[00:00:01]
CLOSED CAPTIONING PROVIDED BY BUFORT COUNTY.
[1. Call to Order]
WELCOME TO THE MAY 8TH, 2024, WILLIAM HILTON PARKWAY GATEWAY CORRIDOR INDEPENDENT REVIEW ADVISORY COMMITTEE.[2. Approval of the Minutes]
WE CALL IT THE ORDER APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF APRIL 10TH, 2024, AND APRIL 22ND, 2024.DO WE HAVE A MOTION? I, I AGREE, MARK.
UM, TWO THINGS IN THE, THE MINUTES THAT, UM, UH, RECEIVED A COMMENT FROM CHARLIE, UH, AS WELL AS ED THAT, UM, ON PAGE THREE WHERE WE TALK ABOUT THE DISCUSSION CONTINUED AMONG THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS AND MR. NORLAN CONCERNING KEEPING A FOUR LANGUAGE.
AND WE DON'T REMEMBER HAVING HIM, THAT CONVERSATION, UH, HERE.
SO I THINK THAT WE NEED TO BE STRUCK FROM THE MINUTES.
SECOND ONE IS THAT, UM, I DO REMEMBER THAT WE TALKED ABOUT, UH, GETTING IN TOUCH WITH, UH, CRAIG WING, SO DOT TO, UM, UH, UNDERSTAND WHERE THE 425 MILLION COMES FROM IN THE PROJECT SCIENCE.
UM, AND THAT, THAT THERE WAS A DISCUSSION BETWEEN YOU AND, AND, UH, SEAN ON ACTUALLY DOING IT.
I AM NOT AWARE OF THE DISCUSSION WHERE THE WHOLE TEAM, INCLUDING THE COUNTY AND
UM, SO THAT TO ME, THAT'S YOU, YOU, YOU SAID, LET'S REACH OUT TO DOT AND FIND OUT IF THESE ARE FEASIBLE.
I SAID, LET'S CALL CRAIG WIN AND FIND OUT WHERE THE FOUR 25 MILLION COMES FROM.
AND THE WHOLE COMMITTEE DISCUSSED IT.
BUT THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S FAR AWAY FROM GETTING A WHOLE GROUP OF PEOPLE TOGETHER TO TRAVEL UP TO COLUMBIA, TO TRAVEL UP TO COLUMBIA.
WELL, WE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE MINUTES RIGHT NOW, BUT I MEAN, THIS IS PART OF THE MINUTES, AND I DIDN'T AGREE WITH WHAT'S IN THE, IN THESE MINUTES.
SO I THINK THAT NEEDS TO BE WHERE PAGE THREE OF THE, OF THE MINUTES YEAH.
AND IT'S BEING VERY LIBERAL WITH, WITH INTERPRETING THE CONVERSATION THAT WE
SO, AND I FIND IT FRANKLY SURPRISING THAT THAT HAPPENS, UH, WITHOUT EXPLANATION TO THE COMMITTEE.
AND FURTHERMORE, IT ALSO UNDERMINES, UH, IF THERE'S A WHOLE DISCUSSION WITH S WITH SE DT ON, ON THE ALTERNATIVES AND WHERE IT GOES AND SO ON, SO FORTH BEFORE WE HAVE EVEN FINISHED WITH, UM, UH,
I THINK THAT'S VERY PREMATURE AND NOT VERY ETHICAL, FRANKLY.
WELL, I, I, I, I SEE THAT AS YOU RAISING A QUESTION ON YOUR OWN PUSH TO HAVE US DO THAT, UH, TO REACH OUT TO DOT TO FIND OUT WHERE THEY STAND WITH THE, THE ALTERNATIVES THAT WERE BEING PRESENTED.
SO I WANNA GO BACK TO THE, TO THE FIRST, UH, THE FOUR LANE BRIDGE.
DO WE HAVE ANY CLARIFICATION ON THAT, UH, FROM DENNIS? IF IT WAS JOHN? UH, WE CAN, WE CAN GO BACK TO THE TAPE AND LISTEN AT THE END OF THE PRESENTATION PROVIDED BY LOCK MUELLER AT THE MEETING ON THE 22ND.
UM, THEY DISCUSSED THE, THE TECHNICAL ME MEMORANDUM AND THE POSITION ABOUT THE FOUR LANE BRIDGE NOT BEING FEASIBLE IN THEIR, IN, IN THEIR OPINION.
THEY'VE ALSO GOT THE TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM THAT WAS PART OF THIS PACKET, SUPPORTING THAT POSITION FROM THEIR PROFESSIONAL, UM, UH, PERSPECTIVE.
SO IF THERE'S AN OBJECTION, THEN DON'T ADOPT THE MINUTES, AND WE'LL, WE'LL GO BACK AND TAKE A LOOK.
UM, MR. WAZA HAD RAISED THAT WITH OUR ADMIN, AND I PROVIDED HIM A RESPONSE THAT SAID LOCK MUELLER DID DISCUSS THAT.
UM, BUT IF THERE'S ANY OBJECTION FROM THE COMMITTEE, WE WON'T ADOPT THE MINUTES RECOMMENDED FOR CLARIFICATION TO THE COMMITTEE AND, AND, UH, THE GENERAL PUBLIC.
CAN YOU TELL US WHO ACTUALLY WENT UP TO COLUMBIA TO DISCUSS THIS? WHO FROM THE COUNTY AND THE TOWN? WE'LL, WE'LL, FIRST OF ALL, LET'S GET THROUGH THE MINUTES AND THEN WE'LL, WE CAN HAVE THAT DISCUSSION.
FIRST OF ALL, IT'S ABOUT GETTING THE MINUTES APPROVED.
ARE YOU OKAY WITH SEAN'S EXPLANATION ABOUT HIS RESPONSE TO MR. WAZA? UM, YEAH, I'M FINE.
I MEAN, I WANT TO CHANGE AND ADMINIS BOTH THESE THINGS.
[00:05:01]
AND I'M FINE.I, I WOULD, I WOULD, I'LL JUST SAY THIS.
SO, UM, IF, IF WE CAN GET THAT BETTER CLARIFICATION SO WE ARE VOTING ON THE RIGHT, YEAH, THAT WOULD BE BETTER.
AND MR. WARNER, YOU'LL YOUR MOTION, I I IN MY MOTION TO INCLUDE MR. MAYOR CLARIFICATION UPON CLARIFICATION.
[3. Unfinished Business]
SECOND ON THAT? I'LL SECOND THIS.ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.
SO MOVED, UNFINISHED BUSINESS UPDATE ON PROJECT PROCESS.
[a. Update on Project Progress]
UH, THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.UH, I'M GONNA GO THROUGH A BRIEF, UM, REVIEW OF OUR, UH, SCOPE OF WORK PROGRESS MADE.
UM, I KNOW NATE AND HIS TEAM ARE GONNA GO THROUGH A MORE THOROUGH, IN DEPTH EVALUATION OF, UH, PROJECT SCOPE.
UM, BUT I'M GONNA PROVIDE YOU THE HIGH LEVEL AL ALSO ALONG WITH SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, INCLUDING THE RESPONSES RECEIVED FROM S-C-D-O-T, UM, AT THE COMMITTEE'S REQUEST TO GET FEEDBACK FROM S-C-D-O-T ON THE ALTERNATIVES, UM, BRIDGE, UH, REHAB VERSUS NEW BRIDGE.
AND I'VE GOT SOME SAFETY INFORMA INFORMATION, UM, TO SHARE.
SO, AGAIN, I WOULD START BACK, THE AUTHORIZING RESOLUTION FOR THIS COMMITTEE WAS TO PERFORM FOUR KEY FUNCTIONS.
UM, WE'VE COMPLETED THREE OF THOSE.
THE FOURTH ONE IS TO, TO MOVE THROUGH THE SCOPE OF WORK, UM, TO MAKE SURE THAT IT IS BEING EXECUTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH BOTH THE SCOPE THAT THE COMMITTEE AND TOWN COUNCIL HAD ADOPTED.
THE COMMITTEE AT THE LAST MEETING, UM, REQUESTED THAT THERE BE AN EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES THAT WERE DEVELOPED INDEPENDENTLY BY LOCK MUELLER, UM, AS WELL AS THE, UM, AS WELL AS THE, UM, HOLD, HOLD UP A DIFFERENT WAY HERE, AS WELL AS THE ALTERNATIVE THAT'S PROPOSED, UM, CALLED THE EXPRESS BYPASS, UM, AND LABEL BYPASS 3.1.
SO IN PURSUIT OF THE REQUEST FROM THE COMMITTEE, UM, A TRIP WAS MADE TO COLUMBIA LAST WEDNESDAY.
THE ALTERNATIVES THAT WERE IDENTIFIED IN THE LOCK MUELLER PRESENTATION, BOTH ON APRIL 10TH AND APRIL 22ND, WERE SHARED WITH SCDT IN ADVANCE OF THE TRIP.
THE ALTERNATIVES INCLUDED, NUMBER ONE, WHICH WAS THE CURRENT BEAUFORT COUNTY PROPOSED ALTERNATIVE NUMBER TWO, WHICH INCLUDED BOW TIES, THE ROUNDABOUTS AT, UM, SQUARE BOAT CHAMBERLAIN, AND SPANISH WELLS.
AND, UM, WILD HORSE ROAD NUMBER THREE, WHICH WAS THE ECHELON OR CENTER TURN ELEVATED AT ONE OF TWO INTERSECTIONS IN THE STONY COMMUNITY.
UH, AND ALTERNATIVE NUMBER FOUR, WHICH WAS THE ELEVATED, UH, BYPASS THROUGH THE ENTIRETY OF THE THE STONY COMMUNITY.
UM, THE OTHER ALTERNATIVE, NOT RECOMMENDED BY LOCK MUELLER, BUT RECOMMENDED FOR, UM, SUBMISSION TO S-E-D-O-T FOR RESPONSE WAS THE EXPRESS BYPASS, THE 3.1, UM, THAT HAS BEEN DISCUSSED FOR, FOR SOME TIME, UH, THAT BYPASS, UM, IMPACTS PROPERTY TO THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE TRADITIONAL CULTURAL PROPERTY IN THE STONY COMMUNITY, UM, AND TIES BACK INTO THE CROSS ISLAND AND BUSINESS ROUTE, UM, NEAR HONEY HORN, WHERE HONEY HORN, UM, AND COASTAL DISCOVERY MUSEUM PROPERTIES ARE, THOSE ALTERNATIVES WERE SUBMITTED TO S-C-D-O-T.
THEY REVIEWED THEM IN ADVANCE OF THE MEETING AND THEN PROVIDED FEEDBACK, UM, AT THE MEETING ON, ON THE ALTERNATIVES.
THEY ALSO PROVIDED SOME INFORMATION RELATED TO THE BRIDGE REHAB VERSUS A RECONSTRUCTION OR A NEW BRIDGE.
AND I'LL SHARE THAT, UM, AFTER WE TALKED THROUGH THIS LETTER.
UM, BUT YOU CAN SEE THOSE WERE, WERE PROVIDED.
THEY DID A THOROUGH, A THOROUGH REVIEW OF THE ALTERNATIVES TO PROVIDE TECHNICAL EVALUATION AND ANY
[00:10:01]
FEEDBACK RELATED TO FEASIBILITY OR VIABILITY OF THE PROJECTS, UH, OR THE ALTERNATIVES TO ADVANCE IN THE PROJECT.UM, SEAN, CAN I JUST ASK YOU A QUESTION, SIR? I'M STILL PUZZLED WHY ALL THESE ALTERNATIVES ARE BEING, UH, DISCUSSED WITH S-E-D-O-T WHEN WE ARE STILL REVIEWING THESE ALTERNATIVES OURSELVES.
I WILL, MAYBE SOMEBODY CAN, CAN ANSWER THAT QUESTION.
I, I'M, I WAS WORKING AT THE UNANIMOUS DIRECTION OF THE COMMITTEE TO HAVE THESE ALTERNATIVES VETTED AND, AND, UM, AND TO PROVIDE FEEDBACK ON THE VIABILITY OR FEASIBILITY OF THESE ADVANCEMENTS.
I DON'T THINK, I DON'T THINK WE EVER, MR. YOU, YOU BROUGHT IT UP AND THEN WE DISCUSSED IT AS A COMMITTEE.
I, WHAT I BROUGHT UP ALAN, WAS THE FOUR 25 MILLION, WHICH IS THE NUMBER USED, UM, FROM THE COUNTY BY
AND THEY ADDED, UM, PORTIONS TO THAT NUMBER, UH, BASED ON THE VARIOUS ALTERNATIVES.
AND MY, MY QUESTION WAS TO SEAN, DO WE KNOW WHAT THE NUMBER CONSISTS OF? IT'S A BASIC NUMBER AND WE USE IT IN THIS GRADING.
AND SO I SAID, WELL, WHY DON'T YOU GIVE HIM A CALL THAT, THAT'S THE ONLY THING I SAID.
I HAVE NOT ASKED FOR A, A FULL DELEGATION TO GO TO COLUMBIA TO DISCUSS ALL THE ALTERNATIVES WHERE WE HAVE NOT EVEN FINISHED.
UM, IT HURTS THE CREDIBILITY OF THIS COMMITTEE.
IF THERE'S MY CREDIBILITY, I, I, I WOULD, I WOULD EXPAND THAT TO SAY THAT YOU'RE REACHING OUT TO LOCK MUELLER AND TO DOT AND TO OTHERS ALSO CREATES QUESTIONABILITY.
UM, YOU HAVE CONSISTENTLY REACHED OUT, SORRY, AGENT THAT WAS ADVISED NOT TO HAVE IT.
I ALSO SENT HIM AN EMAIL AND HAD NO DISCUSSIONS, UH, OUTSIDE OF THIS MEETING WITH
WELL, AND I'M FREE TO TALK TO JARED, FELIX OR TO, UH, CRAIG WYN OR ANYBODY ELSE.
NOTHING ANYWHERE SAYS THAT I COULDN'T DO THAT.
THAT ONE INVOLVES THE COMMITTEE.
OUTSIDE THE COMMITTEE MEETING.
YOU DON'T GO AND TALK TO OTHER PARTIES ON YOUR, BECAUSE YOU'RE REPRESENTING ALL OF US.
AND I TAKE, I'M SORRY, I TAKE ISSUE THAT YOU'RE TALKING TO WHOEVER I TAKE ISSUE IF YOU TALK TO CHARLIE OR WHOEVER ABOUT IT OUTSIDE THE MEETING, BECAUSE YOU ARE PART OF THE COMMITTEE REPRESENTING ME, AND I MAY NOT AGREE WITH YOUR QUESTIONS.
SO I CAN TALK AS A, AS A CITIZEN, AS A RESIDENT, I CAN TALK TO ANYBODY I LIKE.
AND LUCKILY NOT APPLIES TO WHAT THE COMMITTEE IS DOING.
I DON'T WANNA GET INTO ACCOMPLICE WITH YOU IF I FIND IT VERY NORMAL.
IF YOU ARE HAVE ONE SET OF VIEWS, YOURS, YOU DON'T WANNA LISTEN.
AND MR. CHAIRMAN, IF I COULD JUMP IN PLEASE.
UM, UH, REGARDLESS, THE DIRECTION SUPPORTED BY THE COMMITTEE WAS TO HAVE THESE ALTERNATIVES VETTED AND ASK FOR A RESPONSE FROM 'EM, S-C-D-O-T.
THERE WAS NO DIRECTION ON THE METHOD TO GET THAT INFORMATION.
UM, AND SO, UH, WE, WE WENT TO COLUMBIA AND, UM, AND GOT FEEDBACK AS REQUESTED.
UM, AGAIN, THE GENERAL FEEDBACK WERE, UH, TECHNICAL IN NATURE RELATED TO PROJECT IMPLICATIONS FOR COST IMPLICATION TO THE EA AND TIMING, UH, IM IMPLICATIONS, UH, TO FUNDING.
AND, UM, AND THEN ALSO FEASIBILITY TO ADVANCE THROUGH FEDERAL HIGHWAYS THROUGH THEIR PROGRAM.
UH, THEY DID HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE FROM FEDERAL HIGHWAYS THERE THAT OBSERVED THE MEETING, BUT DID NOT PROVIDE FEEDBACK, UM, AT, AT THAT TIME.
UM, YOU CAN SEE, UM, THERE WAS SOME CONCERN ABOUT ANY ALTERNATIVE THAT EXPANDED THE STUDY AREA AS IT WOULD EXPAND THE TIMEFRAME UP TO 12 TO 18 MONTHS TO COMPLETE ADDITIONAL STUDIES.
THERE WAS SENSITIVITY AROUND THE TRADITIONAL CULTURAL PROPERTY.
UM, THERE IS NO DISTINCTION BETWEEN TOWN OR PUBLICLY OWNED PROPERTY AND PRIVATELY OWNED PROPERTY AS IT RELATES TO IMPACT WITHIN THAT TRADITIONAL CULTURAL PROPERTY DESIGNATION, UH, AND AREA.
UM, AND THEY'VE BEEN COORDINATING WITH THE STATE HISTORICAL PRESERVATION OFFICE TO UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THOSE IMPACTS WITHIN THE TCP.
AS FOR SPECIFIC FEEDBACK RECEIVED ON THE ALTERNATIVES WE'RE GONNA GO THROUGH, THEY HAD EXCEPTION, UH, EXCEPTIONS OR CONCERNS WITH ALTERNATIVES, 2, 3, 4, AND THEN ALSO THE EXPRESS BYPASS.
AND I'M JUST GONNA RUN THROUGH THOSE.
IT'S THE FEEDBACK THAT THEY, THAT CAME DIRECTLY FROM THEM.
SO THERE WAS DISCUSSION ON MAY 1ST.
[00:15:01]
LETTER WAS DRAFTED AND, UM, AND SUBMITTED OFFICIALLY BY THEIR DEPUTY SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION CHIEF ENGINEER.SO ALTERNATIVE TO WHICH INCLUDED THE BOW TIES AT SQUIRE, POPE AND SPANISH WELLS ROADS WOULD REQUIRE ADDITIONAL RIGHT OF WAY, UH, WHICH LOCK MUELLER, UM, PROVIDED IN THEIR PRESENT PRESENTATION.
UH, DUE TO THE INCREASE IN RIGHT OF WAY WITHIN THIS TRADITIONAL CULTURAL PROPERTY, THIS, THIS ITEM, UH, THIS ALTERNATIVE WOULD BE ELIMINATED, OR, UH, THE FEASIBILITY OF ADVANCEMENT WOULD BE REALLY LOW.
UM, THEY HAVE CONCERN WITH THE POTENTIAL ISSUES AROUND THE ROUNDABOUT VOLUMES, UH, NEEDED FOR DUAL LANE.
UM, SO IT'S NOT, MAYBE NOT JUST AS EASY AS MAKING A RIGHT TO MAKE A LEFT, THAT THE VOLUMES EXPERIENCE IN THOSE AREAS WOULD REQUIRE SOME ADDITIONAL CAPACITY IN THE ROUNDABOUTS.
UM, THEY THOUGHT THE COST ESTIMATE AND THE CONSTRUCTION DURATION WERE A LITTLE LOW TO ADD THOSE FOUR ROUNDABOUTS IN.
UM, AS IT ALSO INCREASES THE RIGHT OF WAY, UM, UM, P PHASE OF THE PROJECT AS WELL.
UM, THEY WERE CONCERNED ABOUT, UH, POTENTIAL, UH, INCREASE IN REAR END CRASHES AT INTERSECTIONS, UM, FOR THOSE THAT ARE NOT USED TO USING THIS, UM, THIS TRAVEL TRAVEL PATTERN, UH, TO TRA TRA TO TRAVERSE THROUGH THE AREA.
UM, SO THAT WAS THEIR FEEDBACK ON ALTERNATIVE TO
UM, AND, AND THAT WOULD HAVE IMPACTED THE STONY COMMUNITY.
SO THEY'RE CONCERNED ABOUT THE S THE TCP AND ADDITIONAL RIGHT OF WAY, UM, NEEDS.
UM, S-D-E-M-S-E WALLS, WHICH ARE MECHANICALLY STABILIZED EARTH, I THINK WALLS, UH, WOULD ALSO NEED, UM, WOULD HAVE ADDITIONAL IMPACTS FOR ELEVATED STRUCTURES AND POTENTIALLY INCREASE THE OVERALL WIDTH WITHIN THE STONY COMMUNITY.
UM, THERE WAS CONCERN ABOUT THE SHOULDER WIDTH AS YOU HAVE THE, THE AT GRADE, UH, ROADWAY AND, AND, AND REQUIRE SHOULDER WIDTH OUTSIDE OF THOSE, UM, SUBSTRUCTURES TO SUPPORT THE ELEVATED AREA, UM, THAT COULD HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL IMPACT.
UH, THEY ALSO THOUGHT THE COST ESTIMATE FOR, UM, THIS ELEVATED AREA, UH, FOR, FOR THE ECHELON OR CENTER TURN AT ONE OF THE TWO, AT ONE OF THE TWO INTERSECTIONS, UM, THAT WOULD COST MORE THAN WHAT THE ESTIMATE, UH, HAD SHOWN FROM THE LOCK MILLER EVALUATION.
UM, ADDITIONAL WATER RIGHTWAY REQUIREMENTS WOULD ELIMINATE IT, AGAIN FROM THE FOUR F REVIEW AND THE IMPACT OF THE TRADITIONAL CULTURAL PROPERTY.
AND THEY THOUGHT THAT THIS MAY TRIGGER A FULL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT.
JOHN, THERE'S SOMEBODY LOOKING TO, UH, JOIN.
UH, AND THEN THE FINAL ONE, YEAH, THEY MAY TRIGGER A FULL EIS, UH, DUE TO INCREASED IMPACTS FROM THIS ALTERNATIVE.
UM, THE ELEVATED BYPASS, AGAIN, IT WOULD BEGIN, UH, THE, IT WOULD BEGIN TO, UM, BEGIN AT THE CAUSEWAY TO HILTON ISLAND AND RUN THROUGH THE ENTIRETY OF THE, OF THE STONY CORRIDOR, AND THEN TIE INTO BUSINESS ROUTE AND TO THE, UM, INTO THE CROSS ISLAND PARKWAY.
UM, AGAIN, THEY HAD SOME ADDITIONAL CONCERNS HERE WITH A, WITH AN ELEVATED, UM, ROADWAY WITH A, WITH A SUB STRUCTURED SUPERSTRUCTURE REQUIRING SUPPORT THAT WOULD SQUEEZE, UM, ADDITIONAL NEEDS AND RIGHT OF WAY IMPACTS TO THE OUTSIDE OF THE EXISTING, UH, ROADWAY.
UM, AND, AND ALSO, UM, TO, AND ALSO TO REQUIRE WORK ZONE FOR CONTRACTORS, UM, TO, TO BE ABLE TO OPERATE.
UM, SAME THING WITH THE, THE MECHANICALLY STABILIZED EARTH WALLS TO SUPPORT THE SUP, THE SUPER ELEVATION.
UM, AGAIN, SAME THING WITH SHOULDER WIDTH.
THERE WAS CONCERN THAT THESE WOULD REQUIRE ADDITIONAL WIDTH, UH, WITHIN, WITHIN THE CORRIDOR, WHICH WOULD REQUIRE MORE RIGHT OF WAY THROUGH STONY.
UM, AGAIN, THEY THOUGHT THE COST ESTIMATE AND CONSTRUCTION DURATION HERE WERE, WERE TOO LOW.
AND, AND IF YOU RECALL, IT WAS FOUR HUNDRED AND TWENTY FIVE, FOUR HUNDRED THIRTY FOR ALTERNATIVE ONE.
SO EVEN AT A $150 MILLION INCREASED COST, THEY THOUGHT THAT WAS, UH, WAS TOO LOW.
UM, AND THIS ADDS A LOT OF COMPLEXITY WHEN YOU START GETTING SUPER STRUCTURE, UM, AND SUPER ELEVATION, AN ELEVATED ROADWAY THROUGH
[00:20:01]
THAT AREA.UH, A LOT OF COMPLEXITY, UM, TO THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD AND TO THE OVERALL EXECUTION OF THE PROJECT.
UM, ALSO YOU ADD IN SOME ADDITIONAL SEISMIC CONCERNS ONCE YOU HAVE THAT, UH, COMPONENT.
UM, AND AGAIN, THEY THOUGHT THAT AN, UM, A FULL EIS WOULD BE RE MAYBE REQUIRED IF THIS ALTERNATIVE, UM, WAS CONSIDERED, AGAIN, ALTERNATIVES TWO, THREE, AND FOUR, VERY LOW ON THE FEASIBILITY OR VIABILITY TO BE ABLE TO ADVANCE BASED UPON THE NIPA PROCESS, UM, UM, AND, AND THROUGH AND TO GET THROUGH FEDERAL HIGHWAYS WITH MINIMIZING THE IMPACTS.
UM, ANY QUESTIONS ON THOSE? THOSE WERE THE THREE LOCK MUELLER ALTERNATIVES THAT THEY PROVIDED FEEDBACK ON BEFORE I GO THROUGH THE EXPRESS BYPASS.
UM, DID YOU HAVE A CHANCE TO, UM, GET AN EXPLANATION FROM S-C-D-O-T ON THAT 4, 3 5, UH, HOW IT WAS BUILT UP, WHETHER IT WAS BASED ON 11 LANES LEVELING BRIDGE, WHETHER, UM, IT WAS A THREE LANE BRIDGE OR A FOUR LANE BRIDGE.
UM, WHAT THE CONTINGENCIES ARE, I, I KNOW THE BREAKDOWN TO SOME EXTENT, UH, DIVIDED BY, UH, BRIDGE WORK, ROAD WORK, ENVIRONMENTAL UTILITIES, AND SO ON.
BUT DID THEY, WERE YOU ABLE TO FIND OUT A BIT MORE? THE, UH, THE COST ESTIMATE IS BASED UPON THE, UH, CONFIGURATION THAT'S INCLUDED IN THE EA.
IT INCLUDES TWO 10 FOOT SHOULDERS, UH, ONE IN EACH DIRECTION.
IT INCLUDES SIX FOOT SHOULDERS ON THE INTERIOR.
THE 10 FOOT SHOULDERS HAVE BEEN REDUCED.
IT INCLUDES A 12 FOOT, UH, BIKE AND PAD PATHWAY ALONG THE BRIDGE.
IT'S ONE BRIDGE WITH SIX LANES.
UM, IT FLIES OVER PINNEY ISLAND.
UM, IT DOES NOT LAND ON PINCKNEY ISLAND DUE TO SAFETY CONCERNS AND THOSE EXPRESSED BY, UM, UH, FISH AND WILDLIFE.
WITH THAT, UM, IT INCLUDES A SIX LANE SEGMENT ONCE YOU LAND ON JENKINS ISLAND, UH, SIX LANE SEGMENT, UM, COMPLETE ALL THE WAY THROUGH, UH, THE SQUIRE POPE INTERSECTION.
IT INCLUDES INTERSECTION AT SQUIRE POE WITH TURN LANES, UH, TWO TURN LANES ONTO SQUARE PULE FROM MOUNTAIN PARKWAY, AND TWO RIGHT TURN LANES OFF.
