The Route 278 Corridor Project is spinning on, with what over 10,000 Citizen petition signers believe is inadequate quantitative planning, poor analysis of other options, and unfair heavy - handed politics. There is great concern that the Project, as currently formulated, will not meet our needs.
As a result, the TWG (Technical Working Group) has written an 18-page report to Federal Highway (FHWA) and National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) authorities urgently requesting them to delay any FONSI (Finding of No Significant Impact) approval of the Project until we see a well-quantified plan that addresses our concerns including safety, efficacy, impact, etc.
Below is a short overview of six important things you should know about this Project.
If you would like a full copy of our letter to FHWA, and the included 18-page report, please send your email address to: hiltonhead.twg@gmail.com
If you want to make a difference, please sign the free petition at https://chng.it/gxXykZBv The more names, we get, the more traction we will have with Federal Authorities to get this project on the right track.
Sincerely,
Technical Working Group
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Many people are wondering about progress or lack of progress on the Route 278 Corridor Project. Here is a summary.
Funding for the $240 million Corridor project was approved in the Nov. 2018 bond Referendum. It is estimated that $10 -$20 million has been spent on design since then. Several groups filed official comments enumerating problems, and a petition, now numbering over 10,000 responses, was created indicating that an independent analysis of SCDOT’s proposed plan was needed. It appears that the County/SCDOT did not take most comments seriously. Late in 2022, we detected that they were continuing to ignore citizen concerns and were about to file for federal approval (via a FONSI – Finding of No Significant Impact) of their Corridor plan, without acting on the reported problems, and without any further public input.
On March 31, 2023, our Citizen based Technical Working Group (TWG), filed comments with Federal authorities to hold off on any approval until an Independent Study is completed. While the County continued to ignore the need for a second opinion, the Town supported it and formed a citizens advisory committee to monitor an independent study. Solicitations for consultants will go out shortly.
1. Why is progress so slow? A project of this size takes lengthy planning, including a detailed federal environmental review process. Since at least 2020, members of the TWG have documented project flaws that could impact the success and timing of the approval process, but those warnings were ignored. Project costs have grown to $328 million and are likely to rise further due to these flaws.
Over 10,000 Citizens feel that this project will not meet its goals, is heading in the wrong direction, has hidden costs, will displace better plans, and desperately needs an Independent second opinion.
We all want to begin constructing a solution that will solve our problems as soon as possible. Had County Council supported the Independent Study proposed in 2020 and again in 2022, we would be ready to start today. BUT we must not pour time and money into the current untested, incomplete, and likely defective plan. Hopefully, the Town’s Independent Study will get us back on track.
2. What are the problems with SCDOT’s plan? SCDOT’s original goal was to deal with our 1 bridge span (out of 4) that was nearing its end of rated life, and improve our congestion problem. SCDOT’s solution was to increase capacity via a new single bridge of 11 equivalent lanes, a 6-lane highway with two 11-lane intersections through Stoney stopping prematurely at Spanish Wells Road, and an increase in the number of traffic lights from 2 to 3.
Citizens believe that SCDOT’s plan will not sufficiently reduce congestion because its scope does not include efficient interfaces to the Cross Island Parkway (CIP) and local 278, and their plan adds an additional traffic light. There is also concern about pedestrian and vehicle safety along the Corridor. Many believe that any potential gain from the bridge and road capacity increase will be dissipated in the lights and intersections, and lack of attention to the feeds to/from the CIP and local 278. They feel that alternate plans (e.g., using overpasses, underpasses, bypasses, etc. to avoid the lights) should have been more thoroughly evaluated.
3. How did the County divert the needed studies? The County’s diversion methods were clever. They chartered their own study with the same name, controlled the work statement to avoid asking the important key questions, and forbid Citizen input and oversight. A documentation trail shows they did this in 2020 and 2022.
4. Why would County Council act this way? Some people believe that there is a hidden agenda to begin construction on the current plan, then suddenly ‘discover’ its flaws and push another 1% sales tax to repair them. Rumors are that the repair would include 6-laning local 278 all around Hilton Head. The net result would be a tremendous increase in capacity onto and around the island. The Chamber of Commerce, Realtors, and the Greater Island Council, who lobbied for the original Corridor Referendum, have never helped to support a second opinion, lending plausibility to this hypothesis.
5. Why are you so concerned? This is a once in a lifetime opportunity to obtain a safe, functional, and beautiful entrance gateway to Hilton Head. The current cost estimate is $328 million for an incomplete and poorly verified plan that will likely not meet our needs. Many believe the cost will go much higher. They believe that a second opinion is essential to ensure that we have not missed a better way to meet our goals.
6. What about bridge safety? One of our four bridge spans is labeled as “structurally deficient", one of 477 in the State with that label. That does not imply that it is likely to collapse or that it is unsafe. It means the bridge must be monitored, inspected and maintained, or is in need of renovation. Bridges are considered structurally deficient if they are restricted to light vehicles, closed to traffic or require rehabilitation. Our bridge span currently has no weight or speed restrictions.
Bottom Line: A project of this importance, size and complexity needs to measure twice and cut once. The Town’s Independent Study is the way to do that.
Technical Working Group HHI hiltonhead.twg@gmail.com