Proponent of development argues affordable homes vital
While the developers seeking to build businesses and hundreds of homes near Angel Oak Park try to sway their opponents, the Coastal Conservation League is proposing instead that millions of public dollars be spent to buy much of the Johns Island land.
The development's proximity to the ancient Angel Oak tree has been the focus of debate, and that doesn't sit right with David Richardson, CEO of Sea Island Comprehensive Health Care, the Civil Rights-era organization that sold the land for development.
Richardson says the mostly white opponents of the project are ignoring the needs of black Johns Islanders, who could benefit from affordable housing included in the project.
"We support the project because there's a chance that workers could have some affordable housing on Johns Island," Richardson said near the end of a more than three-hour meeting Wednesday, where the Angel Oak Village development team sought to convince opponents of the merits of the plan.
"While you all look at some of the technical things, we Africans look at the practical needs," said Richardson, addressing opponents of the project gathering in the community room of Sea Island Apartments. "You all are talking about trees?"
Samantha Seigel has been doing much of the speaking for the trees. She created a grass-roots effort to block the development out of concern for the Angel Oak, and appeared stunned by Richardson's comments.
Site plan: Site plan from Angel Oak Village LLC for phase one of the proposed development, also showing the distance of the proposed development from the trunk of the Angel Oak.
Dana Beach, director of the Coastal Conservation League, later said Richardson's statements were irresponsible.
"To turn it into an us-and-them, you're against people on the island thing … was completely nonproductive and disrespectful," Beach said.
Sea Island Comprehensive Health Care, which provides health care services and housing to needy residents of the Sea Islands, was in bankruptcy and teetering on the brink of ruin when it sold the land for development, for $3.5 million.
The organization has been promised a portion of the development profits, which could aid its plans to improve services and build new facilities.
Plans to develop the Angel Oak Village property have been in place since 1999, and have changed several times. The current plan was approved by Charleston City Council and its planning and zoning commissions last year, and the city has stood behind the project.
Charleston officials said the location is appropriate for dense development and would help create a vibrant, walkable community where 10 percent of the housing would be sold or rented at prices affordable to middle-income families.
PROVIDED
This is the Coastal Conservation League's rough sketch of how they would like to see land preserved with public dollars, rather than developed, on a parcel adjacent to Charleston's Angel Oak Park.
"If you're a teacher at Haut Gap (school), just starting out, there will be a place for you at Angel Oak Village," developer Robert DeMoura said.
County Councilman Dickie Schweers said Thursday that he doesn't understand why such a dense development would be allowed at the edge of rural Johns Island.
The city's Johns Island Plan, approved in 2007, designates the property for dense development, and the Conservation League had previously dropped its opposition after plans for a big-box-type store was eliminated.
Beach now says the league should have opposed the plan all along. His idea is that greenbelt funds from the county's half-cent sales tax could be used to purchase about half the land, allowing some development but also protection of wetlands and an expansion of Angel Oak Park.
"The whole point was to figure out how to resolve this," Beach said. "I hope that's the nature of the resolution — an expanded park with more protection for the tree, and some financial investment that allows them to back off on the number of units."
There are a number of roadblocks to Beach's plan.
The property is located within the "urban growth boundary" recognized by the city and county, which makes the property ineligible for rural greenbelt funds. Moving the boundary could make the land eligible for funding, but the city and county would have to agree on moving the line.
DeMoura, of CC&T Real Estate Services, said he had no comment on the Conservation League's idea to buy about half the land.
Charleston Mayor Joe Riley said Thursday that he's willing to listen, but questioned the impact of the league's proposal on the planned affordable housing, and indicated his continuing support for the development. "The plan has been altered and made better," he said.
DeMoura said the current plan has significantly fewer units than before, and sets aside about 10 acres of land to buffer Angel Oak Park. The latest version of Angel Oak Village shows 60 percent less commercial space, 160 fewer parking spaces, and at least 10 percent fewer housing units, he said.
Seigel, the creator of savetheangeloak.org, was not impressed. She said the development team has not been responsive to suggestions for improvement.
One change that will be coming due to the opposition is this: DeMoura said the name "Angel Oak Village" will soon be dropped, because it's too controversial.
