[00:00:01]
CLOSED CAPTIONING PROVIDED BY BUFORT COUNTY.
I WOULD LIKE TO CALL THIS TOWN COUNCIL WORKSHOP OF MONDAY, JUNE 17TH TO ORDER.
IS THERE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE AGENDA? I MOVE.
WE ACCEPT THE AGENDA AS SUBMITTED.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SIGNIFY BY RAISING YOUR RIGHT HAND.
COUNCIL, TOWN MANAGER, AND, UM, THE MOST GUESTS I'VE EVER SEEN.
I THANK IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS AT ONE TIME.
UH, AND I'M HERE TO, UH, LEAD DISCUSSION AND PRESENTATION ON THE WELTON PARKWAY GATEWAY CORRIDOR PROJECT.
UH, THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN IN THE MIX FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS, STARTING, UH, BACK AS FAR AS 2017.
UM, I'M GONNA PROVIDE FACTUAL INFORMATION, UH, TO HELP, UH, TOWN COUNCIL AND THE COMMUNITY, UM, SETTLE ON A POSITION FOR THIS PROJECT AS WE MOVE FORWARD.
UH, WE'VE GOT A LOT OF PEOPLE AT THE TABLE IN ADDITION TO ME, THE TOWN MANAGER, UM, AND TOWN COUNCIL.
UM, SO I WANT TO INTRODUCE, UH, A FEW OTHERS IN THE ROOM.
WE'VE GOT JARED FRA, ASSISTANT COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR.
UH, HE IS THE PROJECT MANAGER FROM THE COUNTY'S STANDPOINT AS I AM THE PROJECT MANAGER FROM THE TOWN STANDPOINT.
UH, WE'VE GOT THOMAS BOXLEY, THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF OUR GULL GULLAH GEECHEE HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD COMMUNITY DEVELOP CORPORATION.
UH, WE'VE GOT CONSULTANTS HERE, BRIAN KINSMAN, SENIOR PRINCIPAL WITH MKSK.
I KNOW BRIAN'S BEEN AT A FEW OF THESE WORKSHOPS OVER THE YEARS.
UH, HE'S GOT, UH, 40, OVER 47 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE, UM, IN LAND AND TRANSPORTATION PLANNING, UH, AND HAS HELPED US IN GUIDING SOME IMPROVEMENTS OVER THE PAST, UH, THREE PLUS YEARS.
UH, TO HELP SHAPE THIS PROJECT.
UH, WE'VE GOT OUR CONSULTANTS FROM LOCK, THE LOCK MUELLER GROUP, UH, HERE AS WELL.
UH, WE'VE GOT, UH, NATE NORAN.
HE SERVES, UM, IN A DUAL ROLE WITH LOCK MUELLER AS THE OVERALL PROJECT MANAGER AND CLIENT LIAISON.
UM, HE BRINGS OVER 20 YEARS OF DIVERSE TRAFFIC ENGINEERING EXPERIENCE, UM, AND HAS HAD THE ENTIRE, UM, CAREER AND OPPORTUNITY TO FOCUS ON TRAFFIC ENGINEERING RELATED STUDIES.
WE'VE GOT KATE WINFORD, UM, ALSO SERVING A DUAL ROLE FOR LOCKE MUELLER, UM, AS DEPUTY PROJECT MANAGER, UM, AS WELL AS LEAD ENGINEER OVERSEEING COMPLETION OF ALL TECHNICAL ASPECTS RELATED TO TRAFFIC, ENGINEERING, SAFETY, AND BIKE AND PEDESTRIAN COMPONENTS OF THIS CORRIDOR STUDY.
UH, KATE HAS EITHER LED OR SERVED AS ONE OF BLOCK NEW SENIOR PROJECT ENGINEERS ON 20 CORRIDOR STUDIES THROUGHOUT HER 11 YEAR CAREER.
CHAD IS ONE OF LOCK MILLER'S CHIEF ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS, AND IS SERVING AS THE LEAD ENVIRONMENTALIST NEPA SPECIALIST ON THIS PROJECT.
HE HAS OVER 26 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE COMPLETING NEPA STUDIES AND TECHNICAL ANALYSIS FOR TRANSPORTATION RELATED PROJECTS.
HE HAS EXTENSIVE EXPERIENCE IN ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING FOR FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL PUBLIC AGENCIES.
HE'S CERTIFIED THROUGH FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION AND THE INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AS A NEPA AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES SPECIALIST.
PE LAUREN IS A, UH, CHIEF ROADWAY ENGINEER WITH A LOCK MEER GROUP, AND BRINGS OVER 30 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE IN HIS ROLE AS LEAD ROADWAY, RIGHT OF WAY, ANALYST ENGINEER ON THIS PROJECT.
HIS AREAS OF EXPERTISE INCLUDE PLANNING, UM, AND ROUTE STUDIES, STREET SCAPES, BICYCLE, MULTI-USE PATHS, GEOMETRIC DESIGN, PROJECT COST ESTIMATING, CONSTRUCTION STAGING, AND TRAFFIC CONTROL, UH, AS WELL AS A DA COMPLIANCE.
I THINK WE'VE INTRODUCED EVERYONE AT THE TABLE.
UH, JUST WANTED TO PROVIDE THAT CONTEXT AS WE BEGIN TO, TO MOVE FORWARD.
UM, KIM, CAN WE GO AHEAD AND, UM, PUT UP THE PRESENTATION PLEASE? THANK YOU.
SO WE'RE GONNA WALK THROUGH A PRESENTATION, UM, TODAY.
IT INCLUDES, UM, SEVERAL ELEMENTS AND I'LL, AND I'LL GO TO AN OUTLINE HERE, UM, PRETTY QUICKLY AS SOON AS I CAN.
SO THE PRESENTATION, THE OUTLINE FOR THE PRESENTATION.
I'M GONNA COVER SEVERAL TOPICS ALONG WITH THE FOLKS AT THE TABLE HERE.
UH, GOING TO LOOK AT PROJECT BACKGROUND, THE CURRENT PROJECT ASSESSMENT OF ALTERNATIVES A, WE'RE GONNA LOOK AT A PROPOSED PROJECT VIDEO, UH, THE PROPOSED PROJECT
[00:05:01]
DEFINED IN DETAIL, PROPERTY IMPACTS, UH, INPUT RELATED TO THE GULLAH GEECHEE HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION RECOMMENDATIONS, AND THEN NEXT STEPS.SO AS WE GET INTO, UM, INTO THIS PRESENTATION AND PROJECT BACKGROUND, UH, AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, THE PROJECT STARTED BACK IN 2017.
UM, THAT'S WHEN THE PROJECT WAS ANNOUNCED TO, UM, FROM THE S-E-D-O-T STANDPOINT, SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AS A DEFICIENT BRIDGE OVER MACKEY CREEK EASTBOUND, UH, WAS IDENTIFIED.
UM, AT THAT TIME WHEN THE PROJECT WAS, UH, AT ITS ONSET, THE TOWN OF THE COUNTY HAD AGREED TO LOOK AT A MORE COMPREHENSIVE APPROACH FOR THIS CORRIDOR.
UM, WITH THE SIX LANES HAVING OCCURRED ON THE MAINLAND THROUGH THE MOSS CREEK INTERSECTION, UH, IT WAS A LOOK FROM THE MOSS CREEK INTERSECTION THROUGH WHERE, UH, THROUGH SQUARE PULE ROAD.
UH, ADDITIONALLY, THAT'S WHERE SIX LANES BEGAN ON HILTON AND ISLAND BETWEEN SQUARE PULP ROAD AND SPANISH WELLS.
THE PROJECT WAS, UM, LATER EXTENDED, UH, TO GO BEYOND SQUARE PULP, UM, TO THE SPANISH WELLS WILDHORSE INTERSECTION OF WILLIAM MILTON PARKWAY.
UM, THAT WAS IN SEPTEMBER, 2017.
IN NOVEMBER OF 2018, THERE WAS A SALES TAX REFERENDUM, UH, PAID BY, UM, UH, APPROVED BY BEAUFORT COUNTY VOTERS, UM, THAT INCLUDED $80 MILLION IN LOCAL FUNDING, UM, TOWARD THE WIDENING OF THE BRIDGES.
UM, AND THE PROJECT DEFINED BETWEEN MOSS CREEK AND, AND, UH, SPANISH WELLS WILDHORSE, UH, ROAD.
UM, IN FEBRUARY OF 2020, TOWN COUNCIL ADOPTED GUIDING PRINCIPLES THAT WERE A RESULT OF A CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE THAT WAS APPROVED BY TOWN COUNCIL.
UM, AND THE GUIDING PRINCIPLES WE'LL TALK ABOUT HERE IN A MINUTE.
UH, IN APRIL OF 21, UH, WE STARTED WORKING WITH CONSULTANTS, UH, MKSK, UM, TO, UM, EVALUATE THE PROJECT IN MORE DETAIL, UH, AND TO DEFINE, DEFINE RECOMMENDATIONS, UM, TO IMPROVE THE PROJECT FROM A PEOPLE, NOT JUST A TRANSPORTATION PERSPECTIVE.
SO, IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE NOW, THAT WAS, UH, LOOKING AT THE GUIDING PRINCIPLES, A COMMITMENT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WERE IDENTIFYING IMPACTS RELATED TO THE PROJECT, UM, AND NOT JUST FOCUSING ON THOSE THAT MOVED THROUGH THE CORRIDOR OR MOVING FOLKS THROUGH AS FAST, UH, THROUGH THE CORRIDOR AS FAST AS POSSIBLE.
UM, IN OCTOBER OF 20 21, 26 RECOMMENDATIONS WERE ADOPTED BY TOWN COUNCIL.
UH, THEY INCLUDED SEVERAL DESIGN REQUESTS AND MODIFICATIONS, UM, FOR THE PROJECT, AS WELL AS SOME ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WERE RELATED TO PROJECT IMPACT, BUT NOT NECESSARILY TO BE INCLUDED IN THE OVERALL PROJECT DESIGN.
IN, UH, FEBRUARY OF 2023, UM, THE A, A MODIFIED ALTERNATIVE FROM S-C-D-O-T, WELL, NECESSARILY, LEMME BACK UP HERE.
UM, AND OCTOBER OF 21, THE RECOMMENDATIONS AND, UM, WERE IN RESPONSE TO A PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE.
THE S-C-D-O-T, UH, HAD RELEASED, UM, IN THE, UH, IN THE FOLLOWING, UM, SPRING, IN MARCH OF 2022, THE, THERE WAS A MODIFIED ALTERNATIVE THAT WAS PRESENTED BY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION.
THE TOWN ENTERED A MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT WITH BUFORT COUNTY OUTLINING A CRITICAL PATH, UH, TO MAKE A, UH, TO BE ABLE TO, UM, MAKE A FINAL DECISION AND, AND PROVIDE DIRECTION ON THE PROJECT.
UM, AT THAT POINT, TOWN COUNCIL AUTHORIZED THE CREATION OF A, UM, A ADVISORY COMMITTEE, WILLIAM, UH, PARKWAY, GATEWAY CORRIDOR INDEPENDENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE, UM, TO HELP GUIDE A TOWN PROCURED EFFORT TO DO AN INDEPENDENT STUDY OF THE GATEWAY CORRIDOR.
UM, LOCK MUELLER WAS THE GROUP THAT WAS SELECTED, UH, BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE, UM, AND INCLUDED A SCOPE OF WORK, UM, AND, UM, AND PROPOSAL, UH, THAT WAS APPROVED BY BOTH THE COMMITTEE AND TOWN COUNCIL.
THE COUNTY, UM, HAD PROCURED A, A TRANSPORTATION INJURY CONSULTANT, CBB AS PART OF THE AGREED UPON MOU.
UM, THEY COMPLETED AN INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF THE PROJECT AND PRESENTED FINDINGS TO TOWN COUNCIL, UH, IN OCTOBER OF 23, UM, IN OCTOBER,
[00:10:01]
AROUND THAT SAME TIME, LOCK MEER WAS UNDER CONTRACT, AND THEY BEGAN REVIEW OF THE INDEPENDENT STUDY, UM, ON BEHALF OF THE TOWN.BOCH MILLER WORKED FROM NOVEMBER THROUGH, UH, JUNE, UH, TO WORK THROUGH THE SCOPE, THROUGH SCOPE OF WORK, UM, TO DO THE ASSESSMENT, INCLUDING, UM, MODELING DESIGN, AL DESIGN ALTERNATIVES, AND, UM, AND PRESENT THOSE FINDINGS TO THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE.
UH, THEY LAST MET, UH, LAST WEEK, JUNE 12TH, AND PRESENTED FINDINGS, UM, AT THAT, AT THAT TIME.
IT GOES BACK FROM SEVEN YEARS.
UM, WHEN WE GET BACK INTO THE, THE PURPOSE OF THE PROJECT, UM, IN 2015, SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DID AN EVALUATION OF THE BRIDGES TO HILTON HEAD.
AT THAT TIME, THE EASTBOUND MACKEY CREEK BRIDGE, UM, WAS, WAS, UM, IDENTIFIED AS DEFICIENT AND PLACED DOWN THE, UH, DEFICIENT BRIDGE LIST OR NEEDED REPAIR.
UH, WHEN ONCE THAT HAPPENS, S-C-D-O-T HAS TO PUT TOGETHER A PLAN TO MITIGATE.
AND SO THAT'S WHY IN SEPTEMBER OF 2017, THE PROJECT, UH, WAS ANNOUNCED.
UH, THE MACA BRIDGE WAS BUILT IN DURING THE 1950S, AND IT OPENED IN 1956.
UM, AND IT'S SCHEDULED WITHIN THE SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION'S BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROGRAM.
WHEN WE LOOK AT THE FULL PROJECT EXTENT, AS AGAIN, AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, THE PROJECT WAS DEFINED, UH, TO START ON THE MAINLAND, UM, AT THE, UM, WHERE AT THE MOSS CREEK INTERSECTION, WHERE THERE'S CURRENTLY THREE LANES IN EACH DIRECTION, UM, IT MOVES ALONG THE CAUSEWAY AND, UM, AND THE BRIDGES FOR THE MACKEY CREEK TO PINNEY ISLAND, THE BRIDGES FROM PINNEY ISLAND TO JENKINS ISLAND THROUGH JENKINS ISLAND, AND THEN ONTO HILTON HEAD, UH, CONNECTING TO WHERE THE CROSS ISLAND AND THE BUSINESS ROUTE SPLIT HERE ON HILTON HEAD ISLAND.
AND THERE'S SOME REFERENCE POINTS IN HERE.
UM, ON, UM, ON THE TOP LEFT SIDE HERE, THE BLUFF AND FLYOVER, UM, THIS IS THE CAUSEWAY SECTION, THE, THE FIRST SET OF TWO BRIDGES, HAY POINT LANDING, THE WILTON GRAVES BRIDGES, UM, AND THEN JENKINS ISLAND.
YOU SEE, HOG ISLAND, HOG ISLAND, BLUE IRON POINT, WINDMILL HARBOR, JENKINS ISLAND.
AND THEN A FEW MORE POINTS OF, UH, REFERENCE HERE.
UM, THERE'S THE JENKINS ISLAND CEMETERY.
YOU CAN SEE THE POWER LINE EASEMENT, UM, THAT'S IDENTIFIED HERE.
UH, THE CAUSEWAY, THE HILTON HAD THE STONY NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, THE FIRE POPE, OLD WILD HORSE, WILDHORSE AND SPANISH WELLS ROAD LABELED HERE ON THIS, UM, ON THIS GRAPHIC.
SO THERE HAVE BEEN SEVERAL, UH, INFLUENCES ON THE PROJECT THAT HAVE SHAPED IT TO ITS CURRENT STATE.
UM, AS I MENTIONED, THE TOWN COUNCIL, UH, CREATED A US 2 78 GATEWAY CORRIDOR COMMITTEE, UH, BACK IN 2018.
UH, THE COMMITTEE MET 32 TIMES, ACCORDING TO THE, OUR RECORDS AND THEIR REPORT.
UM, THEY MET IN THIS POLICE COUNCIL CHAMBERS AS WELL AS THEY WENT OUT INTO THE COMMUNITY.
THEY DELIVERED A REPORT TO TOWN COUNCIL IN FEBRUARY OF 2020.
AND AT THAT MEETING, TOWN COUNCIL ADOPTED GUIDING PRI PRINCIPLES TO HELP SHAPE DECISION MAKING ON THE PROJECT AND PROJECT ELEMENTS.
UM, THOSE GUIDING PRINCIPLES ARE LISTED HERE.
YOU KNOW, NUMBER ONE, FIX THE TRANSPORTATION ISSUES, UM, THAT IMPROVES SAFETY AND QUALITY OF LIFE FOR ALL RESIDENTS, WORKERS AND VISITORS TO HILTON HEAD ISLAND.
AND THEN SUB BULLETS ADDRESS TRANSPORTATION NEEDS FOR NATURAL DISASTERS AND RESILIENCY OF ISLAND ACCESS.
CONSIDER FUTURE TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES.
NUMBER TWO, SECOND MAIN BULLET, IMPROVE THE SAFETY AND QUALITY OF LIFE FOR THE RESIDENTS OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS AND BUSINESSES DIRECTLY IMPACTED BY THE US 2 78 CORRIDOR.
AND THAT INCLUDED THE STONY COMMUNITY, COMMUNITY AND NEIGHBORHOODS ON JENKINS AND HOG ISLANDS, INCLUDING LIMITED AND WINDMILL HARBOR.
AND THEN THE THIRD MAIN POINT, HAVE A GATEWAY TO AND FROM HILTON ISLAND THAT THE REGION WILL BE PROUD OF.
AND THEN SUB WELLS AESTHETICALLY PLEASING AND REFLECTING HILTON HEAD ISLAND LOW COUNTRY VALUES WITH SAFE AND FUNCTIONAL PATHWAYS FOR, FOR
[00:15:01]
PEDESTRIANS AND CYCLISTS.AND THAT MINIMIZES ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND ENHANCES THE, THE NATIONAL NATIONAL ASSET OF PINKNEY ISLAND.
SO THOSE GUIDING PRINCIPLES HAVE, UM, HAVE BEEN PART OF THE DNA FOR EVALUATIONS AS WE'VE GONE THROUGH AND CONSIDERED RECOMMENDATIONS, UM, AS WE'VE WORKED WITH CONSULTANTS AND AS WE'VE BROUGHT RECOMMENDATIONS FORWARD TO TOWN COUNCIL, SOME ADDITIONAL PROJECT INFLUENCES.
MAYOR MAY ASK A QUESTION, UH, ARE WE ALLOWED TO ASK, UH, QUESTIONS? IS TOWN COUNCIL ALLOWED TO ASK QUESTIONS DURING THE PRESENTATION? ABSOLUTELY.
UM, CAN YOU GO BACK ONE SLIDE? UH, WERE THOSE GUIDING COUNCILS ARE INCLUDED, UM, THERE'S MUCH MORE TO THAT REPORT OF FEBRUARY 18TH, 2020.
ISN'T IT ACCURATE THAT THE COMMITTEE PROPOSED A MITIGATION PLAN FOR STONY, WHICH THE TOWN COUNCIL DID NOT ADOPT AT THAT TIME? IS THAT ACCURATE? THAT THAT IS ACCURATE? AND IF I MAY, SINCE, UM, WE ARE ASKING QUESTIONS AS WE GO ALONG IN TERMS OF THE GUIDING PRINCIPLES, UM, TO CONSIDER FUTURE TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES.
HAS THAT BEEN DONE? UM, THE SECOND QUESTION THAT I HAVE IS THE NEIGHBORHOODS ON JENKINS AND HOG ISLANDS, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO WINDMILL HARBOR.
WHAT NOTIFICATION HAVE THEY RECEIVED AND WHAT INVOLVEMENT HAVE THEY HAD, UM, IN THIS PROCESS? UM, CERTAINLY, UM, EMPHASIS PUT ON THE CURRENT, UM, DESIGN.
THE A THIRD ONE, UM, I THINK YOU CAN, UM, TELL BY THE REACTION OF THOSE IN THE ROOM, UM, AESTHETICALLY PLEASING AND REFLECTING THE HILTON HEAD ISLAND LOW COUNTRY VALUES.
UM, IF ANYONE WERE TO LOOK AT THAT BRIDGE, THE, UM, SNARKY LAUGH, LAUGHING, UM, DISAPPROVAL THAT WE'VE ACCOMPLISHED, ANYTHING ALONG THOSE LINES WOULD BE ABSOLUTELY ACCURATE TOO.
UM, AND, AND I APPRECIATE THAT THAT WAS, UM, EXPRESSED ALREADY.
SO THERE ARE THREE POINTS WITHIN GUIDING PRINCIPLES THAT WE HAVE NOT FULLY, UH, TAINED AND THEREFORE SHOULD NOT BE, UM, MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS PROJECT SINCE WE HAVE NOT EVEN SATISFIED OUR OWN REQUIREMENTS.
