Georgetown is South Carolina's third-oldest city, and while it has a historic district with many handsome streets and interesting older buildings, many don't think of it as having the same amount of charm as Charleston or Beaufort, its older coastal siblings.

But it could, and it should. And it currently has a significant opportunity to remake itself, as International Paper, Liberty Steel and its former port property all appear ripe for redevelopment.

There are mixed blessings at work here: The recent closures of the paper plant and steel mill have cost the city hundreds of jobs, which in turn has understandably created economic anxiety for many households.

Those jobs won't be replaced all at once but should be over time — and in a way that benefits more residents than simply those who lost the jobs. In fact, Georgetown's shuttered mills also have marred the beauty and scenery of this historic port city for decades, especially for those arriving by crossing the Sampit River on U.S. Highway 17. And a successful redevelopment ultimately could generate new business that would help replace those jobs.

As The Post and Courier's Lauren Leibman recently reported, many people, including state Sen. Stephen Goldfinch, wisely urge that Georgetown lay the groundwork for a cohesive approach to redevelopment of the paper mill, steel mill and Georgetown port as an extension of the city's scenic — but now relatively limited — waterfront. And as state Rep. Lee Hewitt wrote in a commentary last month, the loss of the paper and steel mills "opens the door to a bold new vision for Georgetown’s waterfront — one that balances economic growth, environmental responsibility and community well-being." Those are all good ideas. 

It will require leadership on the local and perhaps state levels to seize this opportunity and create the zoning framework and possibly financial incentives to ensure the redevelopment not only turns a profit for the developer and new tax revenues for local governments but that it also provides important public good, such as new parks, housing and environmental benefits, from flood control to improved water quality to wildlife habitat.

There are complex land-use and taxation questions to work out, but we urge city leaders to be creative, involve the public early and seek outside expertise to assure success.

While the possible sale of the Liberty Steel property is a new development, the idea of redeveloping Georgetown's industrial waterfront is not. A 2016 study recognized the huge potential, concluding that any plan for the area should be aspirational and challenge the status quo, and that the site “represents a historic opportunity for community planning in the broadest sense of that term — physically, economically, and socially.” It's time to break out that study again and take a fresh look.

Local governments, including the city with its zoning authority and Georgetown County, which received the 40-acre former port terminal site from the State Ports Authority, should be expected to do the heavy lifting. State lawmakers should look for strategic opportunities to assist if necessary, much like the Legislature did this year when it approved a bill to include affordable housing among the permissible uses for local government spending on former military sites. That bill is expected mainly to benefit North Charleston's effort to redevelop the northern end of the former Navy base.

One potential obstacle to a coherent plan for Georgetown's former industrial waterfront might be multiple owners, as the port site belongs to the county but a private developer is reportedly poised to buy the steel mill site and possibly the paper mill, too. While public ownership gives residents more leverage, it's almost always better for the private sector to be developing property instead of government, and in any event proper communication and transparency will help ensure the redevelopment's success even if part of it is in public hands and part remains in private hands. Cleaning up these sites following their industrial use is another potential complication that could take money and time.

The Urban Land Institute's 2016 study recommended a mix of commercial, residential and educational uses for the port site — much like how other cities have transformed their former industrial waterfronts to more resident-centered uses — so the county should tread carefully when considering a biomass power plant at the paper mill site. As Mr. Hewitt wrote, the allure of another heavy industrial plant should not be embraced before Georgetown's residents consider what kind of community they have the opportunity to create in the wake of the paper plant’s closure.

Georgetown deserves a robust public planning process that looks at not only specific waterfront land uses but also visions of what the city could be.

Click here for more opinion content from The Post and Courier.