Safe Harbor draws ire of Port Royal residents by skipping meeting and blocking access
For some 20 years, the town of Port Royal has been waiting to see the underutilized industrial property abutting Battery Creek turned into a gem. Even when the port property was still owned by South Carolina Ports Authority, the town began preparing a vision that might include a marina, housing, restaurants, public parks and a promenade.
Finally, in 2017, Grey Ghost Properties LLC bought it and put together a master plan. Anticipation grew. Then, in late 2021, Grey Ghost sold the project to well-heeled Safe Harbor Marinas, setting the stage for the town’s vision to become reality.
But residents haven’t been happy with what they’ve seen so far from Safe Harbor and that concern came to a head at a meeting Wednesday. Safe Harbor had been invited to give an update but it was a no-show, which riled up residents even more. Also aggravating the mood of the town are trespassing signs that Safe Harbor recently put up on the narrow 2-mile stretch of waterfront where the marina and housing are planned. For years, residents have enjoyed access to portions of the port property and the waterfront, even though it’s technically not public. Residents took the signs as a rebuke from Safe Harbor over recent criticism of its plans.
Council members — including Mayor Joe DeVito and Councilman Kevin Phillips, the town’s candidates for mayor — expressed, at length, their own concerns with the progress of the project. DeVito and Phillips explained what their approach would be to lead the town forward. The election is Nov. 7.
And for the second time in two weeks, the Town Council went into executive session to discuss the town’s development agreement with Safe Harbor Marina. That agreement spells out what’s expected from the project.
Residents raise concerns
Tricia Fidrych, a Port Royal resident, received hearty applause when she said liability issues may have prompted Safe Harbor to put up the no trespassing signs on the impressive property “but the message conveyed by those signs is undeniable.”
It was “deeply disappointing,” Fidrych added, that Safe Harbor was not at the meeting with a presentation. She called it a lost opportunity to respond to concerns raised by residents and to share a timeline and details. Those concerns include a preliminary housing plan that would feature all rental townhomes and single family homes. Large cranes that are in use to assemble docks on the Port Royal site – for use at other sites that Safe Harbor manages – also are sticking in the craw of residents.
“What happened to the dream?” said Barbara Berry, another resident. “What happened to what we thought was going to come here because it’s not coming.”
A friend of hers, she said, was on the road in the area known as The Bluff looking at the sunset when a black SUV drove up and told her to leave. Port Royal, she said, is a walking community.
“I’m just incredibly sad and disappointed,” Berry said.
Residents want to know what’s going on with the development, which will define the community, including its aesthetic and property values, Gail Tramontano said. Transparency, she added, builds trust.
“But secrecy builds contempt and I think that’s a very important issue to be addressed,” Tramontano said. “I really feel the council should be on top of it and holding Safe Harobr accountable with what they are doing.”
Mayor outlines his approach
Mayor DeVito called the plans for the port property “one of the most important developments for the town of Port Royal.”
He knows everybody is disappointed, he said. The council is too. “But we’re not done,” DeVito said. “We’re just getting started.”
DeVito added that he wanted to “put some real facts on the table” so residents understand what’s going on.
First, he said, the plan for the all-rental housing was put forth by The Beach Company, which is handling the housing portion of the development, and not Safe Harbor.
“They are doing, at this point of time, what I call fishing,” DeVito said. “And we voiced our opinions to them very loudly about what they proposed. Now we have to see what they come back with.”
DeVito emphasized that the project at this time is in the preliminary stages and the town has issued no permits to build anything. The moment somebody asks for a permit, then provisions of the development agreement and planned unit development documents will kick in, DeVito said.
The trespassing signs, DeVito added, are disappointing to the entire council, which found out by email that the signs were going up. But Safe Harbor does own the property, he added.
The town, DeVito said, is not afraid of legal action if it comes to that, but having conversations with Safe Harbor is a better approach than being adversarial and getting the lawyers involved.
The town, DeVito said, is coming up on 20 years of trying to find somebody to develop the port property and it took 17 years for the Ports Authority to sell it. In the past two years, he noted, Safe Harbor has invested more money than anybody else. Safe Harbor, he said, was a willing partner on a land exchange in which the town was able to secure a public park in a better location.
Phillips outlines his approach
Phillips, who is running against DeVito, said the town has been nice — and good neighbors — to Safe Harbor, which has not worked.
“When you are dealing with a bully, they only understand one thing,” Phillips said.
The town has tools at its disposal and should use them, he said.
In response to the trespassing signs, Phillips suggested that the town hold sunset parties every night at the end of 13th Street, which leads to the waterfront and past Safe Harbor property. “See you all out there,” he said.
Van Willis, town manager, said property records show that the public right-of-way extending from 13th Street ends at the rail corridor, short of the waterfront. But the town was still verifying that as of Thursday morning.
This story was originally published October 12, 2023 at 12:55 PM.
