The gulf that divides the two groups is what port leaders, politicians, frustrated residents and hopeful environmentalists are working to navigate.

For the State Ports Authority, traversing this sometimes treacherous landscape could be key to the future of the area's waterfront. For people who live near the port, crossing the void is about gaining ground in the fight to preserve space between the places where people live and work.

While opposition to the port's plans for expansion at the former Charleston Naval Base is stacked fairly high, port leaders claim support for the project is stacked higher.

"I just don't see that (high) level of opposition," said Bernard Groseclose, Ports Authority president and chief executive. "What we're hearing from residents and from the business community is that the port project should happen, but they want to make sure the Ports Authority does it right."

Critics say project leaders already have fallen behind on that goal. People from more than 20 neighborhoods and about as many businesses and economic groups have formed a coalition, Hold the Port to Its Promises, to ensure that North Charleston gets a say in how its waterfront is used and how its roads are expanded to handle more industrial development.

"It's not about my house, my road, even my city," said Hanna Goss, a resident of an Olde Village neighborhood a few miles from the proposed port site.

"This isn't just because trucks are going to be coming by my house and there might be noise. It's about how long we all want to spend in our cars each day. How much do we want to clog our waterfront? And what do we want this state to look like? How much do we want to sacrifice?"

Known for decades as the industrial epicenter of the Lowcountry, North Charleston now tries to emphasize its growing retail base, the pending tourist draw of the Hunley exhibit and the unique city-within-a-city that is the Noisette development project.

"People just don't seem to realize that the place is changing," Goss said. "Property values in the area are skyrocketing, and it's not just an industrial center anymore. Those projects should be given the opportunity to flourish and not be slapped down by a port development project that may or may not be the economic engine they think it's going to be."

There's also a strong distaste among some about how port officials are going about the job of getting its expansion approved.

"Consistently, the port is a little disingenuous with the way it deals with communities," said David Goss, Hanna Goss's husband and a member of Hold the Port. "They tell us what they think we want to hear, and then they just go ahead and do what they want anyway. There's just a manner that representatives from the port have, an arrogance, that's just baffling. It's as though they're going to do what they're going to do regardless of what other people say, regardless of what might be bad for the community."

The port has a long history of conflict with people who live near its terminals. For the past few years, the port has been at odds with a group of Mount Pleasant residents who live close to the Wando Welch Terminal.

The residents have fought against plans to expand that terminal by about 50 acres, and they complain about the noise, the light and the container stacks they see from their backyards.

The ports authority maintains it tries to connect with the community through public meetings and tries to keep residents informed of development plans.

"We've posed solutions (to residents' complaints) and have done what we've been asked to do," Groseclose said.

Tension remains.

In part, that may be because the proposed terminal in North Charleston evolved from opposition to port development elsewhere.

The Legislature nixed plans to build the terminal on Daniel Island after people moving into new upscale neighborhoods there protested a port so close to their homes.

The Ports Authority has owned its Daniel Island property for years and even helped pay for a highway interchange to improve truck access to the site. But the Legislature instead mandated the terminal be built on the other side of the Cooper River, in North Charleston.

Resentment runs strong among folks in North Charleston about the process.

"It really is exacerbating a feeling in North Charleston that has been there for a long time, that the quality of life here doesn't matter because it's just a lot of poor people, a lot of poor black families and they're used to industrial (zoning) so let's just dump it on them," said Kurt Taylor, a North Charleston city councilman who has helped in negotiations between his city and the Ports Authority.

Taylor also lives a few miles from the port site and feels his community's concerns are now being cast aside.

There is some sentiment in neighborhoods in and around Union Heights, a predominantly poor black community, that their complaints won't be heard as well as those made by more politically connected areas like those in Daniel Island.

Hundreds of people involved with Hold the Port to Its Promises have signed petitions asking the state to immediately provide funding for traffic studies of their area. They also regularly attend port board meetings and legislative delegation meetings to keep officials apprised of concerns.

While port executives say they're often frustrated about what they sometimes feel is an impossible-to-please group of protestors, those who question unfettered port development say the image of them as all-or-nothing naysayers is wrong.

"We aren't trying to stop the port. No one is saying that," Taylor said. "We just don't want it to grow at the expense of everything else. It's a question of balancing port success with the quality of life of residents."

Residents, ports leaders and Corps of Engineers officials agree the top concern is that North Charleston's roads won't be able to handle more truck traffic to and from a new terminal. While an agreement between the Ports Authority and the city makes new roads a condition for port development, Groseclose said the Legislature once again will make the ultimate decision about whether new roads are built.

That's a worry for North Charleston.

"The underlying fear is that ... someone will say this (port) project is too critical and the infrastructure is too expensive and the state just doesn't have the money," Taylor said. "They're going to come to us and say, 'We're really sorry North Charleston, we just can't build your roads right now. We'll come back to you.' "

Hanna Goss, meanwhile, questions how much good it will do the city to build a terminal that will help the port stay competitive for such a short time.

"Any reasonable person is going to wonder, going to ask, is this really cost-efficient for the state," she said.

Groseclose counters that the port should be able to leverage every available resource to make trade as profitable as possible for South Carolina, where unemployment remains higher than in most of the nation. He points to the state's reliance on the $39 billion industry and the 85,000 jobs created by the maritime industry.

He also says the port recognizes that maintaining its success means ensuring stable relations with its neighbors.

It also means residents should recognize the landscape is based in part on the sea, he said, and the shipping industry's tentacles will often reach into residential space.

It doesn't have to be a bad thing, he said.

"We have said we do want to be a good corporate citizen," Groseclose said. "But it puzzles me that people now think we have to live in suburbia. If people are concerned about what we're going to do with the place, look at Columbus Street. It's surrounded by condos and waterfront businesses. Look back. East Bay (Street) was originally a center for merchants and shipping, and everything else sprung up around that, because of that."

Click here to return to story:
http://www.charleston.net/stories/120504/loc_05portoppose.shtml