UH, IT INCLUDES, UH, SOME MINOR INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS AT SPANISH WELLS AND WILDHORSE ROAD, UM, BUT NO SIGNIFICANT WIDENING THROUGH THAT SEGMENT OTHER THAN THE TURN LANE, UH, FOR THE, UH, FOR SQUARE AS YOU GO WESTBOUND.
UM, THE CURRENT PROJECT ON JENKINS ISLAND DOES SHIFT THE WESTBOUND LANE SLIGHTLY NORTH, UM, INTO THE JENKINS ISLAND TRACK, CLOSER TO THE POWER LINE EASEMENT.
UH, THE PROJECT CURRENTLY INCLUDES A MULTI, UH, USE PATHWAY, UH, PRIMARILY ON THE NORTH SIDE, UH, THAT RUNS, UM, THROUGH, IN, UH, JENKINS ISLAND AND MOVES BACK, UM, TOWARD THE POWER LINE EASEMENT.
UH, IT ALSO INCLUDES A SINGLE POINT ON JENKINS ISLAND AT THE INTERSECTION OF WINDMILL HARBOR, THE JENKINS ISLAND ROAD.
UM, ACCESS IS A RIGHT AND RIGHT OUT, IT'S NO LONGER LEFT IN, LEFT OUT.
ALL TRAVEL MOVEMENTS INTERNAL TO THE JENKINS ISLAND ON NORTH SIDE ARE NOW FUNNELED THROUGH THAT SIGNAL AT WINDMILL HARBOR.
THOSE ARE THE ELEMENTS THAT ARE INCLUDED.
THERE ARE SOME MITIGATION THAT'S ALSO INCLUDED, YOU KNOW, NOT ENOUGH IN MY OPINION, BUT IT'S THE ORIGINAL MITIGATION THAT THE S-E-D-O-T AND THE COUNTY HAD WORKED WITH, UM, COMMUNITY MEMBERS, UH, IN THE PAST ON A PAVILION, SOME SIGNAGE, A ORAL HISTORY, UM, BUT THAT'S WHAT'S INCLUDED IN THAT OVERALL, UM, $425 MILLION ESTIMATE.
SO THEY, ARE THEY WORKING, SO LET ME UNDERSTAND.
IT'S THREE LANES IN A BREAKDOWN LANE AND A BIKE LANE.
SO IT'S AT FOUR AND FOUR AND ONE, IT'S THREE TRAVEL LANES IN EACH DIRECTION, IF WE WANNA GO ON ISLANDS SIX.
AND THEN IT IS THREE, IT'S THREE TRAVEL LANES ON IT DOES HAVE A 10 FOOT SHOULDER.
WE CALL IT BREAKDOWN LANE, BUT IT'S, IT'S A 10 FOOT SHOULDER ON THE INTERIOR.
INITIALLY THEY WERE PROPOSING A 10 FOOT SHOULDER ON THE BRIDGE.
I MEAN, THAT'S BEEN REDUCED TO SIX FEET IN THE CURRENT DESIGN.
IT'S THE SAME TREATMENT AS YOU GO WESTBOUND.
THREE TRAVEL LANES GOING OFF THE ISLAND WITH A 10 FOOT SHOULDER TO ACCOUNT FOR BREAKDOWN AND A SIX FOOT INTERIOR SHOULDER.
SO NINE LANES, WELL, IT'S SIX LANES IN EACH DIRECTION.
MOST, MOST ROADWAYS HAVE SHOULDERS, SIX LANES ON THE, I'M TALKING ABOUT THE BRIDGE.
SO 12 LANES, THREE THREE EACH WAY.
ONE BREAKDOWN LANE ON EACH SIDE, AND THEN A, A BIKE LANE.
THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT.
I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY'RE, I'M, I'M TRYING TO BE AS CLEAR AS I CAN.
UM, I, I, THE, THIS IDEA OF 11 TRAVEL LANES IS,
[00:25:02]
IS A, A LITTLE HARD TO, TO SORT OF PROMOTE HERE.IT'S THREE TRAVEL LANES IN EACH DIRECTION.
ONE BIG, UH, DEFICIENCY WITH THE CURRENT BRIDGE IS THERE'S NO BREAKDOWN LANES.
IF THERE'S AN ACCIDENT ON THE BRIDGE, EVERYONE THAT'S COMING OR GOING TO HILTON HEAD IS IN TROUBLE.
SO THERE'S A 10 FOOT OUTER, UM, OUTER LANE.
SO THE OUTSIDE LANE WOULD BE, UH, THE OUTSIDE SHOULDER IS 10 FEET.
INITIALLY, THEY HAD AN INSIDE SHOULDER OF 10 FEET THAT WAS REDUCED TO SIX FEET.
THAT WAS AFTER DISCUSSIONS THAT YOU DON'T NEED TWO BREAKDOWN LANES ON THE BRIDGE.
SO THAT CONCESSION HAS BEEN MADE, AND THE MODIFIED PREFERRED THAT WAS PRESENTED IN MARCH OF 2022 HAD THAT REDUCTION.
SO IT'S A SHOULDER OR BREAKDOWN LANE, THREE TRAVEL LANES AND A SMALLER INTERIOR SHOULDER.
THERE IS SOME, SOME BARRIER RIGHT BETWEEN THE, THE LEFT OR EASTBOUND AND WESTBOUND TRAFFIC.
AND IT'S A VERY SIMILAR TREATMENT ON THE WESTBOUND SIDE.
I JUST HAVE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT'S, BUT DID THEY TALK ABOUT, WAY BACK, THEY TALKED ABOUT A 40%, FOUR ZERO CONTINGENCY, UM, ON THE OVERALL PROJECT AMOUNT, WHICH BROUGHT THEM TO THE 4 25.
IF THEY EXPLAIN, UM, HOW MUCH THE CONT CONTINGENT, IT'S A BIG NUMBER, UH, CONTINGENCY HOW MUCH THAT IS, AND WHETHER THAT CONTINGENCY DIFFERS ON THE VARIOUS ELEMENTS OF THE PROJECT.
MAY I, I WOULD THINK THAT YOU HAVE A CONTINGENCY FOR THE BRIDGE FOR THE ROAD WORK UTILITIES.
WE, WE DID NOT ASK FOR A DETAILED BREAKDOWN OF EVERY LINE ITEM IN THE BRIDGE IN THE, IN THE ESTIMATE FOR THIS PROJECT.
UM, WE HAVEN'T, WE HAVEN'T SETTLED ON A ALTERNATIVE.
UM, SO AT THIS POINT FROM IT, IT'S BENEFICIAL TO LOOK AT THE COMPARATIVE ASSESSMENT BETWEEN ALTERNATIVES TO UNDERSTAND WHAT, WHAT THE APPROXIMATE COST OF ALTERNATIVE ONE IS VERSUS ALTERNATIVE FIVE.
UM, I, I, I DON'T THINK THERE'S MUCH VALUE IN, IN GETTING DOWN INTO THE BREAKDOWN OF CONTINGENCY VERSUS THE OTHER COMPONENTS, UM, AT THIS POINT.
UM, AND AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS, YOU KNOW, AS THE, UH, ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WENT FORWARD, COST WAS NOT, WAS NOT A, A, A FACTOR IN THE INITIAL ASSESSMENT THAT WAS DONE TO THAT ALTERNATIVES.
IT WAS BROUGHT IN AS A SECONDARY CRITERIA ALONG WITH A BUNCH OF OTHER ITEMS. AS YOU WORK THROUGH THE NEPA PROCESS, I WILL SAY THAT THERE'S STILL AN ELEMENT THAT NEEDS TO TAKE PLACE.
IT'S REQUIRED BY THE NEPA PROCESS, AND THAT'S A VALUE ENGINEERING.
SO ONCE AN ALTERNATIVE IS SELECTED, THERE'S AN ADVANCEMENT THROUGH FEDERAL HIGHWAYS.
THERE'S A, THERE'S VALUE ENGINEERING THAT HAS TO BE DONE TO IDENTIFY WHERE THERE COULD BE ADDITIONAL COST SAVINGS FOR THE PROJECT.
UM, IS A, IS A COPY OF THIS LETTER INCLUDED IN THIS PACKAGE? I HAVE, I HAVE COPIES RIGHT HERE.
UM, I, IT WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE, UM, IN THE PACKET BECAUSE THE PACKET WENT OUT BEFORE I HAD IT, BUT I HAVE COPIES RIGHT HERE THAT I, I'LL DISTRIBUTE AND, AND MAKE.
LAST BUT NOT LEAST, WHO WAS ON THE BUS? WELL, WHO ALL WENT UP THERE? UM, TO, TO COLUMBIA FROM THE TOWN OF HILAND ISLAND.
IT WAS, UH, MAYOR PERRY, IT WAS TOWN MANAGER, MARK ORLANDO.
UH, COUNCILMAN ALEX BROWN, MYSELF AND THOMAS BOXLEY, WHO'S THE CHAIRMAN OF OUR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION.
AND FROM THE COUNTY, FROM THE COUNTY, WE HAD, UH, UH, CHAIRMAN JOE PASSMAN, UM, INTERIM ADMINISTRATOR JOHN ROBINSON AND JARED FRA.
I JUST WANNA MAKE FOR, FOR THE RECORD, UH, ALAN, THAT I THINK THAT IN MY VIEW, THAT TRIP WAS PREMATURE.
YOU COULD HAVE HAD A ZOOM CALL AND FIND OUT ABOUT THESE THINGS.
I WOULD THINK THAT YOU NEED TO DO ANOTHER TRIP ONCE WE ARE DONE WITH THE, THE COMPLETE EVALUATION, WHICH WOULD MAKE IT A LEVEL PLAYING GROUND.
YOU ARE, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN PUSH OR, OR, OR, UH, STEP ON THE BRAKES ON CERTAIN IDEAS.
AND I DON'T THINK THAT IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO.
IT'S NOT FAIR, UH, FOR, UH, THE RESIDENTS OF HIL NETS.
UM, AND I THINK IT'S A FAIR PROCESS TO REALLY WAIT UNTIL WE, ARE WE HOSTILE THE T'S AND DO ALL THE I CONCERNS ARE WELL NOTED.
I SAID YOUR CONCERNS ARE WELL NOTED.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THE, ON ALTERNATIVE TWO, THREE, AND FOUR FROM LOCKHILL? I, I GUESS SINCE, SINCE, UH, DEIDRICH WAS TALKING ABOUT THIS, UM, MR. WACK HAD A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS, WHICH WAS, WHICH DEIDRICH ADDRESSED, UM, ONE OF THEM.
BUT HE DOES ASK, NOW THAT WE KNOW THE LANE, UH, THE WIDTHS OF THE BRIDGES FROM BARRIER TO BARRIER 36 FEET, WHICH CAN ACCOMMODATE THREE 12 FOOT LANES OF TRAFFIC, WHY CAN'T
[00:30:01]
THE B BRIDGES BE RETRIED ACCORDINGLY? PERHAPS WITH THREE 11 FOOT LANES, ONE OF 'EM A HALF FOOT CLEAR WITH BARRIERS ON EACH SIDE WITH ADDITIONAL LANES ADDED ON EACH APPROACH AND BEYOND.UM, I, I THINK THAT WAS ANSWERED AT ONE POINT IN TIME THAT BECAUSE IT'S A FEDERAL HIGHWAY BRIDGE, THAT IT HAS TO BE A CERTAIN WIDTH.
I, I CAN GIVE YOU WHAT I, WHAT I'VE LEARNED THROUGH THE PROCESS, BUT THEY CAN TALK.
ONLY THING I WAS GONNA SAY WAS BASED ON OUR REVIEW OF THE INFORMATION WAS THAT WAS A, A TOPIC THAT THE TOWN BROUGHT FORTH ON THEIR PREFERRED MODIFICATIONS TO SEEK THE A, A MORE REDUCED LANE WIDTH.
AND THEY WERE ACCOMMODATING TO HAVING 11 FOOT INTERIOR LINES.
BUT THEN THE OUTER LANE, THEY SUGGESTED HAVING 12.
BUT I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S BEEN FURTHER DISCUSSIONS WITH THAT.
WELL, ON THE BRIDGE, ON THE BRIDGE PROPER, UM, THE RESPONSE WHEN WE VISITED WITH THE SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION, CHRISTIE HALL AND HER TEAM, THIS WAS A COUPLE YEARS AGO.
UH, 'CAUSE WE WERE RECOMMENDING REDUCING THE LANES ON THE BRIDGES TO 11 FEET.
UH, THE RESPONSES WERE THE, THE, THE VOLUME AND SPEED ASSOCIATED WITH THE BRIDGE, ALONG WITH S-E-D-O-T, THEY HAVE AN OBJECTIVE ABOUT FREIGHT AS WELL.
AND SO OBVIOUSLY ALL THE, ANY BIG TRUCK THAT COMES ACROSS HERE, CONTRACTORS, YOU KNOW, UH, GARBAGE TRUCKS, TRACTOR TRAILERS, UM, THEY NEED, THEY, THEY REQUIRE 12 FEET IN THOSE, IN THOSE AREAS, UH, FOR LANE WIDTHS.
UM, AND ALSO, UM, YOU NEED THE, AGAIN, ONE BIG DEFICIENCY IS NO BREAKDOWN LANE.
AND SO JUST RES STRIPING TO ACCOMMODATE THREE LANES ON THE EXISTING BRIDGES.
UM, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE, YOU REALLY RUN AN ISSUE WITH SOME SAFETY CONCERNS AND ANY ACCIDENTS, AND I'M GONNA SHOW YOU SOME SAFETY INFORMATION OR SOME ACCIDENT COLLISION INFORMATION HERE IN A MINUTE.
UM, BUT THAT WAS THE RESPONSE THAT WE RECEIVED.
THEY WERE AMENABLE ON, ONCE YOU LANDED ON JENKINS ISLAND TO REDUCE THE TWO INTERIOR LANES IN EACH DIRECTION TO 11 FEET, UM, THEY WERE SUPPORTIVE THAT, UM, THAT THE COUNTY WITH TOWN SUPPORT COULD SUBMIT A DESIGN EXCEPTION.
AND IT'S SOMETHING THEY THOUGHT THEY COULD SUPPORT, BUT NEEDED TO MAINTAIN 12 FOOT LANES ON THE OUTER EDGE FOR THAT FREIGHT TRAFFIC THAT, UM, THAT'S INTEGRAL TO THEIR, THEIR PROGRAM.
AND, UM, I HAVE ONE, UH, REMARK BEFORE WE DIVE INTO, UM,
AND I'M SAYING THAT BECAUSE, UH, WE HAVE LOOKED INTO THIS EXTENSIVELY.
WE'VE LEARNED A LOT, UM, OVER THE LAST FEW MONTHS.
AND WE'VE COME UP WITH A, A, UH, AN ALTERNATIVE THAT I THINK LOT NEEDS TO INCLUDE IN FULL DETAIL, UM, IN THEIR, IN THEIR WORK.
SO BEFORE WE GO FURTHER, I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE SOMEBODY SECOND THAT MOTION, UM, AND THEN MOVE, MOVE TO DISCUSSION ON IT.
IS, IS THERE A SECOND ON THAT? AND SO THERE'S A SECOND PERSON TO SECOND ON THE TABLE, UM, FOR DISCUSSION.
IF, IF IT, IF IT MEANS AN INCREASE IN COST, THEN IT HAS TO GO BACK TO COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL.
UM, WELL, WE'LL FIND OUT ABOUT THAT.
I MEAN, BUT I THINK IT'S QUESTION WHO IS, WHO IS THIS GROUP? WHAT, WHAT QUALIFICATIONS, WHO IS THE GROUP THAT'S PUT THIS TOGETHER? YEAH, I'LL, I'LL, I'LL GET TO THE NEXT, I NEED THAT ANSWER BEFORE WE HAVE, THAT'S PART OF MY DISCUSSION I HAVE, WOULD BE HELPFUL FOR ME TO GIVE FEEDBACK THAT WE RECEIVED FROM S-E-D-O-T.
WELL, ON THAT, WELL, WE GOT A MOTION A SECOND ON THE TABLE.
UM, UM, THEN I ALSO HAVE, UM, UM, A PROXY FROM, UH, CHARLIE ICK, WHO ALSO WOULD LIKE TO SEE THIS, UH, BEING TAKEN AT EQUAL LEVEL AS THE OTHER ALTERNATIVES.
MR. WAZE DID NOT NOTIFY ANYBODY OF PROVIDING THIS PROXY.
I WISH HE COULD HAVE DONE THAT.
UM, WELL, I HAVE THIS PROXY OVER HERE.
FIELD, I CAN GIVE IT TO YOU LATER.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS? I MEAN, I, I I'M NOT CERTAIN WHAT IT WILL MEAN, YOU KNOW, TO ADOPT THE HORIZONTAL, I MEAN, WE HAVEN'T EVEN GOTTEN THE FULL PRESENTATION YET.
NO, BUT THAT'S BECAUSE WE ARE GOING INTO IT.
I DON'T WANNA SORT OF BACKTRACK AGAIN.
I WANT, I WANT YOU TO MAKE AWARE OF THIS AND, AND, UH, HAVE IT BE CONSIDERED.
AND THEN AS WE GO THROUGH THE PRESENTATION, WE CAN, UH, ACTUALLY DISCUSS IT.
AND I ALSO BROUGHT ON SOME COPIES FOR IT.
WELL, NO, WE HAVE TO VOTE ON IT NOW.
LET, LET'S VOTE PRIOR TO GOING THROUGH THE FULL PRESENTATION AND, AND THAT I DON'T SEE AS BENEFICIAL BECAUSE IT, IT, IT IS PREMATURE.
I'M GOING THROUGH THE FULL PRESENTATION.
I CAN TELL YOU IT'S BENEFICIAL.
[00:35:01]
ARE YOU, ARE, ARE YOU A TRAFFIC ENGINEER? NO, I'M NOT.WE HAVE CONSTRUCTION EXPERIENCE.
HAVE YOU BUILT IN WETLANDS? HAVE YOU BUILT IN MARKLAND? THOSE ARE SIMPLE QUESTIONS.
BUT MY POINT BEING IS THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO VOTE ON SOMETHING AND WE HAVE NOT GONE THROUGH THE PRESENTATION.
SHAKE YOUR ALL YOU WANT FACTUAL.
I CAN SHAKE MY HEAD BECAUSE I KEPT EVERYTHING.
WE DON'T NEED TO HAVE INTERACTION LIKE THAT.
YOU HAVE LOOKED AT IT WITH ENGINEERS, BUT WE HAVE LOOKED AT IT FROM ALL THE ANGLES THAT WE COULD, AND FOR THE INTEREST OF OUR COMMUNITY AND TO REALLY LOOK AT ALL THE STUFF THAT'S ALL THE POSSIBILITIES THAT, THAT WE HAVE.
IT'S, IN MY OPINION, YOU'RE, YOU'RE LOOKING TO THROW OUT THE RESPONSE AND THE, AND THE WORK THAT LOCK MUER HAS DONE.
AND, UM, THE RESPONSE FROM, FROM DOT AS TO THEIR FINDINGS AND EVERYTHING ELSE BY MAKING THIS MOTION TO PUSH THAT THROUGH.
UM, WELL, WE, WE HAVE THE MOTION ON THE TABLE.
UH, MR. CHAIRMAN, I, AGAIN, I'D BE HAPPY TO PROVIDE THIS INFORMATION UP AND FORM THIS DECISION BY GOING THROUGH THE DOT.
I WANT YOU TO GO AHEAD AND PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION.
I WOULD ALSO LIKE FOR NATE AND ANY MEMBER OF HIS TEAM TO PROVIDE THEIR OPINION ON, UM, ON THIS ALTERNATIVE FROM AN ENGINEERING STANDPOINT.
UM, AND WHETHER OR NOT THEY BELIEVE IT IS A FEASIBLE ALTERNATIVE TO ADVANCE THE INFORMATION NEEDS TO BE PROVIDED.
SO IT NEEDS TO HAVE THE FULL CONSIDERATION.
AND AFTER THAT HAS BEEN GIVEN, THEN WE CAN EITHER SAY, WELL, THIS, THIS IS A CRAZY IDEA, IT DOESN'T WORK AT ALL.
OR, HEY, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE ACTUALLY SOME REALLY VALID POINTS IN HERE.
AND I THINK THAT'S, YOU KNOW, HAVING BEEN ON THIS COMMITTEE FOR, FOR ALL THESE, ALL THESE, UH, UH, MONTHS, HAVING WORKED ON THIS FOR FOUR YEARS, WE HAVE BECOME VERY GRANULAR ON THIS IDEA.
AND IT IS A, UH, IT'S WORKED OUT INTO A FINAL DETAIL.
AND TO PUSH IT ASIDE IS TO, UH, IS A DISADVANTAGE TO OUR WHOLE COMMUNITY.
SO YEAH, I'M, I'M HAPPY TO PROVIDE THE FEEDBACK THAT S-C-D-O-D PROVIDED.
I, I WOULD LIKE TO VOTE ON THIS NOW.
SO, WHO'S IN FAVOR? I'M SORRY.
AT LEAST ONE RIGHT UP THERE, LARRY, ON THE SCREEN.
YOU NEVER GAVE IT TO YOU JUST WRONG ON SOMETHING.
SO I, I WILL, I'LL CALL THE FOLK TO, WHICH WAS A BY MR. ADVOCATE, SECOND BY MR. YOUNG FOR FULL CONSIDERATION OF THE HORIZONTAL BYPASS CONSIDERATION.
THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE SIGNIFY BY RAISING YOUR RIGHT HAND.
RAISING YOUR RIGHT HAND AND SO IS CHARLIE.
ONE SECOND OPPOSED THREE TO TWO.
ALRIGHT, SO I'M GONNA, I'LL WE'LL PROVIDE THE INFORMATION PROVIDED BY SCD OT IN RESPONSE.
AGAIN, THE, IF, IF THE AUDIENCE COULD STAY QUIET WHILE WE HAVE THIS DISCUSSION THAT WE'D GREATLY APPRECIATED.
THE EXPRESS BYPASS VERSION 3.1 THAT'S BEEN MOST RECENTLY SUBMITTED WAS PROVIDED TO S-C-D-O-T FOR THEIR FE, UH, TO GET THEIR INPUT AND FEEDBACK, UM, AND ASSESSMENT ON VIABILITY FOR ADVANCEMENT.
UM, DUE TO THE SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF, UH, IMPACT TO THE SONY COMMUNITY, THEY THOUGHT THAT THIS WOULD TRIGGER A FULL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT.
UM, AND IT WOULD INCREASE SIGNIFICANTLY THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS.
AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, THE TRADITIONAL CULTURAL PROPERTY, WHICH HAS BEEN NOW IDENTIFIED AND INCLUDED IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT.
ANY ADDITIONAL IMPACT TO THE TCP, BOTH, UM, FROM A PUBLIC OR PRIVATE PROPERTY STANDPOINT OR OTHER FOUR F RESOURCES, UM, AS WAS COVERED IN THE LAST MEETING, UM, WOULD, WOULD ELIMINATE THIS ALTERNATIVE.
THE BYPASS DOES NOT ACCOUNT FOR IMPACTS TO RESIDENTIAL RELOCATIONS WITHIN THE STONY COMMUNITY, UM, AS YOU GO WEST OF SQUIRE POPE ROAD, OR FOR THE FLYOVER BRIDGE AND ACCELERATION DECELERATION LANES AS IT TIES BACK INTO, UM, THE EXPRESS BYPASS.
UM, AT THE LAST MEETING, THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS BEING AN AT GRADE BYPASS, BUT THERE, AS I MENTIONED, THERE ARE FIVE TO NINE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES THAT WILL BE IMPACTED, UM, WITH AN AT GRADE BYPASS IN THIS SECTION.
[00:40:01]
RELOCATIONS ARE, WOULD BE REQUIRED IN THIS AREA.THE CURRENT ALTERNATIVE HAS TWO COMMERCIAL, UM, TWO COMMERCIAL PROPERTY IMPACTS, AND THEN TWO RESIDENTIAL, UH, PROPERTY IMPACTS.
NO RE RELOCATIONS OF RESIDENTIAL.
UM, THERE ARE TWO FOUR F RESOURCES, AGAIN, WERE COVERED IN THE LAST MEETING THAT WILL BE IMPACTED BY THE EXPRESS BYPASS.
UM, THOSE ARE THE TOWN PARK, THE OLD SCHOOLHOUSE PARK, UM, AS WELL AS THE, UH, COASTAL DISCOVERY MUSEUM AND HONEY HORN PROPERTY.
THE COST FOR CONSTRUCTION FOR THE EXPRESS BYPASS WOULD SIGNIFICANTLY BE INCREASED OVER THE CURRENT PROJECT.
THE FLYOVER HEIGHT, AND THIS WAS, UH, WE TALKED ABOUT THIS LAST MEETING.
THE FLYOVER OVER THE FLYOVER TO TIE BACK INTO THE BUSINESS ROUTE WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY 20 TO 24 FEET IN HEIGHT TO ACCOUNT FOR ADEQUATE CLEARANCE AND DEPTH OF THE BRIDGE STRUCTURE.
AS YOU CAN SEE, ALTERNATIVE TWO, THREE AND FOUR LOW, VERY LOW FEASIBILITY TO ADVANCE, UM, THEIR STATEMENTS FROM S-E-O-D-O-T THAT THEY'D BE ELIMINATED AS IS THE CASE WITH THE EXPRESS BYPASS THAT WAS PRESENTED.
UM, AND WHAT WAS SUBMITTED WAS EXACTLY WHAT WAS SUBMITTED TO THE TOWN FOR CONSIDERATION.
AND THIS IS A RESPONSE FROM S-C-D-O-T.
UM, THEY DON'T BELIEVE THAT THE, UH, EXPRESS BYPASS IS A VIABLE OPTION ON MANY ACCOUNTS.
UM, BOTH PROPERTY IMPACT, ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT, COST TIMEFRAME.
UM, AND, AND, UM, IT WOULD NOT ADVANCE THIS FEDERAL HIGHWAYS WOULD LIKELY REJECT THIS OP OPTION IF SUBMITTED DUE TO THE ADDITIONAL TCP IMPACT.
UM, THE INCREASE OR, OR THE, UM, IT WOULD, UH, GO AGAINST THEIR, UM, THEIR, UH, OBJECTIVE OF AVOIDING PROPERTY IMPACTS, UM, MINIMIZING PROPERTY IMPACTS AND MITIGATING IN THAT ORDER.
SO THIS WOULD HAVE ADDITIONAL PROPERTY IMPACTS, UM, POTENTIAL RELOCATIONS AS RESIDENTIAL AS YOU CAN SEE THERE, AND WOULD NOT BE AN ALTERNATIVE.
FEDERAL HIGHWAYS WOULD LIKELY REJECTED IF SUBMITTED BECAUSE THERE ARE, ARE, THERE ARE LESS IMPACTFUL ALTERNATIVES THAT HAVE BEEN DEVELOPED.
THIS IS FROM S-C-D-O-T, AND I PARAPHRASED A LITTLE BIT FROM DISCUSSION RELATED TO THAT, THAT CONVERSATION WITH S-C-D-O-T.
BUT I ASKED NATE TO, TO SHARE ANY OF THEIR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING OPINION ON THE, ON THE FEASIBILITY OF THIS ALTERNATIVE ADVANCING.
THAT'S PART OF THE PRESENTATION THAT WE'LL BE GETTING INTO LATER ON.