DON, IF YOU'LL CONTINUE, UM, ADDITIONAL PROJECT INFLUENCES INCLUDE, UH, SAFETY.
SO THIS SLIDE REPRESENTS, UM, TRAFFIC COLLISIONS THAT HAVE OCCURRED BETWEEN 2016 AND 2024 WITHIN THE PROJECT EXTENT.
YOU CAN SEE WITHIN THAT TIMEFRAME, THERE HAVE BEEN OVER 1100 COLLISIONS, SIX FATALITIES, UH, TWO IN TWO INVOLVED PEDESTRIANS.
THERE'VE BEEN 81 MAJOR INJURIES, UM, IN THAT PERIOD.
AND, UM, COLLISIONS THAT, UM, WENT HOME, PARKWAY SQUARE, POPE ROAD, AND WENT HOME.
PARKWAY, UH, WILDHORSE ROAD INTERSECTION MAKE UP OVER, UM, A LITTLE MORE THAN 40% OF ALL THOSE COLLISIONS.
I CAN SEE THIS AS IT'S BLOWN UP, UM, IN A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL RELATED TO THOSE TWO INTERSECTIONS ON HILTON HEAD.
SOME ADDITIONAL, UH, PROJECT INFLUENCES, UM, INCLUDE TRAFFIC CONGESTIONS ALONG US HIGHWAY 27 OR 2 78 WILL MIL PARKWAY.
UH, THESE ARE SOME, UM, SOME PHOTOS THAT SHOWING, SHOWING THE CONGESTION THAT OCCURS.
UH, YOU CAN SEE THE TOP LEFT PHOTO IS AT THE, THE MERGE WITH A FLYOVER FROM THE BLUFFTON PARKWAY.
AND THEN AS YOU MOVE, UH, UH, ONTO THE ISLAND, YOU CAN SEE THE BOTTOM LEFT PHOTO AS YOU COME OFF THE BRIDGE.
UM, THE, UM, THE BRIDGES TO HILTON HEAD, UH, AND THEN THROUGH JENKINS ISLAND COMMUNITY MAYOR, IF I MAY, ON THIS, UM, PHOTO ASK, UM, WHEN THOSE PHOTOS WERE TAKEN, UH, THEY WERE TAKEN DURING AN AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC.
UM, THESE ARE, UM, ABOUT FOUR YEARS OLD AT THIS POINT, BUT THEY WERE TAKEN IN, UM, IN 2020 AS PART OF THE INFORMATION PRESENTED TO THE, IN THE ORIGINAL US 2 78 CORRIDOR COMMITTEE.
IT WAS DURING A, IT AM, UM, WORKDAY P HOUR, THANK YOU.
NOT DURING THE HEIGHT OF, UM, SEASON THEN OUR TOURIST SEASON NOW.
AND ALL THE DATA FROM THIS PROJECT SHOWS THAT MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY, UM, PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC IS MORE, IS MORE RELATED TO COMMUTER TRAFFIC THROUGHOUT THE YEAR THAN PEAK OUT, UH, THAN PEAK
[00:20:01]
SEASON.NOW, THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE, UM, RIGHT NOW WE'RE IN A HIGHER VISITOR SEASON, BUT THERE'S NO SCHOOL TRAFFIC.
AND I'LL TELL YOU THAT THE CONDITIONS AND CONGESTION ARE MUCH LESS WHEN SCHOOL IS NOT IN SESSION THAN WHEN SCHOOL IS IN SESSION.
SO THIS IS A PART-TIME, PART YEAR SITUATION THAT WAS DESCRIBED HERE AND NOT A FULL 12 MONTH, UM, PICTURE DESCRIBING THE SITUATION.
WELL, AS ANY, ANY PHOTO IS GONNA BE A POINT IN TIME.
CAN YOU HEAR MYSELF TURN? UM, ADDITIONAL PROJECT INFLUENCES INCLUDE THE DESIGNATION OF, UM, OF HISTORIC STONY COMMUNITY AS A TRADITIONAL CULTURAL PROPERTY.
UM, WHAT YOU SEE IN THE GRAPHIC ON THE RIGHT ARE THE, IS A BOUNDARY THAT INCLUDES BOTH THE BIG AND LITTLE STONY COMMUNITIES.
UM, AND AS PART OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT THAT'S PART OF THE NEPA PROCESS, IT WAS THAT IN THAT PROCESS, IT WAS DESIGNATED AS THIS, UH, TCP TRADITIONAL CULTURAL PROPERTY.
UM, AND WITH THAT DESIGNATION ENACTS WHAT THEY CALL A FOUR F RESOURCE.
UM, AND THERE'S REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE US DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ACT OF 1966 THAT PROVIDE DIRECTION ON HOW THAT RESOURCE MUST BE HANDLED, UH, FOR ALL PROJECTS RECEIVING FEDERAL MONEY.
AND SO I'M GONNA HAVE CHAD, UM, OUR NEPA EXPERT EXPLAIN FOR A RESOURCE AND WHAT WHAT IT IS.
SO, AS SEAN SAID, SC DOT'S ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY, A BIG INFLUENCING FACTOR OF IT IS SECTION FOUR F.
SO TO UNDERSTAND A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT FOUR F IS, IT'S ONLY APPLICABLE TO PROJECTS THAT INVOLVE A US DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AGENCIES.
SO THAT WOULD BE FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION, FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, FEDERAL TRANSIT, FEDERAL RAIL ADMINISTRATION.
THOSE ARE YOUR MAIN TRANSPORTATION AGENCY.
SO ANYTIME THEY HAVE FUNDING OR OVERSIGHT OF A PROJECT, FOUR F BECOMES A, A MAJOR INFLUENCING FACTOR IN THE DECISION MAKING PROCESS.
WHAT ARE FOUR F PROPERTIES? WELL, SEAN TOUCHED ON ONE, UM, NA UH, PROPERTIES THAT ARE LISTED OR CONSIDERED ELIGIBLE FOR THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES.
UH, AN EXAMPLE THAT IS THE STONY TRADITIONAL CULTURAL PROPERTY.
UH, BUT IT DOESN'T JUST END THERE.
ALSO, OTHER CONSIDERATIONS ARE WILDLIFE REFUGES.
AN EXAMPLE OF THAT ON THIS PROJECT IS PICKNEY, UH, WILDLIFE REFUGE, AND THEN ALSO PUBLICLY OWNED PARKS AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES.
SO, UM, AN EXAMPLE OF THAT ON THIS PROJECT IS OLD SCHOOLHOUSE PARK AT 1 52, UH, WILLIAM HILTON PARKWAY.
UM, WHAT THE LAW SAYS, UM, IT REQUIRES FEDERAL HIGHWAY.
UH, FEDERAL HIGHWAY IS NOT ABLE TO APPROVE THE USE OF A FOUR F RESOURCE, UM, UNLESS ONE OF THREE CONDITIONS ARE MET.
THE FIRST IS THERE'S NO FEASIBLE AND PRUDENT AVOIDANCE ALTERNATIVE IDENTIFIED.
UM, SECOND, THE, UM, THE ACTION INCLUDES ALL POSSIBLE MEASURES TO MINIMIZE HARM TO THE FOUR F RESOURCE, OR THE ADMINISTRATION DETERMINES THAT THERE'S A DE MINIMIS IMPACT.
SO THERE MAY BE A USE, BUT IT'S SO MINIMAL THAT, UH, IT'S, IT'S NOT GOING TO IMPAIR THE, UH, FACILIT OR IMPAIR THE RESOURCE SUCH THAT THE, UH, ATTRIBUTES OR COMPROMISED, UH, USE FOR THE INTENTS AND PURPOSES OF SECTION FOUR F USE IS DEFINED AS THE INCORPORATION OF PORTIONS OF THE FOUR F RESOURCE INTO A TRANSPORTATION FACILITY.
SO THAT'S LOOKING AT NON TRANSPORTATION PARTS OF THE FOUR F RESOURCE, AND WHETHER THEY'RE GONNA BE
[00:25:01]
ADDED IN, WHETHER THROUGH, UM, PERMANENT RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION OR TEMPORARY EASEMENTS.UM, OR THERE'S ALSO A USE CAN OCCUR IF THERE'S PROXIMITY IMPACTS, PROXIMITY IMPACTS, MEANING THAT, UH, THERE'S, YOU MAY NOT ACTUALLY PHYSICALLY ACQUIRED A RESOURCE, BUT, UH, WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED IS SO DAMAGING TO THE RESOURCE, IT WOULD BE CONSIDERED A USE.
AND I THINK, UM, JUST REAL QUICK, AGAIN, THERE'S THE AREA THAT THESE PROVISIONS APPLY TO, UM, EVERYTHING WITHIN, WITHIN THE BOUNDARY OF THAT RED, UM, THAT RED LINE.
AND THEN AGAIN, THE THREE GOALS ARE, ONE, AVOID AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.
UM, AND THEN, UM, THREE IS TO, TO MITIGATE.
MAYOR, IF I COULD ASK A QUESTION.
AS PART OF YOUR WORK WAS LOCK MEAL, OR DID YOU LOOK AT THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT? S-E-D-O-T PREPARED FOR THIS PROJECT? A AS PART OF YOUR WORK WITH LOCK MILLER, DID YOU LOOK AT THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT THAT S-E-D-O-T PREPARED FOR THIS PROJECT? YES.
AND DID YOU EXAMINE APPENDIX O OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT BEING THE SECTION FOUR F SECTION? THAT'S CORRECT, YES.
AND DID NOT S-C-D-O-T MAKE A FINDING OF DE MINIMUS IMPACT ON STONY AS A RESULT OF THIS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT? YEAH.
WELL, LET'S BACK UP ONE SECOND.
FEDERAL HIGHWAY CAN IS THE ONLY AGENCY THAT CAN MAKE A DIMIS IMPACT.
SO THEY CAN PUT FORTH A RECOMMENDATION FOR DIMIS, BUT FEDERAL HIGHWAY WOULD HAVE TO PROVE IT.
UM, I'M, I'M LOOKING AT, UM, EXHIBIT, OH, SORRY.
SUMMARY AND DETERMINATION PREPARED BY S-C-D-O-T.
THE PROJECT INVOLVES A DI MINIMUS SLASH NO ADVERSE USE.
IS THAT NOT A SUMMARY OF DETERMINATION BY S-C-D-O-T OF THE STONY NEIGHBORHOOD? IT'S A RECOMMENDATION PUT FORTH UNTIL FEDERAL HIGHWAY ISSUES PONZI.
IT WOULD NOT BE AN OFFICIAL, BUT IT IS A FINDING THAT THEY MADE.
S-E-D-O-T MADE IT'S DRAFT THAT THAT'S A DRAFT EA THAT'S PUT OUT.
IT, IT, IT, I DON'T KNOW HOW ELSE TO EXPLAIN.
IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT FINAL UNTIL FEDERAL HIGHWAY APPROVES IT.
AND LET ME, LET ME SAY, SO S-C-D-O-T WILL HAVE TO SUBMIT TO FEDERAL HIGHWAYS, UH, A REQUEST, UM, INCLUDING THIS PERMITTING INFORMATION IN, IN THE CURRENT DRAFT EA THEY, THEY BELIEVE THEY HAVE A RECOMMENDATION OF DE MINIMUS IMPACTS THAT WILL HAVE TO BE EVALUATED AS PART OF THE SUBMISSION TO FEDERAL HIGHWAYS BEFORE FEDERAL HIGHWAYS CAN MAKE THAT, UM, ISSUE THAT FINDING.
MAYOR, IF I MAY, UM, JUST ONE POINT, UM, AS YOU WERE SPEAKING, ONE OF THE FIRST, UM, POINTS THAT YOU MADE WAS THAT THERE SHOULD BE NO, UM, ALTERATIONS ANY IMPACT ON A FOUR F DESIGNATED AREA UNLESS THERE'S A FEASIBLE AND PRUDENT ALTERNATIVE THAT AVOIDS SUCH A USE.
MM-HMM,
AND A SECOND BRIDGE ISN'T FEASIBLE OR PRUDENT IN TERMS OF BEING ABLE TO PROVIDE A NUMBER OF THE OTHER ISSUES THAT WE HAVE WITH REGARD TO SAFETY, UM, ON THE ISLAND IN, UM, EMERGENCIES, ET CETERA.
UM, BEING ABLE TO PROCESS ADDITIONAL CARS, AS SEEMS TO BE THE DESIRE OF THE STATE AND THE COUNTY THROUGH, UM, THE COR THE BRIDGE AND THE CORRIDOR ONTO THE ISLAND, UM, THERE SEEMS TO ME THAT THERE ARE A NUMBER OF THINGS THAT WOULD JUSTIFY A SECOND BRIDGE BEING CONSIDERED.
HEY, CHAD, I, UM, IN, IN THE PRESENTATION, WE HAVE A MAP FOR POTENTIAL ALTERNATIVE SECOND BRIDGE LOCATION LOCK MEER, IN THEIR FINDINGS THAT WERE PRESENTED TO THE COMMITTEE, UM, DID LOOK AT THE, UH, IMPLICATIONS OF ASSESSMENT OF A SECOND BRIDGE, UM, WHICH INCLUDED A SIGNIFICANT DELAY ABOUT 20 YEARS, BUT THE TIME, BY THE TIME YOU DID THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT, UM, OR A NEW BEFORE A NEW BRIDGE COULD BE IN PLACE.
SO, AND HEARING YOU, HEARING YOU IN TERMS OF THE DRAMATIC TIME, THE DRAMATIC TIME SPAN THAT, UH, 20 YEARS THAT'S BEEN INDICATED, ISN'T IT ALSO
[00:30:01]
TRUE THAT THE COUNTY HAS SAID ABSOLUTELY NO TO A SECOND BRIDGE? NO, I BELIEVE THERE'S, I BELIEVE THAT IT'S IN THE, UM, THE DOCUMENTS THAT THE COUNTY HAD MADE A COMMENT THAT THE, UM, THERE WOULD BE NO SECOND BRIDGE THAT THAT WOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED, NOT, NOT AS PART OF THIS PROJECT.SO LATS IS THE MPO, THEY'RE THE REGIONAL PLANNING OPERA, UM, ORGANIZATION FOR THE AREA.
AND THEY HAVE THAT IN THEIR LONG RANGE PLAN TO STUDY A SECOND BRIDGE.
AND THAT IS IN, I DON'T HAVE THEIR, UH, PLANNING THEIR PLANNING GUIDE IN FRONT OF ME, BUT IN THE NEXT YEAR OR TWO, THEY HAVE THAT AS A, A FUNDED PLAN FOR LATS TO TAKE UP FOR THE REGIONAL, NOT JUST THE COUNTY, BUT, UM, THE REGION TO CONSIDER THAT.
SO THE FUTURE MIGHT HOLD A SECOND BRIDGE.
MEANWHILE, WE'RE SITTING HERE TODAY CONSIDERING A HALF A BILLION DOLLAR BRIDGE, THAT AS THE EVIDENCE FROM THE VARIETY OF DIFFERENT CONSULTANTS WILL CONFIRM, SAVES NO ONE ANY TIME, SIGNIFICANT TIME TO GET ONTO THIS BRIDGE, BUT HAS MULTIPLE NEGATIVE IMPACTS, NOT JUST ON STONY, WHICH IS CRITICALLY IMPORTANT, BUT ACROSS THE ISLAND FOR EVERY RESIDENT AND EVERY VISITOR THAT COMES ONTO OUR ISLAND.
AND SO SOMEONE DIDN'T THINK THAT IT WOULD BE PRUDENT TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION MOVED UP TO MOVE THAT TIMELINE FORWARD TO INCORPORATE IT.
AND JUST FOR THE RECORD, I AM CERTAIN, AND I WILL FIND IT, UM, I WILL SUBMIT IT LATER IF I DON'T HAVE IT, UM, DURING THIS MEETING WHERE THE COMMENT WAS MADE THAT THE COUNTY WAS NOT INTERESTED IN THE SECOND BRIDGE, ANOTHER WHEEL OFF THE SIDE.
UM, AND SO MOVING BEYOND THE PROJECT INFLUENCES, I WANTED, SORRY, MAYOR, I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION ABOUT FOUR F FINDINGS.
UH, AGAIN, TURNING TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT APPENDIX.
AGAIN, TURNING TO APPENDIX O OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WITH REGARD TO SECTION FOUR F, UH, INCLUDED IN THAT APPENDIX IS A LETTER TO ELIZABETH JOHNSON, DEPUTY STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER FROM DAVID P. KELLY, THE NEPA COORDINATOR WITH S-E-D-O-T.
HAVE YOU REVIEWED THAT LETTER? YES.
AND I'M READING FROM THE LETTER, IT SAYS, THE PROPOSED US 2 78 PROJECT WILL ACQUIRE RIGHT AWAY WITHIN THE BOUNDARY OF THE STONY COMMUNITY, TCP STANDING FOR TRADITIONAL CULTURAL PROPERTY.
BUT THIS ACQUISITION IS MINIMAL IN NATURE, HAS NO IMPACTS TO THE INTEGRITY OR THE DISTRICT, AND DOES NOT SUBSTANTIALLY CHANGE THE CHARACTER SETTING OR FEEL OF THE STONY COMMUNITY.
IS THAT NOT A FINDING? IT'S PART OF THE COORDINATION PROCESS THAT GOES ON BETWEEN THE SPONSOR AND THE OFFICIAL WITH JURISDICTION OVER THE RESOURCE OFFICIAL WITH THE JURISDICTION WHERE THE HISTORIC PROPERTIES IS THE STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER.
THAT'S ALL INFORMATION THAT'S FED INTO THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT.
ONCE FEDERAL HIGHWAY APPROVES IT, IT'LL BECOME AN OFFICIAL FINDING UNTIL THEN, STILL DRAFT I, WELL, THIS LETTER'S NOT A DRAFT, SIR.
THAT'S JUST NORMAL PROJECT COORDINATION IN THE EVA PRO.
I CAN SHOW YOU HUNDREDS OF LETTERS THAT INFORM THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT THAT WILL HELP FEDERAL HIGHWAY MAKE THE DECISION, WHETHER IT'S, HEY, WE GOTTA BUMP THIS TO AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT, OR WHETHER WE'RE GONNA ISSUE A FINDING AND NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.
THAT'S JUST NORMAL COORDINATION THAT GOES ON.
WELL, LET'S CALL IT A STATEMENT.
THEY STATED THAT DIDN'T THEY SERVE.
AND I WOULD CERTAINLY SAY TO ADD TO THAT, THAT IT IS, UM, INTERESTING, INTERESTING TO ME, AND LIKELY IMPORTANT TO THE PEOPLE OF HILTON HEAD ISLAND THAT DECISIONS ARE BEING MADE PRIOR TO DETERMINATIONS BEING, UM, ASSESSED.
I MEAN, YOU'RE MAKING THE ASSUMPTION THAT NOTHING WILL COME OF THE LETTERS THAT HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED, UM, THAT WOULD DISQUALIFY THIS PROJECT FROM MOVING FORWARD.
I THINK WE SHOULD KNOW THAT INFORMATION NOW, NOT LATER.
SO MOVING FORWARD, UM, TO LOOK THROUGH PROJECT BACKGROUNDS ON ALTERNATIVES THAT HAVE BEEN ASSESSED,
[00:35:01]
YOU CAN LOOK HERE IN MAY OF, OF 2019.THERE WERE A RANGE OF ALTERNATIVES THAT WERE, UM, THAT WERE INCLUDED IN THE DRAFT OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT.
YOU CAN SEE ALL THE ALIGNMENTS THAT WERE PART OF THAT, THAT INCLUDED, UH, SOME ADDITIONAL ALTERNATIVE ROUTES THAT WEREN'T NECESSARILY THROUGH THE STONY COMMUNITY.
YOU CAN SEE ALL OF THOSE THAT WERE IDENTIFIED.
THEY WENT THROUGH AN INITIAL EVALUATION, UH, BA THROUGH THE NEPA PROCESS BASED ON THEIR CRI, THE CRITERIA AND A RANGE OF REASONABLE ALTERNATIVES WERE IDENTIFIED.
AS YOU CAN SEE, MOST OF THOSE ALTERNATIVES WERE NEAR THE ORIGINAL OR THE CURRENT ALIGNMENT OF WILLIAM MOUNTAIN PARKWAY AND THE BRIDGES.
THERE WERE SOME ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATION AND A FEW AREAS ABOUT POWER LINE EASEMENT LOCATION, UM, BUT ALL OF THEM WERE ROUGHLY REPLACEMENT OF THE BRIDGES IN THAT CURRENT IN, IN THIS CURRENT CORRIDOR.
UM, OR VERY CLOSE, CLOSE BY, IF I CAN JUST BACK UP.
