Georgetown South Carolina - Urban Land Institute

to include recruiting skilled manufacturing to the county aswell as fostering new economic opportunities. Basedon demographics, land economics, regionalposition, natural context, and market projections andtrends, which type of “best place” fits for the future ofGeorgetown and what needs to be done to achieve it?1/4 mileTo Myrtle BeachKEN KAY ASSOCIATES/ULI1/2 mile1 mileTo CharlestonThe location of the studyarea, with scale indicatingdistances from the center of theArcelorMittal steel mill.The part of the area that includes the steel mill facilityis located in the city of Georgetown, while the area thatincludes the Port of Georgetown terminal is located in theunincorporated area of Georgetown County.The study area is adjacent to Georgetown’s West Endneighborhood and City of Georgetown Historic District,registered with the National Register of Historic Places.It is separated by U.S. Highway 17 (Fraser Street) fromthe West End, an area of Georgetown with high rates ofpoverty.The Panel’s AssignmentThe panel was asked to respond to the following issuesand questions:1. Market conditions, economic development, economic sustainability, and diversityGoal: Conceptualize and define the redevelopment of thestudy area as a multifaceted place that leverages Georgetown’s unique assets, builds on its geographic attraction,and recognizes its potential to draw a wide variety of usersthat includes tourists, residents, and businesses. Recommend solutions that enhance and expand the greaterGeorgetown community’s economic development efforts,8 Examineand identify strategies and mix that provide thebest near- and long-term development opportunitieswith maximum economic impact to the community, suchas number of jobs, payroll dollars, induced economicimpacts, and property, hospitality, and accommodationstaxes to local government. Developrecommendations that consider the waterfrontarea and how it and its natural features can be assetsthat positively enhance periphery development opportunities and avoid risks from coastal flooding. Does anopportunity exist to integrate Goat Island? Doesdemand currently exist for new opportunitiesthrough the creative and technology economy or otherknowledge-based workers? If no current demand exists,what are some strategies to create a more diverseeconomy? Whatpolicies, planning, or steps need to be implemented to ensure that shortsighted growth does not occurand affect Georgetown’s ability to achieve higher-qualityand more resilient development over the long term?2. Placemaking, neighborhood cohesion, community engagementGoal: Recommend strategies for developing creative andvibrant places that benefit surrounding neighborhoods andattract new audiences to Georgetown. Provide strategies that leverage the proposed study area concept andcomplement Georgetown’s quality of life. Whatare the recommended opportunities for publicspace, community use, waterfront activities, greenareas, connectivity to nearby neighborhoods, and thelike that should be considered?A ULI Advisory Services Panel Report

Arecase studies or examples available of successfulcommunity engagement strategies that enhance community support for redevelopment efforts? What stepswill ensure the community is engaged in the future visonand planning efforts? Whatare some recommended steps to further buildsocial cohesion that will help Georgetown overcomefuture adverse events, such as a large employer closingor a natural disaster?3. Infrastructure, incentives, and next steps toredevelopmentGoal: Recommend the near- and longer-term steps local government needs to take to attract and encouragequalified development firms to get engaged. Recommendstrategies to gain site control of the properties to directthe development in the best interest of the community.Recommend leadership structures that expand the localcapacity with pertinent expertise to effectively, efficiently,and expeditiously marshal the redevelopment process inthe community’s best interest. Whatstrategies and approaches are available to address brownfield properties? How can the concept besubdivided or phased but still keep the synergy of amaster plan? Whatadditional concerns may have a direct or indirectimpact on inner harbor redevelopment that need to beaddressed (e.g., corridor transportation and mobility, community development, education, workforcedevelopment, resilience and coastal environment/floodmanagement)? What strategies can be recommended toaddress some of these concerns?4. Future visioning and planningGoal: Recommend additional visioning and planning thatshould be explored to augment the redevelopment ofthe study area and to guide Georgetown to realize its fullpotential. Direct the community on policies, strategies,and planning steps to protect the equity of a more valuedGeorgetown community. Whatincentives will work best to facilitate and encourage the desired development? Are any special financingtools available through the local or state government aswell as the private sector? Whatpublic infrastructure needs should Georgetownconsider in the short and long terms to encourage andaccommodate the potential redevelopment? What arekey, implementable steps to address development andconnectivity issues in the short and long terms? Whatare some recommended strategies and approaches for acquiring or assembling the larger ArcelorMittalproperty as well as Praxair’s and Geo Specialty Chemical’s smaller parcels for redevelopment? Whatcase studies or examples are available of redevelopment efforts of similar sites that used private sector,public sector, or public/private partnerships to shepherdsites through redevelopment?Georgetown, South Carolina, September 18–23, 20169