WE WENT THROUGH, THIS WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE SCOPE OF SERVICES, BUT WE HAD OUR, UH, FLEET EXPERTS, LAUREN AND CHAD.
AND, UH, ALSO FROM THE TRAFFIC PERSPECTIVE, WE LOOKED AT IT AND WHAT WE'RE GONNA BE PROVIDING OUR INPUT ON IT.
JUST, YOU KNOW, I DON'T WANNA RAIN ON YOUR PARADE, UH, SEAN, BUT, UM, IF WE ARE TALKING ABOUT AN INDEPENDENT CONSULTANT DOING THE WORK AND WE OPEN UP THE DOOR TO HAVE, UH, UH, IN DEPTH CONVERSATIONS WITH S-E-D-O-T AND, AND THE CONSULTANT IS PRIVY TO ALL THIS INFORMATION AND VIEWS OF S-C-D-O-T, NOW DRAW YOUR CONCLUSIONS.
JUST SO YOU KNOW, DIETRICH, THE INFORMATION THAT WE'RE GONNA BE SHOWING YOU FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE WAS BEFORE WE DIDN'T, WE HAD NOT SEEN ANYTHING WITH THAT PRIOR TO CHAD OR SEAN SENT ME AN EMAIL WITH THIS DOCUMENT TODAY.
SO WE HAD NOT HAD ANY CONVERSATIONS AT ALL.
THESE WOULD BE OUR INDEPENDENT VIEWPOINTS ON THE BYPASS.
UM, I I DO WANNA POINT OUT THAT, UM, I CANNOT MODIFY THE SCOPE OF WORK JUST AT THE DIRECTION OF THIS COMMITTEE.
IT WAS APPROVED BY TOWN COUNCIL.
THE COMMITTEE'S CHARGE WAS FOR THESE, UH, THE WORK WITH A CONSULTANT TO MOVE FORWARD MATERIALLY CONSISTENT WITH THE SCOPE OF WORK THAT THEY CREATED.
UM, BEFORE I WOULD EXECUTE A CONTRACT AMENDMENT TO EVALUATE THIS ALTERNATIVE, I WOULD HAVE TO ASK TOWN COUNCIL IF THEY AGREED, YOU MADE A RECOMMENDATION ON A SCOPE OF WORK TO COUNCIL, THEY APPROVED IT.
UM, YOU'RE, YOU'RE CHANGING THE SCOPE OF WORK.
I NEED TO MAKE SURE THE COUNCIL, UM, AGREES WITH THE THAT STEP.
SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THE COMMITTEE'S AWARE OF THAT.
UM, SO THAT'S THE LETTER OF THE RESPONSE.
I WANTED TO MAKE SURE I BROUGHT UP THE LETTER SPECIFICALLY ON THEIR LETTERHEAD, UH, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT'S PROVIDED.
UM, I'M GONNA GO THROUGH JUST VERY BRIEFLY, UM, A COUPLE MORE THINGS.
UM, UM, ALRIGHT, SO IN ADDITION TO THE ALTERNATIVES, WHICH THE COMMITTEE ASKED US
[00:45:01]
TO VET THROUGH S-C-D-O-T, THERE'S BEEN SOME QUESTIONS RELATED TO A BRIDGE REHAB VERSUS A NEW BRIDGE.UM, WE DID ASK S-C-D-O-T WHAT ARE THE DESIGN COSTS AND CONSTRUCTION IMPLICATIONS RELATED FROM BRI BRIDGE REHABILITATION VERSUS A NEW BRIDGE? AND THEY SHARED SOME FEEDBACK WITH US, WITH US.
THE EXISTING DEFICIENT BRIDGE, THE EASTBOUND MACKEY CREEK BRIDGE IS APPROACHING 70 YEARS IN ITS LIFECYCLE BRIDGE DESIGN.
UH, AND LIFE LIFECYCLE IS ABOUT 70 TO 75 YEARS, RIGHT? SO IT'S NEAR NEARING THE END.
UM, IT'S VERY CLOSE TO THE END OF ITS, UH, LIFE, UM, CYCLE.
UM, THEY SAID THAT BRIDGE REHABILITATION COULD BE PERFORMED, BUT THEIR PREFERENCE IS FOR A NEW BRIDGE.
AND THERE'S MANY REASONS FOR THAT.
AS THEY LOOKED AT THE SUBSTRUCTURE, THE SUPER STRUCTURE AND THE BRIDGE DECK, THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT CONCERNS WITH ALL ELEMENTS.
UM, THE BRIDGE COST OR THE COST TO REHABILITATE THE BRIDGE WOULD LIKELY, UH, APPROACH THE COST OF A BRAND NEW BRIDGE.
A NEW BRIDGE COULD BE BUILT WITH MINIMAL TRAFFIC IMPACTS.
IT WOULD BE WE, IT WOULD BE BUILT OFFLINE AND CONSTRUCTED, AND THEN THERE WOULD BE A SLIGHT TRANS, UH, TRANSITION TO, TO MOVE TRAFFIC ONTO THE NEW BRIDGE BEFORE THE OLD BRIDGE WOULD BE, UH, DEMOLISHED.
UM, THERE'S SOME SIGNIFICANCE IN THAT BECAUSE IT PROVIDES MINIMAL IMPACT TO, TO, TO TRAFFIC OPERATIONS, EXCUSE ME.
DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD, THEY MENTIONED THAT A REHABILITATION OF THE EXISTING BRIDGE, UM, COULD CAUSE, COULD CAUSE LANE CLOSURES AND DELAY THE MOTORISTS DURING THAT CONSTRUCTION PERIOD.
AND THEN FINALLY SEGMENTING THE BRIDGES, UM, SEGMENTING THE, THE PROJECT INTO REHABILITATION OF FOUR BRIDGES WOULD CREATE, UM, ADDITIONAL, UM, TIME ON OVERALL CONSTRUCTION, LIKELY INCREASE PROJECT COST AND RESULT IN DIFFERING LIFE CYCLES OF THE BRIDGES THAT ARE, ARE, ARE THERE.
SO THEIR, AGAIN, THEIR PREFERENCE IS FROM A, A COST STANDPOINT, A CONSTRUCTABILITY STANDPOINT, IMPACT TO, UH, TRANSPORTATION OPERATIONS AND UNIFORM LIFECYCLE.
THEIR PREFERENCE IS TO BUILD A NEW BRIDGE BECAUSE THEY BELIEVE IT WOULD BE MORE EFFICIENT AND EFFECTIVE TO DO SO.
I DID WANNA POINT OUT A COUPLE OF OTHER THINGS.
UM, THIS IS A HEAT MAP THAT SHOWS, UM, TRAFFIC INCIDENTS OR COLLISIONS FROM 2016 TO 2024.
UM, AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE'S A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT AS YOU GO THROUGH THE BRIDGE CORRIDOR SECTION.
AND THEN ALSO AS YOU GET INTO STONY COMMUNITY SPECIFIC STATISTICS IN THIS 4.1 MILE SECTION ARE THAT OVER EIGHT YEARS, THERE'S BEEN 1,108, UH, TOTAL COLLISIONS.
IT'S ABOUT 140 A YEAR AND SIX FATALITIES, TWO INVOLVING PEDESTRIANS, AND THERE'S BEEN 81, SO ABOUT 10 MAJOR INJURIES A YEAR, UH, IN THIS SEGMENT.
AND SO WHEN WE THINK BACK, THINK BACK WHY WE'RE TRYING TO ADVANCE A PROJECT WITHOUT A PROJECT.
WE, WE, WE DON'T HAVE A MECHANISM TO HELP PROVIDE SOME IMPROVEMENTS IN THIS AREA, UH, INCLUDING TRYING TO SLOW SPEED SOME TRAFFIC CALMING, UM, AND HAVE A SAFER, UM, TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM THROUGH THIS AREA.
UM, I DO WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE UNDERSTAND AGAIN, THE, THE COUNCIL AUTHORIZED SCOPE OF WORK WAS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAD A CONSULTANT REVIEW ALL THE ASSUMPTIONS, THE METHODOLOGIES, AND COME UP WITH WHAT THEY BELIEVE WERE ALTERNATIVES TO ADVANCE FOR THIS PROJECT.
THEY WERE ENCOURAGED TO DEVELOP THEIR OWN IDEAS AND RECOMMEND THEIR OWN AL THEIR OWN ALTERNATIVES.
UM, AND THIS WAS TO BE INDEPENDENT.
THE PROPOSED PLANS HAVE TO PASS NEPA.
THIS WAS RIGHT FROM THE, THE, UM, THE ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE SCOPE OF WORK.
UM, AND THAT ANY ADDITIONAL IMPACTS INCLUDING, UM, SAFETY AND OTHER ITEMS THAT ARE CONSIDERED BY FEDERAL HIGHWAYS, UH, WOULD NEED TO BE CONSIDERED.
AND SO I THINK WHAT LOCK MEER HAS DONE IS LOOK AT THE ALTERNATIVES AND ALSO THE VIABILITY OF THEIR, THE VIABILITY AND ABILITY FOR THEM TO MOVE THROUGH THE PROCESS, UM, THE NEPA PROCESS AND BE, UM, UH, ALTERNATIVES THAT WOULD BE SUPPORTED BY FEDERAL HIGHWAYS.
AND THEN THE FINAL THING IS ANTICIPATION THAT THIS WOULD NOT TAKE LONGER THAN ABOUT SIX MONTHS TO GET COMPLETE.
AND THEN, UM, THERE'S ALL OF THE SCOPE PASSED THAT ARE BELOW THAT.
I'M, I'M JUST GONNA GO THROUGH THIS AT A HIGH LEVEL.
ALL ITEMS IN TASK ONE, OTHER THAN THE ONGOING MEETINGS AND UPDATES HAVE BEEN COMPLETED.
AND TASK TWO, THE MODELING DATA AND RECOMMEND RECOMMENDED DESIGN CONCEPTS AND TASK TWO HAVE ALL BEEN COMPLETE.
AND TASK THREE, THE MODEL AND OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS TO LEAD TO THE RECOMMENDED
[00:50:01]
ALTERNATIVES FROM LOCK MUELLER, UM, HAVE BEEN COMPLETE.THEY HAVE ALSO EXPANDED THE STUDY AREA BEYOND THE, UM, THE SPANISH WELLS INTERSECTION TO GUMTREE AND THIS MODIFIED PROJECT AREA, BUT ALSO HAVE ADDED THE OTHER INTERSECTIONS DOWNSTREAM, BOTH ON THE BUSINESS ROUTE AND ON THE CROSS ISLAND ROUTE TO SEA PINE CIRCLE.
SO IT'S BEEN COMPLETE, WE DON'T HAVE ALL THE RESULTS ON THAT NEXT SEGMENT, BUT THEY HAVE EXPANDED IT, UM, PAST THREE.
UM, UH, WITH ADDITIONAL, UH, ITEMS HERE, THEY'VE BEEN CONSIDERED ADAPTIVE TRAFFIC SIGNALS.
THEY'VE LOOKED AT PROVIDED YOU MODEL OUTPUTS FROM THE SYNCHRO THAT THEY'VE RUN.
THEY'VE GOT DATA FROM, UH, THE, THIS SIM AT THE LAST MEETING.
THEY'VE LOOKED AT IMPACTS TO THE TCP, UM, AND HAVE PROVIDED YOU FOUR ALTERNATIVES THAT THEY BELIEVE, UH, WERE VIABLE, UH, TO ADVANCE.
THEY'RE NOW MOVING INTO TASK FOUR.
THE CONTRACT WAS SEGMENTED TO TRY TO GET INFORMATION FROM THE MOSS CREEK THROUGH THE GUMTREE AREA BECAUSE THAT'S THE AREA THAT'S SLIGHTLY LARGER THAN WHAT THE, UH, WAS INCLUDED IN THE NEPA PROCESS.
AND SO I THINK THEY PROVIDED THAT INFORMATION CONSISTENT WITH THE DIRECTIVE AND THE, AND THE SCOPE OF WORK THAT WAS IN THE CONTRACT.
UH, THEY'LL CONTINUE ON PAST FOUR TO LOOK AT SOME ADDITIONAL ELEMENTS AND THEN THE DOWNSTREAM IMPACTS, UH, TO THOSE OTHER INTERSECTIONS.
AND THEN TASK FIVE WOULD BE DELIVERY AND PRESENTATION OF THEIR FINAL REPORT AND FINDINGS.
UM, SO I WANTED TO PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION TO MAKE SURE THE COMMITTEE KNEW WHERE WE'RE AT, THE COMMUNITY KNEW WHERE WE'RE AT, UM, THAT WE'RE TRACKING.
NATE AND I ARE TRACKING, UM, THE SCOPE OF WORK AND PROGRESS KIND OF, UH, IN LOCKSTEP ME FROM WHAT COUNCIL AND THE COMMITTEE APPROVED.
UM, AND THEN NATE AND I FROM THE CONTRACT THAT WE'VE EXECUTED FOR THEM TO DO THE WORK.
ANY QUESTIONS ON WHAT I'VE PRESENTED? I DIDN'T MEAN TO GO SO LONG, BUT I THINK THAT'S ALL IMPORTANT INFORMATION TO YOU HAVE ON THE TABLE.
WE'LL GO AHEAD AND STARTED WITH OUR PORTION OF THE PRESENTATION.
UM, JUST SO EVERYBODY'S AWARE OF MEMBERS OF OUR TEAM THAT ARE JOINING US, HERE WE GO.
UM, A LOT OF FAMILIAR FACES, KATE, MICHELLE, CHAD AND LAUREN, YOU ALL KNOW VERY WELL, BUT WE'RE ALSO INTRODUCING A COUPLE NEW TEAM MEMBERS WITH YOU.
JASON NICKEL IS ONE OF OUR STRUCTURAL DEPARTMENT MANAGERS.
HE HELPED US, UH, PERFORM THE ANALYSIS OF THE EXISTING BRIDGE DATA THAT WE'LL BE SPEAKING ABOUT HERE IN A MOMENT.
AND THEN SEAN D***S IS OUR IN-HOUSE, UH, TRANSIT EXPERT AND HE PROVIDED INPUT ON THE MEMORANDUM WE PUT TOGETHER REGARDING THE FEASIBILITY OF TRYING TO MAINTAIN FOUR LANES, UM, WEST OF SQUARE PROBE ATTENDED EVENT.
WE'LL GO OVER THE PROJECT PROGRESS SEAN SPOKE TO, UH, MOST OF THOSE ITEMS WE'RE IN CONCERT WITH THAT.
WE'RE ALSO GOING TO GIVE YOU, UM, UH, SUMMARY OF FINDINGS RELATED TO THE SEISMIC REVIEW.
WE PERFORMED THE MEMO I MENTIONED BEFORE, OUR CURSORY OBSERVATIONS RELATED TO THE SOUTHERN BYPASS ALTERNATIVE AND THEN FINALIZE THE PRESENTATION WITH REMINDING EVERYONE ONCE AGAIN WHERE THE, THE FINAL SCORING MATRIX LANDED WITH THE ALTERNATIVES THAT WE ARE UH, MOVING FORWARD WITH IN OUR STUDY.
UM, THIS SLIDE JUST SHOWS THE ITEMS THAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON SINCE WE LAST MET ON FEBRUARY, I'M SORRY, APRIL 22ND.
ESSENTIALLY, THE ITEMS WE'LL BE SPEAKING ABOUT TODAY AS WELL AS THE ITEMS THAT WE HAD SUBMITTED TO SEAN AS DELIVERABLES ON FRIDAY, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE, UM, THIS PRESENTATION, THE TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FOR TASK 1.3 0.3, THE DRAFT SUMMARY OF FINDINGS MEMO FOR ALTERNATIVE FOUR.
THAT IS THE ULTIMATE DELIVERABLE FOR TASK THREE.
WE WON'T BE SPEAKING TO THAT DIRECTLY AS A PART OF THIS PRESENTATION, UM, AS THAT IS JUST ESSENTIALLY EVERYTHING THAT WE'VE COMPLETED TO DATE AND WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT AT MULTIPLE MEETINGS.
SO WE DID NOT WANT TO BE REDUNDANT WITH THE INFORMATION PROVIDED TODAY.
AND THEN WE'VE ALSO, AS SEAN MENTIONED, WE'VE BEGAN MODELING THE INTERSECTIONS DOWNSTREAM IN THE CROSS ISLAND PARKWAY MOVING FORWARD.
SORRY, NATE, CAN I ASK A QUESTION? THE, UM, I'VE ALWAYS BEEN VERY INTERESTED IN THE MODELING.
UM, THIS A MORE SYNCRO, I DON'T KNOW WHICH ONE'S BETTER, BUT IT WOULD BE, UM, UH, VERY GOOD IF WE CAN ACTUALLY SEE THAT, HUH? I MEAN WE SAW AT ONE POINT IN TIME YOU HAD SORT OF A, UM, YOU DID SHOW US, UH, THE SORT OF THE OVERVIEW, UH, UM, UH, IN A PRESENTATION, BUT REALLY TO HAVE A TOP DOWN VIEW OF, OF THE, THE AREA, UH, BUILT PLANTATION TO MOSS CREEK AND TO SEE WHAT IT DOES TO THE TRAFFIC VOLUME IN WHICH THEY DO IN A LIVE MODELING, UH, KIND OF THING.
CAN YOU DO THAT OR COULD THAT BE DONE IN THE NEXT, UH, NEXT MEETING? CORRECT.
AS A PART OF TASK FOUR WE'LL BE INCLUDING THIS AND MODELING AND
[00:55:01]
I'LL INCLUDE THE ENTIRE PROJECT STUDY AREA.WANTED TO GIVE YOU ALL AN UPDATE ON WHERE WE STAND WITH THE PROJECT.
OVERALL, I WOULD SAY THAT WE'RE RIGHT ABOUT 60% COMPLETE INTO THE OVERALL PROJECT.
WE ARE CURRENTLY WRAPPING UP TASK THREE, THAT'S THE MIDWAY POINT OF THE PROJECT.
AND SINCE WE HAVE BEGAN EFFORTS IN TASK FOUR 60% IS AN ACCURATE ESTIMATE FOR TASK ONE.
AS SEAN MENTIONED, WE ARE ESSENTIALLY COMPLETE NOW THAT WE PROVIDED YOU WITH THE DELIVERABLES ASSOCIATED WITH TASK ONE, WITH JUST A COUPLE MORE MEETINGS THAT WE HAVE OUTLINED IN OUR SCOPE TO YET PROVIDE.
TASK TWO IS EXISTING CONDITIONS IN THE TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL AND WE HAVE COMPLETED THAT.
TASK THREE WAS THE INTERSECTIONS WITHIN THE MODIFIED PROJECT STUDY AREA, UH, WEST OF THE CROSS ISLAND PARKWAY AND GUMTREE ROAD.
THE DELIVERABLE FOR TASK THREE WAS THE, UH, DRAFT SUMMARY OF FINDINGS MEMO THAT WAS SUBMITTED TO YOU ON FRIDAY.
UM, AGAIN, WE WON'T BE SPEAKING TO THAT DIRECTLY, HOWEVER, WHEN WE GET INTO QUESTION AND ANSWERS, IF DURING YOUR REVIEW YOU HAD DO HAVE QUESTIONS, WE'D BE HAPPY TO ADDRESS THOSE.
AND THEN MOVING FORWARD, AFTER WE RECEIVE ANY FEEDBACK FROM THAT SUMMARY FINDINGS MEMO, WE WILL INCORPORATE THOSE AND THEN BE PRESENTING OUR FINDINGS TO MEMBERS OF COUNCIL.
UM, EITHER IN LATE JUNE, NO SORRY, LATE MAY OR EARLY JUNE TENTATIVELY, BUT THAT DATE HAS YET TO BE SET AS FOUR INTERSECTIONS DOWNSTREAM OF CROSS ON PARKWAY.
WE HAVE BEGAN THOSE, UM, BASED ON DIRECTION RECEIVED FROM TOWN STAFF ON MAY 1ST WITH ALTERNATIVE ONE FOR THE REASONS THAT SEAN HAD OUTLINED IN HIS PORTION OF THE DISCUSSIONS TODAY.
THE, WITH THE MODIFIC BILLING MODIFICATIONS BEING THAT IN LIEU OF DUAL AUXILIARY TURN LANES AT SQUIRE OAK ROAD FOR THE EASTBOUND AND LEFT TURN AND SOUTHBOUND RIGHT TURN MOVEMENTS, WE WILL BE SEEKING TO, UM, EVALUATE THE IMPACTS OF THOSE ARE SINGLE TURN LANES AS WELL AS MODIFYING THE LOCATION OF THE MEETING ACCESS INTO CRAZY DRIVE.
THE PURPOSE OF THOSE ARE TO MINIMIZE IMPACTS ALONG THE NORTH SIDE OF WILLIAM HILTON PARKWAY, WEST COAST SQUARE PARK ROAD.
[c. Presentation of Findings - SCDOT Seismic Study Review]
THE TASK FIVE IS JUST A SUMMATION OF EVERYTHING PREPARING A FORMAL TRAFFIC SAFETY AND OPERATIONS REPORT THAT WOULD BE SUBMITTED FOR REVIEW TO COUNCIL AND ULTIMATELY PRESENTATION.SO THAT CONCLUDES THE PROJECT PROGRESS UPDATE.
DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON WHERE THINGS STAND? ANY QUESTIONS? NO.
[b. Update on Committee Requests]
I MOVE FORWARD INTO THE, UM, TASK 0.1 0.8 IN OUR SCOPE THAT, UM, HAS BEEN APPROVED BY THE COMMITTEE AND TOWN COUNCIL WAS ASKING US TO PROVIDE A VERY HIGH LEVEL FIRST YEAR OVERVIEW OF THE FEASIBILITY IF SEISMIC RETRO FITTING OR STRUCTURALLY REHABILITATING THE EXISTING STRUCTURES.UM, WHAT'S FEASIBLE IN OUR OPINION AS COMPARED TO CONSTRUCTING NEW BRIDGES.
AND AGAIN, JUST STRESSING THAT THIS IS JUST A REVIEW OF INFORMATION, NOT FOR US TO DO ANY REDESIGN TO CRITIQUE ANYONE'S CALCULATIONS OR GET INTO FINE DETAILS.
JUST REALLY FOCUS ON TRUTHFULLY THE LIFECYCLE COST ANALYSIS.
UM, IN THE US 2 78 BRIDGE SEISMIC STUDY THAT WAS COMPLETED BY THE DOT AND THEIR DESIGN TEAM, WHICH WAS NOT BY KCI AND UM, I THINK THERE WAS ANOTHER SUB-CONSULTANT THAT ASSISTED THEM.
WE, UM, THAT WAS DATED APRIL OF 2020, SO IT'S ABOUT FOUR YEARS OLD TODAY.
WE RECEIVED A COPY OF THAT ON A FEW WEEKS AGO ON APRIL THE 15TH.
THAT WAS A VERY LENGTHY DOCUMENT, APPROXIMATELY 1800 PAGES IN TOTAL.
UM, THE NARRATIVE, UH, AND SUMMARIES WERE APPROXIMATELY A HUNDRED PAGES WITH THE REMAINING BEING DATA OUTPUTS, VERY DETAILED CALCULATIONS.
UM, BUT AGAIN, AS I MENTIONED, BASED ON OUR SCOPE, WE FOCUSED REALLY ON THE LIFECYCLE COST ANALYSIS AND PROVIDING OUR INPUT, THE LIFE, THE STUDY FOCUSED ON THREE DIFFERENT OPTIONS, UM, EITHER REHABILITATE REHABILITATION AT SEISMIC MUTUAL FITS OR OPTION THREE, WHICH WAS THE NEW LENGTH.
SO A NEW SIX LANE STRUCTURE SIMILAR TO WHAT THE DOT'S PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE WAS.
OPTIONS ONE AND TWO ARE THE REHABILITATIVE OPTIONS.
THEY'RE VERY SIMILAR IN THAT THEY BOTH CONSIDER A NEW EASTBOUND STRUCTURE THAT WOULD PROVIDE IN A TEMPORARY CONDITION, FOUR LANES OF TRAFFIC, TWO LANES IN EACH DIRECTION WHILE REHABILITATIVE EFFORTS ARE BEING DONE ON BRIDGES.
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO IS THAT IN OPTION ONE, BOTH WESTBOUND STRUCTURES FOR MACKEY CREEK AND SKULL CREEK WOULD BE REHABILITATED OR AS AN OPTION TWO, THE WESTBOUND STRUCTURE OVER MACKEY WOULD BE REPLACED.
BUT THE WESTBOUND STRUCTURES OVER SKULL CREEK WOULD BE MODIFIED IN THE MANNER, UH, SIMILAR TO WHAT WAS WHAT WE'LL GO OVER HERE IN OPTION ONE WITHIN THE STUDY.
THEY REALLY FOR THAT, THAT EASTBOUND STRUCTURE THAT I TALK ABOUT, UH, AS A LIFELINE SO THAT TRAFFIC TO FROM THEM CAN BE MAINTAINED DURING REHABILITATION.
UH, THE SEQUENCE OF THEY ASSUMED WAS THAT THE EASTBOUND STRUCTURE, AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, WOULD BE CONSTRUCTED FIRST WHILE
[01:00:01]
THE EXISTING LANES ON THE TWO 70 BRIDGES, UM, REMAINED IN PLACE.ONCE THE NEW EASTBOUND STRUCTURE THAT WOULD WOULD ALLOW TWO LANES, UH, OF TRAVEL IN EACH DIRECTION, THE TRAFFIC WOULD BE MOVED OVER TO THAT TO ALLOW, AGAIN, EQUIVALENT FOUR LANES TO AND FROM THE ISLAND.
AND THEN REHABILITATION EFFORTS CAN BEGIN ON THE EXISTING STRUCTURES.
ONCE THE REHABILITATION EFFORTS ARE COMPLETED, THEN THE, UM, OUN NEW STRUCTURE WOULD BE RECONFIGURED TO ALLOW FOR THREE LANES OF TRAVEL WITH THE SH SHOULDERS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF BREAKDOWN LANE AND INTERIOR SHOULDER.
AND THEN THE REHABILITATIVE REHABILITATED STRUCTURES WOULD ALLOW, WOULD PROVIDE THE THREE LANE IN EACH DIRECTION AS WELL AS THE SHOULDERS.
AND OPTION THREE IS A NEW SIX LANE STRUCTURE, UH, SIMILAR TO WHAT THE DOT'S ALTERNATIVE IS.
THE NEXT FEW SLIDES JUST PROVIDE CROSS-SECTIONAL VIEWS OF WHAT WAS SHOWN IN THE STUDY.
UH, WE DID NOT CREATE THESE, UH, BUT I THOUGHT THAT THEY WOULD BE BENEFICIAL JUST FOR EVERYONE TO GET A FEEL FOR WHAT THEY WERE FROM A CROSS-SECTIONAL VIEW.
OPTIONS ONE TWO, AS I SAID, WERE VERY SIMILAR IN THAT THEY BOTH ASSUMED THIS LIFELINE STRUCTURE.
SO AT THE TOP YOU CAN SEE IN A TEMPORARY CONDITION AT NEW EASTBOUND STRUCTURE WOULD BUILD BUILT WIDE ENOUGH TO ACCOMMODATE TWO LANES IN EACH DIRECTION WHILE THE REHABILITATION EFFORTS ARE TAKING PLACE.