I FOUND THE INFORMATION THAT I PROMISED TO PROVIDE, AND IT'S ON, UM, IT'S A RESPONSE, UM, FROM S-C-O-D-S-C-D-O-T ON ONE.
BUT THE RESPONSE I'M INTERESTED IN TALKING ABOUT IS FROM BEAUFORT COUNTY, WHEREIN IT SAYS CLEARLY THE DUAL BRIDGE OPTION.
THE DUAL BRIDGE OPTION INCREASES THE ESTIMATED PROJECT COST BY 17.3 MILLION.
ADDITIONALLY, TWO SEPARATE BRIDGE STRUCTURES WILL SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASE THE CONSTRUCTION TIME, POTENTIALLY EXTENDING THE, AND I, IT'S HARD TO READ.
THIS IS VERY LIGHT, THE, UM, IN JEOPARDIZE THE SIB FUNDING.
BUT THE MOST IMPORTANT PART IS, UM, THAT THEY DO NOT, THE COUNTY DOES NOT SUPPORT THIS REQUEST.
SO, IN FACT, I BELIEVE I'M RIGHT THAT THE COUNTY DOES NOT SUPPORT TWO BRIDGES.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE IT'S IN THE RECORD NOW.
I THINK THAT WHAT YOU'RE REFERENCING, UM, IS A SECOND BRIDGE.
SO THE ALTERNATIVES, AS SEAN JUST DESCRIBED, THERE IS 19 ALTERNATIVES THAT GOT WHITTLED DOWN TO SIX AND THEN GOT WHITTLED DOWN TO, UM, THE LAST PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE.
WHAT YOUR REFERENCE IS ISN'T A DIFFERENT ALIGNED BRIDGE, UM, BUT A INSTEAD OF ONE MONOLITHIC BRIDGE, TWO SEPARATE INDEPENDENT BRIDGES TO REPLACE THE EXISTING BRIDGES THAT EXIST TODAY.
AND WHAT WAS BEING DESCRIBED THERE IS THAT WHEN YOU HAVE TWO INDEPENDENT BRIDGES, THEN YOU HAVE, UH, EXTRA COSTS AND THEN OFFSETS, UM, THAT WOULD ALSO AFFECT THE UTILITIES AND TRANSMISSION LINES.
THAT'S WHAT THAT QUESTION AND THAT ANSWER WAS SPECIFIC.
HERE'S THE QUESTION THAT WAS ASKED.
UM, IT SAYS, THE TOWN AND COUNTY AGREE TO SUPPORT THE EVALUATION OF A SECOND BRIDGE TO HILTON NET ISLAND THROUGH LOW COUNTRY AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY LACKS AS OUTLINED IN THE LONG RANGE TRANSPORTATION STUDY FOR THE REGION.
AND THE RESPONSE DIRECTLY FROM THE COUNTY WAS THAT YOU DO NOT SUPPORT A SECOND BRIDGE.
SO IT'S PRETTY CLEAR TO ME THE, THE, THE RECOMMENDATION THAT WAS PART OF THE MEMORANDUM OF, OF AGREEMENT, UH, WITH BUFORT COUNTY AND TOWN COUNCIL IN OCTOBER OF 2022, AGREED TO ONE BRIDGE CONNECTING THE RECOMMENDATION, UM, OR DISCUSSION BEFORE THAT.
AND THE 26 RECOMMENDATIONS FROM COUNCIL WAS TO CONSIDER TWO THREE LANE BRIDGES VERSUS A ONE SIX LANE BRIDGE.
UM, THE RESPONSE AND AGREEMENT IN THAT 2022 MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT WAS FOR ONE SIX LANE BRIDGE.
AND JUST TO POINT OUT, NOT TO BELABOR IT, BUT I WILL POINT OUT THE FACT THAT THE AGREEMENT CAME AFTER THE COUNTY SAID NO
SO AS WE MOVE FORWARD, THERE WERE 17 ALTERNATIVES THAT WERE EVALUATED.
THEY WERE WHITTLED DOWN TO SIX THREE WERE, UH, INCREASED TO NINE FOR ALTERNATIVES, SOME, SOME OTHER ALTERNATIVES.
BUT IN JULY OF 2021, A RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE WAS SHARED AT A PUBLIC HEARING.
UM, AND I'M, I'M JUST GONNA WALK, KIND OF WALK THROUGH IT, BUT YOU, YOU CAN
[00:40:01]
SEE IT WAS A SIX LANE BRIDGE CONNECTING AT THE FLYOVER, UM, CONNECTING THE FLYOVER AND, UH, US 2 78 ON THE MAINLAND.UM, YOU CAN SEE, UM, ROUGHLY WHERE THE BRIDGE ALIGNMENT WAS TYING IN AND BE ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE CURRENT BRIDGES.
UM, IT INCLUDED A SHARED PATHWAY, UM, PER PICKNEY OR, OR US, UM, FISH AND WILDLIFE PROGRAM GOALS.
THE ALIGNMENT WAS KEPT CLOSE TO AND ON THE SOUTHERN SIDE IN A TIGHT ALIGNMENT OVER PINCKNEY ISLAND.
THE ALIGNMENT AS IT TIED INTO JENKINS ISLAND WAS BACK, UM, WITHIN THE EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY WHERE THE OLD, UH, SWING, BRIDGE AND ROADWAY ALIGNMENT, UH, EXISTED.
UM, IT INCLUDED A, UH, NEW CONNECTION ROAD, AND I'LL SHOW A LITTLE MORE DETAIL HERE IN A MINUTE.
UM, SHIFTING THE ACCESS FOR MARINERS COVE BLUE HERRING POINT HOG ISLAND FROM THE SOUTHERN SIDE TO THE NORTHERN SIDE, UM, IT INCLUDED PATHWAY CONNECTIONS AND UNDER BRIDGE, UH, CONNECTIVITY OF THE PATHWAY, UM, UM, IN THIS LOCATION THAT I'M HIGHLIGHTING HERE, AND THAT IT HAD AN ALIGNMENT THROUGH JENKINS ISLAND, ROUGHLY WHERE IT EXISTS TODAY, WITH EXPANSION, WITH WIDENING OF THE LANES TO THE NORTH SIDE.
HERE'S WHERE, UM, I'VE INCLUDED SOME PREVIOUS IMAGES.
UM, YOU CAN SEE THAT THIS, UH, IMAGE ON THE LEFT IS WHERE THE LOCATION OF THE OLD ROADWAY ALIGNMENT WAS WITH A SWING BRIDGE.
YOU CAN SEE RIGHT HERE, THERE WAS A SPIT OF LAND, UH, THAT CAME OFF OF HOT ISLAND WHERE, UH, THIS WAS ACTUALLY ON THE ROAD.
THE, THE BRIDGES WERE SHIFTED IN THE EIGHTIES, AND THE BRIDGE OVER HERE SHOWS THAT THE, THE BRIDGE ALIGNMENT WAS SHIFTED ABOUT 120 FEET ON FROM CENTER LINE HERE, UM, TO THE NORTH, UH, EAST.
AND THIS IS THE CURRENT LOCATION OF THE EXISTING BRIDGES.
YOU CAN SEE AT THAT TIME, UH, BOTH, BOTH IN THE, IN 19 79, 19 86, THAT THERE WAS DEVELOPMENT AT MARINERS COVE, UM, AND DEVELOPMENT, STARTING ON THE BALANCE, UH, UH, OF HOG ISLAND, THE LOCATIONS OF THE BRIDGES.
UM, AS THEY EXIST TODAY, UH, YOU CAN SEE HOW THEY'RE BUILT IN THAT SAME ALIGNMENT.
YOU CAN SEE RIGHT HERE THE ACCESS ROAD TO MARINERS COVE, WHICH IS THEN THE OLD ROADWAY, UM, LOCATION WHERE, UH, USED TO CONNECT TO THE SWING BRIDGE.
I'VE BLOWN THAT UP A LITTLE BIT MORE.
BUT THIS, YOU CAN SEE THE SPIT OF LAND, UH, WHERE THE ROADWAY USED TO RESIDE HAS NOW, UH, BEEN ABSORBED INTO THE MARSH.
THE, UH, OLD ROADWAY WAS IN THIS ALIGNMENT, AND YOU CAN SEE ABOUT 120 FEET OFFSET FROM THE CURRENT LOCATION OF THE BRIDGE AND THE ROADWAY.
UM, BEFORE I MOVE ON, EXCUSE ME, JUST FOR CLARITY, WILL THE NEW PROPOSED BRIDGE CLOSEST, UH, TO MARINERS COVE BE THE SAME DISTANCE AS THE PREVIOUS 1979 BRIDGE? IT WILL BE, SIR, WILL BE VERY CLOSE.
I CAN'T GIVE YOU THE, IT IS VERY, VERY CLOSE, AND I'LL SHOW YOU THE NEW BRIDGE ALIGNMENT ON THE NEXT PAGE.
IT IS COMPLETELY WITHIN THE RIGHT OF WAY.
YOU CAN SEE THE PROPERTY LINE HERE ON THIS.
UM, I'LL SAY OUR A AERIALS ARE NEVER 100% ACCURATE, BUT THERE'S THE PROPERTY LINE AND THE OLD BRIDGE ALIGNMENT.
UM, THE NEW EDGE OF THE BRIDGE, YOU CAN SEE THIS GREEN LINE, UM, IF WE CAN SEE IT RIGHT, THIS LITTLE GREEN LINE IS THE EDGE OF THE RIGHT OF WAY, AND THEN YOU CAN SEE THE OUTSIDE EDGE OF THE ROADWAY, UM, IN THAT SECTION.
SO IT'S COMPLETELY WITHIN THE EXISTING ROAD RIGHT OF WAY.
UM, AND I THINK IT STAYS VERY CLOSE TO THE ALIGNMENT A LITTLE BIT LATER.
UH, WHEN I SHOW THE BRIDGE PROFILE, YOU CAN SEE A SHADOW UNDERNEATH OF WHERE THE OLD SWING BRIDGE ALIGNMENT WAS.
AND, UH, CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE PREVIOUS SLIDE, THE AERIAL VIEW? YES.
SO WHEN THE NEW BRIDGE IS CONSTRUCTED AS PROPOSED, UH, WHAT HAPPENS TO THAT TREE AREA WITHIN THE RIGHT OF WAY? DOES THAT DISAPPEAR? THE, UM, TH THIS, I'M SORRY, GOING THE WRONG WAY HERE.
WE, WE TALKING, UH, IS IT THIS, THIS YEAR? THAT'S CORRECT.
WELL, SO THE, SO THE NEW BRIDGE AND ROADWAY ALIGNMENT, UH, WELL, THE NEW BRIDGE WILL COME THROUGH THIS AREA AND THEN BEGIN TO TIE BACK INTO CURRENT ALIGNMENT.
UM, ON JENKINS ISLAND, THERE WILL BE SOME ADDITIONAL TREE IMPACTS THROUGH THIS AREA.
UM, WHEN THE ROADWAY IS REMOVED IN THIS SECTION, THERE'S OPPORTUNITIES TO PLANT, PLANT SOME NEW LITTLE TREES.
[00:45:01]
REITERATE A CONCERN OF MINE WITH REGARD.I UNDERSTAND, AND THE POINT IS WELL TAKEN THAT THIS IS WITHIN THE, UH, RIGHT OF WAY, AND THAT THE BRIDGE MOVING TO THE SOUTH SIDE, UM, WHERE THE OLD BRIDGE WAS, UM, DOES NO MORE HARM THAN THE OLD BRIDGE WOULD'VE DONE.
BUT REMIND ME AGAIN, WHEN WAS MARINER COVE DEVELOPED? UM, YOU COULD SEE IN THOSE AERIAL THAT IT WAS BEING DEVELOPED IN THE 1970S.
AND WHEN WAS THE BRIDGE SHIFTED TO THE NORTH, WHERE IN ITS CURRENT LOCATION? UM, IN THE 1980S, AS I MENTIONED, THERE WAS ALREADY DEVELOPMENT ON, ON THIS PROPERTY AND BEGINNING, UH, DEVELOPMENT ON THIS, UH, PART PART OF, UH, HOG ISLAND WHEN THE OLD, WHEN THE CURRENT BRIDGES WERE RELOCATED TO THEIR CURRENT POSITION.
AND WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME THOSE ROSE, THOSE COMMUNITIES WERE UPDATED ON THE PLANS.
SO THEY WERE, THEY WERE STAKEHOLDERS THAT WERE INCLUDED IN MEETINGS WITH BOTH S-C-D-O-T, UM, ON BEHALF OF THE COUNTY.
UM, THE, THE, THE PROPOSED ALIGNMENT HAS NOT CHANGED SINCE THE, PER THE ORIGINAL ONE BACK IN 2021, THE, THE ONE RELEASED IN 2022 IS EXACTLY THE SAME ALIGNMENT.
UM, SO THAT, THAT WAS PART OF THE PROCESS THAT THEY WENT THROUGH IN STAKEHOLDER MEETINGS.
AND I HEAR YOU AND UNDERSTAND THAT.
UM, I JUST HAVING EXPERIENCED IN THE PAST LACK OF NOTIFICATION ON THIS ISLAND, WHEN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD WAS REZONED AND CHANGED THE CHARACTER AND THE DYNAMICS FOREVER, UM, IT WOULD'VE BEEN NICE TO HAVE AN ONGOING DISCUSSION, UM, MUCH LESS THE LACK OF NOTIFICATION THAT WE NEVER RECEIVED.
BUT HERE, 2021, WE'RE IN 2024, IT SEEMS TO ME, UH, I'D BE INTERESTED IN KNOWING HOW MUCH COMMUNICATION HAS BEEN GIVEN TO THESE COMMUNICATION, UH, COMMUNITIES OVER THE LAST THREE YEARS.
UM, AND THEN MOVING THROUGH THE THIRD SECTION OF, OF THE 2021 ALTERNATIVE, UM, IT, IT WAS THROUGH, UM, ROUGHLY IN THE CURRENT ALIGNMENT.
UM, THE, THE TRADITIONAL CULTURAL PROPERTY IMPACT IS NOTED HERE, THAT OF THE 300, UH, ACRES, UH, WITHIN THE TEA, THE TRADITIONAL CULTURAL PROPERTY, UM, COMMUNITY, 4.77 ACRES WERE BEING, UM, WERE, UH, BEING IMPACTED.
AND OF THE 4.77 ACRES, THERE WAS 1.52 ACRES OF PRIVATE PROPERTY, UM, WITHIN THE, UH, PROPERTY IMPACT AND ACQUISITION, UM, PART OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT.
SO, UM, I, I WON'T HAVE CHAD GO GO TOO DEEP INTO THIS.
SO AGAIN, UM, GOING BACK TO THE IMPACT OF THE TRADITIONAL CULTURAL PROPERTY, THAT 4.77 ACRES WAS A, A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER, UM, IN THAT IT IDENTIFIED THE IMPACT WITHIN THAT 300 ACRE, UH, FOUR F RESOURCE.
UM, YOU CAN SEE THAT THE THREE, UM, THE THREE, UH, FOUR F RESOURCES ARE LIFTED LISTED ON THE LEFT SIDE, AND THAT BASED ON THAT DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, THAT 4.77 TOTAL, UH, ACRES OF IMPACT WITHIN THAT TCP, UM, THAT S-E-D-O-D-O-T HAD DRAFTED WHAT THEY THOUGHT WOULD BE A DI MINIMUS FINDING, SUBMITTING IT AS PART OF THE PERMITTING TO FEDERAL HIGHWAYS.
UM, WHAT WE'VE DONE HERE AT THE TOWN IS SAY THAT WE'RE TRYING TO REDUCE IMPACT AND TRY TO REDUCE THIS NUMBER, BOTH THE OVERALL 4.77 ACRES, AS WELL AS THE 1.52 ACRES OF PRIVATE PROPERTY IMPACT.
UH, YOU CAN SEE THE ORIGINAL ALTERNATIVE, UM, IDENTIFIED, UM, ABOUT A QUARTER ACRE IMPACT TO THE TOWN'S, UM, THE TOWN'S, UH, PROPERTY, THE OLD SCHOOLHOUSE PARK, AND IT'S A LITTLE DIFFICULT TO SEE HERE.
BUT THIS ALTERNATIVE INCLUDED THE, UM, NON-TRADITIONAL INTERSECTION DESIGNS, WHICH HAD THE, THE U-TURN MOVEMENTS AT OLD WILDHORSE ROAD, UM, AND OFF ISLAND.
SO YOU'D GO THROUGH SQUIRE POPE INTERSECTION AND DO A U-TURN AT WILDHORSE OLD WILD HOR HORSE ROAD AND HAD, UM, ONE WAY TRAFFIC ON OLD WILD HORSE ROAD.
UM, AS PART OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT TOWN COUNCIL CONSIDERED, UH, WAS TO GO BACK TO MORE TRADITIONAL, UM, INTERSECTION DESIGN AND TO REDUCE THAT 4.77 ACRES, UM, AND, UM, OF TOTAL IMPACT.
AND THEN, UH, PRIVATE PROPERTY IMPACT.
UM, WHILE YOU'RE ON THAT SLIDE ABOUT THE OLD SCHOOLHOUSE PROPERTY, UH,
[00:50:01]
DOES THE PROPOSED PLAN INCLUDE BETTER ACCESS TO THE PICKLEBALL COURTS? SO THE CURRENT LOCA, UH, THE CURRENT ACCESS IS PROVIDED OFF ADRIANA LANE, UM, THE ACCESS WOULD REMAIN IN THAT LOCATION.SO NO IMPROVEMENTS ACCORDING TO THE, OR BASED ON THIS PLAN.
THERE'S NO ADDITIONAL IMPROVED, UM, ACCESS TO THAT RESOURCE AS PART OF THIS PROJECT.
AND THEN I'VE LISTED OUT THESE ARE THE, UH, TOWN COUNCIL ADOPTED RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WERE, UM, THAT WERE ADOPTED IN OCTOBER OF 2021, AND PROVIDED AS OFFICIAL STAKEHOLDER INPUT TO, UH, BEFOR COUNTY AND TO S-E-D-O-T, UM, AS PART OF THE NEPA PROCESS AND, AND RESULTS OF THE PUBLIC HEARING, UM, YOU CAN SEE THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WERE MADE BY TOWN COUNCIL, UH, RE TO REDUCE LANE WIDTHS, UM, WHEREVER POSSIBLE, UM, FOR TRAFFIC COMBINING AND TO REDUCE PROPERTY IMPACTS.
PRODUCING RAISED CURBS AND MEDIANS WERE POSSIBLE ENCOURAGING VEGETATION AND DRAINAGE, EXCUSE ME, NATURAL DRAINAGE IN AREAS, UM, VERY MEETING WIDTHS AND MEANDER, UM, UH, ROADWAY ALIGNMENTS FOR TRAFFIC AND AESTHETICS.
UH, TAKE ADVANTAGE OF TOWN OWNED PROPERTY FOR SAKE OF PRO PARKWAY IMPROVEMENTS.
UM, UTILIZATION OF ITS SMART SIGNAL, UH, THE TOWN HAS INSTALLED, UM, ADAPTIVE TRAFFIC, UM, SIGNAL TECHNOLOGY AT ALL 25 SIGNALS.
UM, AND WITH THIS, IT WOULD BE TO INCLUDE SIGNALS NOT UPGRADED AS PART OF THAT PROJECT RIGHT NOW WOULD BE WINDMILL HARBOR, UH, SIGNAL, UH, REDUCE, REDUCE CURB CUTS, AND PROVIDE ALTERNATIVE SAFER ACCESS FOR PROPERTIES THROUGHOUT, UH, PROVIDE TRAILS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE PARKWAY WHERE POSSIBLE, AND TO SEPARATE THOSE TRAILS FROM THE ROADWAY, UM, IN LIEU OF SIDEWALKS THAT WERE CONNECTED TO THE BACK OF CURB, UH, CREATE A COMPREHENSIVE SYSTEM OF SAFE, COMFORTABLE, AND ATTRACTIVE SHARED USE, SHARED USE PATHWAYS FOR CYCLISTS AND PEDESTRIANS.
UM, ENCOURAGE, UH, OPENING VIEWS TO THE WATER WHEREVER POSSIBLE.
SO VIEW CORRIDORS, VIEW SHEDS, UM, AND ENSURE, UH, INTEGRATION OF UNIQUE HILTON HAD, UM, SPECIFIC SIGNAGE, LANDSCAPE THEMES, PUBLIC ART PROGRAMS, ARCHITECTURAL, UM, FEATURES, ACCENT LIGHTING, UM, AND, AND OTHER ELEMENTS REDUCED DESIGN AND POSTED SPEEDS THROUGHOUT THE CORRIDOR.
UM, EVALUATE THE ISLAND WIDE, UH, TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM.