Introduction and Guiding PrinciplesTHE LARGE AMOUNT OF LAND in the study area,the complexity of its history, its ownership, its place inthe physical and economic landscape of the Georgetown communities, and the physical, economic, and social challenges and opportunities faced by the Georgetowncommunities dictate the need for a thoughtful, comprehensive, and far-looking vision, process, plan, and approach toresources to overcome those challenges and capture thoseopportunities. Cities far larger and more experienced attackling such sites and circumstances—and doing so withfar greater resources than the city of Georgetown—struggle no less. From the passionate panel discussions anddebates, one can see that this will be no easy task.The study area has multiple owners, highlighed on this map.ARCELOR MITTALMCDANIELPRAXAIR INCGEOSPECIALTYCHEMICALSKEN KAY ASSOCIATES/ULISC PORTAUTHORITY10COGSo, what is the best way forward?Georgetown is a city of many unique and authentic assets—most notably, the surrounding natural resources, itsindustrial history, and its cultural heritage.Since the founding of the United States, one of the inalienable rights and responsibilities reserved to the states andlocal jurisdictions has been the power to control the use ofland within their respective borders. At a very visible level,that power enables a community to determine its physicallayout and organization. However, at a much more forcefuland lasting level, exercise of that right is one of the mostimportant tools a community holds and can exercise touniquely mold its assets. By careful and thoughtful exercise of its power over land use, a community establishesfor itself and its citizens the community’s identity, culture,lifestyle, and pathways to sustainable economic viabilityand success. The city of Georgetown and the state ofSouth Carolina, along with thousands of towns, cities,counties, regions, special-purpose authorities, and statesacross the nation, have been exercising this vital rightsince their respective beginnings.During this assignment, the panel studied the city ofGeorgetown, placing a particular focus on the 150 acres ofwaterfront land that encompass the steel mill, the Port ofGeorgetown, and a number of other publicly and privatelyowned lands. That study area is generally referred to as“the site” throughout this report. The site and how theGeorgetown community exercises its powers of land usecontrol represent the most critical part in determining andshaping Georgetown’s identity, culture, and economicviability for the next 50 to 100 years.The public already owns and controls a substantial portionof the site. The panel knows that the steel mill portion ofthe site is privately owned. The panel believes that path-A ULI Advisory Services Panel Report

In starting this long and involved process of shaping itsfuture through land use control, the Georgetown community has noted and the panel concurs that a set of guidingprinciples, a vision, is essential. That vision, an expression of what Georgetown wants to be, must be not onlythe guidepost that leads the community engagement anddecision-making processes that must start today, but alsothe guidepost that the community constantly returns to asit makes decisions over the next 20 or so years that thesite’s transformation is likely to require.To accomplish the complex and difficult task of redevelopment and reuse of the site, the panel established thefollowing ten guiding principles for redevelopment. Theplanning and execution for reuse of the sitemust recognize the historic context of the Georgetown community—its heritage, culture, neighborhoods, natural settings, and community assets. Anyfuture plan must not only celebrate the richness of thecommunity’s past but must also proactively acknowledgeand reconcile the difficulties and challenges of the past,particularly social and economic. The plan must accountfor and lay the foundation for providing a means to mitigate and erase historic and significant differences withinthe community in terms of employment, educationalopportunities and attainment, condition of infrastructure,and housing. When looking through the lens of the site,Georgetown, South Carolina, September 18–23, 2016PAUL ANGELONE/ULIways to public ownership and control of this portion of thesite may exist, if that is what the community desires anddecides to do. However, the vision, the plan, the objectives,and the tasks the panel recommends throughout this report do not depend on actual ownership. The pathways toachieve these objectives may vary depending on ultimateownership and means of control, but the objectives themselves do not. Whether by public acquisition and ownership, by exercise of its land use powers relative to privatelyowned land, or, more likely, by some combination of both,the Georgetown community has the responsibility and thepower to determine its future through the lens of this siteand the community-wide dialogue and decision-makingprocesses in which the community must engage.The panel believes Georgetownis at a crossroads. If thecity follows the panel’srecommended principles,it has the rare opportunity toreimagine and revitalize a keyand highly visible 150-acrewaterfront site.the proper vision and consequent plan must look to, address, and benefit Georgetown holistically. Thesite is and must continue to be a catalyst fortransformative change. The site is an incubator,metaphorically, physically, and economically. It is thestarting place for the new Georgetown: a new economicand jobs-driven revitalization that does not threaten butrather enhances the existing postindustrial Georgetowneconomic base. The site is the bridge to creating a community that will retain and attract the community’s youthand future generations. This process could not begin orevolve anywere else in the city. TheGeorgetown community’s control of the site isindispensable—whether by ownership, regulationand administration, or a combination of both. Futureplans for the site must simultaneously beaspirational and challenge the status quo. Thesite represents a historic opportunity forcommunity planning in the broadest sense of thatterm—physically, economically, and socially. This iswhere Georgetown should place its bet on the future.11