AND THEN ONCE THOSE ARE COMPLETED, THEN YOU CAN SEE AT THE BOTTOM IT WOULD BE ALLOW, THEY WOULD ALLOW THREE LANES OF TRAVEL WITH, UH, SHOULDER WIDTH OPTION ONE OVER MACKEY.
IF YOU RECALL, I I SAID THAT OPTION ONE ASSUMED THAT THE WESTBOUND STRUCTURE OVER MACING WOULD BE REHABILITATED.
UM, AND SO HERE YOU CAN SEE THAT, UM, THE EXISTING CONDITION OF TWO LANE STRUCTURE.
AS WE, UM, MOVE DOWN, IT KIND OF GIVES YOU AN IDEA AS TO WHAT WOULD BE DONE.
YOU CAN SEE THAT IT WOULD BE WIDENED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE ROAD, UH, TO PROVIDE A MULTI-USE PATH AND WIDENED TO THE SOUTH OF THE, THE NEXT LANES AS WELL AS THE, THE SHOULDERS.
SO JUST TO REMIND THE GROUP THAT THIS STUDY WAS COMPLETED IN APRIL OF 2020 AND THE CURRENT DOTS ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDS THAT THAT MULTI-USE BATHROOMS ALONG THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE BRIDGE FOR THE ENTIRETY OF, OF THE, UM, ENTIRETY OF ITS LENGTH.
SO AGAIN, THAT'S JUST DUE TO THE FACT THAT THIS WAS CREATED IN APRIL, 2020.
AND MODIFICATIONS HAVE BEEN DONE OVER THE SKULL CREEK BRIDGES AGAIN IN ONE AND TWO PREMISE BE THE SAME.
THE ILLUSTRATION HERE SHOW PROPOSED FOR THE FIRST SIX SPANS OF THE STRUCTURE.
SO THAT'LL BE STARTING FROM THE WEST END OF THE SCULPTURE BRIDGE IS MOVING EAST.
THE FIRST SIX STRUCTURES THAT THE EASTBOUND LANES WOULD REMAIN BE REMAINED IN PLACE WHERE THE EXISTING WESTBOUND STRUCTURES WOULD BE REMOVED.
AND THEN YOU CAN KIND OF SEE IF YOU BRING, YOU KNOW, LINE STRAIGHT DOWN, YOU CAN SEE WHERE THE WIDENING TAKES PLACE TO ULTIMATELY ALLOW THE THREE LANES, WESTBOUND, SHOULDERS, AND A MULTIUSE PATH SPAN.
YOU CAN SEE IN THE EXISTING CONDITION, THEY'RE VERY CLOSE TOGETHER.
COULD BE JOINED BY CONCRETE, UM, NEW CONCRETE DECK, JOINING THEM AND ALLOWING THE THREE LANES OF TRAVEL ANY, UH, WESTBOUND AND THE MULTI-USE PATH.
OPTION THREE WAS THE NEW SIX LANE BRIDGE.
SO YOU CAN SEE THE BRAKE ON HERE IF YOU JUST IMAGINE THIS COMING UP TO HERE.
SO SEAN WAS DESCRIBING FROM RIGHT TO LEFT, WHICH WOULD BE SOUTH, SOUTH TO NEW NORTH.
YOU HAVE SHOULDER THREE LANES OF TRAVEL, INTERIOR SHOULDERS, THREE LANES OF TRAVEL, AND A UH, SHOULDER ON THE EITHER SIDE.
UM, BEFORE I MOVE FURTHER, I JUST WANNA PAUSE AS EVERYBODY UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY'RE, THE STUDY ASSUMED FOR EACH OPTION MOVE FORWARD THEN.
SO SOME OF THE KEY FINDINGS THAT WE NOTED, THESE ARE NOT OUR OPINIONS AS YOU JUST THINK, WE PULLED OUTTA THE STUDY AS WE WANTED TO BRING EVERYONE'S ATTENTION.
THE EXISTING BRIDGES WERE CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO DESIGN A CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO CURRENT SITE REQUIREMENTS FROM T'S PERSPECTIVE.
SO THEREFORE, ALL EXISTING BRIDGES ARE CONSIDERED INADEQUATE PERSPECTIVE.
THE GRADING FROM THE SITELINK PERSPECTIVE ARE TWO DIFFERENT CRITERIA.
ONE WOULD BE THE FUNCTIONAL EVALUATION EARTHQUAKE OR THE FE.
THAT'S A LOWER MAGNITUDE EARTHQUAKE EVENT, A HIGHER CHANCE OF OCCURRING.
AND THE MOST CONSERVATIVE, UH, DESIGN THRESHOLD WOULD BE THE SAFETY EVALUATION EARTHQUAKE.
THAT'S A HIGHER MAGNITUDE EARTHQUAKE THAT HAS A LOWER CHANCE OF OCCURRING.
UM, NEW BRIDGES CAN BE CONSTRUCTED TO MEET FE, I'M SORRY, SEE REQUIREMENTS.
UM, AND THE ABILITY FOR EXISTING STRUCTURES IS BASED UPON, UM, SOME INFORMATION ON THE SLIDE SHOWING NEXT COUPLE SLIDES.
BUT I DID WANNA NOTE THERE AT THE BOTTOM THAT GIVEN THE CRITICAL NATURE OF THE TWO 70 BRIDGES, THEY'RE CONSIDERED AN OC ONE, AND THAT'S JUST A RATING THAT SAYS
[01:05:01]
THAT ANY EFFORTS MUST BE THE MINIMUM.THEY DO NOTHING, CANNOT, UM, IS NOT AN OPTION.
THEY ALSO LOOKED AT CONDITIONS UNDERNEATH THE, THAT THEY, UH, EXHIBIT A POTENTIAL FOR, UM, ACTION TO OCCUR.
AND THAT'S ESSENTIALLY ALLOWING FOR ROADWAYS TO SETTLE SLIDER, COLLAPSE IF EVENT THAT WAS AT OR ABOVE AN FEE LEVEL TO PLACE.
IN ORDER TO MITIGATE THAT, THE UM, WHAT WOULD BE NEEDED IS ESSENTIALLY BRINGING IT UP TO SSEE LEVELS, AND THAT WOULD REQUIRE ADDITIONAL FOUNDATIONS, EACH OR OTHERS.
AND THE DESIGN TEAM NOTED THAT THE, THE COST THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO BRING THAT UP TO AN SEE LEVEL, NOT ONLY FROM A COST PERSPECTIVE, BUT ALSO, UM, GREATLY INCREASES THE ENVIRONMENTAL DISTURBANCE WITH DOT'S CONCURRENCE, THE DESIGN TEAM MOVES FORWARD IN THEIR STUDY TO ONLY SEE FEE LEVEL.
SO THEREFORE, ANYTHING THAT WE TALKED ABOUT WITH RETROFIT DOES NOT MEET SEE REQUIREMENTS.
UH, WITH THE QUALIFICATIONS, AGAIN, AS I SAID, CAN'T MEET THAT SEE REQUIREMENTS, BUT IN THIS CASE, THE 2 78 BRIDGES WILL NOT BE ABLE TO MEET THAT FE BEST.
AND I THINK MAYBE IF YOU RECALL A COUPLE MEETINGS AGO, UH, THE COUNTY HAD SHARED A STATEMENT THAT THE EXISTING BRIDGES WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO BE SE THE STANDARDS, AND WE WANTED TO GET THE CONFIRMATION AS TO WHAT THAT MEANT.
I THINK THAT'S WHAT THEY WERE REFERRING TO, WAS THAT IT WOULD VARY FROM A COST PERSPECTIVE AND IMPACTS IT WOULD JUST NOT BE, WOULD NOT BE POSSIBLE.
SO THE KEY FINDINGS IN IN THIS STUDY WAS WHAT WE REALLY FOCUSED ON WAS THE LIFECYCLE COST ANALYSIS THEY PUT TOGETHER.
OF COURSE, THIS WAS COMPLETED IN 2020, SO THEY'RE USING 20 $20.
THEY USE AN ANNUAL INFLATION RATE 2%, WHICH AS WE KNOW, THAT'S, UM, PRETTY LOW CONSIDERING WHAT WE'VE BEEN THROUGH THE LAST FOUR YEARS.
THE, UM, AS WHEN THEY'RE MAKING THEIR INPUTS FOR THEIR MODEL TO LIFECYCLE COST ANALYSIS, THEY DID COORDINATE WITH LOCAL CONTRACTORS WHO HAVE EXPERIENCE WITH HEAVY CONSTRUCTION OVER WATERWAYS.
AND THE FEEDBACK THAT THEY RECEIVED FROM THE LOCAL CONTRACTORS IS THAT, UM, IT'S APPROXIMATELY ONE AND A HALF TO TWO TIMES MORE EXPENSIVE TO REHABILITATE EXISTING STRUCTURES AS COMPARED TO BUILDING NEW WHEN YOU'RE OVER WATER.
SO AT THE BOTTOM YOU CAN SEE WHAT THE RESULTS WERE FOR THE THREE OPTIONS.
UM, WE HAVE INITIAL CONSTRUCTION COST, THAT IS, I MIGHT THIS RIGHT DOWN HERE.
SO THAT WOULD BE THE COST OF THE NEW, MANY NEW PORTIONS OF BRIDGES.
WIDENING EXISTING BRIDGES IN OUR MAIN DEMOLITION COSTS.
REHABILITATION OF, UH, THE BRIDGES THAT ARE RETAINED, THE FUTURE CONSTRUCTION COSTS THAT ACCOUNTS FOR, UM, THE REPLACING OF THE REHABILITATED STRUCTURES ONCE THEY, THEIR USEFUL LIVES.
SO OPTION REHABILITATION SAYING THAT, OKAY, MAYBE 130 MILLION ROUGHLY IN THE BEGINNING, BUT WHEN THEY REACHED THEIR USE OF LIFE, THEN YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO PAY 85 MILLION WITH THESE ESTIMATES TO REPLACE USER COST.
THAT WAS A, THEY, UM, UH, INSERT INTO THEIR MODEL.
THIS WOULD INCLUDE TIME LOSS DUE, TRAFFIC BACKUP, ADDITIONAL TIME FOR TRAVELING DES, AND THEN THE MAINTENANCE COSTS WOULD BE ESTIMATED MAINTENANCE FOR EXISTING BRIDGES OR BRIDGES LENGTH.
HERE'S A KEY FINDING THAT WE NOTED WAS TO HAPPEN.
THE COSTS SHOWN ONLY REFLECT REHABILITATION.
IT DOES NOT REFLECT COSTS FOR ANY SEISMIC IMPROVEMENTS.
AND AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, THEY HAVE TO BE MODIFIED FOR IMPROVEMENTS.
IT CAN'T BE, IT CANNOT BE LEFT ALONE.
WITHIN THE STUDY, THEY NOTED THAT THE DESIGN TEAM WAS DIRECTED BY THE DOT, NOT TO PUT TOGETHER NT COSTS, WHETHER WANTS TO DO THAT, IN OUR OPINION, I DON'T THINK THAT THAT WAS FROM NEFARIOUS REASONS.
I THINK RATHER IT'S JUST THEY PROBABLY RAN THROUGH THE LIFE CYCLE PROCESS IN THE BEGINNING AND SEE DELTA ALREADY JUST BASED ON STRUCTURAL REHABILITATION EFFORTS.
AND THEN KNOWING THAT YOUR MILLIONS, TENS OF MILLIONS POTENTIALLY WHAT IT WOULD BE TO, UM, IMPROVE THANKS TO JUST GET TO THE FE LEVEL.
THEY JUST DECIDED TO NOT USE THE RESOURCES TO GET THOSE DEFINED COSTS.
SO AS WE MOVE FORWARD THROUGH THIS PORTION, JUST REMEMBER THAT THESE COSTS DO NOT INCLUDE MILLIONS MORE THAT WOULD NEED TO BRING IT UP TO THE SITE STANDARD, WHICH AREN BE REQUIRED.
SO AGAIN, YOU CAN SEE FROM LEFT TO RIGHT THAT OPTION ONE HAS
[01:10:01]
A LOWER FRONT END COST, BUT BECAUSE YOU'RE RETAINING EXISTING STRUCTURES TO REHABILITATE THEM OVER THE LIFE CYCLE, IT'S GONNA BE MORE EXPENSIVE.OPTION TWO, YOU'RE PUTTING, UH, YOU'RE REPLACING MORE, UH, AT THE FRONT END, SO THAT'S WHY IT'S MORE EXPENSIVE.
AND THEN THE FUTURE CONSTRUCTION COSTS LESS.
SAME ORDER MAGNITUDE ON TIMEFRAME.
OPTION THREE BE A NEW BRIDGE RIGHT OUTTA THE GATE, UM, INITIAL CONSTRUCTION PROCESS HIGHER, WHICH MAKES SENSE, BUT THEN YOU DON'T HAVE AS MUCH THERE NO FUTURE, THERE'S NO WITH THAT.
AND THEN THE MAINTENANCE COST IS MORE, IS MUCH REDUCED.
AND I THINK MY INTERPRETATION OF THIS WAS THAT MAY WONDER WHAT THE DIFFERENCE INANCE, THE STUDY ASSUMED THAT EXISTING BRIDGES HAVE A LOT MORE STEEL AND THOSE ARE PART UNITS OVER TIME VERSUS THIS WOULD BE MORE OF A FULLY CONCRETE STRUCTURE.
THE DESIGN TEAM ALSO WENT THROUGH BENEFITS TO RISK MATRIX ON A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT TOPICS FOR EACH OF THE OPTIONS FOR ONE, TWO, AND THREE, REVIEWED THOSE AND AGREEMENTS AND FINDINGS.
SO THESE ARE OUR, OUR KIND OF OBSERVATIONS AS WE, AS WE CAN PUT.
SO AGAIN, WE DID NOT GET IN AND DO ANY TYPE OF REDESIGN.
WE DIDN'T DO ANY CALCULATIONS JUST FOCUSED ON THE LIFECYCLE COST, LOOKED THEIR METHODOLOGIES.
AND IN SUMMARY GRADE, WE AGREE THAT, UH, FINDINGS VALID AND THEY APPEAR TO FOLLOW STANDARD ENGINEERING PRACTICES.
AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, ONE OF THE KEY THINGS IS THAT WE LOOK AT THESE COSTS, THESE ARE NOT TRUE COSTS BECAUSE THESE DO NOT INCLUDE WHAT BE REQUIRED TO IMPLEMENT BESIDES, UM, SITE IMPROVEMENTS.
OF COURSE IT'S OBVIOUS THAT THEY TAKE LONGER TO DO BECAUSE THEY BOTH REQUIRE THE NEW EASTBOUND STRUCTURE TO ALLOW.
SO THIS WOULD BE A STRUCTURE, EVEN AN OPTION.
THEN ONCE TRAFFIC OVER, THEN IT REHABILITATION HERE WAS THAT, UM, WE LOOK AT THE 60 MONTHS, THAT'S JUST OPTION ONE, BUT DOES NOT INCLUDE TIME,
JUST, JUST CURIOUS, JUST TO ASK THE QUESTION, BUT ON OPTION ONE AND TWO THAT AT 60 MONTHS, DOES THAT INCLUDE THE SEISMIC WORK AS WELL? IT DOESN'T INCLUDE THE COST.
IT DOES NOT INCLUDE THE COSTS.
UM, JASON, THAT'S SOMETHING WE CAN GET BACK TO YOU.
JASON, ARE YOU, JASON, ARE YOU ON THE LINE? I AM, YES.
DO YOU RECALL IF THAT TIMEFRAME FOR OPTIONS WOUNDED TWO, IF THAT INCLUDED? BECAUSE IN THEIR MODEL, THEY, IT DID INCLUDE THE, THE, UM, BASE IMPROVEMENTS.
SO DO YOU KNOW IF THAT INCLUDED THE SCHEDULE? I CAN'T SAY FOR SURE OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD.
WE CAN FOLLOW UP WITH THAT MAYOR IF NEED BE.
AND THEY, THERE, THERE'S A COST THAT YOU, YOU CAN'T INCLUDE AND THAT'S THE A COST TO, UH, ECONOMY.
AND EVERY PLACE THAT THEY'VE REHABBED THE BRIDGE, THEY'VE FOUND THAT THEY HAD TO RECONSTRUCT, UH, OR RESTRICT, UH, TRAFFIC.
SO INSTEAD OF TWO LANES, WE MIGHT BE DOWN TO ONE LANE AND INSTEAD OF AN HOUR, IT MIGHT BE THREE HOURS TO GET ACROSS THE BRIDGE.
AND I, I, I LOOK AT, UH, INTERSTATE 91 OVER, UH, THE DEERFIELD RIVER IN MASSACHUSETTS.
IT WAS DOWN AND THERE WAS NO, NO TRACTOR TRAILERS GOING ACROSS THAT BRIDGE AND THE INTERSTATE BECAUSE THEY HAD TO RESTRICT BECAUSE OF THE VIBRATION OF, OF TWO LANES.
SO YOU HAVE TO ADD INTO THAT, WHICH IS UNKNOWN WHAT IT'S GONNA DO TO OUR ECONOMY.
COUPLE MORE SLIDES RELATED TO THIS.
UM, AND SEAN SPOKE ABOUT THIS.
UM, WHEN WE READ THROUGH IT, IT WAS, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE APPROXIMATE, THEY'RE REACHING 50 YEARS, UH, 50 YEARS OF AGE, SO BEST CASE, APPROXIMATELY ANOTHER 25 TO TO 35 YEARS, UH, REHABILITATED STRUCTURES.
WHEREAS COMPARED NEW, UM, NEW DESIGN PRACTICES AND PROPER MAINTENANCE, UH, A NEW RICH COULD LAST 75 TO A HUNDRED YEARS.
APOLOGIZE, LEMME MOVE THIS DOWN A LITTLE BIT SO I CAN SEE.
SO I KNOW THAT THERE WAS A QUESTION ABOUT, AGAIN, THIS WHOLE, UH, DISCUSSION WAS TO SEE IF IT WAS FEASIBLE.
IF, IF THIS USED SIMPLY FROM A TEMPORARY CONDITION.
AND YOU KNOW, IN OUR OPINION, EVEN IF YOU LOOKED AT OPTION ONE THAT HAD THE MOST OR HAD THE LEAST COST FROM A FRONT END STANDPOINT, AGAIN, THAT COST DOES NOT INCLUDE WHAT THE
[01:15:01]
SEISMIC REQUIREMENT IMPROVEMENTS WOULD BE.AND SO THAT DELTA THAT YOU SEE BETWEEN THE ONE 30 APPROXIMATELY AND THE 170, THAT WOULD DECREASE, UH, SUBSTANTIALLY FROM THE FRONT END.
AND THEN YOU GET INTO, UM, STILL HAVING TO REPLACE THAT AT SOME POINT.
OPTIONS ONE AND TWO, SEAN MENTIONED THIS AS WELL.
YOU PUT THIS ON DIFFERENT, UM, MAINTEN MAINTENANCE SCHEDULES, AND THEN WHENEVER YOU HAVE TO GO BACK AND REPLACE IT AND YOU'RE CAUSING DISRUPTIONS TO THE PUBLIC, AGAIN, WHENEVER YOU HAVE TO REPLACE IT AT WHATEVER TIME IS DEEMED, UH, FEASIBLE TO REPLACE IT.
AND THEN IN SUMMATION, TWO OPTIONS, ONE AND TWO WOULD NEVER BE ABLE TO MEET SEE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS, WHICH IS THE, UH, CURRENT BEST DESIGN PRACTICES.
WHEREAS A NEW STRUCTURE WOULD BE ABLE TO DO THAT, UM, WITH A, A LOWER OVERALL TOTAL LIFECYCLE COST AS WELL AS ON A SHORTER TIMEFRAME.
SO FOR ALL THESE REASONS, WE DO NOT RECOMMEND, UH, THE PURSUIT OF REHABILITATION EFFORTS OF RETROFITS AS COMPARED TO BUILDING IN.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS WITH, WITH THAT, THE NEXT TOPIC WE'D LIKE TO GET INTO IS THE TASK DELIVERABLE, UM, 1.3 0.3, WHICH WAS ASKING US TO PROVIDE OUR PROFESSIONAL OPINION IF THERE WAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAINTAIN FOUR LENGTH SECTION OF WILLIAM HILTON PARKWAY, WEST OF SQUARE OAK ROAD.
AND I'M GOING TO ALLOW MICHELLE MINE OF OUR TEAM TO, UM, GO INTO MORE DETAIL ON THAT.
[d. Presentation of Finding - Technical Report]
GOOD AFTERNOON.AS N MENTIONED, AS PART OF OUR SCOPE, WE ARE TASKED TO PROVIDE A HIGH LEVEL REVIEW OF WHETHER A FOUR LANE SECTION COULD BE MAINTAINED BETWEEN MOSS CREEK AND SQUIRE POPE.
IF ONE OR MORE OF SOME SELECT STRATEGIES WERE IMPLEMENTED, THESE STRATEGIES INCLUDE A SECOND BRIDGE MODIFICATIONS TO THE EXISTING MASS TRANSIT SYSTEM IMPLEMENTATION OF A NEW FERRY SYSTEM AND OR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF A FACILITY USAGE FEE, WHICH IS COMMONLY KNOWN AS CONGESTED PRICE PRICING.
AS A BASIS FOR THIS HIGH LEVEL REVIEW, WE REVISITED THE EXISTING AND FUTURE TRAVEL TIMES ALONG THIS CORRIDOR.
WE USE VIM, WHICH IS A MICRO SIMULATION TOOL IN ORDER TO CALCULATE THE TRAVEL TIMES AS SHOWN.
IT CURRENTLY TAKES ABOUT 19 MINUTES TO TRAVEL EASTBOUND ALONG US 2 78 BETWEEN MOSS CREEK DRIVE AND INDIGO RUN DURING THE A MP GO.
AND THEN ABOUT 21 MINUTES TO TRAVEL IN THE WESTBOUND DIRECTION ALONG TO US 2 78 BETWEEN INDIGO RUN AND MOSS CREEK.
DURING THE PMP HOUR, THE SECTION OF ROAD IS ABOUT 8.2 MILES LONG, SO USING THOSE CALCULATED TRAVEL TIMES, THE SPEED ALONG THIS CORRIDOR IS ABOUT 26 MILES AN HOUR DURING THE A MP HOUR AND 23 MILES AN HOUR DURING THE PM PEAK HOUR, BOTH OF WHICH ARE WELL BELOW THE POSTED SPEED LIMITS OF 45 MILES PER HOUR AND 55.
WE'VE PRESENTED THIS TABLE IN PREVIOUS MEETINGS, AND AS SHOWN, THE 2045 TRAVEL TIMES ARE EXPECTED TO INCREASE BY APPROXIMATELY 36% IN THE EASTBOUND DIRECTION IN THE MORNING, AND APPROXIMATELY 23% IN THE WESTBOUND DIRECTION DURING THE PMP HOUR.
SO IN SUMMARY, WE FOUND THAT THERE'S ALREADY SIGNIFICANT CONGESTION IN THIS AREA.
THIS IS EXPERIENCED BY YOU TODAY AS PART OF YOUR DAILY LIVES, AND IT'S EXPECTED TO BE EVEN WORSE IN 2045 WITH OUR FORECASTED GROWTH.
WE LOOKED AT THE TRAFFIC MODELS AND FOUND THAT THE 2023 EXISTING VOLUMES WOULD NEED TO BE REDUCED BY ABOUT 30% IN ORDER FOR THE CURRENT FOUR LENGTH CONFIGURATION TO OPERATE ACCEPTABLY.
AND THEN THE 2045 TRAFFIC VOLUMES WOULD NEED TO BE REDUCED BY ABOUT 40% IN ORDER FOR THE CURRENT FOUR LENGTH CONFIGURATION TO OPERATE ACCEPTABLY.
UM, CAN I, CAN I ASK YOU A QUESTION? YES.
TO ME, THERE'S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN, UM, TRAFFIC FLOWS ON THE BRIDGES AND TRAFFIC FLOWS ON THE ISLANDS.
UM, UM, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, UM, THE, THE, THE BRIDGES ARE NOT THE PROBLEM.
IT'S THE LIGHTS ON THE, ON THE, ON THE ISLANDS AND BBO HARBOR AND HAVE YOU RUN THE, THE MODELS ASSUMING THAT, UH, ONE LANE IS GOOD FOR 1500 CARS PER HOUR.
SO THREE LANES ON THE BRIDGE WOULD BE GOOD FOR, UM, 4,500 CARS PER HOUR DURING THE PEAK HOURS.
HAVE YOU RUN THAT SCENARIO AT ALL.
AND THEN, SO SEPARATING OUT THE BRIDGES FROM, UM, THE FLOW OF TRAFFIC ON THE ISLANDS COMING ONTO THE ISLANDS, OFF THE ISLANDS, WE RAN THE MODELS BASED ON THE EXISTING LANE CONFIGURATIONS AND THE VOLUMES
[01:20:01]
THAT WE HAVE.AND THEN FROM THERE, AND WE INCLUDED ALL OF THE TRAFFIC SIGNALS BECAUSE ALL OF THOSE PLAY A ROLE IN HOW THE TRAFFIC OPERATES.
AS YOU MENTIONED, THE SIGNALS CAN STOP PEOPLE, SO WE INCLUDED THE ENTIRE AREA AND FROM THERE WE DETERMINED AND BACKTRACK THE TRAFFIC VOLUMES TO SEE AT WHAT POINT DO ALL OF THE INTERSECTIONS AND EVERYTHING START OPERATING ACCEPTABLY.
AND THAT'S HOW WE DETERMINED THIS 30 TO 40% RANGE IN REDUCTION.
SO WE'VE SPOKEN ABOUT A SECOND BRIDGE IN THE PAST.
UH, THE SECOND BRIDGE HAS BEEN DISCUSSED LOCALLY FOR QUITE SOME TIME NOW, AND AS WE'VE DISCUSSED, A SECOND BRIDGE COULD TAKE UP TO 20 YEARS TO CONSTRUCT ONCE ALL OF THE STUDIES AND PLANNING AND DESIGN ARE COMPLETE.
THIS, UH, SECOND BRIDGE HAS NOT BEEN FULLY VETTED OR REALLY EVEN STARTED YET, SO IT WOULD TAKE QUITE SOME TIME TO MOVE THIS FORWARD.
AND AS WE'VE SHOWN IN THE PAST, THE OPERATING CONDITIONS ARE ALREADY CONGESTED TODAY, AND IN 2045, THEY'RE ONLY GOING TO BE WORSE.
SO OUR FOCUS AND OUR SCOPE WAS TO MITIGATE THE EXISTING AND FORECASTED CONDITIONS.
AND AS AGAIN, WE'VE SHOWN THERE'S GONNA BE A LOT OF CONGESTIONS.
SO IT IS OUR OPINION THAT A SIX LANE SECTION IS NEEDED INDEPENDENTLY OF A SECOND BRIDGE.
WE ALSO LOOKED INTO WHETHER ANY MODIFICATIONS TO THE EXISTING TRANSIT SYSTEM COULD BE IMPLEMENTED IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN A FOUR LANE SECTION ALONG US 2 78 BETWEEN MOSS CREEK AND SQUIRE PULP.