SO THOSE WERE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WERE MADE FROM COUNCIL TO APPLY THROUGHOUT THE CORRIDOR.
UM, AND THEN THERE WERE SOME SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS, UH, TO BALANCE OUT THE, OR TO ROUND OUT THE, UH, TOTAL OF 26 THAT WERE ADOPTED BY TOWN COUNCIL.
UM, NUMBER 13 RELATED TO IMPROVEMENTS OUT IN THE MOSS CREEK AREA.
UM, NUMBER 14 WAS TO ESTABLISH A GATEWAY EXPERIENCE ON THE MAINLAND SIDE OF THE BRIDGES.
UM, THERE WAS A RECOMMENDATION TO REDUCE BRIDGE MASS WITH, UM, WITH TWO SEPARATE BRIDGES AND A SHARED PATH ON THE SOUTH SIDE, UH, TO REDUCE BRIDGE LANE WIDTHS TO 11 FEET IN WIDTH.
UM, REDUCE SHOULDER WIDTH ON THE LEFT AND HAVE ONLY ONE BREAKDOWN, LANE OR SHOULDER ON THE RIGHT, PROVIDE A 14 FOOT MINIMUM NON-MOTORIZED, UH, LANE OR MULTI-USE PATHWAY ON THE BRIDGE WITH VIEWING AREAS.
UM, 18, ATTENTION TO BRIDGE DESIGN DETAILS AS VIEWED FROM AFAR.
SO TO CONSIDER, NOT JUST THE AESTHETIC ON THE BRIDGE, BUT AS YOU VIEW THE BRIDGE, UH, FROM A DISTANCE, CONSOLIDATE JENKINS ISLAND, ACCESS TO ONE SIGNAL SIGNALIZE LOCATION AT THE, UH, CHARLOTTE.
HE WINDMILL HARBOR ENTRANCE, PROVIDE TRADITIONAL TURN LANES, UM, THROUGH, UM, ESPECIALLY IN THE STONY COMMUNITY WHERE IT HAD THOSE U-TURN MOVEMENTS, WHICH RELATES TO THE NEXT ONE.
ELIMINATE CONFUSING S-E-D-O-T U-TURNS THAT WERE PART OF THE PROJECT.
ELIMINATE LEFT TURNS, UH, AND TRAFFIC INTRODUCTION ONTO WILDHORSE ROAD.
UM, CREATE A NEW PARK ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF STONY, CONSIDER A NEW VISITOR CENTER, CREATE A STONY AUTHORED VISION PLAN FOR THE NEXT GENERATION OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND THEN TO CREATE AND PROFESSIONALLY STAFF A DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AS A VEHICLE FOR STONY ADVANCEMENT.
A LOT OF THESE ITEMS WERE INCLUDED AND, AND, AND, UM, AND THE RESULTANT MODIFIED ALTERNATIVE THAT WAS RELEASED IN MARCH, UM, IN, UH, INCLUDED A LOT OF THESE RECOMMENDATIONS.
WHEN WE GET TO, UM, LATER IN THE PRESENTATION, UH, WE WILL HAVE, UM, WE'LL LOOK THROUGH
[00:55:01]
THE, THE ITEMS THAT HAVE BEEN INCORPORATED AND THOSE THAT, UM, WOULD BE REQUESTED AS PART OF, UH, REQUEST TO THE COUNTY THROUGH A, UM, UH, A NEW MOU.AND IF, EXCUSE ME IF I MAY, UM, THAT IS THE LIST THAT HAS RESPONSES FROM BOTH S-C-D-O-T AND THE COUNTY.
AND IF YOU'LL JUST GO BACK TO THAT SLIDE FOR ME, PLEASE.
YOU CAN START WHEREVER YOU WANT.
UM, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I CONTINUE ASK ABOUT IS WHAT IS THE COST OF THIS PROGRAM, THIS BRIDGE IN CORRIDOR? WHAT IS THE ACTUAL COST AND WHAT ARE THE LINE ITEMS SPECIFIC TO EACH FEATURE THAT'S DESCRIBED? HOW DO WE KNOW WHAT WE SHOULD RED LINE OUT AND SAY, NO THANK YOU, BECAUSE WE CAN'T AFFORD IT BECAUSE IT'S TOO MUCH OF AN INCONVENIENCE FOR THE STONY NEIGHBORHOOD OR FOR THE RESIDENTS OF HILTON HEAD, ET CETERA.
AND WHAT I WANNA HIGHLIGHT HERE IS THAT WITHIN THE RESPONSES THERE ARE, AND I WILL BE HAPPY TO GO THROUGH EACH ONE OF THEM NOW OR LATER, BUT I WILL GO THROUGH THEM EVENTUALLY.
HOW MANY OF THESE, UM, EITHER S-C-D-O-T HAS SAID, DO NOT QUALIFY FOR FUNDING OR FOR SIB FUNDING, OR THE COUNTY HAS SAID, SOUNDS GREAT TO US.
SO IF AS YOU'RE LOOKING AT THAT AND YOU'RE THINKING THERE'S SOME PRETTY FINE STUFF IN THERE, JUST UNDERSTAND THAT THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY INCLUDED IN THE OVERALL NUMBER THAT GETS BANTERED ABOUT, OF SOMEWHERE NEARING A HALF A BILLION DOLLARS, THAT THERE'S MORE MONIES THAT WOULD HAVE TO COME, AND THOSE DOLLARS WILL HAVE TO COME FROM YOU.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS ON THESE? ANY QUESTIONS ON, ON THESE? NO, I, I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE AS MS. BECKER HAS SAID THAT A NUMBER OF THESE WERE EITHER NOT AGREED TO BY THE COUNTY OR S-E-D-O-T, AND THAT, UH, THE TOWN IS EXPECTED TO PAY IF WE WANT TO, UH, FOR INSTANCE, I'M PICKING OUT ONE NUMBER SIX SOUNDS GREAT.
REDUCE CURB CUTS AND PROVIDE FOR ALTERNATIVE SAFER PROPERTY ACCESS THROUGHOUT S-E-D-O-T RESPONSE AGREEMENT ON THIS ITEM.
CHANGE IN ACCESS DRIVES WITHIN STONY AS PROPOSED BY MKSK IS SEPARATE FROM THE PROJECT.
SO I THINK THE COMMUNITY NEEDS TO KNOW THAT THIS LIST IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE PROJECT.
ONE THAT I WOULD LIKE TO HIGHLIGHT, BECAUSE I KNOW IT'S IMPORTANT TO EVERYONE,
ONE THAT I WOULD LIKE TO HIGHLIGHT TO FOLLOW UP ON THAT IS NUMBER THREE, VARYING MEDIAN WIDTHS AND MEANDER ROADWAY ALIGNMENTS WHERE POSSIBLE FOR TRAFFIC CALMING AND AESTHETICS.
WE WANT THAT IF THIS PROJECT WERE TO COME TO FRUITION.
HOWEVER, UM, THE COSTS ARE TO BE CON UH, ESTIMATED IF THE PROJECT, UM, OVERRUN WILL NEED TO BE FUNDED LOCALLY, NOT S-C-D-O-T OR SIB FUNDING IS THE SC DOT'S RESPONSE.
THE COUNTY'S RESPONSE IS THAT, UM, MEANDERING OF THE PARKWAY, ALL OF THE THINGS I MENTIONED WOULD INCREASE THE APPRO, THE PROJECT BY APPROXIMATELY $1.5 MILLION AND WAS DESIGNED TO AVOID ALL CRITICAL AREAS, FRESH, UH, FRESHWATER, UH, WATERWAYS AND, UM, WILL NOT BE PERMITTED TO RESULT IN WETLAND, UM, IMPACTS.
AND THEN GOES ON TO SAY ON THE SECOND PAGE, THE PART I'M TRYING TO GET TO, THE COUNTY DOES NOT HAVE EXTRA FUNDS FOR AN ADDITIONAL COST, AND ADDITIONAL LOCAL FUNDS WOULD NEED TO BE IDENTIFIED EARLY IN THE PROJECT IF THAT WERE TO TAKE PLACE.
SO AGAIN, NOT S-C-D-O-D MONEY, NOT CIB MONEY, NOT COUNTY MONEY, TOWN OF HILTON HEAD DOLLARS, YOUR TAX DOLLARS, YOUR TAX INCREASE, MS. BECKER ON THAT, ON ON THAT ITEM.
SO THIS WAS MADE IN OCTOBER, 2021 AFTER THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE HAD BEEN DELIVERED IN JULY OF 21.
AND SO THE COUNTY AND DOT WORKED WITH THE TOWN ON THESE 26 RECOMMENDATIONS, AND THE ONLY FEASIBLE AREA TO MEANDER THE RIGHT OF WAY OR THE ROAD IS THROUGH THE JENKINS ISLAND AREA.
[01:00:01]
AND SO THAT, THAT, UM, ALTERNATIVE WAS ADOPTED AND IS PART OF THE MODIFIED PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE.SO THAT COST IS INCLUDED IN THE NEW COST ESTIMATE.
NOW WHAT I'M HEARING ALSO IS THAT THERE'S CHANGES THAT HAVE BEEN MADE THAT NOT, THAT WE'RE NOT NECESSARILY GETTING INFORMED ABOUT, UM, THAT THAT CHANGE WAS AT THE MOD AT THE PUBLIC HEARING HELD IN MARCH, 2022.
SO ALL OF THE, ALL OF THE STAKEHOLDERS AND, UM, FOLKS IN THE, IN THE AREA HAD OPPORTUNITY AT THAT MEETING, AND THAT, THAT CHANGE HASN'T CHANGED SINCE THAT DATE IN, IN MARCH OF 2022.
WELL, I'M GLAD THAT, UM, THE STAKEHOLDERS WERE INFORMED AND ALL OF WHAT YOU SAID.
I WILL TELL YOU SITTING HERE, UM, THIS COUNCILWOMAN WAS NOT INFORMED, UM, BUT I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO GO TO, UM, AND I'LL FIND IT, MAYBE WE'LL COME BACK TO IT IN A MOMENT, BUT THE ISSUE OF THE 14 FOOT PEDESTRIAN BIKE PATHWAY WITH A 2220 BY 50 BUMPOUTS, THAT COST IS ADDITIONALLY, UM, TO BE BORN, THAT THAT COST TOO IS INCLUDED IN THE MODIFIED PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE.
SO WHAT GOT INCLUDED, AGAIN, THESE COMMENTS, UM, MOST, UM, HAVE BEEN INCLUDED AND INCORPORATED ALREADY.
UM, SO WHAT'S INCLUDED IN THE BRIDGE PLANS IS A SINGLE SIX LANE BRIDGE WITH APPROPRIATE SHOULDERS.
AND INITIALLY ON THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE WAS A 10 FOOT SHARED USE PATHWAY ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE BRIDGE.
UH, THE TOWN HAD ASKED FOR 14 ORIGINALLY.
UM, THEN THERE WAS A BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN THE COUNTY AND DOT AND THE TOWN THAT TIME, AND IT GOT, UM, EXTENDED TO 12 FOOT.
AND THEN FROM THERE, WE ENDED UP MODIFYING THE INSIDE SHOULDERS AND REDUCING THOSE FROM 10 TO SIX FEET.
SO THROUGH THAT PROCESS, THERE WAS EIGHT FEET OF BRIDGE WIDTH GAINED OR LESS.
SO TWO OF THAT SIX EIGHT FEET WAS GIVEN TO THE PATHWAY FOR A 14 FOOT PATHWAY, WHICH IS INCLUDED IN THE BRIDGE PLANS AS PRESENTED THE TWO.
AND IS THE COST INCLUDED AS WELL? COST IS INCLUDED IN THE CURRENT COST ESTIMATE INCLUDED ALSO OUR TWO, UM, LOOKOUTS, UH, THAT WERE PROPOSED IN THE MKSK AND THE TOWNS, UH, 26 RECOMMENDATIONS.
SO THERE ARE OVER EACH CREEK A IN BETWEEN THE TWO, UH, PIERS, THERE'S A SECTION, A LOOKOUT SECTION IN BOTH CREEKS.
SO, UM, ONE, ONE PER CREEK, AND THOSE TWO ARE INCLUDED IN THE CURRENT COST TESTIMATE.
SO ALL THOSE, CAN YOU TELL ME WHAT THE COST OF THAT IS? THE TOTAL COST ESTIMATE FOR THE PROJECT AS IT STANDS TODAY IS $488 MILLION, NO, SPECIFICALLY FOR THE BIKE PED AND THE BUMPOUTS.
SO THOSE PEDS, I BELIEVE, WERE THE BUMPOUTS WERE APPROXIMATELY $150,000.
UM, THE EXTRA COST IN THE BRIDGE AT THE TIME WHEN WE WERE CONTEMPLATING, UM, EXPANDING TO THE 14 FOOT PATHWAY WAS $2 MILLION PER WIDTH OF FOOT OF BRIDGE.
SO EXPANDING IT FROM 10 FEET TO 14 FEET WOULD'VE BEEN FOUR FEET OR $8 MILLION IN COST.
WHEN WE REDUCED THE SHOULDER WIDTH, IT ACTUALLY REDUCED THE COST OF THE BRIDGE.
SO, UM, AGAIN, ALL THOSE WERE INCORPORATED INTO THE MODIFIED PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE PRESENTED IN MARCH.
AND ARE IN THE CURRENT COST ESTIMATE AS PRESENTED TODAY, IS THERE A, A COST ESTIMATE THAT INCLUDES LIGHT ITEM LINE ITEMS? SO WE, WE CAN LOOK AT THAT SO THAT WE KNOW.
SO, SO THE LINE ITEMS WHERE THIS PROJECT IS OVERALL IS AT A CONCEPTUAL PHASE.
SO WE ARE IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROCESS, MM-HMM,
AND THEN AT THAT POINT, THE PROJECT PLANS ADVANCE THE ENGINEERING ADVANCES UNTIL WE GET A, A REFINED DESIGN.
AND THEN AT THAT POINT WE HAVE A, A LINE ITEM, UM, COST ESTIMATE.
AT THIS STAGE OF ANY PROJECT, WE HAVE A COST ESTIMATE BASED OFF LINEAR FOOT AND WIDTH.
SO IT'S A HIGH LEVEL COST ESTIMATE AT THIS STAGE OF THE PROJECT.
SO THESE ARE ALL CONCEPTUAL, THE NUMBERS ARE ALL CONCEPTUAL UNTIL WE GET TO A LATER POINT IN TIME THAT'S CORRECT.
AT WHICH TIME WE'LL KNOW WHAT IT'S ACTUALLY GONNA COST, WHAT WE ACTUALLY ARE GOING TO GET.
AND AT THAT POINT, WE'VE ALREADY GIVEN MUNICIPAL CONSENT, SO WE CAN'T REVERSE OUR DECISION.
IS THAT CORRECT? JARED? IF YOU'LL, IF YOU'LL TOUCH ON THAT JUST A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE, UM, WHILE WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A DESIGN COME FORTH, THAT'S NOT THE POLICY OF FEDERAL HIGHWAY, UM, SO IF YOU COULD ADDRESS THAT SO THE PUBLIC CAN, CAN HEAR.
[01:05:01]
ABSOLUTELY.SO AGAIN, WE'RE IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OR THE NEPA PROCESS, AND AS THAT PROCESS IS DEVELOPED, YOU'RE AT A 30% DESIGN LEVEL, UM, PRIOR TO A PROJECT ADVANCING.
UM, IT HAS TO GO THROUGH THIS, THIS PUBLIC PROCESS THAT WE'RE GOING THROUGH TODAY AND HAVE BEEN FOR A WHILE.
AND ONLY THEN AFTER YOU GET A CHECK MARK DOES IT ADVANCE.
SO THERE'S NO OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO SPEND FUNDS ON THE FEDERAL PROJECT TO REFINE THE DESIGN ANY FURTHER THAN WHERE WE ARE TODAY UNTIL WE GET THE CHECK OFF FROM FEDERAL HIGHWAY IN THIS PROJECT, SPECIFICALLY DUE TO THE LIMITS AND WHERE IT CROSSES MUNICIPAL BOUNDARIES AND THE TERMINI, UM, MUNICIPAL CONSENT IS, IS NOT A FEDERAL MANDATE, BUT A STATE MANDATE.
AND SO WE'RE WORKING WITH DOT ON THE PROJECT AS, AS THEY'RE THE LEAD DESIGN FOR, FOR THE COUNTY.
AND SO BETWEEN FEDERAL HIGHWAY'S REQUIREMENTS AND THE NEPA PROCESS AND THE STATE'S MANDATE AND THE MUNICIPAL CONSENT, THOSE TWO THINGS ARE MERGING AT THIS POINT BEFORE WE CAN ADVANCE THE PROJECT FORWARD.
IT DOESN'T ANSWER THE QUESTION THAT ONCE ALL OF THOSE CONSIDERATIONS HAVE TAKEN IN PLACE AND EVERYONE ELSE HAS BEEN SATISFIED, AND WE'VE GIVEN OUR MUNICIPAL CONSENT, EXCUSE ME, FOR THE PROJECT TO MOVE FORWARD, THAT WE HAVE NO RECOURSE IF THOSE DETAILS DO NOT MATCH.
SO THE DE WITH WHAT IT IS THAT WE AS COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE SUPPOSED TO BE DOING, WHICH IS REPRESENTING THE FOLKS OF THIS ISLAND, THE 37,000 PLUS PEOPLE WHO COME TO THIS ISLAND, WHO HAVE EXPECTATIONS OF KNOWING WHAT WE'RE DOING, HOW WE'RE DOING IT, AND WHAT IT'S GONNA COST, AND WHAT THE IMPACTS IN BOTH STONY AND ACROSS THIS ISLAND ARE GOING TO BE.
SO TO, TO REPHRASE AND, AND NOT THINK, WHAT I HEAR YOU'RE ASKING IS TO MAKE A DECISION TODAY WITH NOT A FINAL DESIGN.
AND UNFORTUNATELY WITH FEDERAL FUNDING, THOSE ARE THE PARAMETERS NOT SET BY THE, THE COUNTY, NOT SET BY DOT, BUT SET BY FEDERAL HIGHWAY.
AND BECAUSE OF THE NATURE OF THE PROJECT, THERE IS FEDERAL FUNDING.
AND THIS, AGAIN, WHAT'S INCLUDED IN THE COST ESTIMATE IS, IS THE OVERALL, UH, COST FOR SECTIONS.
IT'S NOT DOWN TO THE LINE ITEM.
AND UNTIL WE REFINE THE DESIGN, WE WON'T HAVE THAT.
BUT WHAT WE DO HAVE IS A CONTINGENCY IN THE OVERALL PROJECT COST FOR, UM, DIFFERENT ELEMENTS THAT AREN'T KNOWN TODAY THROUGH THE FINAL DESIGN, BUT CAN BE EXPECTED.
THE CONTINGENCY, UM, IS BROKEN UP IN DIFFERENT PARTS.
AND SO THE BRIDGE IS THE LARGEST COST OF THE PROJECT.
UM, BUT THE BRIDGE AS IT'S DEFINED TODAY IN A 30% DESIGN IS PRETTY DEFINED.
SO THERE'S NOT MUCH OPPORTUNITY FOR THE BRIDGE TO CHANGE ITS CHARACTER AND SHAPE.
UM, SO THAT CONTINGENCY IS SMALLER.
I DON'T KNOW SPECIFICALLY, I DON'T HAVE THE COST ESTIMATE IN FRONT OF ME.
UM, THE COST ESTIMATE ON THE ROAD PORTIONS, THERE'S MORE OPPORTUNITIES FOR THERE TO BE CHANGED IN THE FINAL DESIGN FROM WHERE IT IS TODAY.
AND SO THERE'S A LARGER CONTINGENCY INCLUDED IN THE COST ESTIMATE ON THE ROAD WORK.
SEAN, I KNOW YOU'VE GOT A LOT MORE ON THE PRESENTATION, SO IF YOU COULD CONTINUE THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
SO BASED UPON THE INPUT THAT TOWN COUNCIL PROVIDED, AS WELL AS FEEDBACK FROM THE PUBLIC AND STAKEHOLDERS, UM, S-C-D-O-T RELEASED A MODIFIED PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE IN FEBRUARY OF 2022.
A PUBLIC HEARING WAS HELD IN MARCH OF THAT YEAR.
UM, THE PROJECTS INCLUDED THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE LISTED HERE, UH, ENTIRE, UH, PROJECT DESIGN SPEED OF 45 MILES AN HOUR.
IT INCLUDED A 12 FOOT SHARED PATHWAY, UH, SHARED USE PATHWAY ON THE BRIDGE, CONNECTING TO A NEW PATHWAY ON BUCKINGHAM PLANTATION ROAD, AS WELL AS THE, THE PATHWAYS PROPOSED ON JENKINS ISLAND.