Futureplans for the site must facilitate and encourage entrepreneurial risk taking that will, in turnand over time, seed more established and diversejobs and consequent investment in the community.Community and economic growth start with establishedassets: Georgetown has them. Craftsmen, establishedand emerging players in recreation and lifestyle, pioneersin art, culture, and food all seize upon these assets,thrive, and grow. Even the site itself will produce jobs asvestiges of its industrial past are removed, environmental conditions are addressed, and new uses find theirhomes. Thefuture vision for the site must capture, protect,enhance, and leverage the unique recreational andcultural assets that have always defined the city ofGeorgetown. Jobs tied to these Georgetown assets canbe immediate and are a critical economic base uponwhich to grow and achieve the longer-term, diverseeconomic objectives of the vision. Thepublic sector must place the first stake in theground for the private sector to undertake the majorportion of invested time and at-risk capital neededto effect the desired transformational change. Anyplan for the site must evolve from the full engagement ofthe Georgetown communities; everyone must be at thetable and engaged. Plans for the site must be responsible in the use of public resources, be they land or capital.12 Futureplans for the site must accommodate andfacilitate changes created by the ripple effect. Executing change on the site will spark change in the surrounding Georgetown neighborhoods and Georgetown’sregional assets. This ripple effect will be multidirectional.Change emanating from the site offers the opportunityto preserve and enhance the preexisting positive assets of the surrounding areas—physical, cultural, andsocioeconomic.Historical physical and social barriers are lowered,blending into a more holistic Georgetown while still retaining the distinct characteristics that make each blockand neighborhood uniquely Geogetown. Afuture vision for the site must recognize that thesite is not homogenous and that lack of homogeneity, combined with its pivotal location and size,represents its greatest opportunity. Ownership andcontrol vary. Timing of availability for reuse varies. Thesite is appropriate for and can be broken into manypieces, each exerting its own impact on economic growthbut tied together by a common vision.The time frame forreuse begins immediately but likely will extend over 20years or more.A ULI Advisory Services Panel Report

Existing Market and EconomicDevelopment OpportunitiesGEORGETOWN’S LOCAL MARKET AREA currently lacks adequate demand drivers to accommodate redevelopment of the entire site in the near term. However,the site’s size and location on the waterfront near theWest End and historic downtown neighborhoods providea longer-term opportunity for a mixed-use water-orienteddevelopment.Within recent history, Georgetown has not enjoyed the level of growth and prosperity of its neighboring jurisdictions.Georgetown County, the city of Georgetown, and the siteare located between two of the fastest-growing counties inthe state of South Carolina—Charleston and Horry (MyrtleBeach). These nearby counties are easily accessible andattract visitors, residents, and businesses with beautifulbeaches, rich histories, and dynamic economies. However,despite Georgetown’s many similar physical and locationalassets, the city’s growth, in particular, has lagged that ofits coastal neighbors.Population Changes in Selected Counties,2000–2015Rank City of Georgetown1.3%112Until recent growth documented in the 2010 census, thecity’s population had declined steadily since 1960. Thecity’s population grew 1.8 percent from 2000 to 2010,to 9,110, after declining from a peak of 12,261 in 1960.However, Georgetown County has experienced populationgrowth similar to statewide growth levels, although stillbelow levels in Horry and Charleston counties. WhereasGeorgetown County grew 10 percent from 2000 to 2015Addressing the Root Causesof Market FundamentalsBecause of low household incomes and poverty, the cityof Georgetown finds itself in a dire predicament whoseorigins can be partially attributed to the area’s earlyeconomic dependence on a plantation economy that wascompletely reliant on human bondage. Although the slaveeconomy built Georgetown into the largest rice-exportingport in the world by 1840, it created a permanenteconomic underclass that has persisted into the currentera. Slavery, followed by Jim Crow segregation, hasseverely limited the African American community’seconomic mobility. Georgetown’s African Americanpopulation currently constitutes over 58 percent of thecity’s overall population, with 40 percent of this populationliving below the poverty line. Redevelopment of thesite has the potential to help deconstruct the economicvestiges of slavery by ensuring equity and access for allGeorgetonians.Median Household Income by Race/EthnicityCity ofGeorgetownGeorgetownCountyTotal population 26,364 41,578White 49,130 53,174African American 20,543 23,377Hispanic/Latino 25,478 26,174Source: U.S. Census Bureau.Source: U.S. Census Bureau.Georgetown, South Carolina, September 18–23, 201613

to 61,298, according to the census, Horry and Charlestoncounties grew 57 percent and 26 percent, respectively.Thus, the city of Georgetown, whose economy over thelast century has been largely tied to economic activitiesat the site, has not garnered its fair share of population growth compared

Beaufort. A city of 9,000 residents, Georgetown is located an hour north of Charleston and 90 minutes south of Myrtle Beach. From the years of early settlement until the Civil War, Georgetown grew with a plantation economy. By 1840, Georgetown County produced nearly a third of the United States' rice, and the Port of Georgetown was the busiest