THERE ARE SEVERAL TRANSIT SYSTEMS CURRENTLY PROVIDED, INCLUDING THE PALMETTO BREEZE, BREEZE TROLLEY, WHICH IS A SEASONAL SERVICE, AND ON-DEMAND VAN SERVICE AND A SHUTTLE FOR BEACH PARKING.
BASED ON THE DATA THAT WE HAVE, WE FOUND THAT TRANSIT ACCOUNTS WERE SMALL PORTION OF THE TOTAL REGIONAL TRIPS.
AND IN ORDER FOR THE TRANSIT SYSTEM TO BE MORE EFFECTIVE, IT WOULD NEED TO BE MUCH MORE ROBUST.
THIS INCLUDES INCREASING THE NUMBER OF DAYS PER YEAR THAT THE SERVICE RUNS, AS WELL AS THE NUMBER OF TIMES PER DAY THAT EACH SERVICE RUNS.
WE ALSO FOUND THAT AS A 2021 TRANSIT ONLY ACCOUNTED FOR 1% OF THE REGIONAL MODE SHARE MODE SHARE INCLUDES TRIPS MADE BY PASSENGER VEHICLES, PEDESTRIANS, TRANSIT, AND MORE.
SO IT'S CLEAR THAT IF TRANSIT ONLY ACCOUNTS FOR 1% IN THIS AREA, THAT IT IS NOT HIGHLY UTILIZED AND IT WOULD NEED TO GROW EXPONENTIALLY.
IN ORDER TO REACH THAT 30 TO 40% REDUCTION IN TRAFFIC NEEDED TO MAINTAIN A FOUR LANE SECTION.
WE LOOKED INTO A FERRY SYSTEM AS WELL AS THE FACILITY USAGE FEE SIMILAR TO THE SECOND BRIDGE, TO OUR KNOWLEDGE, THERE'S BEEN NO FORMAL STUDIES OF A HIGH-SPEED FERRY SYSTEM THAT HAVE BEEN INITIATED.
THEREFORE, IT'S OUR OPINION THAT IT COULD TAKE BETWEEN 10 TO 15 YEARS FOR A HIGH-SPEED FERRY SYSTEM TO BE FULLY OPERATIONAL.
AND THEN EVEN STILL, IF IN ONE FERRY SYSTEM COULD BE IMPLEMENTED, IT'S HIGHLY UNLIKELY THAT THE RESULTING REDUCTION IN TRAFFIC WOULD ALLOW FOR A FOUR LANE SECTION.
AND AGAIN, WE'RE LOOKING FOR BETWEEN A 30 TO 40% REDUCTION IN TRAFFIC.
NOW FOR THE FACILITY USAGE FEE, SOUTH CAROLINA STATE LAW CURRENTLY PROHIBITS TOLLS OR FEES FROM BEING IMPLEMENTED ON ANY EXISTING ROADS.
ONLY NEW ROADS CAN INSTATE FEES AND TOLLS.
THAT BEING SAID, IF A FACILITY SUCH FEE COULD BE IMPLEMENTED, IMPLEMENTED, THE FEE WOULD LARGELY IMPACT COMMUTERS, NOT NECESSARILY TOURIST COMMUTERS LARGELY ENTER THE TRAFFIC FOR WORK AND ACCOUNT FOR THE MAJORITY OF TRAFFIC DURING OUR AM AND P AND PEAK HOURS WHERE WE SEE MOST OF THE CONGESTION.
BUT AGAIN, EVEN STILL, IF A FACILITY USAGE FEE OR CONGESTION PRICING COULD BE IMPLEMENTED, IT IS STILL HIGHLY UNLIKELY THAT THE RESULTING REDUCTION IN TRAFFIC WOULD ALLOW FOR A FOUR LANE SECTION TO BE MAINTAINED.
SO OVERALL, TO KIND OF RECAP EVERYTHING THAT WE LOOKED AT IN THE FOUR LANE VIABILITY MEMO, WE FOUND THAT IN ORDER FOR A FOUR LANE SECTION TO OPERATE ACCEPTABLY, THE TOTAL REDUCTION IN VEHICLES WITHIN THIS AREA WOULD NEED TO BE BETWEEN 30 TO 40%.
WHILE IMPLEMENTING ALL OF THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF STRATEGIES WOULD CERTAINLY HELP SLOW FUTURE TRAFFIC GROWTH AND SHOULD STILL BE CONSIDERED.
IT IS OUR OPINION THAT EVEN IF ALL OF THESE STRATEGIES ARE IMPLEMENTED, THE REDUCTION IN VEHICLES WOULD NOT REACH 30%.
[01:25:01]
SPEAKING TO WHAT NATE HAS SPOKEN ABOUT BEFOREHAND, THESE STRATEGIES WOULD STILL NOT ADDRESS THE STRUCTURAL ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH THE EXISTING BRIDGES.THEREFORE, IT'S OUR OPINION THAT ALL OF THESE STRATEGIES SHOULD BE CONSIDERED AS VIABLE ALTERNATIVES, BUT THEY WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO SOLELY ADDRESS TRAFFIC CONGESTION OR MOBILITY RELATED CONCERNS ALONG THIS CORRIDOR IN ORDER TO ALLOW FOR A FOUR LANE SECTION TO BE MAINTAINED.
SO BEFORE WE GET INTO THE NEXT SECTION, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? GO AHEAD, MICHELLE.
[e. Review of Overall Evaluation Matrix for 4 Alternatives]
OKAY.[f. Observations Related to Southern "Bypass" Alternative]
SO AS NATE MENTIONED EARLIER, WE AS NOT PART OF OUR SCOPE, BUT WE LOOKED INTO THE SOUTHERN BYPASS AS A CURSORY OVERVIEW.AND FROM A TRAFFIC PERSPECTIVE, IT WAS DISCUSSED IN THE DECEMBER 12TH COMMITTEE MEETING THAT ONE OF THE BIGGEST PRIORITIES WAS TO LIMIT RIGHT OF WAY, WHETHER IT'S PUBLIC OR PRIVATE.
AND THAT WAS THE GUIDANCE THAT WAS GIVEN TO US.
WHEN WE ARE SELECTING OUR POTENTIAL ALTERNATIVE ALTERNATIVES THAT WE'VE ALREADY PRESENTED TO YOU, THIS TOPIC WAS AGAIN, REEMPHASIZED AT THE MARCH 27TH MEETING, COMMITTEE MEETING.
SO LOOKING AT THIS VERY HIGH LEVEL FROM A TRAFFIC PERSPECTIVE, THE SOUTHERN BYPASS IS NOT ANTICIPATED TO IMPROVE THE OPERATING CONDITIONS AT GUMTREE ROAD.
THAT'S BECAUSE THERE'S NO EFFECTIVE WAY TO BYPASS GUMTREE.
OUR FOURTH ALTERNATIVE, WHICH IS THE ELEVATED BYPASS, DOES BYPASS GUMTREE.
SO THAT'S A KEY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN OUR ALTERNATIVE FOUR AND THIS SOUTHERN BYPASS.
WE ALSO FOUND THAT WHILE THE BYPASS HAS THE OPPORTUNITY TO REMOVE MOST OF THE THROUGH TRAFFIC FROM US 2 78, IF THE BYPASS REMAINS THAT GRADE, THEN IT WILL STILL NEED TO CROSS SEVERAL STREETS AS SHOWN BELOW, WHICH REDUCES THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE BYPASS.
SO WE'VE CIRCLED A FEW AREAS HERE IN THIS IMAGE, WHICH CALLS OUT THE DIFFERENT LOCATIONS OF THE LOCAL ROADS THAT THE BYPASS WILL STILL NEED TO PASS IF IT'S AT GRADE.
AND THAT MEANS THE INTERSECTIONS WOULD LIKELY BE STOP CONTROLLED.
SO SIMILAR TO THE FAILING CONDITIONS WE HAVE AT SPANISH WELLS AND SQUIRE POPE, THOSE WILL LIKELY NOT GO AWAY BECAUSE THE TRAFFIC WILL STILL BE AT GRADE AND WILL STILL NEED TO PASS.
YOU COULD POTENTIALLY ELEVATE IT.
BUT THEN THAT BRINGS US TO OUR ALTERNA OF FOUR, WHICH WE HAVE ALREADY PROPOSED.
ONE REMAINING ITEM HERE IS THE CONNECTION TO THE CROSS ISLAND PARKWAY AS SHOWN OVER HERE, THE CONNECTION WOULD ACTUALLY NEED TO LOCATE FURTHER EAST AND IT WOULD LIKELY REQUIRE GRADE SEPARATION EVEN STILL.
CAN I, UM, ADD SOMETHING TO THIS? UM, THANK YOU FOR REALLY LOOKING AT THIS, UM, ON GRADE BYPASS.
SO, UM, WE'VE WORKED ON A, UH, WHAT WE CALL IT NEW AND IMPROVED VERSION
WOULD YOU LIKE TO WAIT TILL AFTER, UM, THEY WEIGH IN WITH THEIR INPUT
UM, CHAD, OUR ENVIRONMENTAL LEAD, AND THEN LAUREN, THEY'RE GOING TO, UM, FOLLOW THIS TRAFFIC PERSPECTIVE AND THEY'RE GONNA PROVIDE THEIR ENVIRONMENTAL AND ROADWAY THOUGHTS.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO WAIT, I'LL WAIT FOR THAT AFTERNOON.
LAUREN, WOULD YOU LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND, UH, YES.
AS, UH, AS MICHELLE, MICHELLE MENTIONED, WE, WE'VE LOOKED AT THIS, UH, AT A HIGH LEVEL, AND AS YOU CAN SEE THERE, WE IDENTIFIED, UM, THE EXISTING PARCELS, BOTH, UH, PUBLICLY OWNED AND PRIVATELY OWNED.
AND WHERE WE FELT, UH, THERE WOULD BE FULL TAKES ACCESS CONCERNS, UH, OF THAT NATURE AS WELL AS, UH, AT THE, UH, JARVIS CREEK AREA THERE.
OBVIOUSLY, YOU CAN'T GO AT GRAVE THROUGH JARVIS CREEK, SO THERE WOULD NEED TO BE A BRIDGE THERE.
AND TO TIE DIRECTLY TO THE CROSS ISLAND, YOU WOULD HAVE TO, UH, HAVE THAT BRIDGE EXTEND OVER THE EXISTING, UH, WILLIAM HILTON PARKWAY TO TIE DIRECTLY INTO THE CROSS ISLAND AS THE, THE CONCEPT IS, UH, IS DESIGNED TO DO SO.
UH, AT, FROM THAT POINT OF VIEW, NATE, YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.
WE'VE DONE A, A CURSORY EVALUATION
[01:30:01]
HERE FROM A FEASIBILITY PERSPECTIVE.THERE'S JUST SOME CONCERNS THAT WOULD NEED TO BE ADDRESSED.
UM, AS FAR AS ACTUAL HORIZONTAL ALIGNMENT, MAKING SURE YOU'RE MEETING DESIGN SPEEDS WITH PROPER CURVE RADII THAT, AND MORE PARTICULARLY THE TIE-INS AT EACH END AT THE WEST END.
IF YOU'RE, IF YOU'RE AT GRADE THERE, THEN YOU KIND OF HAVE THE SAME SITUATION YOU HAVE NOW ON THE PARKWAY.
SO IT REALLY, TO MAKE IT FUNCTION WELL AS A BYPASS, YOU'D HAVE TO ELEVATE AND, UH, HAVE A FLYOVER TO BE ABLE TO TIE BACK IN.
AND THEN AT, AS I MENTIONED AT THE EAST END, YOU REALLY NEED TO BE ELEVATED TO TIE DIRECTLY INTO THE, UH, CROSS ISLAND AS WELL AS GOING OVER THE CREEK AREA AND, AND SPANISH WELLS.
AND THEN YOU DO HAVE THE ISSUE OF THE LOCAL ACCESS THROUGH THAT AREA.
THERE ARE SEVERAL PRIVATE PROPERTIES THAT WOULD BE CUT OFF IF THIS WAS A TRUE BYPASS WITH NO LOCAL ACCESS.
SO YOU'D EITHER HAVE TO BRIDGE OVER THOSE, UH, ACCESS POINTS, OR YOU'D HAVE TO HAVE AT GRADE ACCESS THROUGH THERE, LOOKING AT RIGHT OF WAY.
JUST A ROUGH ESTIMATE WOULD BE SIX ACRES OF ADDITIONAL RIGHT OF WAY FOR THIS.
AND THEN BY, BY DOING THIS BYPASS, YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO POTENTIALLY REDUCE THE RIGHT OF WAY TAKINGS ALONG THIS SECTION OF THE EXISTING PARKWAY THAT IS IN THE, UH, THE STATE OPTION, BUT THAT IS ONLY 1.2 ACRES.
WE WENT THROUGH THEIR DRAWING AND, AND ADDED ALL THE, UH, TAKINGS UP THROUGH THIS SECTION.
SO IT WOULD BE A NET INCREASE IN, IN RIGHT AWAY THROUGH THE STONY COMMUNITY AS WELL AS THE ADDITIONAL PARSONS THAT WOULD BE IMPACTED.
UH, AND THEN, UH, THE THIRD POINT THERE AS FAR AS THE RELOCATIONS, AND CHAD WILL GET INTO A LITTLE BIT MORE OF THAT ON, HE, UH, REVIEWS THE ENVIRONMENTAL MOVE ON TO, UH, CHAD, THEN TO KINDA GIVE THE OVERVIEW OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL.
UH, NATE, YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND GO PAST THIS SLIDE.
WE'LL, I JUST WANTED TO HERE IN CASE WE NEED A QUICK REFERENCE.
SO FROM AN ENVIRONMENTAL PERSPECTIVE, UH, A COUPLE QUALIFIERS WE NEED TO KEEP IN MIND HERE BEFORE WE GET THROUGH THIS TABLE.
UH, FIRST, UH, WHEN, WHEN LOOKING AT POTENTIAL IMPACTS FROM A HIGH LEVEL LIKE WE ARE RIGHT NOW AND THE RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH INCORPORATION INTO SC DOT'S PROJECT, IT'S IMPORTANT TO RECOGNIZE THAT THE CONCEPTUAL IMPACTS ARE, UH, WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT HERE, PLUS SC DOT'S RECOMMENDED PREFERRED ALTERNATIVES.
SO THAT'S WHY IT'S IMPORTANT TO GIVE A ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TO SC DOT'S, UH, PREVIOUS FINDINGS AND CONSIDERATIONS AND WHY THAT IS THE, THE FIRST COLUMN HERE IN THIS TABLE.
UM, IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT TO RECOGNIZE THAT NEPA AND SEDT DID ACKNOWLEDGE THIS IN THEIR, IN THEIR LETTER.
AND, AND LIKE NATE SAID AT THE BEGINNING, HIS PRESENTATION, WE DID NOT RECEIVE A COPY OF THAT LETTER BEFORE THIS PRESENTATION AND THIS EVALUATION WAS PULLED TOGETHER.
SO, UM, BUT THE IMPORTANT THING TO REMEMBER IS THAT NEPA, INCLUDING SECTION 1 0 6 AND SECTION FOUR F DOES NOT CONSIDER PUBLIC AND, UH, PRIVATELY OWNED PROPERTIES DIFFERENTLY.
IT'S ONLY CONCERNED ABOUT HOW A PROJECT AFFECTS A SPECIFIC RESOURCE.
AND YOU CAN TELL, UH, AND I GATHERED IT JUST IN MY QUICK LOOK AT SE DTS, UH, LETTER AT THE SAME TIME AS YOU GUYS, UH, SAW IT.
UM, THEY DID REALLY FOCUS IN ON THE SECTION FOUR F ASPECTS OF EACH ALTERNATIVE.
AND, YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHY SECTION FOUR F AND SECTION ONE OF THE SIX ARE AT THE TOP OF MY, UM, MY TABLE HERE.
UH, SECTION 1 0 6 FEEDS INTO SECTION FOUR F.
SECTION 1 0 6 AGAIN IS REFERRING TO CULTURAL RESOURCE IMPACTS.
THOSE ARE, UH, PROPERTIES THAT ARE LISTED OR ELIGIBLE FOR THE NATIONAL REGISTER, BOTH ABOVE GROUND STRUCTURES, BRIDGES, AND ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES.
SO, UH, SCTS PREVIOUS FINDINGS, UH, FROM A 1 0 6 STANDPOINT WAS AN ADVERSE EFFECT, BUT DUE TO IMPACTS TO ONE ARCHEOLOGICAL SITE, UH, IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THEY'VE DETERMINED THEY BE IN FEDERAL HIGHWAY DETERMINED THERE WAS A NO ADVERSE EFFECT FOR THE STONE ETCP, UM, THE CONSTRAINTS OR ISSUES WE IDENTIFIED WITH THE SOUTHERN BYPASS.
[01:35:01]
AND THIS HAS ALREADY BEEN MENTIONED, THERE IS A GREATER IMPACT TO THE STONE ETCP, UH, AND THEN IF WE DO MOVE IN THAT TIE IN POINT FURTHER TO THE EAST TO CROSS ISLAND PARKWAY, YOU ARE NOW IMPACTING ANOTHER CULTURAL RESOURCE.AND THAT'S THE HONEY HORN PLANTATION, WHICH WAS PREVIOUSLY IDENTIFIED AS ELIGIBLE FOR THE NATIONAL REGISTER.
UM, OVERALL RISK ASSOCIATED WITH THIS, THE, THE GREATER IMPACTS THE STONY TCP ARE LIKELY TO ELEVATE THE SECTION 1 0 6 FINDING FROM A NO ADVERSE EFFECT TO AN ADVERSE EFFECT.
AND THEN YOU'RE ALSO LIKELY TO, UH, HAVE A NEW ADVERSE EFFECT FOR THE ADV, FOR THE HONEY HORN PLANTATION.
AND THAT WILL REQUIRE AN AMENDMENT TO THE MEMORANDUM AGREEMENT THAT S-C-D-O-T HAS ALREADY, UH, PREPARED AND EXECUTED WITH, OR, UH, THAT FEDERAL HIGHWAY HAS EXECUTED WITH THE STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER, UH, FROM A SECTION FOUR F STANDPOINT.
SO AGAIN, THESE ARE YOUR PARKS, PUBLICLY OWNED PARKS, UM, WILDLIFE REFUGES, AND AGAIN, YOUR CULTURAL RESOURCES.
SO, UH, A DI MINIMUS IMPACT FINDING WAS ISSUED, OR IS CON, IT'S NOT FORMALLY ISSUED YET DURING THE FINAL STAGES OF ISSUING IT AFTER THE EA GETS SIGNED.
UH, BUT DI MINIMUS IMPACT FOR STONY TCP AND OLD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PARK, THAT'S JUST, UH, FEDERAL HIGHWAY ACKNOWLEDGING THAT WHILE THERE IS A CONVERSION, IF YOU REMEMBER FROM LAST TIME WE TALKED ABOUT A CONVERSION OR A USE BEING TRANSFERRING A FOUR F PROPERTY FROM, UH, NON TRANSPORTATION USE TO A TRANSPORTATION USE.
UH, BUT A DI MINIMUS SAYS YES, THERE IS THAT CONVERSION, BUT IT'S SO MINIMAL, IT'S NOT REALLY AFFECTING THE OVERALL QUALITIES OF THE RESOURCE.
UM, SO THERE'S DI MINIMUS FOR TCP STONY AND, OR EXCUSE ME, STONY, TCP AND THEN OLD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PARK.
HONEY HORN OBVIOUSLY FELL OUT OF THE STUDY AREA, SO IT WASN'T CONSIDERED, UH, WITH ADDITIONAL USE.
SO THERE'S MORE, YOU KNOW, LAUREN SAID SIX ACRES OF ADDITIONAL RIGHT OF WAY.
THAT'S NOT, AGAIN, PUBLIC VERSUS PRIVATE DOES NOT MATTER.
IT'S TRANSPORTATION USE AND NON TRANSPORTATION USE.
WE HAVE MORE CONVERSION FROM A NON TRANSPORTATION USE OR TRANSPORTATION USE THAT IS GOING, AND THIS IS BOTH FOR STONY TCP TO OLD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PARK AND HONEY HOR, THERE'S GONNA BE NEW OR CONVERSION THAT'S GONNA REQUIRE, UH, INDIVIDUAL FOUR F EVALUATION.
YOU SAW THAT IN S-C-D-O-T, THEY CALLED IT A FULL FOUR F EVALUATION.
INDIVIDUALS REALLY, IF YOU GO LOOK AT THE LAW, IT'S REALLY CALLED AN INDIVIDUAL FOUR F EVALUATION.
AND THIS ALL ADDS UP TO ADDITIONAL TIME AND COST, UH, NEEDED TO COMPLETE THAT, UH, INDIVIDUAL EVALUATION.
BUT THE IMPORTANT THING HERE TO NOTE, AND THIS IS WHAT'S REPRESENTED BY THOSE RED AND THE EQUAL SIGN, IS YOU COULD SPEND THE MONEY.
IF S-E-D-O-T TODAY SAID, YES, THIS MAKES SENSE, WE'LL ADD IT INTO OUR PROJECT, UM, WHICH I DON'T BELIEVE FEDERAL HIGHWAY WOULD FIND FEASIBLE, I THINK THEY WOULD, WOULD KICK IT OUT.
BUT, UM, EVEN IF THEY DID, UM, YOU WOULD GO THROUGH THE FOUR F EVALUATION AND MAY COME TO A CONCLUSION THAT THERE IS AN ALTERNATIVE THAT MINIMIZES IMPACTS TO THE FOUR F RESOURCE, THEREFORE YOU'VE GOTTA GO FORWARD WITH THE ONE THAT, UH, HAS LESS IMPACTS.
SO I THINK, UH, SEAN SAID IT TOWARDS THE BEGINNING OF THIS, OF THIS, UH, UH, MEETING, THAT THERE IS AN ORDER OF EVALUATION THAT FEDERAL HIGHWAY CONSIDERS IT'S AVOIDANCE, MINIMIZATION AND MITIGATION.
AND SO, UH, THERE ISN'T A CLEAR AVOIDANCE ALTERNATIVE TO THESE FOUR F RESOURCES.
SO THEN YOU START LOOKING AT MINIMIZING, WELL, WHAT CDOT HAS ON THE TABLE WITH SOME POSSIBLE TWEAKS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, COULD BE VIEWED AS A MINIMIZATION ALTERNATIVE AND STILL MEET THE OVERALL PURPOSE AND NEED OF THE PROJECT.
SO THAT WOULD BE ADVANCED OVER A SOUTHERN BYPASS, JUST 'CAUSE THE SOUTHERN BYPASS HAS MORE IMPACTS FROM AN EJ COMMUNITY IMPACT STANDPOINT.
UH, EJ BEING ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE.
UH, OF COURSE WE HAVE THE, THE STONY COMMUNITY, UH, THE EA THAT HAS BEEN PRODUCED BY S-C-D-O-T DETERMINED THERE, THERE ARE, UM, THE PROJECT EFFECTS ARE NOT DISPROPORTIONATELY HIGH IN ADVERSE COMPARED TO NON EJ AREAS.
[01:40:01]
IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE SOUTHERN BYPASS, YOU HAVE TO GIVE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TO THAT.THERE'S GOING TO BE A NEED FOR ADDITIONAL OUTREACH AND ENGAGEMENT, UH, WITH THE COMMUNITY BECAUSE OF THESE POTENTIAL IMPACTS, UH, MODIFICATIONS TO, UH, THE BENEFITS AND BURDENS ANALYSIS THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN COMPLETED.
AND THEN ALSO WITH A NEW ALIGNMENT OFFSET FROM EXISTING US 2 78, THERE IS NOISE CONSIDERATIONS THAT NEED TO BE CONSIDERED.
UM, AS FAR AS THE OVERALL RISK.
NEW TERRAIN ROUTE INTRODUCES PRUDENTIAL ADDED BENEFITS AND BURDENS TO EVALUATE THAT WILL TAKE TIME TO, UH, FLESH OUT.
UH, THERE IS THE POTENTIAL FOR PUSHBACK OR UNACCEPTANCE BY THE, UH, COMMUNITY, THE DEFECTIVE COMMUNITY.
THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT'D HAVE TO BE ASSESSED THROUGH A DETAILED OUTREACH EFFORT.
AND THEN, OF COURSE, UH, ADDED MITIGATION COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH, UH, THE IMPACTS FROM AN ECOLOGICAL STANDPOINT.
UM, THE EA IDENTIFIED 22.9 ACRES OF WETLANDS AND STREAMS BEING IMPACTED AND, UH, 145 ACRES OF FLOOD PLAIN.
UH, AND THEN AS FAR AS THREATEN ENDANGERED SPECIES, THEY DETERMINED, UH, THERE WAS A MAY EFFECT NOT LIKELY TO ADVERSELY EFFECT FOR LISTED THREATEN ENDANGERED SPECIES.
THE SOUTHERN BYPASS DOES CREATE, THERE'S, THERE'S PORTIONS OF IT THAT WOULD CREATE SEGMENTED FORESTED BLOCKS, WHICH IS SOMETHING THAT US FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE WOULD LIKELY BE CONCERNED WITH.
UM, THERE'S ADDITIONALLY, UH, ABOUT, UH, SEVEN TENTHS OF AN ACRE OF ADDITIONAL NWI WETLAND IMPACT.
NWI WETLANDS ARE NOT FIELD VERIFIED WETLANDS, THEY'RE JUST LINES ON A MAP THAT, UH, US FISH AND WILDLIFE MAINTAINS THAT SAYS THERE COULD BE SOMETHING HERE.
THEY STILL NEED TO BE FIELD VERIFIED.
UH, AND THEN THERE'S ADDITIONALLY 140 LINEAR FEET OF STREAM IMPACT AND A ONE ACRE OF, UH, ADDITIONAL FLOOD POINT IMPACT.
I BELIEVE THAT THESE ADDITIONAL ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS, ESPECIALLY TO SEGMENTATION OF A FORESTED BLOCK, COULD CREATE CONCERNS, UH, FROM REGULATORY AGENCIES.
UM, AND THEN, UH, AND IT MAY ACTUALLY CHANGE THE FINDING FROM US FISH AND WILDLIFE ON THE THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES, UH, FRONT.
WE WOULDN'T KNOW THAT UNTIL YOU ACTUALLY COORDINATE WITH THE US FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE.
BUT BASED ON MY PAST EXPERIENCE, UH, THAT IS SOMETHING THAT, THAT THEY WOULD, UH, PROBABLY LOOK AT VERY HEAVILY, AND THERE MAY BE ADDED MITIGATION COSTS BECAUSE OF THAT.
AND FOR THOSE REASONS, WE JUST, WE DON'T FIND THAT THE SOUTHERN BYPASS WOULD BE A REASONABLE, PRUDENT ALTERNATIVE THAT THE S-C-D-O-T WOULD ADOPT AND, UH, FEDERAL HIGHWAY WOULD ACCEPT.
IT WOULD, UH, UH, HAVE TOO MANY RED FLAGS, TOO MUCH TIME AND COST ADDED TO IT, UH, JUST FROM THE REGULATORY STANDPOINT AND THE RESOURCE IMPACTS.
SO I'LL TURN IT BACK OVER TO, I BELIEVE, IS IT GOING BACK TO YOU, NATE? YEAH, WE'LL, YES.