AS JARED MENTIONED, THE INTERIOR BRIDGE SHOULDERS WERE REDUCED FROM 10 FEET TO SIX FEET.
UM, IT INCREASED MEDIAN WIDTH AND ROAD, UM, SEPARATION IN THE JENKINS ISLAND AREA.
IT'S IN SMALL SCALE HERE, BUT IT DID MEANDER THE WESTBOUND LANE, UH, AND SHIFTED THAT ALIGNMENT NORTH, UH, ON JENKINS ISLAND.
THE U-TURNS WERE REMOVED IN THE STONY AREA, AND THEN FOUR LANES BASED ON THE COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION TO REDUCE LANES TO 11 FEET.
FOUR LANES OF SIX PROPOSED THROUGH STONY WERE REDUCED FROM 12 FEET TO 11 FEET, UH,
[01:10:01]
TWO LANES IN EACH DIRECTION.MAY I ASK A QUESTION? YES, THANK YOU.
IF YOU GO BACK TO THE PREVIOUS SLIDE, PLEASE.
UM, I THINK THERE'S CONFUSION.
MAYBE IT'S MINE AND INTERIOR BRIDGE SHOULDERS REDUCED FROM 10 TO SIX FEET.
I DON'T WANT THERE TO BE ANY MISUNDERSTANDING HERE.
UM, THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT BOTH OF THE, I GUESS THE BREAKDOWN LANE AND THE SHOULDER EASTBOUND, WESTBOUND TO EACH ONE OF EACH ON BOTH SIDES HAVE ALL BEEN REDUCED TO SIX FEET.
IT IS ONLY THE ONES ON THE INSIDE PORTION, RIGHT? SO WHEN PEOPLE ARE ADDING THIS UP, I DON'T WANT THEM TO THINK THAT BOTH THE BREAKDOWN AND THE SHOULDER HAVE BEEN REDUCED FROM 10 TO SIX FEET.
IN FACT, THE, THE BREAKDOWN LANE IS STILL 10 FEET ON BOTH THE EAST AND THE WEST BOUND LANES.
THIS IS, THE WAY THIS IS WRITTEN, IT'S A LITTLE BIT MISLEADING.
THE, THERE ARE, UH, SHOULDER TWO SHOULDERS IN EACH DIRECTION.
THE EXTERIOR, THE OUTSIDE SHOULDER IS 10 FEET, THE INSIDE SHOULDER IS SIX FEET.
SO WHAT IS THE TOTAL NUMBER OF LANES.
TOTAL NUMBER OF LANES IS THREE LANES IN EACH DIRECTION.
THAT WAS SIX WITH SHOULDERS ON EACH SIDE OF THE TRAVEL LANES.
THE, THE EXTERIOR SHOULDER OR OUTSIDE SHOULDER IS 10 FEET IN WIDTH PER SOUTH CAROLINA BRIDGE DESIGN MANUAL, AS WELL AS FEDERAL HIGHWAY STANDARDS.
THE SIX FEET ON THE INTERIOR SHOULDER IS A DESIGN EXCEPTION FROM THE 10 FOOT SHOULDER IN THAT AREA.
SO THERE'S BEEN BEEN A, AN AGREEMENT TO REDUCE THE INTERIOR SHOULDERS FROM 10 TO SIX FEET.
SO THERE, LEMME GET THIS STRAIGHT.
SO THERE'S, UH, SIX TRAVEL LINES, TWO BREAKDOWN LANES, THAT'S A TOTAL OF EIGHT, TWO SHOULDERS, THAT'S 10.
AND THE BIKE LANE, THAT CONSTITUTES 11 AREAS.
MAY I ALSO ASK A QUESTION WITH REGARD TO THAT? THERE MUST BE A MEDIAN, THERE MUST BE SOME SEPARATION BETWEEN EAST AND WEST.
HOW MUCH ROOM IS THAT AND WHAT IS THAT COMPRISED OF? IS IT A LANDSCAPE MEDIAN, TRYING TO KEEP IN, IN CHARACTER AND KEEPING WITH LOW COUNTRY VALUES AS WE FIRST HEARD WAS A POINT THAT WE'RE, UM, MUST ACHIEVE? OR IS IT A, UM, CONCRETE BARRIER ON THE BRIDGE? IT'S A CONCRETE BARRIER.
SO BETWEEN EACH OF THE LANES AND THE PEDESTRIAN, THERE'S A CONCRETE JERSEY BARRIER AS IT'S REFERENCED, RIGHT.
UH, AND THAT'S ABOUT 30 OR 40 INCHES TALL.
AND I BELIEVE AT THE BASE IS 30 INCHES WIDE.
SO THAT, FROM THE FACE OF THAT TO THE TRAVEL LANE IS THE SHOULDERS THAT WE'RE CONSIDERING.
SO SAME THING WITH THE PEDESTRIAN ACCOMMODATIONS.
UH, THAT SEPARATION IS NOT INCLUDED IN THAT WIDTH.
IT'S FROM THE FACE TO THE TRAVEL LANE.
AND HOW MUCH IS THAT? UH, SO IN THE CENTER, AGAIN, IT'S SIX FEET FROM THE, FROM THE FACE TO THE INTERIOR TRAVEL LANE.
AND THEN ON THE SHOULDER IT'S, IT'S 10 FEET FROM THE TRAVEL LANE TO THE FACE OF THE CONCRETE BARRIERS IN BETWEEN PEDESTRIANS AND TRAVEL.
SO THERE'S JUST A CONCRETE BARRIER BETWEEN THESE LANES, THESE 12 FOOT LANES TO THE PEDESTRIAN PATHWAY.
DOES THAT SOUND SAFE? NO, THAT'S, I MEAN, IT'S A RHETORICAL QUESTION, SO NO NEED TO ANSWER.
MY MATH, YOU KNOW, MAYBE I MISSED SOMETHING SOMEWHERE.
BUT THAT'S ROUGHLY 119 FEET WITH NO GREENERY, NO LANDSCAPE, NO GREENERY, NO NOTHING BUT CONCRETE IN FRONT OF YOU.
DOES THAT SOUND LIKE ISLAND CHARACTER? UM, I, I DO WANNA MENTION THE, SO THE EXISTING BRIDGE WITH HAS TWO LANES IN EACH DIRECTION.
IT HAS TWO SHOULDERS IN EACH DIRECTION.
UM, IT DOES NOT HAVE A MULTI-USE PATHWAY.
UM, THE TRAVEL LANES ARE CURRENTLY SEPARATED BY CONCRETE JERSEY BARRIER, UM, AND THE, AND THE SEPARATION ON THE RAVENEL BRIDGE FROM CHARLESTON AND MOUNT PLEASANT HAS A JERSEY BARRIER SEPARATION BETWEEN THE TRAVEL LANES AND THE PEDESTRIAN, UM, TRAFFIC THERE AS WELL.
AND WHILE I APPRECIATE THE REFERENCE TO OTHER BRIDGE, OTHER BRIDGES IN OTHER CITIES, THIS IS HILTON HEAD ISLAND.
[01:15:09]
SO I, I'D LIKE TO ASK A QUESTION ABOUT THE WIDTH OF THE EXISTING BRIDGE STRUCTURE.WHAT IS THE WIDTH OF THE EXISTING BRIDGE STRUCTURES? YEAH, I, I HAVE, I HAVE A LOT OF THIS IN THE IN, UM, BUT I'LL, I'LL COVER REAL QUICK.
THE WIDTH OF THE EXISTING, UH, BRIDGES HERE OVER MACKEY CREEK FROM THE OUTSIDE EDGE TO THE OUTSIDE EDGE IS A HUNDRED FEET.
THE PROPOSED WIDTH OF THE BRIDGE IS APPROXIMATELY 121 FEET WIDE, THAT OUT.
BUT THAT INCLUDES THE MULTI-USE PATHWAY WHERE IT'S 12 FEET OF SHARED USE PATH, BUT ALSO TWO ADDITIONAL FEET OF SEPARATION.
SO IF YOU LOOK AT TRAVEL LANES AND SHOULDERS WIDTH, IT'S A HUNDRED FEET VERSUS 107 FEET.
AND THAT, THAT SECTION, AND THAT INCLUDES THE, THERE ARE TWO BRIDGE SECTIONS THERE AS OPPOSED TO SEVEN FEET, SEVEN FEET WIDER AS IT RELATES TO THE BRIDGES AND TRAVEL LANES AND SHOULDERS.
AND DOES THAT INCLUDE THE, THE SPACE IN BETWEEN THE TWO BRIDGE STRUCTURES OVER MACKEY CREEK? IT DOES.
THE, THE, THE BRIDGES OVER SKULL CREEK ARE APPROXIMATELY 80 FEET WIDE OUTSIDE EDGE TO OUTSIDE EDGE.
UM, OVERALL BRIDGE WIDTH OF 121 FEET, INCLUDING THE MULTI-USE PATHWAY DIMENSION OF 14 FEET.
SO IF YOU DO MORE OF AN APPLES TO APPLES BRIDGE, TRAVEL LANE, UH, SHOULDERS AND THE, UH, PROTECTIONS, UM, IT WOULD BE 107 FEET VERSUS 80 FEET IN THAT SECTION.
IT'D BE INTERESTING TO SEE THAT LAID OUT.
IT'S KIND OF HARD TO BELIEVE THAT YOU ADD THAT MANY LENGTHS AND THERE'S THAT LITTLE DIFFERENCE.
AND WE, AND WE HAVE A GRAPHIC THAT SHOWS THE, THE DIMENSIONS TWO BRIDGES ARE SAFER THAN ONE BRIDGE.
THE, UM, AND THIS, UH, SUMMARIZES, UM, WHAT I PRESENTED IN THE PREVIOUS SCREEN ABOUT DESIGN, UH, SPEED THROUGH JENKINS ISLAND.
YOU CAN SEE THE, UM, THE TRAFFIC ON JENKINS ISLAND CONSOLIDATED AT ONE LOCATION, WINDMILL HARBOR, CONSISTENT WITH TOWN COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION.
UM, AND THEN THERE WAS A VERY, UM, SHIFT TO MEDIAN, UH, TO THE NORTHBOUND FOR WESTBOUND TRAFFIC, UH, TO PROVIDE MORE OF A PARKWAY, UH, FEEL IN THAT AREA.
UM, AS YOU GO INTO THE STONY COMMUNITY, I'M SORRY, UM, WRONG THING HERE, BUT IN THE STONY COMMUNITY, U-TURNS WERE REMOVED IN THE STONY AREA.
AGAIN, FOUR LANES, TWO LANES IN EACH DIRECTION WERE REDUCED FROM 12 FEET IN WIDTH TO 11 FEET IN WIDTH.
THE IMPACT UNDER THIS MODIFIED PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE IS DIFFERENT TO THE TRADITIONAL CULTURAL PROPERTY AS WHERE BEFORE IT WAS 4.77 TOTAL ACRES IMPACTED THE INPUT FROM COUNCIL AND STAKEHOLDERS, REDUCED IT FROM 4.77 TO 3.4.
AND THE 1.52 ACRES OF PRIVATE PROPERTY IMPACT WERE REDUCED TO ONE, UH, 0.21.
SO YOU CAN SEE THE OVERALL REDUCTION, UM, IN THAT, IN THE TRADITIONAL CULTURAL PROPERTY IMPACT THEN THAT'S WITHIN THE STONY COMMUNITY.
UM, SO AGAIN, YOU CAN SEE WHEN YOU APPLY THAT FOUR F RESOURCE, UM, WHEN THE DRAFT EA CAME OUT WITH A 4.777 ACRES OF, UM, IMPACT, AND THERE WAS A, THERE WAS A RECOMMENDATION IN THAT PERMIT DOC AND THOSE PERMIT DOCUMENTS THAT IT WAS DI MINIMIS, WE WERE ACTUALLY ABLE TO WORK WITH THE COUNTY, THE STATE, AND THE COMMUNITY TO REDUCE THOSE IMPACTS EVEN FURTHER.
THEIR FINDING WAS ONLY REINFORCED BY REDUCTION IN OVERALL IMPACT WITHIN THE TCP.
SO THAT WAS RELEASED IN, UH, IN SPRING OF 2022.
UM, THERE WERE SEVERAL MEETINGS AND DISCUSSIONS BETWEEN THE TOWN AND THE COUNTY.
THERE WAS A WORKSHOP HELD, UM, IN THIS MEETING IN APRIL.
UM, BUT DISCUSSIONS THROUGHOUT THE YEAR LED TO A MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT ADOPTED ON OCTOBER 4TH, 2022 BETWEEN THE TOWN AND THE COUNTY.
AND IT OUTLINED A PATH, UH, CRITICAL STEPS AND PATH FORWARD, UM, FOR THE PROJECT.
THERE WERE 11, UH, ITEMS THAT WERE OUTLINED IN THAT, UM, IN THE MOU, UH, FIRST WAS THE TOWN COUNTY WOULD AGREE TO WORK IN PARTNERSHIP COOPERATIVE MANNERS THROUGH THE REMAINDER OF THE PROJECT.
WE HAVE DONE THAT, AND I WILL SAY IN THE PAST SIX OR SEVEN MONTHS, THE PARTNERSHIP HAS NEVER BEEN STRONGER IN TRYING TO, UM, LISTEN TO EACH OTHER AND TO IMPROVE THIS PROJECT, UM, REDUCE PROPERTY IMPACTS TO THE TCP,
[01:20:01]
UM, AND TO, AND TO BE ABLE TO DEFINE THE PROJECT, UM, IN GREATER DETAIL.UM, THE, THERE WAS AGREEMENT TO WORK THROUGH TO TRY TO IDENTIFY THOSE ADDITIONAL 26 RECOMMENDATIONS.
THERE WERE ADDITIONAL, UH, OPPORTUNITY TO MOVE, MAKE, UM, POSITIVE MOVEMENT ON THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS.
UH, WE WOULD DO THAT COLLECTIVELY.
UM, THERE WAS AGREEMENT THAT THE COUNTY WOULD PROCURE AN INDEPENDENT CONSULTANT, UM, TO DO AN INDEPENDENT STUDY AND THAT THERE WOULD BE A TEAM, UM, FOR SELECTION MADE UP OF BOTH COUNTY COUNT, UH, TOWN AND COUNTY REPRESENTATIVES.
THEY CONTRACTED WITH CBD, WHO DID AN INDEPENDENT STUDY, UM, INCLUDED TOWN, UM, INVOLVEMENT AS THEY WORKED THROUGH THE SCOPE OF WORK.
AND THOSE REC AND THOSE, UM, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS WERE PRESENTED TO TOWN COUNCIL AND COUNTY COUNCIL IN SEPTEMBER AND OCTOBER OF 2023.
UM, YOU CAN SEE THAT THE TOWN, UM, IDENTIFIED THE COMMITTEE AND COMMITTEE COMPOSITION AND A DESIGNATION FROM THE TOWN MANAGER OF REPRESENTATION.
UM, ALL ALL RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE, FROM THAT INDEPENDENT REVIEW WERE MEANT TO INFORM THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT.
AND IF THERE WERE ANY RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WOULD AFFECT THOSE DOCUMENTS, UM, WE, THERE WAS AN AGREEMENT TO MODIFY THE DOCUMENTS, UM, SUBMITTED FOR THE FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT IF THOSE, IF THAT HAD TAKEN PLACE, UM, OR MODIFY THOSE IN ADVANCE OF SUBMISSION FOR THE FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IF, UM, IMPACT IF IT HAD NOT TAKEN PLACE.
MAY I ASK A QUESTION? UM, MAYBE JERRY, YOU HAVE IT AT THE TOP OF YOUR HEAD OR SOMEONE ELSE DOES.
WITH THE COUNTY'S, UM, REVIEW THAT TOOK PLACE, THEY CAME, THEY HAD DATA, UM, THAT REPRESENTED THE AMOUNT OF TIME SAVINGS THAT THE NEW BRIDGE WOULD, UM, ADD VALUE TO THE RESIDENTS AND EMPLOYERS AND EMPLOYEES OF HILTON.
HU DO YOU RECALL WHAT THAT TIME SAVINGS FROM THE COUNTY'S CONSULTANT WAS? NO, I DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION IN FRONT OF ME.
UM, THE, THAT WAS DEFINITELY LOOKED AT AS FAR AS TRAVEL TIME AND IS INCLUDED IN THE REPORT THAT WAS PRESENTED TO BOTH COUNTY COUNCIL AND TOWN COUNCIL.
AND AS I RECALL, IT WAS TRULY DI MINIMIS, UM, HAVING LITTLE TO NO IMPACT IN THE COMMUTING TIME FOR ALL OF THE EMPLOYEES AND, UM, VISITORS COMING ONTO THE ISLAND FOUR MINUTES.
SO PLEASE KEEP THAT IN MIND AS YOU'RE LISTENING TO THIS, BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S A CRITICAL ELEMENT.
THE TIME SAVINGS OF A HALF A BI, NEARLY HALF A BILLION DOLLAR PROJECT IS IN THIS CASE FROM THEIR REPORT, LESS THAN TWO MINUTES.
UM, IN, IN A MOMENT, WE WILL BE ABLE TO HAVE OUR CONSULTANTS PROVIDE THE FINDINGS OF THEIR YES, I, I, I HAVE LOOKING FORWARD TO THAT AS WELL.
UM, I'M GONNA MOVE THROUGH THESE.
THE OTHER ELEMENTS WITHIN THAT, UH, MOU INCLUDED, UM, THERE'S A REQUIREMENT OF NEPA PROCESS TO DO A VALUE ENGINEERING TO SEE WHERE THERE'S OPPORTUNITIES TO SAVE, UH, MONEY.
AND THAT'S AN, THERE'S AN AGREEMENT TO DO THAT AS PART OF THAT PROCESS, UM, THAT WE WOULD WORK WITH, UM, THE LATS THAT THE LOCAL, UM, TRANSPORTATION GROUP THROUGH OUR MPO, UM, UH, REGARDING THE SYNCHRONIZED, UH, SIGNAL SYSTEM ALL THE WAY OUT TO I 95, UM, AND, AND WORK TO FIND FUNDING FOR THAT.
UM, ANY SIGNAL THAT WAS NOT PART OF, UH, AN ADAPTIVE TRAFFIC SYSTEM WOULD BE UPGRADED.
UH, FOR EXAMPLE, THE WINDMILL HARBOR LIGHT AS PART OF THE PROJECT WOULD BE INCLUDED.
UM, THE AGREEMENT DID NOT PROVIDE MUNICIPAL CONSENT.
UM, BUT THAT WOULD BE NEEDED BEFORE THE RIGHT OF WAY PRO, UM, PHASE WOULD START ON THE PROJECT.
AND THAT THE TOWN AND THE COUNTY AGREED THAT THE INDEPENDENT REVIEW WAS THE LAST STUDY NEEDED TO MAKE A DECISION.
MAY I ASK ABOUT THAT WINDMILL HARBOR LIGHT, PLEASE? YEAH.
HAS THE COUNTY INCORPORATED THE WINDMILL HARBOR LIGHT INTO THE SYSTEM ON HILTON HEAD ISLAND? AS YOU JUST HEARD, IT WOULD, NO, NOT AT THIS TIME.
SO WHAT'S CALLED OUT IN THIS MOU THAT THAT WOULD HAPPEN IS PRIOR TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF THIS PROJECT WAS PROPOSED IN THE MOU THAT WE'RE, THAT WILL BE CONSIDERED LATER BY TOWN COUNCIL AND COUNTY COUNCIL IS FOR THAT.
SO I FIND THAT INTERESTING AS WE'RE TRYING TO BUILD A GOOD FAITH RELATIONSHIP THAT WE'VE AGREED TO SOMETHING THAT WAS VERY IMPORTANT
[01:25:01]
TO THE RESIDENTS OF HILTON HEAD AS WE LOOK TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT WE COULD SAVE TIME, MOVE TRAFFIC THROUGH IN A MORE SAFE AND EFFICIENT WAY WITH THE, UM, INTEGRATED LIGHTING SYSTEM.AND WE HAVE AN AGREEMENT THAT THE WINDMILL HARBOR WOULD BE PART OF THAT.
AND THE COUNTY'S YET TO DO IT.
THE COUNTY ALSO ASSISTED IN THE 25 LIGHTS THAT THE TOWN, UM, ADVANCED WITH THAT SYSTEM THAT WAS FUNDED THROUGH COUNTY FUNDS.
BUT THAT DOESN'T SPEAK TO WHAT I'M SPEAKING OF HERE WITH REGARD TO WINDMILL HARBOR AND OUR AGREEMENT TO HAVE DONE SO.
SO IN MY MIND, AND MAYBE OTHERS, WHEN WE'RE LOOKING TO ENTER TOWARD AN AGREEMENT WITH THE COUNTY, WHAT GOOD FAITH AND CONFIDENCE DO WE HAVE? THANK YOU.
