So what’s the big rush on this proposed Medical University of South Carolina (MUSC) zoning overlay district? We understand the need for some flexibility to upgrade facilities throughout MUSC — and are particularly heartened by word of a new and improved Hollings Cancer Center.
But while the city of Charleston and MUSC might have been planning it behind closed doors for more than a minute or two, the public now seeing it for the first time has some concerns about the scope and details of what’s ahead. And rightly so.
The whole project feels like a rush job being pushed by MUSC and enabled by the secrecy-affectionate Charleston City Council. It doesn’t help that a subsidiary of a company apparently owned by Charleston Mayor William “Backroom Billy” Cogswell just won a $2.6 million parking contract from (yes, seriously) MUSC’s Board of Directors.
What’s most concerning about the overlay district proposal is how the city of Charleston would apparently cede some of its authority to MUSC and third-party vendors, as the neighboring Harleston Village Association wrote in an Aug. 25 statement:
“One troubling provision would allow MUSC to bypass the Technical Review Commission in favor of third-party stormwater review — presumably hired by MUSC. This contradicts assurances of continued TRC oversight and further limits public engagement. We opposed this provision in its current form.”
There are also concerns about demolition of 17 properties in the district and how new buildings could reach 250 feet in height less than a block from homes.
“There’s definitely historic buildings in the area, and the proposed ordinance has basically picked some winners and losers,” Preservation Society of Charleston President and CEO Brian Turner told the Charleston City Paper this week. “There’s a list of buildings that are listed for continued protection … and a list of buildings that would be exempt from demolition review. Why did they make that decision?”
Historic Charleston Foundation President and CEO Winslow Hastie told City Paper reporter Skyler Baldwin that he was excited that MUSC wanted to double down by investing and expanding on the Charleston peninsula. But he said he also was concerned about the timing of the proposal and the lack of commitment on preserving historic sites on the campus.
“If you’re wanting this additional flexibility, we feel you should have a greater commitment to protecting these buildings that we know and agree are historically significant,” he told the City Paper. “The city is bending over backward to accommodate [MUSC] on this fast-track kind of schedule, and that doesn’t really feel good to us.
And that’s the rub, as he concluded: “It doesn’t give us adequate time to respond in a comprehensive way.”
After weekend rains turned Calhoun Street along MUSC into a river, now is the time for long-term comprehensive planning for MUSC’s future. But the city and university need to slow down a little with lock-step actions and listen — really listen — to the public.
Help keep the City Paper free.
No paywalls.
No subscription cost.
Free delivery at 800 locations.
Help support independent journalism by donating today.