WE'LL JUST PAUSE HERE TO SEE IF ANYBODY, ANY QUESTIONS WITH THE ANALYSIS, THE OVERVIEW THAT WE HAD CONDUCTED.
UM, SO, UH, I WANNA JUST TAKE A STEP BACK BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, IF YOU, IF YOU REALLY THINK ABOUT WHAT WE ARE WE'RE DOING IS, UH, WE'RE DEALING WITH OUR COMMUNITY AND, UH, HOW TO MAKE THE TRAFFIC FLOW, UM, EASIER, UM, WITH THE LEAST IMPACT ON ENVIRONMENT AND PEOPLE AND SO ON, SO FORTH.
UH, AND WHEN YOU, UH, WHEN YOU TAKE A STEP BACK, YOU REALLY SEE THAT THE, THE CRITICAL, UH, ELEMENTS IN THIS ARE THESE TRAFFIC LIGHTS, YOU KNOW, THAT BASICALLY STOP THE TRAFFIC AS IT COMES IN AND OUT OF, OF
SO, UM, I HAVE TO GIVE CREDIT TO STEVE BAER, WHO'S WORKED QUITE HARD ON, ON, UH, LOOKING AT THIS, UM, THIS HORIZONTAL BYPASS AND, UH, AND CIRCUMVENTS THE TRAFFIC LIGHTS.
AND SO, UM, THE, THE, THE NEW AND IMPROVED, UH, VERSION THAT WE HAVE, UM, LOOKED AT, AND I, YOU HAVE A COPY OF YOU ON THE TABLE IN FRONT OF YOU, REALLY IS CLOSER TO, TO 2 78 ON THE SOUTH SIDE IS PART PARTIALLY ELEVATED, UM, OVER CHAMBERLAIN AND TIES INTO THE, UM, INTO THE CROSS ISLAND PARKWAY.
SO I, YOU KNOW, I REALLY LIKE, I KNOW THERE'S
[01:45:01]
SOME ANIMOSITY ON THE TABLE, BUT I'D REALLY LIKE EVERYONE TO OPEN UP TO THIS ALTERNATIVE 'CAUSE UM, IT HAS LESS ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT, LESS IMPACT ON THE WETLANDS.UM, AND I THINK THAT IT'S, IT DESERVES A GOOD LOOK.
IF IT DOESN'T WORK, IT DOESN'T WORK.
BUT, YOU KNOW, WE ARE HERE, WE ARE ALL, UH, BRIGHT PEOPLE, UH, ON THE TABLE AND IN THE ROOM.
YOU KNOW, AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE WANT TO FIND A SOLUTION THAT WORKS, THAT HAS A, A, A LITTLE IMPACT, AS LITTLE IMPACT AS POSSIBLE IN STONY, WHICH THIS DOES, UH, AND BEYOND STONY, UM, AND HAS A LITTLE IMPACT IN DISRUPTION, UH, CONSTRUCTION AND SO ON AND SO FORTH.
SO, AND I KNOW THAT THERE ARE ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS, ESPECIALLY IF YOU LOOK AT THE VERSION THAT'S PRESENTED HERE, UM, IN THESE DRAWINGS.
BUT THIS VERSION IS DIFFERENT.
AND, UH, NATE, I WILL SEND YOU A COPY OF THESE THINGS SO YOU CAN ALSO DISTRIBUTE TO YOUR TEAM, UM, AND TO REALLY CONSIDER IT, HUH? UM, ASK YOURSELF THE QUESTION, WHAT IS IMPORTANT? IT'S VISUAL IMPACTS, IT'S TRAFFIC FLOW, IT'S COMMUNITY, IT'S, UH, WE ARE ALL KEEN TO HAVE AS LITTLE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT AS POSSIBLE.
AND WITH THIS NEW AND IMPROVED VERSION, I THINK WE, WE REACHED THAT CONCLUSION.
SO THAT IS WHY, UH, UH, ALAN, I'M, I'M SORT OF VERY KEEN TO, TO NOT JUST HAVE IT CONSIDERED, BUT TO ALSO HAVE IT ACTUALLY, UM, UH, EVALUATED BY AND BY, THANK YOU.
YOU, TO START, YOU'RE LOOKING AT AN EPA STUDY FIVE, ANY NEW PROPOSAL LIKE THIS STARTS OUT AT, AT FIVE TO SEVEN YEARS, WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO GO THROUGH THAT.
YOU GOT FISHING GAME, YOU COULD HAVE COAST GUARD.
NOW, THE PROPERTY YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, YOU HAVE TO GET DOWN.
YOU SAY AT GRADE, WELL, HOW FAR ARE YOU GONNA EXCAVATE? YOU HAVE TO GET DOWN.
YOU HAVEN'T EVEN LOOKED AT THE COPY ON THE TABLE THAT YOU HAVE TO GET DOWN TO LOAD BEARING SOIL PARTIALLY ELEVATED.
WHAT DO YOU HAVE? I HAVE, BUT I DIDN'T INTERRUPT YOU.
YOU DID, YOU KNOW HOW MANY OF THESE PROPOSALS, THIS IS WHAT NUMBER FIVE, YOU KNOW, IF YOU, IF IF THIS DOESN'T, UH, GET APPROVAL, YOU'RE GONNA COME WITH PROPOSAL NUMBER SIX, KEEP THROWING THE, THE SCREW KEEPS THROWING THESE PROPOSALS OUT.
IT, IT'S, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE SHOUTING AT THE RAIN.
YOU'RE NOT, YOU'RE NOT UNDERSTANDING, YOU JUST DON'T GET IT.
AND I GO BACK TO, YOU'VE GOT ALL THESE REGULATIONS THAT WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO MEET.
I ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT I'VE WALKED SOME OF THAT PROPERTY, AND I KNOW YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO GO DOWN TO LOAD BEARING AND THEN FILL IT BACK UP WITH STRUCTURAL MATERIAL BEFORE YOU'RE EVEN GONNA GET A, A PLAN APPROVED.
AND THOSE ARE JUST FACTS FROM HIGHWAY ROAD BUILDING THAT I'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN FOR OVER 60 YEARS.
SO TO TELL ME, OTHERWISE YOU, YOU'RE NOT GONNA SELL ME BECAUSE NO ONE HAS STUDIED THE PROPERTY AS FAR AS SOIL.
THAT'S GONNA BE A BIG PROBLEM.
AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TRAFFIC TODAY.
IF WE GOTTA WAIT FIVE YEARS BEFORE THE EPA FEDERAL HIGHWAY OR ANYONE ELSE SAYS, OKAY, YOU CAN GO, WHERE'S TRAFFIC GONNA BE? WE NEED TO LOOK AT A SOLUTION, WHETHER IT'S GONNA BE THREE YEARS TO, TO DO THE DOT OR I LIKE AN ELEVATED HIGHWAY.
IF, IF THAT WAS FOUR YEARS AT THE, AT THAT POINT, WE'VE COMPLETED EVERYTHING.
WE'RE MOVING TRAFFIC HOPEFULLY SAFELY THROUGH THE CORRIDOR.
WE'RE NOT JUST NOW WAITING TO GET APPROVAL.
AND YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THE EXPENSE IS GONNA BE.
UH, THAT'S FACT BECAUSE THERE ARE WETLANDS OUT THERE.
YOU'RE, YOU HAVEN'T EVEN THOUGHT ABOUT, DO I NEED A CUTOFF OR DO I NEED DRIVE PILING? AND WHERE IT'S ELEVATED, HOW ARE YOU GONNA PUT YOUR, YOUR PEERS IN? YOU'RE THROWING ALL THIS OUT SO YOU DON'T HAVE ANY INFORMATION.
CAN YOU TAKE A LOOK AT IT? YOU HAVEN'T LOOKED AT THIS.
EVEN I HAVE, I LOOKED AT IT ELEVATED.
HOW ARE YOU GONNA PUT AN ELEVATED HIGHWAY IN, DO YOU KNOW HOW TO BUILD IN, IT'S NOT GOING ON ON THAT LENS.
SO, YOU KNOW, I APPRECIATE IT.
UM, THE, THE MATRIX THAT WE HAVE SHOWN, UM, DOES SPEAK TO THE, THE ONE OF THE PREVIOUS ITERATIONS.
UM, LAUREN AND CHAD, WHILE I'LL LET YOU WEIGH IN HERE, BUT
[01:50:01]
IT'S, IT'S OUR OPINION THAT THERE'S NO ALIGNMENT THAT COULD BE DONE, THAT WON'T HAVE VERY SIMILAR IMPACTS AS TO WHAT CHAD HAS SHARED FROM ENVIRONMENTAL RELOCATIONS, THINGS LIKE THAT.THERE MAY BE NOMINAL DIFFERENCES.
BUT, UM, LAUREN, WOULD YOU AGREE FROM AN ALIGNMENT STANDPOINT? UM, YES.
UH, BASED ON THE NEW BYPASS ALIGNMENT THAT I'M LOOKING AT RIGHT NOW, WHAT THAT DOES IS IT SWAPS ONE PARCEL FOR ANOTHER AS FAR AS A RELOCATION.
PREVIOUSLY WITH THE PREVIOUS ALIGNMENT THAT DIPPED FURTHER SOUTH, THERE WAS A PARCEL ADJACENT TO THE PARK THAT WOULD'VE BEEN TAKEN.
NOW THAT SWAPS TO A PARCEL ALONG THE PARKWAY THAT WOULD NEED TO BE TAKEN IN ADDITION TO THE, THE PROPERTY AT THE CORNER OF SPANISH WELLS.
UM, AND ANOTHER KEY THING TO KEEP IN MIND HERE IS I KEEP HEARING THAT IT HAS LESS IMPACT IN THE STATE OPTION.
AND AS WE SHOWED IN OUR, UH, EVALUATION AND OF RIGHT OF AWAY AND ENVIRONMENTAL, THAT IS NOT TRUE.
THE, THE PROBLEM IS THIS BYPASS IS BEING COMPARED TO THE OVERALL PROJECT, NOT THE PORTION OF THE PROJECT THAT THE BYPASS IS REPLACING.
AS WE SHOWED IN OUR, UH, MATRIX, THE CURRENT WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THIS BYPASS, THE STATE OPTION IS TAKING 1.2 ACRES OF RIDE OF AWAY.
THE BYPASS OPTION WOULD TAKE AT LEAST SIX ACRES IN ADDITION TO THE OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS.
AND, UH, NEEDING TO EXTEND THE BYPASS FURTHER TO THE EAST TO ACTUALLY TIE DIRECTLY INTO THE CROSS ISLAND ACROSS THE J JARVIS CREEK AND TIE INTO THE CROSS ISLAND.
SO IT, IT'S NOT A TRUE COMPARISON SAYING THIS IS LESS IMPACTFUL THAN THE STATE OPTION BECAUSE YOU, YOU, THE STATE OPTION INCLUDES ALL THE OTHER WORK TO THE WEST AS WELL.
AND CHAD, FROM AN ENVIRONMENTAL STANDPOINT, WOULD YOU AGREE THAT THEY'D BE VERY SIMILAR BASED ON IF YOU'VE HAD A CHANCE TO TAKE A LOOK AT THIS NEW ALIGNMENT THAT WOULD BE SUBSTANTIALLY THE SAME IMPACTS? YEAH, AGAIN, I MEAN, WHETHER YOU, WHEREVER YOU MOVE THAT LINE, IT'S GONNA HAVE, UH, CONVERSION OF THAT, OF THE FOUR F RESOURCE, TWO FOUR F RESOURCE IN THIS AREA.
WELL, THREE ACTUALLY, UH, STONY, TCP, THE OLD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PARK.
AND THEN WHEN YOU GET TO THE TIE IN AT, UH, CROSS ISLAND PARKWAY, OF COURSE, HONEY HORN PLANTATION, AND AGAIN, YOU CAN THREAD THE NEEDLE HOWEVER YOU WANT IT, PUBLIC, PRIVATE PROPERTY, HOWEVER YOU WANNA THREAD IT THROUGH THERE, IT'S STILL REMEMBER AN IMPACT TO THE RESOURCE.
AND FROM MY UNDERSTANDING ON PAST CONVERSATIONS AND WHAT'S BEEN SHARED HERE AT THIS COMMITTEE IS, UH, FEDERAL HIGHWAY AND S-C-D-O-T, WERE REALLY ON THE FENCE ON THE DE MINIMUS FINDING.
THEY, THEY'RE GETTING READY TO ISSUE FOR STONY TCP.
SO THAT MEANS IF THEY'RE SITTING ON THE FENCE, ANY ADDITIONAL IMPACT IS PROBABLY GONNA PUSH IT INTO THAT NEED FOR THAT INDIVIDUAL FOUR F EVALUATION, WHICH IS WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO AVOID.
SO THAT'S A LONG WAY OF SAYING YES, I WOULD AGREE.
SO IF I MIGHT, REAL QUICK, UM, ONE THING THAT WE DON'T TALK ABOUT WITH THIS OPTION IS YOU'RE JUST PUSHING THE BACKLOG FURTHER DOWN THE ROAD.
UM, SO, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE A LOT OF OP ALTERNATIVES THAT ARE BEING INTRODUCED, AND NOBODY IS SAYING THAT DOWN THE ROAD THEY MAY NOT BE CONSIDERED.
UM, BUT FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS STUDY AND WHAT WE'RE DOING AND TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHERE ARE WE WITH WHAT IS OUT THERE, UM, WE KNOW THAT THE SCOPE IS FROM SPANISH WELLS LIFE TO BASICALLY PAST SQUARE POPE FOR THIS CORRIDOR.
SO WE KNOW THAT ADDITIONAL THINGS ARE GONNA NEED TO BE DONE DOWN THE ROAD.
AND PART OF THE STUDY IS TO UNDERSTAND HOW THESE EFFECTS WILL PLAY ON THAT AS IT IS IMPLEMENTED AND WHAT IT IS THAT WE CAN DO TO HELP MITIGATE.
SO I JUST, I JUST WANNA MAKE THAT STATEMENT THAT, UH, WE KNOW THAT DOUBT THAT BEYOND THIS PROJECT, THERE'S GONNA BE MORE THAT'S GONNA NEED TO BE DONE TO CREATE A BETTER FLOW.
SO, BUT I ALSO THINK THAT BECAUSE WE STARTED OUT WITH LIKE A SPAGHETTI OF, OF ALTERNATIVES WAY BACK, AND, UH, WE'VE COME NOW TO, TO THE FOURTH BEFORE ALTERNATIVES.
UM, THE ONLY THING THAT WE ARE DOING IS SAYING, LOOK, THE CRUCIAL ELEMENT IS GETTING AROUND THE TRAFFIC LIGHTS AND CREATE THIS LITTLE IMPACT, UH, ON THE COMMUNITIES AROUND IT.
UM, UH, AND I THINK THAT WHAT WE ARE PUTTING OUT HERE, UM, COVERS A LOT OF THOSE BASES.
[01:55:01]
SO WE DON'T HAVE TO MAKE A JUDGMENT NOW, BUT I'D LIKE YOU LIKE, UH, UH, NATE AND HIS TEAM TO, TO TAKE A REALLY SERIOUS LOOK AND AT THE SAME LEVEL AS YOU'VE DONE WITH AN, UH, ELEVATED, UH, BYPASS.BECAUSE I, YOU KNOW, I WOULDN'T, I WOULDN'T PROPOSE THIS, I WOULDN'T COME UP WITH IT.
I WOULDN'T MAKE A FUSS ABOUT IT IF I DIDN'T THINK IT HAD VALUE.
AND YES, THERE ARE ALWAYS ENVIRONMENTAL THINGS, THERE ARE BUILDING THINGS THAT ARE, THAT, THAT MAY BE COMPLICATED, BUT LET'S TAKE A SERIOUS LOOK.
CHAD, BASED ON YOUR EXTENSIVE EXPERIENCE GOING THROUGH, UH, AND WORKING THROUGH THE PROCESS, WOULD YOU AGREE THAT BASED ON, IN ADDITION TO THE INFORMATION THAT WE RECEIVED FROM SEAN'S LETTER WITH THE DOT, THAT THERE WOULD NOT BE A WAY THAT THE FEDERAL, UM, REVIEW BOARD WOULD APPROVE THIS MOVING FORWARD OR ISSUE A PERMIT TO ALLOW THE PROJECT TO MOVE FORWARD? I CANNOT SPEAK DIRECTLY FOR FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION, OBVIOUSLY, BUT BASED ON MY EXPERIENCE, IT WOULD BE A VERY DIFFICULT THING FOR THEM TO APPROVE.
NATE, IF I COULD ASK A, AN ODD QUESTION, UM, AND, AND BEAR WITH ME AS I ASK THIS, WHAT'S THE PURPOSE OF STOPLIGHTS STOPLIGHTS? WHAT'S THE PURPOSE? IS IT, IS IT ONLY TO MOVE PEOPLE FROM ONE SIDE OF THE ROAD TO THE OTHER? OR IS IT TO CREATE A, A FLOW OF TRAFFIC THAT MOVES AT A BETTER PACE? CORRECT.
SO, YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND THE, THE POINT OF MOVING TRAFFIC FASTER, BUT THE FASTER WE MOVE IT, WE'RE JUST CREATING THAT BOTTLENECK SOMEWHERE ELSE.
SO IF WE'RE ABLE TO SPREAD IT OUT, IT IT, AND IT DOES GO HAND IN HAND WITH SLOWING SPEED DOWN THROUGH THAT AREA, THROUGH ALL AREAS, ACTUALLY.
UM, AND YES, I'LL HAVE A HARD TIME ADHERING TO THAT, BUT, UM, IT, IT'LL HELP ALLEVIATE SOME OF THOSE TRAFFIC JAMS AND THAT, THAT'S KIND OF MY QUESTION THAT I'M ASKING FOR THE EXPERT, YOU KNOW, OPINION ON THAT.
IN OUR, IN OUR MODEL DOES ASSUME, YOU KNOW, WITH THE ADAPTIVE SYSTEM, I KNOW REACH OF YOU BROUGHT UP THE FACT THAT MAYBE CURRENTLY THAT THEY'RE NOT TALKING TO ONE ANOTHER, BUT IN OUR MODELS, WE ARE GOING TO ASSUME THAT THEY ARE FUNCTIONING, I MEAN, SPEAKING TO ONE ANOTHER, AND WE'VE WORKED WITH THE Q3 PEOPLE TO, TO WORK THROUGH THAT.
SO IT'S WORKING AS BEST AS POSSIBLE.
BUT AS WE'VE MENTIONED IN THIS, ONCE YOU REACH A SEARCH AND SATURATION LEVEL, UM, YOU KNOW, THE ADAPTIVE SYSTEM CAN ONLY DO SO MUCH.
THAT'S WHY WE NEED TO ADD CAPACITY.
AND THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH PRE SOME PREVIOUS WORK THAT WAS DONE.
THERE WAS MODELING THAT ELIMINATED THE SIGNALS ALTOGETHER AND CREATED ALEA FREE FLOW CONDITION.
UM, SURPRISINGLY ENOUGH, EVEN AT THE WINDMILL HARBOR INTERSECTION, BEFORE A LIGHT WAS PUT IN, THERE STILL WOULD BE STOPPAGE AND TRAFFIC DUE TO CONGESTION IN THE SYSTEM.
THAT WOULD CREATE A BREAK IN TRAFFIC AND PEOPLE WOULD STILL TURN.
UM, AND SO, I, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE.
SO I THINK IF WE'RE FOLLOWING THE EVALUATION, UM, FROM LOCK MUELLER AND, AND OTHER TECHNICAL DOCUMENTS, LIGHTS ARE PART OF THE SYSTEM, BUT THEY ARE NOT IN AND OF, OF THEMSELVES THE BIGGEST ISSUE IN THE CORRIDOR.
I THINK IF YOU LOOK BACK AT THE LOCK DEALER PRESENTATION, WHICH INCLUDED MODELING AND HOTSPOTS, THE MERGE POINT AS YOU COME ON ISLAND FROM, UH, US 7 2 78, MERGING FROM THREE TO TWO, AND THEN FLYOVER MERGING FROM TWO TO ONE AND THEN MERGING AT THE BRIDGE, THAT WAS A VERY BRIGHT RED, UM, CONGESTION POINT.
MUCH, IT WAS, IT WAS MORE SO THERE THAN AT THE, AT THE SIGNALIZE INTERSECTIONS.
AND THEN IN THE PM PEAK, IT WAS AT THE CROSS ISLAND GUMTREE, WHERE THE MERGE OCCURS THROUGH THAT.
AND WE, AND, AND HAVING WORKED ON THIS PROJECT FOR AN AWFUL LONG TIME, THE OBJECTIVE, I'VE NEVER HEARD AN OBJECTIVE TO MOVE PEOPLE AS FAST AS YOU CAN THROUGH THE SEGMENT.
IT WAS TO PROVIDE A BALANCE BETWEEN TRANSPORTATION, LAND USE, AND CIVILITY WITH THE IMPACTED, UM, UH, AREAS.
AND SO WHAT WE LEARNED WITH A FREE FLOW OPTION, IF YOU ELIMINATED ELIMINATED LIGHTS, YOU WERE GONNA CREATE A SIGNIFICANT ISSUE AT THE GUMTREE INTERSECTION ON THE BUSINESS ROUTE AND MOVE TRAFFIC MUCH MORE QUICKLY DOWN TO THE PALMETTO BAY ROAD CORRIDOR AND CREATE EXACERBATE ISSUES, UM, IN THAT AREA.
I'M TRYING TO GET A LOCK MUELLER SO THEY CAN DO THAT ADDITIONAL DOWNSTREAM EVALUATION.
WHAT, WHAT I'VE HEARD FROM S-C-D-O-T ON THIS, UM, SOUTHERN BYPASS IS IT HAS A VERY, VERY, VERY SMALL CHANCE, IF ANY, OF ADVANCING THROUGH THE PROCESS PROCESS.
WE HAVE A REAL CLOCK RIGHT NOW WITH THE, UM, LIFESPAN
[02:00:01]
OF THE EA DOCUMENTS AND THE, THE, UH, THE MONEY FROM THE, UM, STATE INFRASTRUCTURE BANK BANK IS NOT GUARANTEED IF WE DON'T MAKE A DECISION AT SOME POINT HERE.I WANNA MAKE INTERRUPT YOU BECAUSE I THINK THAT THE WHOLE ARGUMENT OF MONEY IS AT RISK IS, IS, UM, UH, SOMETHING THAT SOMEBODY NEEDS TO REALLY CONVINCE ME OF.
S-A-D-O-T WILL RAISE FUNDS FOR, UH, THEIR ROAD WORKS AND THEIR BRIDGES, AND I, I, I DON'T WANT TO PUT THE FEAR INTO PEOPLE BY SAYING, OH, WE GONNA LOSE, WE WANNA LOSE THE FUNDING BECAUSE, UH, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S NOT A CRITICAL POINT, UH, PERIODS AND I, I'VE BEEN IN THAT FINANCING, UH, PART OF THE BUSINESS AND I KNOW, SO LET'S NOT GO THERE IS, SO IT FOR THE, FOR JUST THE, THE PURPOSE OF, UM, KNOWLEDGE.
WHAT ARE THE DISCUSSIONS ON THE WINDMILL HARBOR LIGHT AND INTEGRATING OUR SYSTEM SINCE IT IS NOT CURRENTLY INTEGRATED? UH, PREVIOUS DISCUSSIONS WITH BUFORT COUNTY AND INCLUDED IN THE MEMORANDUM OF, UH, UNDERSTANDING EXECUTED BY THE TOWN OF THE COUNTY IN OCTOBER OF 2022, UM, THE, ANY SIGNAL THAT WAS NOT, UM, ADAPTIVE AT THE TIME OF A PROJECT WOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE PROJECT AND INTEGRATED INTO THE SYSTEM.
SO, UM, IF IT PROJECTED ADVANCED, THAT SIGNAL WILL BE BROUGHT INTO THE ADAPTIVE, UH, S SYSTEM.
THE COUNTY WAS INVOLVED IN THE TOWN PROCUREMENT OF OUR SIGNAL SYSTEM, SO THAT WOULD BE SEAMLESS ONCE IT WAS EXECUTED.
ADDITIONALLY, THE MOSS CREEK SIGNAL, UH, WOULD BE IN THE PROJECT AREA AND, UH, INCORPORATED IN INTO THAT, UH, SYSTEM.
THE COUNTY IS INTERESTED IN PURSUING INTEGRATION OF THE ADAPTIVE SIGNAL ALL SIGNAL SYSTEM ALL THE WAY OUT I 95, BUT BEYOND THE PROJECT AREA, WE DON'T HAVE ANY, UM, GUARANTEE AT THIS POINT.
UM, BUT THEY, THE COUNTY'S WILLING TO PAY FOR IT AND HAVE HILTON NET'S, TOWN OF HILTON NET MANAGE IT.
UM, SO THAT'S GOOD NEWS, RIGHT? WELL, I DUNNO ABOUT THE MANAGEMENT, IT WOULD JUST BE INCORPORATED INTO THE PROJECT AND IT WOULD BE THE SAME TECHNOLOGY THAT THE TOWN CURRENTLY USES FOR OUR ADAPTIVE TRAFFIC SIGNAL.
THE, I JUST WANNA BRING ONE MORE POINT OUT ON THE, ON THE SOUTHERN BYPASS, WHICH IS THAT BY, BY DOING THAT BASS BYPASS, YOU TAKE TRAFFIC OUT OF THE REGULAR 2 78.
SO, UH, SUDDENLY, UH, THAT GIVES A LOT OF ROOM ON THAT TRACK AND IT'S, IT'S A, IT'S A SIGNIFICANT, UH, UH, ELEMENT, HUH? WHEN YOU CAN TAKE 50% OF THE TRAFFIC OUTTA THE 78, UH, COMING ONTO THE ISLAND.
UM, AND THE OTHER THING IS THAT YOU, UH, IF, IF YOU WANTED TO, YOU COULD, UM, MAKE IT A TOLL ROAD.
YOU CAN MAKE TOLL ROADS ON NEW ROADS APPARENTLY, UM, WHICH, YOU KNOW, IF, IF THE TOWN CHOOSES TO, UM, WOULD BE A SIGNIFICANT SOURCE OF INCOME, RIGHT? SO WE ARE ON PAGE 48 OF 157.
WE CONTINUE, THAT'S WHAT I GOT RIGHT HERE.
WELL, OUR, OUR SLIDES THERE ONLY TWO MORE, SO DON'T WORRY ABOUT THAT.
THIS IS THE SAME INFORMATION THAT YOU ALL HAVE SEEN AT THE LAST MEETING.
THE ONLY REASON WE BRING IT BACK TO YOUR ATTENTION IS THAT, UH, IF YOU RECALL, ONE OF THE PRIMARY, UM, DISCUSSION POINTS AT THE APRIL 22ND MEETING WAS THE, THE DELINEATION BETWEEN PUBLIC AND PRIVATE PARCELS.
UH, THE TOWN STAFF, UH, GIS STAFF WAS ABLE TO PROVIDE US WITH A LITTLE BIT ADDITIONAL GIS INFORMATION.
AND SO ONCE ON APRIL 24TH, SO ONCE WE RECEIVED THAT, WE WANTED TO BE, DO OUR DUE DILIGENCE TO SEE IF THAT IMPACTED THE, THE FINDINGS AT ALL.