SO THAT RECOMMENDATION WAS THAT IT WOULD BE INCLUDED WITHIN THE PROJECT.
UM, WE HAVE DRAFTED A LETTER REQUESTING THE, UH, TO, TO TAKE OVER THE MAINTENANCE, UH, UM, AND INCLUDE THAT INTO THE TOWN SYSTEM, UM, AS SUCH.
SO THAT WAS THE MOU ADOPTED BY, UM, BEAUFORT COUNTY AND TOWN COUNCIL.
UM, SUBSEQUENT TO THAT AGREEMENT, TOWN COUNCIL ASKED FOR AN ADDITIONAL INDEPENDENT STUDY BE CONDUCTED, PROCURED BY THE TOWN OF HILTON ISLAND, AND, AND FOCUS ON A SCOPE OF WORK THAT WAS TO BE, UM, RECOMMENDED BY A COMMITTEE AND BY TOWN COUNCIL IN FEBRUARY OF 2023, TOWN COUNCIL AUTHORIZED CREATING A COMMITTEE AND APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERSHIPS.
UM, YOU CAN SEE IN NUMBER ONE THERE WHAT THE MEMBERSHIP WAS.
UM, THE COMMITTEE, UH, ON ACCORD IN, UH, COORDINATING WITH THE TECHNICAL, UH, REVIEW TEAM THAT WAS DESIGNATED BY THE TOWN MANAGER, UM, WAS TO DRAFT AN RFQ AND IDENTIFY A REASONABLE DUMP NUMBER OF FIRMS, UM, TO IDENT, UH, TO BRING IN AS PREFERRED CONSULTANTS.
UM, THE COMMITTEE AND TECHNICAL REVIEW TEAM DRAFTED AN, UH, RFQ AND A SCOPE OF WORK, AND THAT WAS PRESENTED TO TOWN COUNCIL IN JUNE OF 2023 AND APPROVED BY TOWN COUNCIL.
UM, THE RFQ WAS SOLICITED AND THE, UM, THE GATEWAY ADVISORY, UH, COMMITTEE HELPED PROCURE AND RECOMMEND A CONSULTANT TO ENGAGE IN THE INDEPENDENT STUDY.
UM, THEY CONDUCTED INTERVIEWS AND MADE THE RECOMMENDATIONS LOCK.
THE LOCK MEER GROUP WITH CONSULTANTS AT THIS TABLE WERE THE CONSULTANTS THAT WERE SELECTED, UM, BY THE INDEPENDENT REVIEW, UM, ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND RECOMMENDED TO THE TOWN MANAGER FOR EXECUTION OF THE CONTRACT.
AND THEN THE FOURTH ROLE OF THE COMMITTEE, UH, WAS TO MAKE SURE THAT THE ADVISOR, THAT THE, UH, CONSULTANT GROUP, UM, PERFORMED THE SCOPE OF WORK THAT THE COMMITTEE HAD RECOMMENDED AND THAT TOWN COUNCIL HAD ADOPTED AS PART OF THE RFQ THAT WAS DISTRIBUTED, UH, SEEKING THEIR SERVICES.
SO IN, UM, IN THE SCOPE OF WORK AND IN THE RFQ, THESE ARE THE ITEMS THAT WERE IDENTIFIED, UH, TO BE ACHIEVED.
THERE WAS AN INDEPENDENT STUDY OF THE PAR OF THE CORRIDOR PROJECT.
THEY WERE REVIEW ASSUMPTION METHODOLOGIES, ALTERNATIVES, PREFERRED DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS THAT SERVE AS BEST INTEREST OF HILAND ISLAND.
AND THEY TAKE A FRESH LOOK AT THE PROJECT OFFER, UH, NEW ALTERNATIVES, UM, AND I DID DEVELOP ANY OF THEIR OWN IDEAS, UM, AND RECOMMEND ALTERNATIVES TO THE COMMITTEE AND ULTIMATELY TOWN COUNCIL.
UM, NUMBER TWO, THE PROPOSED PLAN WILL HAVE TO PASS NEPA REVIEW WHEN THEY GO BACK TO THE FOUR F.
AND IT WAS IMPORTANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT PROJECT INFLUENCE IS UNDERSTOOD.
SO THE CONSULTANT THAT HAD TO HAVE FAMILIARITY WITH GETTING THROUGH THE NEPA PROCESS, UM, AND, AND, UM, THE REVIEW FROM FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION, UM, ALSO DEMONSTRATE SOLUTIONS TO THE CONGESTION PROBLEM, UM, WAS PART OF THE, AS IT WAS PART OF THE PROJECT PURPOSE AND NEED.
UM, AND THEN FINALLY THE STUDY WAS ANTICIPATED TO TAKE NO LONGER THAN SIX MONTHS AS DIRECTED BY TOWN COUNCIL.
I'M NOT GONNA GO THROUGH EVERY ITEM IN THE SCOPE, I, BUT I'VE GOT FIVE SLIDES IN THE TASK.
THERE WAS A PROJECT INITIATION AND COORDINATION THAT WAS BRINGING THE CONSULTANTS HERE.
THEY, UH, WENT THROUGH ALL PREVIOUS DOCUMENTS, DID SITE VISITS, DID FIELD, UH, MEASUREMENTS AND REVIEW, AND MET WITH THE COMMITTEE.
UM, TASK TWO WAS TO PROVIDE MODELING DATA AND RECOMMEND DESIGN CONCEPTS.
THEY EVALUATED THE TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL THAT WAS USED TO, UM, IDENTIFY GROWTH RATE, UM, AND TO, UM, IDENTIFY WAYS TO EVALUATE THE PROJECT, UM, INCLUDING THOSE ITEMS LISTED THERE.
UM, UH, THROUGHPUT AND TRAFFIC SIMULATION COSTS,
[01:30:01]
SAFETY, ENVIRONMENTAL COMMUNITY IMPACTS.UH, TASK THREE WAS MODEL, UH, AND OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS UPDATES.
SO BASED ON THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL, THEY RAN MODELING, UM, THROUGH, UH, UH, A SYNC, UH, ONE MODELING, UH, SOFTWARE CALLED SYNCHRO, UM, TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE COMMITTEE FOR ALTERNATIVES, UH, FOR A ADDITIONAL ASSESSMENT AND REVIEW.
UM, AND THEN THEY SHIFTED INTO A, A MORE, UM, ACCURATE MODELING SOFTWARE, A MORE, UH, HIGHER, HIGHER LEVEL OF PREDICTABILITY AND OUTCOME CALLED SEM.
AND THAT WAS, UH, INCLUDED IN TASK IN, UH, TASK THREE AS THEY, UM, MOVED THROUGH THEIR WORK.
AND THEN TASK FOUR WAS OUR PROJECT.
WELL, WE FOLLOWED IT END, INDEPENDENT END TO END, END TO END ANALYSIS.
SO IT WENT BEYOND THE SPANISH WELLS WILDHORSE ROAD INTERSECTION AND LOOKED AT DOWNSTREAM IMPACTS TO, UM, INTERSECTIONS ON THE US OR PARKWAY BUSINESS ROUTE, ALL THE WAY TO HOOPING CARRYING WAY INDIGO RUN, UM, AND THEN ON THE CROSS ISLAND ROUTE, ALL THE WAY DOWN THROUGH PALMETTO BAY ROAD, ALL THE WAY TO SEA PINE CIRCLE.
AND SO THEY DID THAT AND PRESENTED THOSE FINDINGS, ALL THE FINDINGS THROUGH TASKS ONE THROUGH FOUR, UH, TO THE COMMITTEE, UM, THROUGH JUNE 12TH OF LAST, UH, WHICH WAS LAST WEEK.
CAN I ASK YOU A QUESTION? UM, IF YOU GO BACK TO THAT LAST SLIDE.
SO IN THE WOR, SO LET ME ASK THE QUESTION THIS WAY.
WILL WE GET AN OPPORTUNITY TO HEAR FROM THE LOCK MUELLER, UM, CONSULTING GROUPS THAT, UH, REPRESENTATIVES THAT ARE HERE WITH REGARD TO THEIR FINDINGS THAT ARE IN THAT REPORT? OR ARE WE YES.
WE'RE GETTING VERY, WE'RE GETTING VERY CLOSE.
AND THEN TASK FIVE WAS TO DELIVER A FINAL REPORT THAT SUMMARIZED OR INCLUDED DETAILS AROUND ALL OF THEIR FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND TO, AND TO DELIVER THAT, UH, TO THE TOWN.
THERE WERE SOME ASSESSMENTS THAT WERE DONE, UM, THROUGH EVALUATIONS ABOUT, UM, OTHER ITEMS, NO LEFT TURNS AT PEAK HOURS, UM, NO LEFT TURNS IN THE STONY COMMUNITY AT PEAK HOURS.
THERE'S AN ASSESSMENT THAT WAS DONE THAT, THAT, UM, RUN THROUGH THE MODELING WHERE THERE WAS SAVINGS IN, UM, WESTBOUND TRAFFIC IN THE PM PEAK, UH, BY ELIMINATING THE LEFT TURNS.
BUT THE ASSESSMENT THAT WAS COMPLETED, UM, AND, AND MODELED, UM, SHOWED, UM, MORE OF A DELAY IN THE AM PEAK BY TRAFFIC BACKING UP, UM, AT THE GUMTREE ROAD INTERSECTION.
UM, AND THIS WAS PRESENTED AS PART OF THE YES, MA'AM, TO DELAY THE LOCK MUELLER'S PRESENTATION.
CAN YOU GO BACK ONE SLIDE? SO I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT THE TITLE THERE.
YOU SAID PRESENTED TO TOWN COUNCIL BY CBB AND CBB, THE CONSULTANT HIRED BY THE COUNTY, AND AND THAT IS, THAT IS CORRECT.
WHAT'S ENTITLED THAT? UH, THAT IS CORRECT, AS PART OF THE WORK, UM, UM, THIS WAS A SLIGHT DEVIATION FROM THE SCOPE THAT CBB PERFORMED, BUT WE WERE WORKING WITH THEM JOINTLY.
THE TOWN REQUESTED AN NO ALERT, AN NO LEFT TURN, PEAK HOUR ANALYSIS, AND, AND CBB PERFORMED THAT WHEN THEY PRESENTED TO TOWN COUNCIL IN OCTOBER OF 2023, THEY INCLUDED THIS INFORMATION AND, AND THEIR FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO TOWN COUNCIL.
SO WE JUMPED FROM THE LOCK MAILER SCOPE OF WORK TO WHAT CBB PRESENTED.
I'M SHOWING YOU THE ASSESSMENT OF THE CURRENT, OF, OF THE CURRENT SITUATION AND ITEMS THAT WERE HERE.
THERE WERE A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT I'M GONNA POINT OUT AND THEN TURN IT OVER TO LOCK MEER TO SHARE THEIR FINDINGS.
AND MY QUESTION IS, IS THIS PART OF THE REPORT FROM CBB OR IS THIS PART OF THE REPORT FROM LOCK MEER? THIS IS PART OF THE REPORT FROM, FROM SEAN, FROM THAT SUMMER.
THIS, THIS FROM CB, THE, THE FINDINGS ARE FROM CBB, I'VE INCLUDED IT IN THE PRESENTATION.
UH, I'M SORRY, YOU CONFUSED ME TO THE HILT BECAUSE YOU JUMPED FROM THE SCOPE OF WORK BY LOCK MUELLER TO A REPORT FROM CBB.
UH, NOW THAT I KNOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT CB B'S REPORT, I UNDERSTAND WHERE WE ARE, BUT THAT WAS EXTRAORDINARILY CONFUSING.
UM, THIS IS, UH, ANOTHER SLIDE SHOWING THAT THE SAME, UH, UH, ROUGHLY THE SAME INFORMATION, BUT YOU CAN SEE THE, THE IMPACT TO TRAVEL TIMES, UM, WITH THE NO LEFT TURNS.
UM, THERE WAS, UM, THERE'S SAVINGS IN THE WESTBOUND PM PEAK, UH, BUT NOT IN AM, UM, AM PEAK IN THE EASTBOUND PEAK.
ANOTHER, I'M SORRY, ARE ARE THESE FROM THE FULL REPORT BY CBB? BECAUSE THE TOWN COUNCIL ONLY HAD A SLIDE PRESENTATION.
IS THIS FROM THE FULL REPORT BY CBB, UH, MS. THESE ARE ITEMS THAT WERE ASSESSED AS, AS IT RELATES TO THE CURRENT PROJECT.
[01:35:01]
I'M PRESENTING A COUPLE OF KEY POINTS BEFORE LOCK MUELLER GETS INTO THEIR FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.YEAH, I'M, I'M HOLDING IN MY HAND A PRESENTATION MADE BY, UH, TO TOWN COUNCIL BY CBB ON OCTOBER 17TH, 2023.
I DON'T THINK THOSE SLIDES ARE IN THERE.
SO THAT'S, THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING.
THERE MUST BE A THICKER REPORT THAT CBB MADE THAT'S SEPARATE FROM THE PRESENTATION THAT WE HAVEN'T SEEN THAT.
THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT IT APPEARS TO BE HAPPENING TO ME.
AND JUST, AND JUST A MOMENT, PUSH BACK ON THAT LAST SLIDE AGAIN, THE 2023 TRAVEL TIME ANALYSIS.
I THINK THIS TRAVEL TIME IS GONNA BECOME IMPORTANT LATER.
AND THERE'S SOME CAVEATS WITHIN THE, UH, DATA.
UM, I BELIEVE IT SHOULD BE HIGHLIGHTED THAT THE CBB REPORT IS USING GROWTH AT PROJECTIONS HIGHER, SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER THAN LOCH MUELLER DID.
SO WHEN WE GET TO THE POINT WHERE WE'RE LOOKING AT THESE RESULTS ON TRAVEL TIME VERSUS THE RESULTS FROM LOCK MUELLER, THERE'S A, THERE'S A DIFFERENCE BECAUSE WE'RE NOT COMPARING APPLES TO APPLES OR ORANGE IN THIS CASE.
SO NOTE TAKEN, RIGHT? UM, DISCUSSION ABOUT A SECOND BRIDGE, UH, CAME UP SEVERAL COMMITTEE MEETINGS.
THIS MAP WAS PUT TOGETHER TO SHOW, UM, SECOND BRIDGE POSSIBLE LOCATIONS.
UM, THERE'S FIVE LOCATIONS THAT COME FROM SOME MAINLAND, UH, CONNECTION, UH, TWO, UM, TO THE, TO THE EAST.
HELENA ISLAND, ONE FROM PAR, UH, FROM FOR ROYAL, CONNECTING A BEACH CITY ROAD.
UM, AND THEN THERE WERE, UH, THREE OTHERS THAT STARTED AT THE BLUFFTON FLYOVER AND EITHER TIED INTO THE CROSS ISLAND, UM, TO THE END HERE, UM, AND, UM, SPANISH CLOSE ROAD OR, OR, UM, ALONG, UH, POINT COMFORT ROAD.
AND, AND I'M SORRY, AGAIN, IS THAT FROM THE CBB REPORT? I'VE NEVER SEEN THAT MAP BEFORE.
THIS IS JUST A, THIS IS JUST AN ILLUSTRATION FOR POTENTIAL SECOND BRIDGE ALIGNMENTS.
WELL, I COULD TELL YOU I'VE NEVER SEEN THAT MAP BEFORE.
NO, NONE OF US HAS EVER SEEN IT.
I NEVER SEEN IT BEFORE TO 60 MEETINGS.
IT'S, I I, OH, IT'S JUST AN ILLUSTRATION THAT REPRESENTS POTENTIAL SECOND BRIDGE LOCATIONS.
BUT WE'VE NEVER SEEN IT, HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE TO DISCUSS THIS.
AND, AND OTHER THAN THE LEFT TURN ASSESSMENT, WHICH CBB PERFORMED ON BEHALF OF THE TOWN, THERE'S NO OTHER, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS WITHIN THE CBB REPORT THAT ARE PART OF THIS PRESENTATION THAT WAS AT THE REQUEST OF TOWN COUNCIL TO HAVE AN INDEPENDENT STUDY DONE.
AND I'M GONNA TURN IT OVER TO LOCK MEER NOW TO GO THROUGH THEIR FINDINGS AND ASSESSMENT, UM, OF THE CORRIDOR.
BUT I DON'T WANNA STEP AWAY FROM THE POINT THAT WAS MADE.
IF YOU GO BACK TO THAT, UM, SLIDE THAT WITH A SECOND BRIDGE ASSESSMENT, WHO DID THE ASSESSMENT? WHEN WAS IT PRESENTED? THIS IS NEWS.
UM, AND I'M UNAWARE, AND IT SOUNDS AS THOUGH THERE'S AT LEAST ONE OTHER COUNCIL MEMBER THAT IS.
UM, AND SO THE INSERTION OF SOMETHING LIKE THIS, IF THOSE QUESTIONS CAN'T BE ANSWERED, UM, SEEMS TO ME TO, UM, UH, BE A LITTLE BIT MISLEADING IN THAT THE TOWN MADE AN ASSESSMENT ON A SECOND BRIDGE, WHICH IS NOT TRUE.
YEAH, I'M NOT, I'M NOT CON I'M NOT MAKING A CONCLUSION THAT WE ASSESS THE SECOND BRIDGE LOCATION.
UH, I'M TRYING TO ILLUSTRATE WHERE POTENTIAL, UM, CONNECTIONS COULD BE FOR A SECOND BRIDGE.
THE TITLE SAYS ASSESSMENT SECOND BRIDGE.
I DON'T NEED TO GO TO GUMTREE ROAD TO GO HOME.
I'M GONNA, I'M GONNA MOVE FORWARD INTO THE LOCK MUELLER PORTION.
THEY'RE GONNA GO THROUGH AND, UM, GO THROUGH THEIR FINDINGS AND, UM, AND THEIR, UH, ASSESSMENT AND, AND SHARE THAT INFORMATION WITH Y'ALL THIS TIME.
UH, LOCK MUELLER WAS TASKED WITH COMPLETING AN INDEPENDENT STUDY OF WORK THAT HAD BEEN DONE PRIOR BY OTHER CONSULTANTS AS WELL AS POTENTIALLY, UH, COME MIC.
[01:40:01]
UH, LOCK MUELLER WAS TASKED WITH COMPLETING AN INDEPENDENT STUDY TO EVALUATE WORK DONE BY PRIOR CONSULTANTS UP TO THIS POINT, AND AS WELL AS BRING POTENTIAL NEW IDEAS FOR CORRIDOR ALIGNMENTS TO THE TABLE AS PART OF OUR WORK.ONE OF OUR FIRST TASKS WAS TO REVIEW THE GROWTH RATE THAT WAS USED IN PRIOR STUDIES.
THROUGH THAT EFFORT, WE DETERMINED THAT THE EXISTING LATS TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL TDM, MAY NOT BE A RELIABLE SOURCE FOR FUTURE TRAFFIC ON THE WILLIAM HILTON PARKWAY.
THAT MODEL SEEMED TO BE THE SOURCE OF THE GROWTH RATE FOR PRIOR STUDIES.
SO WE SET OUT TO DEVELOP A PROPOSED GROWTH RATE THAT USED SOURCES OF INFORMATION THAT DID NOT COME FROM THE LATS TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL.
SO THROUGH CAREFUL APPLICATION OF STATISTICAL ANALYSIS AND AN ALTERNATIVE, WE DEVELOPED AN ALTERNATIVE METHOD FOR FORECASTING THE TRAFFIC ON THE WILLIAM HILTON PARKWAY.
AND THIS WAS USED BASED ON THE POPULATION OF BOTH BEAUFORT AND JASPER COUNTIES, IS THE KEY INDICATOR.
SO BASED ON THIS REVISED METHOD, UH, TRAFFIC ON WILLIAM HILTON PARKWAY AT THE GRAVES BRIDGE IS EXPECTED TO INCREASE BY 0.56% ANNUALLY, RESULTING IN AN A DT FORECAST OF APPROXIMATELY 65,000 DAILY VEHICLES IN 2045.
SO IF WE COMPARE THAT TO THE OBSERVED A DT IN 2023 TO THE FORECASTED 20, THE FORECASTED A DT IN 2045, USING OUR REVISED METHOD, WE GET AN APPROXIMATE ANNUAL GROWTH RATE OF 0.56%.
AND AS HAS BEEN NOTED, THAT DIFFERS FROM THE GROWTH RATE THAT WAS USED IN PRIOR STUDIES AS PART OF OUR, UH, SCOPE, SPECIFICALLY TASKS A 1.8.
UM, IF ANYBODY HAS OUR SCOPE OF SERVICES ADDENDUM, WE WERE ASKED TO EVALUATE THE, UH, FEASIBILITY OF POTENTIALLY, UM, REHABILITATING STRUCTURE, REHABILITATING THE EXISTING STRUCTURES AND SEISMICALLY RETROFITTING THEM AS OPPOSED TO BUILDING NEW THINKING.
