grocery store.
Mayor John Tecklenburg said the city waited several years to see if the department of transportation or county would need to reconfigure the roadway and merge, but the agencies decided to do nothing.
“You could consider that wasted time, but we didn’t waste time beyond that. We engaged the public and came up with a great plan,” Tecklenburg said.
More than two dozen community meetings have been held about what residents would like to see on the site that would also stimulate economic growth and revitalize West Ashley—an area where 44 percent of the City of Charleston’s population resides.
Council members were presented with three options that took into consideration citizen feedback. All options included a performing arts center/civic space, shopping area and green space. The main difference between the options was cost and parking—Option 1, with the underground parking lot, would have been a $45 million investment by the city and a $30 million investment from development partner Landmark Enterprises. Option 2 included a parking deck (a $35-$37 million city investment) and Option 3 included surface parking (a $21-$23 million city investment). The underground parking lot itself would cost $23 million to create.
Only option 1 is shovel-ready. The city’s design and review board has already approved design plans for that option. Jason Ward, president of Landmark Enterprises, said at the meeting that Options 2 and 3 would essentially be council “going back to the starting line” to get approvals.
Despite fifteen residents speaking in favor of Option 1 at the meeting, the council ultimately deadlocked.
After the vote, Mayor Tecklenburg appealed to council asking them to consider Option 2, even trying to sell them on it as a way to provide everything residents asked for at a cheaper cost.
However, council member William Dudley Gregorie made a motion to send the entire project back to a committee for further review, and it passed before a vote on any other option could take place. Council member Mike Seekings was not in attendance.
The meeting quickly turned heated and political, with council members accusing each other of being rude, not taking a stance because it was an election year and only being in favor because they were in the mayor’s back pocket.
“There seems to be a lot of jockeying for political favors. We owe it to the people who put the plan in front of us and not go back to the drawing board,” said council member Jason Sakran.
Council members noted that by sending it back to a committee, the city may be on the hook for $600,000 owed to Landmark Enterprises in termination fees.
“Spending $600,000 to send something to a committee is just about the most government idea I’ve ever heard in my life,” said council member Stephen Bowden. “Wise stewards of taxpayer resources.”
Council members and the mayor pontificated about their stance on the project for their full allotted ten-minute comment period, with the mayor having to tell several members their time was up.
Those in favor said the development could be the catalyst for economic growth, similar to what the Family Circle Cup tennis stadium did for Daniel Island and what Charleston Place hotel has done for King Street, both public-private partnerships.
Some members said further postponing the project will only drive up the cost and said the city has ignored investment in West Ashley for too long. Council member Ross Appel said developers of the nearby Ashley Landing shopping center are investing over $100 million into that site and relying on the Sumar Street development to help attract businesses.
“We’re trying to create a spark for West Ashley revitalization. This is supposed to be the domino that gets the dominos rolling in West Ashley,” Appel said. “It’s a big plan. It’s aspirational. It’s about delivering what West Ashley deserves. It’s time for West Ashley’s time in the sun. (Option 1) is expensive, but it’s reasonable. We can afford it, we have funds for it. We can start the dominos rolling.”
Those opposed to Option 1 said the cost was too high and criticized the plan design, most notably the artificial turf on the green space. Others said the community meetings were confusing for residents, not everyone was able to vote on their favorite option and said none of the options had overwhelming community support.
“We keep saying the ‘majority’ of West Ashley wants this. Based upon what I looked at, (just) 52 people in West Ashley voted for this option. Not the ‘majority’ of West Ashley,” said Gregorie. It is unclear what numbers he was referencing.
Councilman Keith Waring said he believes the mayor has been releasing selected information about Option 1 and called for additional design options.
“The only reason why people like this plan is because they have not seen the next best thing. We would never do a park on the peninsula with a splash pad because nobody with a national reputation in design (would design that). It’s an afterthought. Look at the artificial turf,” Waring said. “This (decision) is coming down to council members that Mayor Tecklenburg helped get elected and ones who won independent of the mayor’s support.”
Waring added that he believes city staff has turned into “lobbyists” working on behalf of the mayor.
“I want this to go to a standing committee in community development where everybody can have input, as opposed to only what the mayor chooses to show us. Facts matter when council spends other people’s money,” Waring said. He said he hoped a committee could also address lowering speed limits in the area.
Councilman Karl Brady said the infighting was jeopardizing the future of West Ashley.
“Petty squabbles, resentment and personal animosity are threatening to derail the most significant generational investment in West Ashley history,” Brady said.
Politics aside, Councilman Boyd Gregg said he did not think the cost justified the project.
“Spending $45 million on a three-acre site (with a goal) to transform thousands of acres across West Ashley is a bit naïve,” Gregg said. “I don’t think that is going to be an effective use of $45 million if the goal is to revitalize all of West Ashley. At the end of the day, we have a duty to be responsible stewards of citizens’ money.” Gregg said by his calculations, Option 1 would have cost $1,700 per square foot to develop and would use all of the city’s tax increment financing.
“This puts all our money into one very small basket,” Gregg said.
Bowden said he was confused by members saying the public wasn’t in favor of Option 1.
“I’m at a loss as to how we all sat in this room and heard public comments and all the emails we got. By my count there’s over 80 percent in favor of Option 1 … it’s not even close,” Bowden said. “We set out to deliver something constituents asked for. What we’re not going to do is say ‘We are not ignoring West Ashley,’ because we are. We shouldn’t second guess what the vast majority of our citizens are telling us. At some point, we have to listen.”
Before the vote, Shahid said he hoped the council would not send it to a committee.
“Doing nothing sends a very clear message to the community of West Ashley … a clear message to our stakeholders that we are paralyzed,” he said.
Political drama continued in the days following the vote with at least two candidates for mayor releasing statements about the outcome. Shahid criticized the mayor for lack of leadership and candidate Clay Middleton called the delay “ridiculous.”
Meanwhile, the site remains three acres of concrete, not used by anyone.
HOW CITY COUNCIL VOTED ON OPTION 1, A $45 MILLION INVESTMENT WITH A CIVIC CENTER, GREEN SPACE, FOUNTAINS AND SHOPPING AREA ON THE FORMER PIGGLY WIGGLY SITE ON SUMAR ST.
In favor
• Ross Appel
• Stephen Bowden
• Karl Brady Jr.
• Jason Sakran
• Peter Shahid
• Mayor John Tecklenburg
Against
• Boyd Gregg
• Robert Mitchell
• William Dudley Gregorie
• Caroline Parker
• Kevin Shealy
• Keith Waring.