AND FOR ALTERNATIVE THREE, WE JUST WANTED TO BRING TO YOUR ATTENTION THAT IF YOU RECALL ON APRIL 22ND, THE TOTAL ACREAGE IS 1.4.
UM, NOW HAVING THIS NEW INFORMATION, YOU REDUCED IT SLIGHTLY DOWN TO 1.1.
AND SO THEN JUST CARRYING THROUGH WITH OUR MATRIX THAT SHOWED NOW A TIGHT SCORE, THE OVERALL RANKING DID NOT CHANGE BETWEEN THE ALTERNATIVES ON THIS.
WE JUST WANTED TO MAKE YOU AWARE OF IT.
AND THEN ON THE FINAL SCORING MATRIX, TAKING THAT, THAT NEW SCORE RIGHT OF WAY, AND THEN ALSO TWO, UM, NOT TO GO TOO FAR INTO THE WEEDS, THE, THE MINOR CHANGE WITH THE, THE RIGHT OF WAY.
THE, THE PARCELS THEMSELVES DID NOT CHANGE.
IT'S JUST THE, THE QUANTITY OF THE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE.
SO CHAD TOOK A LOOK AT THAT WITH HIS STAFF.
AND THESE NUMBERS SWITCHED SLIGHTLY.
SO ALTERNATIVE TWO USED TO BE RANKED AT TWO LOOSELY.
AND CONVERSELY HERE FOR ALTERNATIVE FOUR, WHEN YOU DO THE SUMMATION OF
[02:05:01]
THESE, UM, IF YOU RECALL AT THE LAST MEETING, THE, UM, ALTERNATIVE TWO WAS RANKED AT A, THAT NOTED DOWN THERE.IT WAS RANKED AT A 22 AND IT WAS TIED WITH ALTERNATIVE FOUR.
NOW YOU CAN SEE THE DIFFERENCES IN SCORING.
AND SO NOW JUST THE WAY THINGS SHOOK OUT, UM, IN SCORING.
SO WE JUST WANNA BE TRANSPARENT WITH THE INFORMATION WE PROVIDED, AND THIS IS THE NEW MATRIX THAT'S INCLUDED IN OUR DRAFT SUMMARY FINDINGS MEMO, UH, THAT YOU ALL WERE PRESENT ON FRIDAY.
WE'VE HAD THIS DISCUSSION BEFORE, BUT I'M OKAY WITH, UM, GRADING PER SUBJECT, HUH? YOU CAN COMPARE THAT, BUT I AM FUNDAMENTALLY OPPOSED ADDING THEM UP AND, AND OF A PROFESSIONAL FIRM, YOU SHOULD BE TOO, UH, COUNTING THIS, YOU CANNOT DO THAT.
THIS IS WHAT WE HAVE DONE IN SIT PREVIOUS PROJECTS IN DIFFERENT STATES AND WHOLEHEARTEDLY AGREE THAT CERTAIN COMMITTEES AND MEMBERS MAY WAIT DIFFERENT THINGS DIFFERENTLY.
THIS IS JUST, UH, THIS WAS A DISCUSSION POINT TO HELP WHITTLE DOWN, UM, AND HOW WE CHOSE THEM.
BUT THIS IS WHAT WE'VE DONE IN THE PAST, BUT YOU CAN BE DESCRIPTIVE.
AND SO IF, IF I LOOK AT WHAT'S IMPORTANT, SAFETY RIGHT AWAY, UM, FLOW OF TRAFFIC, UH, UH, VISUAL IMPACT IMPACT ON COMMUNITY, I CAN DESCRIBE IT ON EACH ALTERNATIVE AND THEN I CAN DRAW MY CONCLUSIONS, BUT I, I CANNOT PUT A NUMBER ON IT AND ADD IT UP.
AND WE SHOULDN'T DO THAT EITHER.
WE SHOULD BE DESCRIPTIVE AND BE CONCLUSIVE ON THE, ON THE DESCRIPTION RATHER THAN PUTTING A NUMBER ON.
AND THE INTENT WITH ALL OF THIS WAS TO BE TRANSPARENT WITH LIKE WHAT WENT INTO EACH OF THESE SCORES, BUT THEN ULTIMATELY IT WAS TO PROVIDE YOU ALL WITH THE INFORMATION THAT YOU NEEDED TO MAKE THE DECISION.
YEAH, AND I, I WILL ADD, I MEAN, THIS IS STANDARD WAY OF DOING IT, BUT IF THE COMMITTEE DECIDES THAT THEY DON'T WANT US TO TOTAL THEM UP AND PROVIDE AN OVERALL RANKING, YOU KNOW, THAT'S FINE.
WE CAN REMOVE THOSE LAST TWO ROWS OUT OF THE MATRIX.
AND, BUT I MEAN, THAT, THAT'S ULTIMATELY, IT'S THE COMMITTEE'S DECISION IF THEY WANT TO SHOW THAT OR NOT.
AND AS KATE HAD MENTIONED BEFORE THAT WE'VE MOVED THESE FORWARD BECAUSE WE THINK THEY'RE VIABLE ALTERNATIVES AND WE'RE TRYING TO DELINEATE SOME WAY TO DIFFERENTIATE IN BETWEEN THEM.
WHAT WE DIDN'T WANT TO COME BACK WITH YOU IS JUST SAYING LIKE, YOU'VE GOT FOUR GOOD ONES AND JUST HOW IT IS.
OR WITH THE LOOKING AT PREVIOUS STUDIES WHERE THEY JUST HAVE RED, YELLOW, GREEN AND THERE'S NO OTHER CONTEXT, THERE'S NO PERFECT WAY TO DO IT.
BUT AS LAUREN SAID, AND AS KATE MENTIONED, THIS IS THE WAY THAT WE'VE DONE IT WITH OTHER CORRIDOR STUDIES IN OTHER PARTS OF THE COUNTRY, THEY AGREED UPON SCOPE OF WORK, ASKED FOR THE CONSULTANT TO DETERMINE A WAY TO EVALUATE IT, DID NOT SAY EXACTLY HOW TO DO THAT.
IT, IT HAD A, IT HAD SOME ELEMENTS THAT WERE, UM, NEEDED TO BE INCLUDED IN THE EVALUATION, WHICH THEY ARE.
UM, BUT AGAIN, I'M, I'M, THEY'RE EXECUTING AGAINST THE SCOPE OF WORK.
WE CAN QUESTION SOME OF THE CONCLUSIONS AND FINDINGS THAT THEY HAVE HAVE MADE OR, OR ARE PRESENTED, BUT THEY'RE, THE, THE GOAL OF THIS COMMITTEE IS TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PROJECT IS BEING EXECUTED AGAINST THAT SCOPE OF WORK.
AND WHEN YOU ASK SOMEONE TO DO AN INDEPENDENT REVIEW AND BASED ON ENGINEERING, PROVIDE YOU INFORMATION, AND THEY'VE DONE IT ACCORDING TO THE SCOPE OF WORK, YOU CAN DISAGREE WITH SOME OF THEIR CONCLUSIONS, BUT METHODOLOGY, I UNDERSTAND, SEAN, BUT, UM, IT, IT'S, IT'S, IF YOU END ALL UP, YOU GET A 24 AND A 20, THEN, UM, PEOPLE GONNA SAY, WELL, YOU KNOW, I MIGHT GO FOR THE, FOR THE, FOR THE 20.
UM, AND I THINK THAT'S, UH, YES, YOU NEED TO HAVE A MEASURING STICK.
UM, BUT THEN THERE NEEDS TO BE ANOTHER LAYER ON TOP OF IT.
I DON'T KNOW, YOU KNOW, HOW DO OTHERS DESCRIBE IT? BUT IT'S, IT'S, IT'S WRONG TO TO DRAW CONCLUSIONS ON THE NUMBERS.
SO THAT'S GOTTA BE A DESCRIPTIVE.
UM,
THE TYPE OF DESCRIPTION THAT I THINK IS BEING SOUGHT HERE, THE DETAILED DESCRIPTION IS, IS SOMETHING THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE FLESHED OUT THROUGH THE FORMAL NEPA PROCESS.
SO WHATEVER GETS ADOPTED AND, AND BY S-C-D-O-T AND MOVED INTO THEIR PROJECT, THAT WOULD BE THE NEXT LAYER OF SCREEN.
THIS WAS JUST, I THINK NATE, NATE AND LAUREN BOTH SAID, UH, THAT, UH, WE'VE APPLIED THIS PRACTICE ACROSS OTHER PROJECTS THROUGHOUT THE, UH, COUNTRY.
[02:10:01]
THAT IS TRUE.IT'S JUST, WE JUST WANNA BE INSISTENT IN HOW WE SCREEN ALTERNATIVES AND HOW WE ASSIGN, UH, A GRADE TO IT.
AGAIN, I'VE SEEN OTHER CONSULTANTS USE LIKE RED, YELLOW, GREEN, IT'S, CONSIDER IT JUST AN INITIAL LAYER OF SCREEN.
THAT'S CONCLUDES OUR PORTION OF THE PRESENTATION.
GO OVER IF YOU WANT, BUT READY TO MUTE ME.
SEAN, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD AT THIS POINT IN TIME? WE, WE'VE COMPLETED BASICALLY THE FIRST THREE TASKS TO MOVE THROUGH THE INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF ALL ALTERNATIVES, INCLUDING ANY ADDITIONAL ALTERNATIVES AT LOCK MEER, UH, THOUGHT WORTHY TO ADVANCE.
THEY PRESENTED THOSE ALTERNATIVES.
UM, WE GOT FEEDBACK FROM S-E-D-O-T AT THE COMMITTEE'S DIRECTION.
UM, THERE IS AN ALTERNATIVE THAT IS PREFERRED, UM, AT THIS POINT FROM THE SCTS FEEDBACK.
UM, THERE'S UM, SOME ADDITIONAL, UM, DESIGN MODIFICATIONS THAT COULD BE CONSIDERED TO REDUCE THE RIGHT OF WAY IMPACTS FURTHERING TO REDUCE THE IMPACT OF THE TCP AND THE SONY COMMUNITY LOCK MUELLER NEEDS, UM, TO BE ABLE TO EVALUATE THE DOWNSTREAM IMPACTS, UM, TO, TO COMPLETE THE NEXT COUPLE OF TASKS AND THE SCOPE OF WORK.
SO WE HAVE THE, THE FINAL INFORMATION AND FINAL REPORT DELIVERED.
UM, I, I'VE ASKED LOCH MEER TO MOVE FORWARD WITH ALTERNATIVE ONE WITH SOME DESIGN AND, UM, UM, DESIGN MODIFICATIONS, UM, TO CONSIDER, UM, BASED ON THE FEEDBACK THAT WE RECEIVED FROM S-E-D-O-T ON THE ALTERNATIVES.
SO I'VE ASKED 'EM TO BUILD THAT INTO THEIR MODEL IN
SO I REALLY, SO WE CAN UNDERSTAND THE DOWNSTREAM IMPACTS ARE, ARE YOU AT, AT A POINT WHERE YOU CAN TALK ABOUT WHAT THOSE MODIFICATIONS ARE? I CAN, I ABSOLUTELY PLEASE DO.
SO IN THE CURRENT, UH, AL, UH, PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE THAT THE, THE COUNTY HAS RECOMMENDED AS PART OF THE EA DOCUMENT, UM, THERE, UH, THERE IS 3.4 ACRES OF TOTAL, UM, IMPACT TO THE, TO THE, UH, TCP 1.12 ACRES ARE OUR PRIVATE PROPERTY.
SO THE CURRENT DESIGN AS YOU COME ON ISLAND INCLUDES TWO LEFT TURN LANES FROM WILLIAM HILL PARKWAY, EASTBOUND ONTO SQUARE POPE ROAD, A DESIGN MODIFICATION TO REDUCE THOSE TWO LEFT TURN LANES, UM, EASTBOUND, UM, TO ONE LEFT TURN LANE ONTO SQUARE.
POPE ROAD IS ONE THE S-E-D-O-T IS EVALUATING.
WE'VE ALSO TALKED WITH A COUNTY TO, UM, AND THE COUNTY AND THE TOWN COLLECTIVELY HAVE ASKED S-E-D-O-T TO CONSIDER THAT, UM, FROM A PERFORMANCE AND RIGHT OF WAY IMPACT.
ALSO, THERE ARE CURRENTLY TWO RIGHT TURN LANES PROPOSED AS YOU COME SOUTHBOUND ON SQUARE PO ROAD AND RIGHT TURN ONTO WILLIAM HILTON PARKWAY, WESTBOUND GOING OFF ISLAND.
UH, THERE'S BEEN A DESIGN MODIFICATION, UM, REQUEST TO S-C-D-O-T FROM THE TOWN OF THE COUNTY TO REDUCE THOSE TWO RIGHT TURN LANES TO ONE RIGHT TURN LANE, AGAIN, FURTHER REDUCING THE RIGHT OF WAY IMPACT, UM, ON THE SQUIRE POPE AND THE WILLIAM HILTON PARKWAY SEGMENT.
AND THEN THE THIRD MODIFICATION IS THERE'S CURRENTLY A LEFT, IF YOU GO WESTBOUND OFF ISLAND, THERE'S A LEFT TURN LANE, A DEDICATED LEFT TURN ONLY LANE THAT, UM, ACCESSES THE CRAZY CRAB RESTAURANT.
UM, THERE'S BEEN A DESIGN MODIFICATION REQUEST TO MOVE THAT FURTHER WESTWARD TO REDUCE THE, UM, THE CROSS SECTION, UM, MET CRAZY CRAB AND IN FRONT OF, UM, THE STEWART PROPERTIES, UM, TO SHIFT THAT WESTBOUND AND HAVE THAT, UH, TURN LANE, UH, COME BACK AND SERVE ALL OF THE DRIVEWAY AND ACCESS POINTS.
UM, ON THE SOUTHERN SIDE, THE S-E-D-O-T HAS COMMITTED TO EVALUATE THOSE DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS TO SEE IF THE RIGHT OF WAY AND CROSS SECTION, THE CROSS SECTION WOULD BE REDUCED FOR THE, THE ROADWAY NEED AND THEREFORE RE REDUCE THE PROPERTY IMPACTS THAT THE CURRENT PROJECT, UM, THAT'S IN THE EA UH, PROPOSALS, PROPOSALS, WE BELIEVE THAT THERE WILL BE SIGNIFICANT REDUCTIONS IF THOSE DESIGN MODIFICATIONS, UM, ARE SUPPORTED AND UNDERSTANDING THE, UM, THE BALANCE AGAIN BETWEEN PROPERTY IMPACT.
UM, THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR AND LAND USE AND THE PERFORMANCE OF THE ROADWAY ARE ALL CONSIDERATIONS.
UM, ONE OF THE PRIMARY GOALS OF FEDERAL HIGHWAYS IS SOCIAL JUSTICE AND ENVIRONMENTAL AND, AND SOCIAL IMPACT.
AND SO THEY'RE SIGNIFICANTLY INTERESTED IN ALTERNATIVES THAT REDUCE THE IMPACT AS MUCH
[02:15:01]
AS POSSIBLE.AND THAT'S WHY THE OTHER ALTERNATIVES THAT WERE SHARED WITH S-E-D-O-T WERE, UM, WERE, WERE UNLIKELY TO BE FEASIBLE FROM THEIR, FROM THEIR STANDPOINT, BUT THOSE ARE THE DESIGN MODIFICATIONS THAT WE, WE'VE, UM, WE'VE REQUESTED FROM S-E-D-O-T AND ARE INCLUDED IN THE ALTERNATIVE ONE TO MOVE THE MODELING FOR THE NEXT PHASE OF THE PROJECT, UM, FORWARD THIS TIME.
UM, THAT'S ALL GREAT, BUT I THINK IT'S STILL PREMATURE, YOU KNOW, WE HAVEN'T FINISHED THE, UH, WITH THIS, UH, STUDY AND TO PUSH THE BUTTON AND I MEAN, SOME PEOPLE ARE SO EAGER TO HAVE THAT ALTERNATIVE ONE, UH, MOVE FORWARD.
UM, WE, I'M NOT A HUNDRED PERCENT SURE IT ACTUALLY WORKS.
UM, AND THAT IS WHY, UM, IT'S A GOOD THING THAT WE ARE GOING TO LOOK AT THIS, UM, UH, NEW ALTERNATIVE THAT WE PUT FORWARD TODAY.
SO, UH, I HOPE THAT GETS THE SAME ATTENTION.
UH, UH, SEAN, WHEN YOU MET WITH SC DOT, HOW FIRM ARE THEY WHEN THEY SAY IT'S NUMBER ONE? I'VE HAD EXPERIENCE WITH DTS OF THE COUNTRY, AND YOU CAN SIT THERE AND GET THE FEELING, THEY SAY, WE'RE GOING DO THIS.
AND YET YOU GET THE FEELING THAT THERE'S AN OPENING ON SOMETHING ELSE.
AND DID YOU GET THAT FEELING LIKE NUMBER FOUR OR YOU ANY OF THE OTHER TWO? WAS THERE EVEN A HESITATION? AND I GOT A, I GOT A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT FEELING ON NUMBER FOUR, QUITE FRANKLY.
UH, THEY, THEY WERE NOT INTERESTED IN ALTERNATIVE FOUR AT ALL, UM, ADVANCING.
UM, AND AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, UH, MONEY IS A CONSIDERATION WHEN YOU ARE ULTIMATELY GONNA ADVANCE THIS AND IF THERE'S A VIABLE SOLUTION THAT MINIMIZES THE OVERALL IMPACT, UM, AND IS A, UM, IS A, UH, I DON'T SAY CHEAPER IS NOT THE RIGHT TERM, BUT A LESS EXPENSIVE ALTERNATIVE, UM, THEY WILL CONSIDER SOME ADDITIONAL ELEMENTS, BUT THE, THE POSITION THAT HAS BEEN CONVEYED TO THE TOWN AND THE COUNTY CONSISTENTLY IS THAT THOSE ADDITIONAL COSTS ARE AT THE, UM, WOULD HAVE TO BE BORN AT THE LOCAL LEVEL.
UM, SO WHEN WE, WHEN WE INITIALLY DID TALK, STARTED TALKING ABOUT THE ALTERNATIVES ALTERNATIVE FOR IT WAS A SI OF RELIEF AFTER THE DISCUSSION ON ALTERNATIVE FOUR.
UM, ONE, WHEN THEY SAID THAT, UM, ANYWAY, THEY, THEY LET US KNOW THAT THEY WERE NOT IN, UH, IN FAVOR OF AN AL ALTERNATIVE FOUR WITH AN ELEVATED BYPASS.
[5. New Business]
SO, BUT THEY ARE WILLING TO UNDERSTAND THE LOCAL INPUT, RIGHT? THAT THIS IS, THAT THERE'S LOCAL INPUT IN THE PROJECT AND THAT'S WHY THEY'RE WILLING TO CONSIDER SOME DESIGN MODIFICATIONS, UM, BEYOND WHAT WAS PROPOSED.THEY DID, THEY DID THE SAME THING WHEN THE ORIGINAL PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE WAS PRESENTED.
UM, IT HAD THE, THE, THE UTAH U-TURNS OR MICHIGAN LEFTS OR WHATEVER THEY'RE, THEY'RE CALLED, UM, THAT WERE,
[4. Appearance by Citizens]
THAT, THAT FROM A PERFORMANCE STANDPOINT, THEY, THEY THOUGHT WERE A BETTER, UM, SOLUTION, BUT DID NOT, WERE NOT SUPPORTED LOCALLY.SO THEY DID CONSIDER SOME DESIGN MODIFICATIONS.
DO WE HAVE ANY, ANY NEW BUSINESS? I DON'T Y'ALL.
UH, KAREN, NOW APPEARANCE BY CITIZEN, BUT KAREN, DO WE HAVE ANY APPEARANCES BY CITIZENS ON ITEMS UNRELATED TO THOSE ON THE AGENDA? NO, SIR.
UH, FOR THE RECORD, DID WE RECEIVE ANY PORTAL COMMENTS? YOU DID NOT.
APPEARANCE BY CITIZENS? YES, SIR.
UM, CHRISTOPHER CLIFF, UM, JUST TO PICK UP THE POINT THAT, UH, ED RAISED, UM, I THINK THE LETTER FROM SCOD IS QUITE EXPLICIT.
UM, THERE'S ONLY ONE SOLUTION IN THEIR VIEW, AND IT'S, IT'S THEIR PROPOSED ALTERNATIVE.
UM, THEY MAKE NO COMMENT ABOUT THE LOCHMERE, UH, PROPOSAL OF THEIR PREFERRED SOLUTION, PLUS THERE'S NO COMMENT AT ALL.
SO I PRESUME THAT THEY'RE MAKING IT QUITE CLEAR THAT THEY'RE ONLY PREPARED TO CONSIDER THEIR OPTION.
UM, SEAN A FEW MOMENTS AGO SAID THERE'S A, THERE'S A TIME CONSTRAINT AND ONE OF THE THINGS I THINK SEAN SAID, THE LIFESPAN OF THE EA DOCUMENTS, I'M NOT SURE WHAT THAT ACTUALLY MEANS.
[02:20:01]
IT'D BE VERY APPRECIATED.UM, UM, WHEN CRAIG GRT WAS IN THIS ROOM, HE MADE IT QUITE CLEAR THAT THE DEFICIENCIES, THE MCKAY BRIDGE, UH, WERE, HAD BEEN PROVIDED FOR TO THE TUNE OF $40 MILLION.
BUT WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE SEISMIC STUDY, UH, NUMBERS, UH, THAT HAVE BEEN REVEALED TODAY, UM, THERE'S, THERE'S NO COMPARISON WHATSOEVER.
I, I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHERE THE 40 MILLION THAT CRAIG MENTIONED CAME FROM AND THE FIGURES IN THE CYBER STUDY, WHICH IS DATED APRIL, 2020.
UH, ANOTHER THING THAT CAME OUT TODAY, UM, IT'S NOT BEEN USED BEFORE, UM, ACCIDENT DATA AND WHAT CRAIG GWYNN IN THIS ROOM MADE IT QUITE PLAIN THAT ON JENKINS ISLAND, IT WAS NOT AN ACCIDENT HOTSPOT.
HE EMPHASIZED THAT, UH, QUITE, UH, ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS.
UH, FURTHERMORE, THE SIX FATALITIES THAT SEAN MENTIONED, IF MY MEMORY SERVE ME RIGHT, UM, I THINK ALL OF THEM INVOLVED.
DUI, VERY SADLY, AND ONE OF THEM I THINK INVOLVED FOUR FATALITIES.
SO TO THROW IN, UM, ACCIDENT DATA AS, UM, AN IMPORTANT CONSIDERATION IN THE SCDS PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE, I THINK ACTUALLY IS A, A SLIGHTLY MISLEADING, UM, I, I THINK WE'RE AT A POINT WHEREBY, UH, SIX LANES IS BEING PUSHED BY ALL THE AUTHORITIES, INCLUDING YOURSELVES, UH, MAYOR, I MEAN, UM, AND ALL IT DOES IS PUSH THE CONGESTION FURTHER DOWN THE DOWN THE ROAD.
THE SVDT PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE ISN'T A SOLUTION AT ALL, UH, WHICH IS QUITE ASTONISHING, REALLY.
IF, IF, IF CRAIG, IF SEAN COULD EXPLAIN WHAT HE MEANT BY THE EA DOCUMENTATION LIFESPAN, I'D BE VERY GRATEFUL.
I THINK, UH, YOU FOLKS HAVE DONE A GREAT JOB IN RATIONALIZING THAT THE S-E-D-O-T PLAN IS THE ONE AND ONLY TRUE PLAN.
YOUR STUDY SHOULD TO BE BASED ON A FEW KEY PRINCIPLES.
NUMBER ONE, STAY IN SCTS FOOTPRINT.
WHO AUTHORIZED THAT? I'D LIKE TO KNOW EXACTLY WHO AUTHORIZED STAYING IN SC DOT'S FOOTPRINT.
SOMEONE MUST HAVE CONSTRAINED LOCK MAILER TO DO IT.
SECONDLY, YOU IGNORE PROVING THAT YOU'VE SOLVED THE CONGESTION PROBLEM, NOR DO YOU HAVE A STRESS TEST.
WE DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT YOUR FORECAST NUMBERS ARE MONTH AFTER MONTH.
I'VE STOOD UP HERE AND SAID, WHAT ARE THE FORECAST LEVELS YOU'RE USING? HOW MANY VEHICLES PER HOUR ARE IN YOUR STUDY? I DON'T SEE IT.
TRULY LOW NUMBER, AND THAT'S WHY YOUR STUDY WORKS.
UH, WHERE IS THE STRESS TEST? IF YOU GET MORE THAN, UH, EXPECTED, AND I THINK YOU WILL, I THINK YOU'LL BE UP TO 4,000 VEHICLES PER HOUR, UH, BY THE END OF THE STUDY, THIS PLAN IS SIMPLY NOT GONNA WORK.
YOU'RE GONNA SPEND 425 MILLION ON AN UNPROVEN PLAN.
PROVING THAT THIS PLAN WORKS WITH THE CURRENT LEVELS AND WITH THE PROJECTED GROWTH LEVELS IS A TRIVIAL EXERCISE THAT WE HAVE NOT SEEN IN THE HUNDREDS OF GRAPH AND DOZENS OF HOURS AS WE'VE BEEN UP HERE.
WE SHOULD SEE THAT DATA NEXTLY, YOU HAVE, THE ONLY WAY THIS SURVIVES IS BY VALUING, UH, GAH GEECHEE INPUT AT A AND, UH, LAND THAT ESSENTIALLY ZERO.
IT'S EASY TO PROVE YOU HAVE THE BEST CLAN IF YOU JUST RAM THROUGH SOMEONE ELSE'S LAND.
I HAVEN'T SEEN ACCURATE COMPARISONS, UH, THAT VALUE GOOG GEECHEE LAND THAT YOU'RE TAKING AND DEGRADING THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD BY CUTTING OFF THEIR DRIVEWAYS TO THE OTHER, UH, UH, UH, ITEMS THAT YOU SHOWED HERE A LITTLE WHILE AGO.
YOU'VE ALSO DUCKED CITIZENS QUESTIONS.
WE KEEP ASKING QUESTIONS AND WE DON'T GET ANSWERS.
UM, IT ALSO WOULD'VE BEEN NICE TO WORK INTERACTIVELY AND, UH, UH, TO WORK THE PROBLEM TOGETHER.
FOR EXAMPLE, THERE ARE SEVERAL ERRORS IN THE SLIDES YOU'VE SHOWN.
THEY'RE GONNA BE PROPAGATED YOU, YOU ASSUME A BIG IMPACT ON A HONEY HORN.
THERE'S ZERO IMPACT ON A HONEY HORN.
ALL OF A SUDDEN YOU'VE INVENTED THINGS THAT GET PROPAGATED, UH, THAT MAKE NO SENSE.
SO I, THIS IS PROBABLY THE MOST UNSCIENTIFIC STUDY I'VE EVER SEEN IN MY 50 YEARS OF ENGINEERING LIFE.
MILA HAS SAID THAT AFTER WE SPEND CLOSE TO HALF A BILLION DOLLARS, UH, THE TIME SAVED ON THE EASTBOUND COMMUTE IS ONE MINUTE AND 40 SECONDS, AND ON THE WESTBOUND COMMUTE IS FOUR MINUTES.