IF THAT MIGHT BE A MORE COST ECONOMICAL SOLUTION, PLEASE, I APOLOGIZE.
IN ORDER TO DO THAT, WE WERE DIRECTED TO REVIEW THE, UH, SEISMIC STUDY THAT WAS COMPLETED BY S-C-D-O-T IN THEIR DESIGN TEAM.
IT WAS COMPLETED IN APRIL OF 2020, AND WE WERE TASKED WITH NOT, UM, COMING UP WITH ANY NEW DESIGNS, NEW LAYOUTS, CRITIQUING DETAILED CALCULATIONS, LOOKING AT THEIR MODELS AND INPUTS.
IT WAS REALLY JUST FOCUSING UPON, UM, ENSURING THAT IN OUR OPINIONS, THEY WERE FOLLOWING STANDARD ENGINEERING PRACTICES AS WELL AS THAT THE, UM, THE EVALUATIONS APPEARED TO BE VALID.
THE, UM, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS ON THERE OR NOT, I APOLOGIZE.
THERE WAS A, UH, LIFECYCLE COST ANALYSIS WAS THE KIND OF THE CULMINATION OF WHAT THEY PUT TOGETHER.
THE, THE STUDY LOOKED AT THREE DIFFERENT OPTIONS.
TWO OF THOSE WERE GEARED TOWARDS REHABILITATION AND SEISMICALLY RETROFITTING THE BRIDGES.
THE OTHER ONE WAS CONSIDERING THE, JUST THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE SIX LENGTH STRUCTURE THAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT TODAY.
FOR THE DOT'S ALTERNATIVE, THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN OPTIONS ONE AND TWO ARE THAT OPTION ONE, CONSIDERED THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW EASTBOUND STRUCTURE THAT WOULD ACCOMMODATE THREE EASTBOUND TRAVEL LANES.
AND THEN FOR THE WESTBOUND STRUCTURES OVER MACKEY AND SKULL CREEK, THOSE WOULD BOTH BE REHABILITATED IN OPTION TWO, THE WESTBOUND STRUCTURE OVER MACKEY WOULD BE REPLACED, AND THEN THE WESTBOUND STRUCTURE OVER SKULL CREEK WOULD BE, UH, REHABILITATED AS WAS IN OPTION ONE.
THOSE WOULD PROVIDE THE THREE LANES OF WESTBOUND TRAVEL.
AND THEN ONCE AGAIN, SIMILAR TO OPTION ONE, THE EASTBOUND, UH, A NEW EASTBOUND BRIDGE WOULD BE CONSTRUCTED TO ACCOMMODATE THREE LANES OF EASTBOUND TRAVEL.
AND THEN AGAIN, THE, UH, OPTION THREE WAS A, A BRAND NEW SIX LANE BRIDGE AS WE'VE BEEN DISCUSSING TODAY.
UM, THEY CAME UP WITH A LIFECYCLE COST ANALYSIS THAT INITIAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS, FUTURE COSTS, USER COSTS, MAINTENANCE COST.
AND I, I THINK MAYBE FOR THE GOOD, I CAN, MAYBE I CAN PULL UP MY SLIDES HERE SO EVERYBODY CAN SEE THE, THAT WAY EVERYBODY CAN SEE THE TABLE THAT I'M SPEAKING ABOUT.
[01:45:10]
OKAY.SO THIS IS A, UM, JUST SOME SLIDES THAT WE BROUGHT FORWARD JUST FOR RESOURCES IN CASE QUESTIONS COME UP.
UH, AS I SAID, THE CULMINATION OF THAT REPORT WAS LOOKING AT THE LIFECYCLE COST ANALYSIS, AND AS YOU CAN SEE THE TABLE BELOW OPTIONS 1, 2, 3, AND THEN DESCENDING FOR THOSE COSTS.
UH, WE PROVIDED A PRETTY DETAILED PRESENTATION ON MAY 8TH TO GO THROUGH, UM, ALL OF OUR FINDINGS.
SO I'LL TRY TO BE BRIEF, BUT I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY AND ALL QUESTIONS THAT PEOPLE MAY, UH, BRING FORTH TODAY.
UM, AS YOU CAN SEE, OPTION ONE IS SHOWS A LOWER INITIAL COST, BUT ALSO SHOWS A HIGHER FEATURE CONSTRUCTION COST.
THE REASON FOR THAT IS THE LOWER INITIAL COST IS YOU ARE SIMPLY REHABILITATING EXISTING WESTBOUND STRUCTURES.
THE FUTURE COST CONSIDERS WHAT IT WOULD BE TO REPLACE THOSE REHABILITATED WESTBOUND STRUCTURES WHENEVER THEY FIND THE END OF THEIR USEFUL LIFE.
AND THEN YOU HAVE A USER COST AND THE MAINTENANCE COST, UM, THAT WOULD TAKE APPROXIMATELY 60 MONTHS TO COMPLETE.
AND YOU CAN SEE THAT OVER THE COURSE, IT'S JUST, UM, JUST A LITTLE BIT OVER $248 MILLION.
OPTION TWO HAS A LITTLE BIT HIGHER INITIAL COST BECAUSE YOU'RE REPLACING THE WESTBOUND STRUCTURE OVER MACKEY WHILE REHABILITATING THE WESTBOUND STRUCTURE OVER SKULL CREEK.
THEREFORE, IT HAS A LOWER FEATURE COST BECAUSE YOU'RE ONLY REPLACING ONE BRIDGE WORK YOUR WAY DOWN.
SO THEREFORE, THE TOTAL LIFECYCLE COST IS A LITTLE BIT LOWER THAN OPTION ONE.
STILL HAVE A, A SIMILAR TIMEFRAME.
OPTION THREE WAS THE BRAND NEW BRIDGE.
UM, YOU HAVE A HIGHER INITIAL COST BECAUSE YOU'RE CONSTRUCTING A BRAND NEW SIX LANE STRUCTURE.
AND THEN, UM, IT'S A SHORTER TIMEFRAME AND DURATION.
SO AGAIN, THIS WAS AN 1800 PAGE DOCUMENT.
WE GIVEN THE PRESENTATION, BUT I DIDN'T WRITE DOWN JUST A COUPLE THINGS THAT I THINK MAY BE OF NOTE.
FIRST OF ALL, FROM THE FINDINGS IS NONE OF THE EXISTING BRIDGES MEET CURRENT SEISMIC DESIGN STANDARDS.
THEY WERE DESIGNED TO CONSTRUCT IT PRIOR TO ANY OF THE CURRENT SEISMIC STANDARDS THERE, UM, ARE NEEDED TODAY.
UH, THEREFORE ANY, AND GIVEN THE CRITICAL NATURE OF THE US 2 78 BRIDGE, ANY REHABILITATIVE EFFORTS ON THAT BRIDGE NEED TO INCLUDE A MINIMUM SEISMIC DESIGN IMPROVEMENTS.
AND NOT TO BORE ANYBODY TOO MUCH, BUT THERE'S TWO CATEGORIES OF SEISMIC DESIGN REQUIREMENTS.
ONE IS CALLED A, UM, A FUNCTIONAL EVALUATION EARTHQUAKE THAT IS CONSIDERING A LOWER MAGNITUDE EARTHQUAKE THAT HAS A HIGHER CHANCE OF OCCURRING.
THAT IS THE BASELINE OF SEISMIC IMPROVEMENTS THAT YOU MUST MAKE A DO NOTHING ALTERNATIVE IS NOT AN OPTION.
IF YOU'RE REHABILITATION BRIDGE, YOU MUST BRING IT UP TO SEISMIC STANDARDS.
THE CURRENT BEST PRACTICE IS CALLED A SAFETY EVALUATION EARTHQUAKE.
THAT'S A HIGHER MAGNITUDE EARTHQUAKE THAT HAS A HIGHER, THAT HAS A LOWER CHANCE OF OCCURRING.
NOW, EXISTING STRUCTURES CAN POTENTIALLY BE, UH, SEISMICALLY, RETROFITTED TO ATTAIN, UH, THE BEST DESIGN PRACTICE SEE LEVEL, BUT IT JUST DEPENDS ON SOME OTHER CONDITIONS.
THE THE OTHER CRITICAL ITEM THAT WE FOUND IN THIS IS THAT THE STUDY SHOWED THAT THE COST THAT YOU SEE ON THAT SCREEN DO NOT INCLUDE THE COST THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO SEISMICALLY IMPROVE THE REHABILITATIVE BRIDGES.
THE COSTS SHOWN ONLY SHOW STRUCTURALLY REHABILITATING THE BRIDGES.
AND THE REASON THEY WERE NOT SHOWN IN THE STUDY, IT NOTED THAT AS CDOT DIRECTED THEIR DESIGN TEAM TO NOT GO THROUGH THE EFFORT OF COMPLETING A SEISMIC IMPROVEMENT COSTS.
AND I DO, I DO NOT BELIEVE IN MY OPINION, THAT IT WAS KNOWN FOR NEFARIOUS REASONS OR TO AVOID DOING IT.
I JUST SIMPLY THINK THAT THEY FIRST LOOKED AT, YOU CAN SEE THAT THE DELTA BETWEEN THE, UM, JUST FROM A STRUCTURAL STANDPOINT, AND I THINK JUST FROM A RESOURCES STANDPOINT, THEY DECIDED THAT GOING THROUGH THE EFFORT OF COMING UP WITH THE ADDITIONAL COSTS, UH, FOR THE SEISMICS IMPROVEMENTS, THAT WOULD JUST INCREASE THE DELTAS THAT YOU SEE ON THE TABLE.
UM, THROUGH OTHER EVALUATIONS THROUGHOUT THE STUDY, IT WAS NOTED THAT THE EXISTING WESTBOUND, UH, THE EXISTING MACKEY CREEK AND SKULL CREEK BRIDGES WILL NOT BE ABLE TO ATTAIN THE BEST OR SEE DESIGN LEVELS.
THEY WILL ONLY BE ABLE TO ATTAIN THE FEE LEVEL, BUT A NEW BRIDGE WOULD BE ABLE TO BE DESIGNED AT THE BEST DESIGN PRACTICE.
SO THERE'S A LOT OF VERB VERBIAGE ON THERE.
I WILL NOT READ THAT VERBATIM FOR YOU.
UH, BUT WHAT I DID WANNA HIGHLIGHT WAS THAT WE, IN OUR OPINION, IT DOES FIND THAT THE, UH, THE DESIGN TEAM DID FOLLOW STANDARD ENGINEERING PRACTICES, AND WE OVERALL AGREE WITH, WITH THEIR FINDINGS.
AS I NOTED THERE BEFORE, THE TRUE COSTS SHOWN DO NOT REFLECT THE SEISMIC IMPROVEMENTS.
UM, THE, YOU NOTED THE, THE TIME IN BETWEEN THE TWO, UH, YOU CAN SEE THAT THE, THE OPTION NUMBER THREE, JUST BUILDING IT NEW WILL, UH, REQUIRE A,
[01:50:01]
A SHORTER DURATION.UM, JUST SOME OF THE KEY FINDINGS HERE, THE SHOULD, IF THERE WAS A, UM, A DESIRE TO STRUCTURALLY REHABILITATE, UM, AS OPPOSED TO JUST BUILDING NEW, YOU WOULD PUT THEM ON DIFFERENT, UM, MAINTENANCE SCHEDULES, THEREFORE CAUSING FUTURE USE AND DISRUPTIONS.
AND THEREFORE THAT WOULD ALSO INCREASE THE TIME SHOWN.
AND THEN, AS I NOTED TOO, THE EXISTING STRUCTURES FOR OPTIONS ONE AND TWO WOULD NEVER MEET THE BEST OR THE SAFETY DESIGN REQUIREMENTS.
SO, UM, FOR ALL THOSE REASONS, WE DO NOT FEEL THAT IT WOULD BE PRUDENT TO PURSUE AN OPTION OF REHABILITATING OR SEISMIC NEW RETROFITTING THE BRIDGES AS COMPARED TO A BUILDING A NEW SIX LENGTH STRUCTURE.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT TOPIC? JUST ONE QUICK, ONE QUICK QUESTION.
ONE QUICK QUESTION SINCE YOU HAD, I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT SEISMIC MEASUREMENT
UM, BUT ALONG WITH THIS, WHEN YOU PRESENTED TO THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE, YOU HAD A NUMBER OF SKETCHES.
UM, SO CAN YOU TELL ME FROM THOSE SKETCHES, I COULDN'T READ THE NUMBERS.
WHAT'S THE SIZE OF THE EXISTING BRIDGE? JUST BRIDGES, PLURAL.
WHAT'S THE WIDTH OF THE EXISTING BRIDGES? UM, YEAH, THERE'S YOUR SCHEDULE.
I HAVE, I HAVE THE SLIDES FROM OUR PRESENTATION.
UM, I DON'T, I APOLOGIZE HERE.
THIS IS VERY, IT'S KIND OF SMALL.
I JUST, I COULDN'T READ THE NUMBERS.
I WAS JUST TRYING TO USE THOSE TO TRY TO FIGURE OUT THE, THE WIDTH OF THE EXISTING BRIDGES COMPARED TO THE WIDTH OF THE PROPOSED BRIDGES.
AND, AND MS. BRESSON, I'M NOT SURE THAT THAT PROVIDES, THAT DID THE ILLUSTRATIONS THAT I PROVIDED AT THE COMMITTEE MEETING WAS JUST REFLECTING THE, THE OPTIONS AS THEY OUTLAYED THERE, SO RIGHT.
I'LL GO AHEAD AND MOVE FORWARD.
UM, AS A PART OF TASK 1.3 0.3, IN OUR SCOPE OF SERVICES ADDENDUM, WE WERE ASKED TO EVALUATE THE FEASIBILITY OR LOOK FOR OPPORTUNITIES.
COULD, WOULD THERE BE AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAINTAIN A A FOUR LANE SECTION WEST OF SQUI POPE ROAD ALONG WILLIAM HILTON PARKWAY? AND IN ORDER FOR US TO DO THAT, WE FIRST NEEDED TO GET AN UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THE, UH, EXISTING AND FUTURE FORECASTED OPERATING CONDITIONS WOULD BE.
WE HAD PROVIDED THAT THROUGH, UM, VARIOUS DELIVERABLES AND WE'VE SPOKEN ABOUT THAT.
UM, BUT IN SUMMARY, UH, OUR CALCULATIONS INDICATE THAT FROM A EXISTING 2023 TRAFFIC VOLUMES, THE REDUCTION IN TRAFFIC THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO OBTAIN ACCEPTABLE OPERATING CONDITIONS ALONG THE MAIN LINE WOULD BE A REDUCTION OF 30% FROM A 2045 TRAFFIC VOLUMES, IT WOULD BE ON THE ORDER OF 40%.
SO ONCE WE DEVELOPED THAT BASELINE OF INFORMATION, WE LOOKED AT A COUPLE DIFFERENT, UM, IDEAS THAT HAVE BEEN BROUGHT FORTH BY, UM, BY THE COMMITTEE TOWN STAFF AND, AND THE COMMUNITY ASKING THE QUESTION, IF, UM, IS THERE AN OPPORTUNITY VIA IMPROVEMENTS TO THE EXISTING TRANSIT SYSTEM, WOULD THAT BE ABLE TO INITIALLY HELP MAINTAIN FOUR LANES, UM, IN THE FUTURE? AND THAT BEGAN BY US REACHING OUT TO THE, UH, LEMME SURE THEY INDICATE THEY'RE CORRECT DELO COUNTY, UH, REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY FOR EXISTING, UM, RIDERSHIP INFORMATION.
AND WHAT WE WERE PROVIDED, IT INDICATED THAT THE EXISTING TRANSIT MODE SHARE IN THE REGION IS ONLY 1% AT THIS TIME.
UM, THE, UM, OUR, OUR IN-HOUSE TRANSIT EXPERT INDICATE THAT, UM, EVEN THOUGH THAT WAS IN 2021, UM, AS YOU CAN SEE, THE, THERE WOULD BE A SIGNIFICANT DELTA AND REQUIRE HIS EXPONENTIAL GROWTH IN ORDER TO GET UP TO 30%.
AND IN FACT, THAT IT WOULD BE UNREALISTIC, HE THINKS, IN HIS OPINION, THAT IT WOULD MOST LIKELY IF A SYSTEM WERE IMPROVED, OPERATING AS AS EFFICIENTLY AS HE COULD WITH ITS DEMAND, THAT IT WOULD BE STILL BE ON THE ORDER OF LESS THAN 5% OVERALL.
MAY I ASK A QUESTION AT THIS POINT? SURE.
AND SO WHEN YOU INVESTIGATED, UM, TRANSPORTATION ISSUES, YOU ONLY LOOKED AT THAT ONE CONCEPT WITH REGARD TO THE TRANSIT SYSTEM THAT'S IN PLACE WHERE SOMEONE MIGHT LIVE IN A COMMUNITY ANYWHERE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE BRIDGE AND CHOOSE TO TAKE A BUS TO COME ONTO HILTON HEAD ISLAND.
AND THAT'S THE TYPE OF TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM THAT Y'ALL REVIEWED THAT WOULD BE REFLECTIVE OF COMING TO AND FROM HILTON HEAD ISLAND, CORRECT? CORRECT.
[01:55:01]
DID YOU LOOK AT ANY OTHER TYPES OF TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS? THE, WE ALSO LOOKED AT, UM, THE, THE QUESTION THAT WAS BROUGHT FORTH, WHAT IF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF A HIGH-SPEED FERRY, RIGHT? MM-HMM.BUT IN TERMS OF AUTOMOBILES, WERE THERE ANY OTHER IDEAS? WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET AT IS THAT INDEPE STANDING ALONE, THE INVESTIGATION THAT YOU MADE, YOU HAVE DATA WHICH ARE FACTS UNDERSTOOD AND ACCEPTED THAT THE CONVERSATION ABOUT WHAT TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES MIGHT BE HAS NEVER BEEN HAD.
AND I KNOW IT'S BEEN BROUGHT UP 'CAUSE I'VE BROUGHT IT UP SINCE 2018, AND, AND, AND YOU AND I HAVE SPOKEN ABOUT THIS, THE TRANSPORTATION IDEAS ARE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN WHAT Y'ALL INVESTIGATED.
FOR INSTANCE, ONE IDEA MIGHT BE THE LEASE OR PURCHASE OF LAND ON THE, UH, OTHER SIDE, ON THE MAINLAND SIDE OF, UM, THE BRIDGES WHERE WE COULD CREATE A PARK AND RIDE TYPE OF SITUATION SO THAT THERE WOULD BE FEWER CARS COMING ACROSS THE BRIDGE, BUT PEOPLE WOULD LEAVE THEIR HOME IN THEIR CAR, LEAVE IT AT THE, UM, PARK AND RIDE STATION AND TAKE A SHUTTLE.
AND SOME MIGHT SAY, WELL, THE TRANSIT SYSTEM DOESN'T ACCOUNT FOR THAT.
WE COULD CERTAINLY LOOK TO DEVELOP IT.
BUT EVEN MORE, UM, I WOULD SUGGEST, UM, THAT WE HAVE A TROLLEY SYSTEM THAT CIRCLES THIS ISLAND REGULARLY TO PICK UP VISITORS TO FREE OF CHARGE, TAKE THEM TO THEIR DESTINATION, AND MAYBE A, UM, REALIGNMENT OF THOSE RESOURCES TO GO OUT TOY PARK AND RIDE AND PICK UP THOSE EMPLOYEES AND COMMUTERS ONTO THE ISLAND AND BRING THEM ONTO THE ISLAND ON A REGULAR BASIS, UM, WOULD BE BENEFICIAL.
DID Y'ALL LOOK INTO ANYTHING LIKE THAT? THE, THE SYSTEM THAT YOU'RE SPEAKING TO? I THINK IF YOU JUST LOOK AT THE, AT THE DELTA, IT'S AN UNPROFESSIONAL OPINION THAT THE, THE BEHAVIORAL CHANGE THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED FOR THAT.
AND ALSO KEEPING A FOCUS OF WITHIN A 20 YEAR WINDOW.
SO SOMETHING FOR THAT TO BE IMPLEMENTED, GET UP TO SPEED, AND THEN, UM, WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE, THE NEED TO REDUCE BY 40% BY 2045, WE DON'T FEEL THAT THAT WOULD MAKE THAT DECREASE THAT DELTA SIGNIFICANTLY TO WHERE YOU STILL WOULDN'T NEED TO WIDEN TO WIDEN.
SO AS, AS ONE ALTERNATIVE, PERHAPS IT HAS A SMALLER IMPACT THAN, THAN WOULD GIVE US THE 30 TO 40% NEEDED.