[02:25:01]
ADDED TODAY, UM, THAT, AND THEY USE PERCENTAGES TO MAKE IT LOOK WAY WORSE THAN, OR WAY MUCH MORE OF AN IMPROVEMENT THAN IT USUALLY IS.UH, THEY SAID TODAY, I DID THE CALCULATIONS, THE EASTBOUND AM IN 2045 WOULD BE A WHOLE SEVEN MINUTES LONGER IF, IF NOTHING WAS DONE.
AND, UH, WESTBOUND COMING OUT.
UH, IF NOTHING, YOU KNOW, THE NO BUILD SCENARIO FIVE MINUTES LONGER.
SO FOR THIS, WE'RE SPENDING HALF A BILLION DOLLARS.
UH, THE OTHER THING IS, UM, I WAS VERY DISAPPOINTED.
UH, WELL, FIRST OF ALL, I THOUGHT IT WAS INTERESTING THAT IT WAS AND VERY CONVENIENT THAT THE UH, S-C-D-O-T RESPONSE REJECTS ANY AND ALL ALTERNATIVES.
ALTERNATIVES EXCEPT THEIR OWN BIG SURPRISE THERE.
UM, ALSO S-C-D-O-T ERRORED AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS PROJECT BY ENDING IT AT SPANISH WELLS ROAD, WHICH WAS RIDICULOUS, RATHER THAN INCLUDING THE ADJACENT MAJOR ROADWAYS THAT AN INTER THAT ARE INTEGRAL TO THE PROJECT, NAMELY GUMTREE ROAD AND THE CROSS ISLAND PARKWAY.
AND NOW THEY'RE SAYING, OH, WE CAN'T EVEN CONSIDER THOSE AS PART OF THE PROJECT.
UH, THESE CRITICAL ERRORS CANNOT BE INCLUDED IN THIS PROJECT WITHOUT GREATLY EXTENDING THE TIME OF CONSTRUCTION.
YET IMPROVEMENTS IN BOTH AREAS ARE NECESSARY TO REDUCE PEAK TRAFFIC FLOW CONGESTION.
IT WAS SC DOT'S MISTAKE IN NOT GOING, UH, FOR ENOUGH, FAR ENOUGH FOR HILTON HEAD TO BEGIN WITH.
AND NOW WE'RE BEING ASKED TO IGNORE AN ESSENTIAL AREA FOR INCLUSION IN THE PROJECT TO ARRIVE AT THE BEST POSSIBLE SOLUTION TO OUR PROBLEM.
BECAUSE S-C-D-O-T SCREWED UP AT THE BEGINNING AS A 12 YEAR HILTON HEAD RESIDENT BEING ASKED TO ACCEPT AN INFERIOR PRODUCT AT THE OUTRAGEOUS COST OF ABOUT HALF A BILLION DOLLARS.
I FIND IT TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE, AND I HOPE YOU WILL TOO.
UM, AND OF COURSE I'M A MEMBER OF THE FIFTH GENERATION OF MY FAMILY AS I SIT HERE TODAY AS A NATIVE ISLANDER, A BLACK PERSON, AND, UM, AND JUST LISTEN, FIRST OF ALL, I WANT TO THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING ON THE COMMITTEE, BUT, UM, AS YOU SERVE ON COMMITTEES, YOU MAKE DECISIONS FOR OTHER PEOPLE.
AND IT, I FEEL SO GOOD WHEN I HEAR PEOPLE MAKING DECISIONS FOR MY COMMUNITY WHO SEEM LIKE THEY HAVE A HEART AND THEY UNDERSTAND THAT WE LIVE THERE AND, UM, AND, AND, UH, THE COMMUNITY WHICH OUR ANCESTORS ESTABLISH IS OUR INHERITANCE.
AND FOR A MAJOR HIGHWAY TO JUST COME RIGHT ON THROUGH WHAT YOU HAVE WITH NO CONSIDERATION OF YOUR LIFE, YOUR LIVELIHOOD, UM, YOUR HOME REALLY, AND WHEN THAT IS TAKEN AWAY FROM YOU FORCIBLY, YOU HAVE REALLY NO PLACE TO GO AND OUR HOME MEAN AS MUCH TO US AS YOURS MEAN TO YOU.
AND WITH COMMITTEE MEMBERS MAKING DECISION FOR OTHER PEOPLE.
SEE, YOU HAVE TO THINK ABOUT WHAT YOU ARE DOING.
YOU ARE MAKING DECISION FOR SOMEONE ELSE.
YOU DON'T HAVE TO LIVE WITH THAT DECISION THAT YOU WERE MAKING BECAUSE AFTER YOU HAVE MADE YOUR DECISIONS, YOU PROBABLY GO BACK ON THE PLANTATION BEHIND THE GATES AND THAT DECISION YOU MADE IS NOT GONNA AFFECT YOU.
BUT IF YOU CAN GO HOME AND GO TO BED AND SLEEP, WHEN YOU MAKE A DECISION TO COME THROUGH PEOPLE PROPERTY, I'M TALKING ABOUT DESTROY THEIR COMMUNITY, DESTROY THEIR FAMILIES, THEIR HERITAGE, THEIR CULTURE, AND DON'T CARE SOMETHING IS SERIOUSLY WRONG.
SO I JUST WANT TO SAY ON TOP OF WHATEV, UH, WHAT HAVE BEEN SAID BEFORE, WHAT WE HAVE BEEN SAYING MANY, MANY TIMES IN THESE MEETINGS, YOU ARE HURTING PEOPLE.
I'M BLACK BECAUSE GOD DECIDED TO PUT ME IN THIS BLACK BODY.
AND THE, THE, THE COMMUNITIES THAT WE GREW UP IN HERE ON HILTON HEAD ISLAND, AND I ALWAYS RELATE TO THE SCRIPTURES, PSALMS 47, VERSE FOUR SAID, GOD, CHOOSE YOUR INHERITANCE.
[02:30:01]
GOD DID.SO WE ARE HERE IN THESE COMMUNITIES ON THE LAND THAT GOD CHOOSE FOR US, AND IT'LL REALLY, REALLY MAKE ME FEEL GOOD THAT YOU PUT YOURSELF IN OUR PLACES AS YOU MAKE YOUR DECISION.
AND YOU GONNA REAP WHAT YOU SAW.
YOU GONNA GET IT BACK IF YOU OTHER COMMENTS, PLEASE? YES, SIR.
WHAT A SURPRISE TO HEAR THAT THE BUREAUCRATS UP IN COLUMBIA, THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, LIKED THEIR PLAN THE BEST.
WHAT A SURPRISE WITH THE BUREAUCRATS IN COLUMBIA DON'T LIVE HERE.
AND I WANNA CONGRATULATE, UH, THE MAYOR, THE UNELECTED CHAIR OF THIS COMMITTEE FOR THE FIRST TIME.
YOU ALL, YOU FOLLOWED ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER.
YOU ALLOWED A VOTE ON MR. ADVOCATE'S MOTION, AND IT WAS PASSED BY A VOTE OF THREE TO TWO.
NOW WE AWAIT AN IMPARTIAL INDEPENDENT REVIEW BY THE CONSULTANTS ON THE HORIZONTAL BYPASS PLAN, BUT MINUTES LATER WE HEAR FROM MR. COLLIN THAT, WELL, WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE TOWN COUNCIL.
YOU DON'T HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE TOWN COUNCIL.
I'VE READ THE STATEMENT OF WORK, AND IT'S JUST ANOTHER OBSTACLE THAT YOU'RE THROWING IN OUR FACE, THAT WE GOTTA HAVE THE TOWN COUNCIL APPROVE THIS.
THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THAT THERE'S BEEN ANY DISCUSSION OF THE HORIZONTAL BYPASS PLAN SUBMITTED TO THIS COMMITTEE.
A PLAN WHICH CONNECTS DIRECTLY TO THE CROSS ISLAND PARKWAY.
A PLAN WHICH USES ALMOST NO PRIVATE LAND IS LESS THAN HALF THE PRICE OF THE AIRPLANE.
FOUR, CONSIDER THAT MORE THAN 50% OF THE TRAFFIC COMING ONTO THE ISLAND ARE BOUND FOR THE CROSS ISLAND PARKWAY, AND YET NONE OF THE PLANS, INCLUDING THE STATE PLAN ON THE TABLE NOW PROVIDE A DIRECT LINK TO THE CROSS ISLAND PARKWAY.
HOW CRAZY IS THAT? AND FINALLY, I JUST CANNOT UNDERSTAND HOW AN 11 LANE AIRCRAFT CARRIER SLAB AKA, THE BRIDGES IS IN KEEPING WITH PRESERVING THE CHARACTER OF HILTON HEAD ISLAND.
MR. MAYOR, MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE CONSULTANTS.
MY NAME IS RICHARD RITTER, R-I-T-T-E-R.
I'M A MEMBER OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF THE NEW HILTON HEAD, BLUFFTON BRANCH OF THE N-A-A-C-P.
AND WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF DRAFTING AND SUBMITTING TO THE TOWN A LETTER EXPRESSING THE CONCERNS OF THE N-A-A-C-P ABOUT ALL OF THE TRAFFIC PROPOSALS DISCUSSED TODAY.
UH, I CAN'T SAY MUCH ABOUT THE CONTENT OF THE LETTER BECAUSE IT HAS TO BE APPROVED BY THE MEMBERSHIP AT A MEETING TONIGHT, AND THEN IT HAS TO GO TO THE STATE CONFERENCE OF THE N-A-A-C-P FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL.
WE EXPECT TO HAVE THAT LETTER READY TO BE SENT TO THE MAYOR WITHIN THE NEXT TWO WEEKS.
OUR CONCERNS ARE OBVIOUSLY WITH THE IMPACT OF THE PLANS ON THE STONY COMMUNITY AND THE GULLAH GEECHEE COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE, THE, UH, ALTERNATIVE ONE PLAN SAYS IT HAS NO ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE, UH, STONY COMMUNITY.
THAT IS NOT TRUE, AND I THINK I NOW UNDERSTAND FOR THE FIRST TIME WHY THAT STATEMENT IS MADE.
THE TERM ADVERSE IMPACT IS DRAWN FROM ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE LAW AND CIVIL RIGHTS LAW, WHERE THE CONCEPT IS, DOES A PLAN HAVE A HARSHER IMPACT ON ONE GROUP COMPARED TO ANOTHER? IT'S PROBABLY WITHIN THAT CONTEXT THAT THE TERM ADVERSE IMPACT IS BEING USED, AND THEREFORE YOU CAN SAY, WELL, THE IMPACT ON THE NON STONY COMMUNITY IS NO GREATER THE THAN THE IMPACT ON THE STONY COMMUNITY.
THAT'S THE ONLY WAY I CAN COME UP WITH A RATIONAL UNDERSTANDING OF THE STATEMENT IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT OR THE CONSULTANT'S REPORT THAT NOT THAT ALTERNATIVE ONE WILL
[02:35:01]
HAVE NO ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE STONY COMMUNITY.WE KNOW THAT IT WILL AND IT WILL BECAUSE THERE ARE HOMES ON BOTH SIDES OF 2 78 AS WELL AS SOME BUSINESS PROPERTIES THAT ARE GONNA BE IMPACTED.
AND IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO MAKE CLEAR THAT OUR CONCERNS ARE WITH THE STONY COMMUNITY AND, AND THE FACT THAT THE STONY COMMUNITY IS ONE OF 14 HISTORIC DESIGNATED COMMUNITIES ON HILTON HEAD ISLAND THAT PUTS THEM IN A SPECIAL PLACE.
AND OUR CONCERN IS TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT THE INTERESTS OF THIS HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD ARE BEING FULLY ACCOUNTED FOR, AND THAT THERE ARE NO OPTIONS, NO ALTERNATIVES THAT CAN BE DISCUSSED AND PUT IN PLACE.
ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENTS? SURE.
I AM THE PRESIDENT OF THE NAACP.
UM, I JUST WANTED TO SAY, I'VE BEEN COMING TO THESE MEETINGS, SEEING FAMILIAR FACES, TRYING TO LEARN THE NAMES.
UM, YOU MIGHT KNOW ME AS BEVERLY SISTER BOBBY.
UM, WHAT I JUST WANTED TO SAY WAS ME COMING IN AND COMING TO YOUR MEETINGS AND, UM, BECAUSE I WAS CURIOUS AS TO WHAT WAS GOING ON.
I HAVE SEEN CHANGES OVER THE YEARS.
I ADMIRE WHAT HAS BEEN DONE, BUT WHEN IT STARTS TO START REACHING INTO OUR COMMUNITY, I'M SPEAKING FOR MYSELF, MY MOTHER.
OKAY? IT'S HARD, OKAY, BECAUSE I CAME HERE TO LIVE, BUT Y'ALL, EXCUSE ME, THEY KEEP COMING IN AND CHOPPING, CHOPPING, CHOPPING AWAY WHERE IT'S GETTING SMALLER AND SMALLER.
ALL I'M ASKING IS THAT YOU, WITH YOUR DECISIONS, KEEP IN MIND THAT LIKE MS. COHEN SAID, WE LIVE HERE.
YOU KNOW, I'M, I'M, I'M ASLEEP ONE MORNING AND I HEAR SOUNDS IN THE BACK AND YOU, YOU ALWAYS IGNORE ME, BUT IT'S OKAY.
AND, UM, I HEAR SOUNDS OF BANGING, BANGING IN THE BACKYARD.
WHO WANTS TO WAKE UP TO THAT? AND THAT'S BECAUSE THEY SAY, OH, WE HAVE A RIGHT OF WAY.
THEN I HAD TO FIND OUT WHAT THAT MEANT.
NO, I'M NOT AN ENGINEER, BUT IF YOU TALK TO ME ABOUT ANYTHING WITH DENTAL, I CAN TALK TO YOU.
SO WE AS THE COMMUNITY WANT TO UNDERSTAND BETTER NOT SIT HERE AND REALLY LISTEN FOR TWO AND A HALF HOURS, SOMETHING THAT I FELT THAT YOU COULD HAVE KEPT IN PRIVATE AND THEN COME TO US WITH A IDEA OF WHAT YOU'RE COMING UP WITH.
AND I WENT UNDER THREE MINUTES.
MY NAME'S TREY GRAVES, UH, BORN AND RAISED ON HILTON HEAD LIVE IN BLUFFTON.
THIS IS NOT AN EASY DECISION TO MAKE AT ALL.
IT IS, UH, COMPLETELY COMPLEX DUE TO THE GEOGRAPHY OF THIS AREA, UM, ON HOW TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM.
I SIT IN THAT TRAFFIC EVERY DAY.
I WOULD GUAR BE WILLING TO BET THAT ROUGHLY 90% OF THE PEOPLE IN THIS ROOM WILL NOT BE SITTING IN THAT TRAFFIC IN 2045.
THAT SAID, THERE IS AN ALTERNATIVE.
IT IS RADICAL, UM, THAT WAS PROPOSED DECADES AGO, UH, TO PUT ANOTHER BRIDGE OFF THE ISLAND, NOT IN THE SAME FOOTPRINT OF THE GRAVES BRIDGE, BUT SOMEWHERE AT THE END OF BEACH CITY ROAD THAT COULD CONNECT TO ST.
HELENA, THAT WOULD PROVIDE TWO ENTRANCES AND EXITS ONTO THE ISLAND.
IT WOULD ACT AS A GIANT CIRCLE.
IT WOULD MAKE IT SO THE PEOPLE THAT I WORK WITH EVERY DAY DON'T HAVE TO DRIVE FROM BRIDGEWOOD AND HARDY BILL AND SIT IN FOUR PINCH POINTS BEFORE THEY EVEN GET TO THE BRIDGE BECAUSE IT WOULD ILLEGAL ALLEVIATE AT LEAST 50%.
YOU WOULD HAVE TO GO TO PRIVATE MONEY.
IT WOULD HAVE TO BE A TOLL, IT WOULD TAKE A LOT OF ENGINEERING.
IT WOULD AFFECT THE BEAUTY OF THE ISLAND, BUT IT IS NOT A PROBLEM OR SOLUTION THAT THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE THAT ARE AFFECTED TODAY THAT ARE MAKING THESE DECISIONS TODAY WILL HAVE TO DEAL WITH WHEN I'M YOUR AGE.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? ALL RIGHT, SYNC.
WE'LL COME BACK TO THE COMMITTEE AND WE ARE ADJOURN.
CAN YOU TALK ABOUT THE LIFESPAN OF THE EA? I'M SORRY.
UM, YEAH, SO, UM, AS PROJECTS GO THROUGH THE NEPA PROCESS WHEN, UH, WHETHER IT'S AN EIS OR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, UM, THE INFORMATION THAT THE, THE FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS ARE BASED ON
[02:40:01]
AS A THREE YEAR LIFESPAN.SO ONCE IT GETS BEYOND A THREE YEAR, ONCE THAT EXPIRES, UH, THEN NEW, THEN YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH AND AMEND OR UPDATE THE INFORMATION OR
UM, AGAIN, DO YOU KNOW WHEN THE END DATE IS? UH, I BELIEVE IT IS THE END OF JUNE.
SO THAT'S WHAT PUSHING SOME OF THESE DECISIONS OUT, I GUESS.
WELL, I'M JUST LETTING EVERYONE KNOW THAT THERE IS A, THAT IS A TIME INTRAIN.
ALRIGHT, SO THANK YOU EVERYBODY.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS TODAY, AND THANK YOU FOR, UH, BEING HERE FOR THIS LONG GREAT ADJOURN.
[6. Adjournment]
HELLO, MY NAME IS EBONY SANDERS.I AM THE BEAUFORT COUNTY ASSESSOR.
OUR GOAL AT THE BEAUFORT COUNTY ASSESSOR'S OFFICE IS TO EDUCATE THE PUBLIC IN THE AREAS OF REAL PROPERTY TAXATION IN AN EFFORT TO MEET THAT GOAL.
WE ARE HERE TODAY TO SHOW YOU A SERIES OF VIDEOS.
STARTING WITH THIS ONE CONCERNING THE BEAUFORT COUNTY ASSESSOR'S OFFICE WAGE.
START BY GOING TO THE BEAUFORT COUNTY WEBSITE, WWW.BEAUFORTCOUNTYSC.GOV, AND YOU CAN GO THERE TO LOCATE OUR WEBPAGE.
TO BEGIN, WHEN YOU'RE AT THE WEBPAGE, YOU'LL START BY GOING TO THE GOVERNMENT TAB ON YOUR PAGE.
THEN YOU WILL FIND DEPARTMENTS AND UNDER ASSESSOR.
WHEN YOU SELECT ASSESSOR, THE PAGE WILL DIRECT YOU TO OUR WEBPAGE.
ON THE ASSESSOR'S WEBPAGE, YOU WILL FIND A HOST OF INFORMATION THAT YOU CAN DO RESEARCH ON.
YOU CAN FIND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ABOUT YOUR PARTICULAR PROPERTY, BUT YOU CAN ALSO ACTUALLY ON FIND ONLINE APPLICATIONS WHERE YOU CAN APPLY FOR LEGAL RESIDENCY APPLICATIONS AS WELL AS AG USE.
SO LET'S LOOK AT THE LEGAL RESIDENCY APPLICATION.
TO BEGIN, YOU'LL SEE THERE'S A LINK THAT YOU CAN APPLY FOR THE LEGAL RESIDENCY APPLICATION.
YOU SELECT OUR LINK, AND HERE THE APPLICATION IS PROVIDED FOR YOU.
MY SUGGESTION WOULD BE TO READ THE ENTIRE APPLICATION THOROUGHLY BEFORE YOU BEGIN, AS YOU WILL NEED CERTAIN DOCUMENTS TO SUBMIT WITH YOUR APPLICATION.
IF YOU CHOOSE NOT TO APPLY ONLINE, YOU CAN ALSO APPLY IN PAPER FORM.
GO BACK TO THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE WEBPAGE, GO TO FORMS, AND HERE YOU'LL SEE A LIST OF ALL THE FORMS AT OUR OFFICE OF SUPPLY, OUR TAXPAYERS.
YOU CAN ACTUALLY DOWNLOAD THESE FORMS AND PRINT THEM OFF AND SUBMIT THEM IN WRITING.
YOUR APPLICATION CAN BE MAILED INTO OUR OFFICE AS WELL.
YOU CAN MAIL THEM BY USING OUR MAILING ADDRESS, WHICH IS LOCATED IN OUR CONTACT INFORMATION ON OUR WEBPAGE.
YOU CAN ALSO FAX YOUR APPLICATION IN, ALONG WITH YOUR DOCUMENTS TO THE FAX NUMBER THAT'S LISTED ON OUR WEBPAGE.
AGAIN, THE FORM SECTION OF OUR WEBPAGE DOES HAVE A LOT OF INFORMATION THERE.
YOU CAN BROWSE, YOU CAN NAVIGATE THROUGH THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF APPLICATIONS AND SELECT THE ONE THAT'S MOST APPROPRIATE FOR YOUR SITUATION.
ADDITIONALLY, ON OUR WEBPAGE, YOU'LL FIND INFORMATION ABOUT WHO WE ARE AND WHAT WE DO.
THERE'S A SHORT VIDEO BLAINE'S ASSESSOR'S OFFICE ROLE IN THE TAXATION PROCESS.
ANOTHER PART OF OUR ONLINE WEBPAGE THAT WILL BE VERY INTERESTED, MAYBE BENEFICIAL, IS TO DOWNLOAD THE 2018 REASSESSMENT GUIDE BY SELECTING THE REASSESSMENT GUIDE.
YOU CAN ACTUALLY DOWNLOAD THIS PARTICULAR BROCHURE AND READ IT AT YOUR CONVENIENCE OR READ IT WHILE YOU'RE ONLINE.
IT WILL GIVE YOU MORE DETAILED INFORMATION ABOUT OUR OFFICE AND WHAT WE DO AND HOW WE CAN HELP YOU AS A TAXPAYER WITH REGARDS TO YOUR REAL PROPERTY, UM, VALUATION.
RETURNING TO THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE WEBPAGE, YOU WILL SEE THAT YOU CAN CONTACT US BY REACHING US AT 8 4 3 2 5 5 2 4 0 0.
OUR LOCATION IS LISTED ON OUR WEBPAGE AS WELL.
WE HAVE THREE DIFFERENT OFFICES.
WE HAVE TWO SATELLITE OFFICES, ONE LOCATED IN BLUFFTON, ONE LOCATED IN HILTON HEAD, AND OUR MAIN CAMPUS IS HERE IN BEAUFORT, SOUTH CAROLINA.
IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO KNOW THE ADDRESSES FOR THOSE LOCATIONS AND FIND THE ONES CLOSEST NEAR TO YOU, YOU CAN GO, GO BACK TO OUR PAGE TO RESOURCES, SELECT OFFICE LOCATION, AND THE ADDRESSES TO OUR BUILDINGS OR OUR LOCATIONS ARE LISTED THERE.
ADDITIONALLY, WHAT WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL TO A LOT OF OUR TAXPAYERS, THEY WOULD LIKE TO FIND OUT MORE ABOUT THEIR PROPERTY VALUE OR PROPERTIES IN THEIR SURROUNDING AREAS.
YOU CAN USE OUR PROPERTY MAX FEATURE UNDER RESOURCES TO SEARCH FOR REAL PROPERTY BY YOUR PERSONAL PIN NUMBER.
[02:45:01]
YOUR A IN NUMBER OR YOUR NAME AND YOUR SITE ADDRESS IS HELPFUL TO HAVE AS WELL.IF YOU WANT TO SEARCH FOR A PARTICULAR ONE BY YOUR SITE ADDRESS.
IN THE NEAR FUTURE, WE'RE GONNA DO SERIES OF VIDEOS THAT WILL GIVE YOU MORE DETAILED INFORMATION ON THE PROPERTY MAX PORTION OF OUR WEBSITE.
ANOTHER FEATURE THAT YOU MAY FIND VERY, VERY INTERESTING CAN FOLLOW US ON TWITTER.
OUR TWITTER ADDRESS IS LOCATED HERE ON OUR WEBPAGE, AND YOU CAN ACTUALLY LINK TO OUR TWITTER ACCOUNT AND YOU CAN ACTUALLY SEE ANY NEW UPDATED EVENTS THAT ARE OCCURRING WITH THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE THAT'S IMPORTANT TO YOU AS A TAXPAYER OR JUST INFORMATION THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO SHARE.
THANK YOU FOR JOINING US AND ALLOWING ME TO INTRODUCE MYSELF.
YOU CAN GAIN ADDITIONAL INFORMATION BY GOING TO WWW.BEAUFORTCOUNTYSC.GOV.
YOU CAN CONTACT US BY CALLING US AT 8 4 3 2 5 5 2 4 0 0, AND YOU CAN ALWAYS SEND A MESSAGE TO US USING OUR CITIZEN GRAHAM THAT'S LISTED ON OUR WEBPAGE.
AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR JOINING US.
HI, MY NAME IS JAVIER ZEBRA AND I AM A VOLUNTEER AT THE BEAUFORT COUNTY ALCOHOL AND DRUG ABUSE DEPARTMENT.
UH, IT'S IMPORTANT TO ME BECAUSE I MYSELF HAD STRUGGLES WITH ALCOHOL AND DRUGS, AND I THINK, UH, ME BEING A MEMBER OF SOCIETY AND, UH, AND IN RECOVERY AND BEING BILINGUAL AS WELL, UH, IS A BIG PLUS TO BE SERVING ON THIS PARTICULAR BOARD.
I'VE BEEN IN THIS, UH, IN THIS COUNTY FOR 26 YEARS, AND I'VE SEEN THE GROWTH AND I SEE THE, THE IMPACT AND THE DAMAGE THAT ALCOHOL AND, UH, DRUGS AND NEW DRUGS HAS AFFECTED OUR COMMUNITY.
AND, UH, BY ME BEING OF SERVICE AND EXPERIENCING, UM, SHARING MY EXPERIENCE WITH ALCOHOL AND DRUGS AND GETTING THE MESSAGE OUT THERE AND TELLING, UH, LETTING PEOPLE KNOW THAT THERE IS LIFE AFTER ALCOHOL AND DRUGS.
AND, UH, WE, THE BOARD, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE HERE FOR, TO OFFER A, A NEW BEGINNING FOR SOMEBODY THAT, UH, THINKS, UH, THAT THEY'RE LOST.
TO SEE A LISTING OF BEAUFORT COUNTY'S AGENCIES, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS, OR TO FILL OUT AN APPLICATION, VISIT WWW.BEAUFORTCOUNTYSC.GOV/BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.
MY MOTHER WAS ALWAYS VERY FAMILIAR WITH HER NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT ONE DAY SHE STOPPED AT THE STOP SIGN FOR MUCH LONGER THAN USUAL.
AND, UH, SHE DIDN'T KNOW WHETHER SHE SHOULD GO FORWARD OR, OR TURN, AND SHE WASN'T EVEN REALLY SURE WHERE SHE WAS AT.
IT WAS VERY UNSETTLING FOR HER.
I FELT SO MUCH BETTER AFTER MY SON TOLD ME, MOM, I DON'T WANT YOU TO WORRY OR BE AFRAID.
I'LL BE THERE FOR YOU AND WE'LL FIGURE IT OUT.