HOWEVER, IF YOU ADD THAT TO, UM, ANY NUMBER OF IDEAS AND HOW WE COULD REDUCE THE TRAFFIC COMING ACROSS THE BRIDGE ADDITIVELY, IT COULD BE VERY SIGNIFICANT.
HAS ANYONE TAKEN THE TIME TO LISTEN TO THOSE IDEAS, TO INVESTIGATE THEM AND MAKE AN ANALYSIS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE KNOW IS IT INSIGNIFICANT OR DO WE APPROACH THAT 30% EVEN MAYBE EVEN THAT 40%? I KNOW, UM, I'D BE INTERESTED IN KNOWING IF WE'VE TRULY, AS IF WE'VE BEEN LISTENING TO PUT TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES IN THOSE DISCUSSIONS AS A PRIORITY.
I HAVEN'T HEARD ANY, AND I APPRECIATE THAT Y'ALL TOOK THE APPROACH THAT YOU DID, BUT THAT DOESN'T ADDRESS WHAT COULD BE DONE AND WHAT THE ADDITIVE NATURE OF TAKING SEVERAL STEPS MIGHT BE.
WE WHOLEHEARTEDLY AGREE THAT THESE, UH, OTHER TYPES OF TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES ARE DEFINITELY WORTHWHILE TO PURSUE, UH, TO HELP SLOW THE GROWTH.
HOWEVER, WE WERE LOOKING AT WHAT THAT NEEDED WOULD BE TO REDUCE IT FROM SIX LANES WITHIN 20 YEARS.
AND THE ITEMS THAT YOU'RE BRINGING UP, IT'S OUR PROFESSIONAL OPINION THAT WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO GET TO THAT 30% DELTA, BUT THERE WAS NO RESEARCH DONE INTO THAT.
WE UTILIZED IN-HOUSE TRANSIT EXPERTS WITHIN OUR FIRM THAT HAVE WORKED ON SIMILAR TYPES OF PROJECTS.
AND HE LOOKED AT THE IN AREA, DID THEY LOOK AT ANYTHING SIMILAR TO WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT? A VARIETY OF, OF DIFFERENT ONES.
I CAN GO BACK THROUGH HIS NOTES.
I DON'T HAVE HIS NOTES WITH ME.
BUT, UM, HE WAS VERY ADAMANT THAT EVEN REACHING 5% AT A ROBUST SYSTEM WAS VERY CON A A VERY LOFTY GOAL, I GUESS.
AND I'VE READ THE REPORT IN DETAIL AND HIGHLIGHTED AND GONE BACK OVER IT, BUT IT SEEMS TO ME THERE WAS A SINGULAR FOCUS.
AND WHAT MY POINT REALLY IS, IS THIS, THE CONVERSATION ABOUT TRANSPORTATION AND OTHER ALTERNATIVE WAYS TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF CARS COMING ACROSS THE BRIDGE HAS NOT HAPPENED INTERNALLY, UM, IN A MEANINGFUL WAY BETWEEN LAST COUNCIL, FRANKLY, OR THIS COUNCIL.
[02:00:01]
AND SO WE'RE MAKING CONCLUSIONS THAT IT WON'T BE HELPFUL WITHOUT REALLY EVEN HAVING MOVED THAT BALL OFF THE STARTING POINT.SO I THINK THAT THAT HAS BEEN, UM, SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD HAVE DONE WE, UM, SHOULD DO PRIOR TO GIVING MUNICIPAL CONSENT AND TO HAVE A TRULY, UM, HAVE IT TRULY ANALYZED TO SEE WHAT THE, UM, WHAT THE CHANGE, HOW CLOSE WE COULD GET TO THAT 30 TO 40% THAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO.
UH, IT'S UNFAIR NOT TO DO THAT.
UM, WE ALSO LOOKED AT THERE, THERE'S BEEN DISCUSSIONS ABOUT WHAT A IMPLEMENTATION OF A HIGH-SPEED FERRY WOULD THAT ALSO HELP US CLOSE THAT DELTA.
AND WE LOOKED AT, UM, LA'S CURRENT LONG RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLAN.
AND IT'S OUR UNDERSTANDING THAT THEY DO HAVE A FEASIBILITY STUDY, UH, EARMARKED IN THEIR CURRENT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN.
BUT IT'S OUR UNDERSTANDING THAT THAT HAS NOT BEEN INITIATED AS OF YET.
AND SO THINKING ABOUT NOT KNOWING IF THAT'S GONNA GET INITIATED, IF THAT FEASIBILITY SHOWS, IF THERE WOULD BE A SUFFICIENT DEMAND TO SUSTAIN A SYSTEM, WE, UM, WE DIDN'T FEEL THAT THAT WOULD, UM, PROVIDE SIGNIFICANT IMPACT EITHER.
AND SO, BUT WITH THOSE TWO ITEMS, WE, WE FELT THAT, UM, AS STANDALONE STRATEGIES TO BE ABLE TO RETAIN FOUR LANES THROUGH STONY, UM, WE DID NOT FEEL THAT THAT WOULD BE WORTHWHILE.
HOWEVER, TO MS. BECKER'S POINT, WE WHOLEHEARTEDLY AGREE THAT, UM, LOOKING FOR OPPORTUNITIES TO SLOW THE GROWTH WOULD BE BENEFICIAL.
BUT IT'S OUR PROFESSIONAL OPINION THAT DELTA IS JUST TOO GREAT.
I WOULD LOVE, I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION IN A MEANINGFUL WAY AMONG OUR COUNCIL MEMBERS.
I THINK IT'D BE FABULOUS IF WE COULD SIT DOWN AND ACTUALLY TALK ABOUT IDEAS THAT WE AS REPRESENTATIVES OF THE TOWN HAVE THAT COULD CONTRIBUTE TO PROTECTING OUR ISLAND AND MOSTLY PRESERVING THE COMMUNITIES THROUGHOUT THE ISLAND.
AND SO WE HAVE FAILED ALREADY.
I'M TAKING THE SUN IF THAT WORKS.
BEFORE YOU LEAVE THAT FOUR LANE VIABILITY, UM, DID YOU SEPARATE OUT, UM, LIMITING FOUR LANES ONLY THROUGH STONY? WE WENT FROM WEST OF SQUIRE POPE OVER THE BRIDGE JUST TO ENSURE THAT WE REITERATED OUR PREVIOUS FINDINGS THAT WE DO THROUGH, THROUGH THE WHOLE QUARTER.
BUT YOU DIDN'T SEPARATE OUT ONLY FOUR LANES THROUGH STONY.
WE CONSIDERED THE VOLUMES THAT LED ALL THE WAY UP TO, TO THE STONY AREA EAST OF STONE, EAST OF SQUIRE.
POPE, AS YOU KNOW, WAS ALREADY A SIX LANE.
SO WE WERE LOOKING FOR OPPORTUNITIES PER THE SCOPE TO SEE IF WE COULD DO THAT TO THE WEST.
YOU DIDN'T SEPARATE OUT STONY, WE DID NOT LOOK AT A SIX LANE SECTION NEXT TO A FOUR LANE SECTION NEXT TO A SIX LANE SECTION.
UM, IT'S OUR PROFESSIONAL OPINION THAT IF THAT CONFIGURATION WOULD BE IN PLACE, NOBODY WOULD ACTUALLY REALLY USE THAT EXTRA LANE BECAUSE EVERYBODY KNOWS IT'S GONNA BOTTLENECK DOWN.
NOBODY WANTS TO GET CAUGHT AND HAVE TO MERGE.
AND SO, UM, WE, WE PROFESSIONALLY WOULD NOT RECOMMEND THAT CONFIGURATION FOR OPERATIONAL REASONS.
DO YOU EVER RECOMMEND ROAD DIETS? I'M SORRY? DO YOU EVER RECOMMEND ROAD DIETS WHERE YOU'VE REDUCED THE NUMBER OF TRAVEL LANES SO YOU CAN CONTROL THE TRAFFIC? YES.
IN DIFFERENT CIRCUMSTANCES WITH DIFFERENT A DT VALUES.
AND JUST TO COMMENT, UM, SO IT SOUNDS LIKE TO ME THAT MAKES SENSE, RIGHT? NOBODY WANTS TO COME FROM THREE LANES DOWN TO TWO LANES.
I GET THAT THAT MAKES SENSE, BUT WHAT IT ALSO SAYS TO ME IS THAT THE DICTATE THAT THE COUNTY MADE, THAT THIS WOULD BE A SIX LANE BRIDGE INFLUENCED AND INFORMED YOUR DECISIONS IN TERMS OF WHAT WOULD HAPPEN ON THE MAINLAND COMING THROUGH STONY AND COMING THROUGH THE REST OF OUR COMMUNITIES.
AND WE ALL KNOW THAT THE IMPACTS DON'T STOP THERE.
THOSE IMPACTS WILL CONTINUE ALL THE WAY THROUGH 2 78 TO SEA PINES, NOT ONLY ON 2 78, BUT THE SIDE ROADS AND THEN WHAT'S THE ANSWER TO THAT? SO EXCEPT FOR MORE CONCRETE COURT.
SO I THINK FROM THE START THAT WE'VE BEEN MISGUIDED.
UM, I'LL JUST CLARIFY, UM, THE PROCESS THAT WE WENT THROUGH TO ARRIVE AT THE APPROXIMATION THAT BETWEEN 30 AND 40% OF EXISTING VOLUMES WOULD NEED TO BE OTHERWISE ACCOMMODATED TO ACCEPTABLY
[02:05:01]
KEEP THE FOUR LANE SECTION LOOKED AT A FOUR LANE SECTION FOR THE ENTIRETY OF THE CORRIDOR.AND WE DID A STAIR STEP METHOD, YOU KNOW, WOULD THIS OPERATE ACCEPTABLY IF WE HAD A 5% REDUCTION? NO.
AND STAIR STEPPED IT UP UNTIL WE GOT TO A VALUE WHERE IN OUR OPINION, THE CONDITIONS WERE ACCEPTABLE ALONG THE CORRIDOR.
AND THAT'S WHERE WE LANDED AT THE 30 TO 40%.
EXCUSE ME, FOLKS IN THE BACK HERE, PLEASE SPEAK A LITTLE CLEARER, LOUDER, PLEASE.
AND YOUR OPINION IS BASED ON ACCEPTING THE INCREASE IN CAPACITY, IS THAT CORRECT? CAN YOU REPEAT THAT? I'M SORRY.
AND YOUR OPINION IS BASED ON ACCEPTING A LARGE INCREASE IN CAPACITY, IS THAT CORRECT? BY 2045, WE EXPECT THAT TRAFFIC WILL CONTINUE TO GROW ALONG THE CORRIDOR.
AND SO WHEN WE MADE OUR 2045 PREDICTIONS, WE WERE WORKING ON AN ASSUMPTION THAT THE EXISTING A DT WOULD GROW AT A RATE OF APPROXIMATELY 0.56% PER YEAR THROUGH 2045.
SO BASED ON ACCEPTING THAT POSSIBILITY OF THAT INCREASE IN CAPACITY, YES, THAT ASSUMPTION.
CAN I ASK YOU WHAT YOU MEAN BY, UM, OPERATE SUCCESSFULLY? OPERATIONS ON A ROADWAY MEAN A LOT OF DIFFERENT THINGS.
UM, WE HAVE A SLIDE LATER IN THE PRESENTATION THAT ALSO GETS INTO THIS A LITTLE BIT.
BUT, UM, LEVEL OF SERVICE, WHICH, UM, YOU KNOW, IF NOBODY'S FAMILIAR WITH THAT IT'S TIED TO DELAY.
DELAY IS SECONDS, UH, PER VEHICLE THAT IS REQUIRED TO WAIT IN A CERTAIN SITUATION.
SO WE LOOK AT LEVEL OF SERVICE, WHICH IS TIED TO DELAY.
WE ALSO LOOK AT QUEUING THAT RESULTS FROM OUR SIMULATION MODELS.
AND WE ALSO LOOK AT VOLUME TO CAPACITY RATIO, WHICH IS A DECIMAL, UH, THAT INDICATES WHETHER A CERTAIN LANE CONFIGURATION IS OPERATING OVER OR UNDER CAPACITY.
SO WHEN WE DO AN ASSESSMENT OF ROADWAY, WE LOOK AT ALL OF THOSE THINGS COMBINED.
AND FOR THIS QUARTER IN PARTICULAR, WE ALSO LOOKED AT TRAVEL TIME FROM END TO END.
AND SO WHEN YOU REFER TO THE LEVEL OF SERVICE, WHERE ARE WE CURRENTLY? I DON'T WANT TO MISSPEAK.
UH, IF THIS IS LATER IN YOUR PRESENTATION, I'M HAPPY TO WAIT.
WE, WE DO GO THROUGH, UM, WE DO GO THROUGH MORE SPECIFIC LEVEL OF SERVICE DETAILS LATER AND I'LL WAIT.
THIS, AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, OUR INDEPENDENT STUDY TASK WAS, UM, ALSO TO COME UP WITH POTENTIAL ALTERNATE IDEAS FOR ROADWAY CONFIGURATIONS THAT COULD WORK ACCEPTABLY ALONG THIS CORRIDOR.
WE WERE TASKED WITH COMING UP WITH FOUR ALTERNATIVES, ONE OF THEM BEING THE 2022 MODIFIED PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE, SO THAT WE COULD MAKE AN APPROPRIATE ANALYSIS OF THAT ALTERNATIVE WITH THE NEW GROWTH RATE THAT WE FEEL IN OUR OPINION, UH, PERHAPS WILL BETTER ESTIMATE THE FUTURE TRAFFIC THAT WILL BE REALIZED ALONG THE CORRIDOR.
ALTERNATIVE NUMBER TWO, LOOKED AT, UH, A BOW TIE CONFIGURATION, A SQUIRE POPE ROAD IN SPANISH WELLS ROAD.
A BOW TIE IS A CONFIGURATION WHERE, UM, IF A VEHICLE IS GOING TO MAKE A LEFT TURN ONTO A SIDE STREET, THEY FIRST WOULD TAKE A RIGHT TURN AND TRAVERSE A ROUNDABOUT AND THEN GO THROUGH THE INTERSECTION TO MAKE A LEFT.
NUMBER THREE, WE EVALUATED A FEW DIFFERENT OPTIONS TO GRADE SEPARATE SOME OF THE INTERSECTIONS WITHOUT TAKING THE FULL STEP INTO A COMPLETELY ELEVATED BYPASS.
FOUR, WE EVALUATED AN ELEVATED BYPASS OF THE, OF THE CORRIDOR.
UM, AS WE STEPPED FURTHER THROUGH THIS PROCESS, UH, IN DISCUSSIONS WITH THE TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP AND THE COMMITTEE, WE ALSO DID A CURSORY EVALUATION OF A SOUTHERN BYPASS THAT WAS PROPOSED BY MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY.
SO THESE ARE JUST SOME GRAPHICS OF EACH OF THESE ALTERNATIVES.
YOU'VE SEEN THIS GRAPHIC BEFORE.
UM, YOU KNOW, THE MODIFIED RECOMMENDED PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE WAS ALTERNATIVE ONE, ALTERNATIVE TWO BOW TIES AT SQUARE POPE AND SPANISH WELLS.
UM, THIS IS AN ILLUSTRATION OF HOW A VEHICLE WOULD MAKE A LEFT HAND TURN AT AN INTERSECTION WITH THIS CONFIGURATION, IT WOULD FOLLOW THE YELLOW ARROW.
[02:10:01]
THREE, WE CONSIDERED ONE OF TWO THINGS.UM, THESE TWO CONFIGURATIONS ARE CALLED AN ECHELON OR A CENTER TURN OVERPASS.
THESE CONFIGURATIONS ARE CONSOLIDATED, UM, UH, RESTRICTED RATHER TO SINGLE INTERSECTIONS.
THEY'RE NOT ENTIRE SYSTEM OVERPASSES.
THE GENERAL IDEA BETWEEN BOTH OF THESE IS THAT YOU TAKE EITHER THE LEFT TURNS AS IS THE CASE WITH THE CENTER TURNOVER PASS, AND ELEVATE THEM OVER THE MAJOR MOVEMENTS OF THE ROADWAY AND HAVE LESS MOVEMENTS TRYING TO UTILIZE THE SAME TRAFFIC SIGNAL SO THAT YOU CAN GIVE MORE GREEN TIME AND MORE PRIORITY TO THE VOLUMES THAT HAVE A HIGHER DEMAND.
AND ECHELON IS A SIMILAR IDEA, BUT INSTEAD OF RAISING THE LEFT TURNS AT EACH APPROACH, YOU RAISE TWO OF FOUR INTERSECTION APPROACHES, UH, TO BE ELEVATED, LEAVING TWO OF FOUR APPROACHES AT GRADE.
AND EACH SIGNALED INTERSECTION, ONE ON TOP ONE BELOW IS ONLY TRYING TO SERVE TWO DIRECTIONS OF TRAFFIC AT ONE TIME.
OUR PROPOSED VERSION OF AN ELEVATED BYPASS FOR THE ROADWAY IS SHOWN IN A SERIES OF SLIDES.
UM, BUT GENERALLY WE WOULD HAVE A COMPLETE GRADE SEPARATION OF THROUGH TRAFFIC TRYING TO GO SOUTHBOUND ON THE CROSS ISLAND PARKWAY, AS WELL AS TRAFFIC TRYING TO CONTINUE EITHER EAST OR WESTBOUND ON 2 78.
SO IT WOULD COMPLETELY SEPARATE A MAJORITY OF THE THREE TRAFFIC FROM THE LOCAL ROADWAY SYSTEM, INCLUDING SQUIRE, POPE, SPANISH WELLS, AND GUMTREE.
THIS ALTERNATIVE HAS A DIRECT CONNECTION TO BOTH 2 78 AND THE CROSS ISLAND PARKWAY IN BOTH DIRECTIONS.
AND THIS IS A CLOSER VIEW, AN ATTEMPT AT A CLOSER VIEW OF WHAT SOME OF THE SPECIFIC INTERSECTIONS WOULD LOOK LIKE.
THE AT GRADE ROADWAY CONFIGURATION WOULD BE ABLE TO BE LESS WIDE THAN IT CURRENTLY IS TODAY BECAUSE OF BULK OF THE TRAFFIC WOULD BE SERVED THROUGH THE ELEVATED BYPASS SECTION.
SO WE HAVE PRESENTED THIS INFORMATION BEFORE AT THE TECHNICAL WORKING GROUPS, AT THE COMMITTEES, UH, COMMITTEE MEETINGS.
THIS INFORMATION IS A RESULT OF SYNCHRO SOFTWARE.
UH, SEAN ALREADY MENTIONED PRE PREVIOUSLY.
WE USE TWO DIFFERENT SOFTWARE MODELS IN OUR ANALYSIS.
SYNCHRO IS A, UM, A VERY GOOD ANALYSIS TOOL THAT HELPS US TO GET A GENERAL UNDERSTANDING AND A A, A PRETTY GOOD CONFIDENCE LEVEL OF HOW CERTAIN SITUATIONS AND CERTAIN ROADWAY CONFIGURATIONS WILL PERFORM.
AND THEN WE, PER OUR SCOPE, WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A FEWER NUMBER OF ALTERNATIVES FORWARD INTO VISIM ANALYSIS, WHICH IS A MICRO SIMULATION MODEL THAT IS MORE OF A REAL TIME SIMULATION OF THE PROPOSED CORRIDOR RATHER THAN SYNCHRO, WHICH IS BASED ON EQUATIONS LARGELY FROM THE HIGHWAY CAPACITY MANUAL, WHICH IS A, AN APPROVED DOCUMENT BY THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION.
SO AS YOU CAN SEE, COMPARING OUR ALTERNATIVES ONE THROUGH FOUR, THERE ARE APPROXIMATE TRAVEL TIME REDUCTIONS END TO END IN BOTH AM AND THE PM PEAK PERIODS FOR EASTBOUND AND WESTBOUND TRAFFIC RANGING FROM 16 TO 20% REDUCTION IN EASTBOUND TRAFFIC IN THE AM TO ANYWHERE FROM 34 TO 45% APPROXIMATELY FOR THE WESTBOUND DIRECTION IN THE PM.
AND I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO NOTE THAT THE TRAVEL TIMES, UH, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, WE'RE COMPLETED IN SYNCHRO BETWEEN, UH, MOSS CREEK AND INDIGO RUN.
IF, IF WE CAN JUST ASK YOU YES.
UM, I HEARD THE PERCENTAGE 16%, UM, APPROXIMATELY 16% DURING AM PEAK PERIOD AND WESTBOUND WILLIAM HILTON PARKWAY BY APPROXIMATELY 34% DURING THE PM PEAK PERIOD IS THAT'S WHAT I HEARD YOU SAY, I BELIEVE.
AND THAT'S WHAT'S ON PAGE 32 OF YOUR REPORT.
BUT IT ALSO SAYS IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT WESTBOUND WILLIAM HILTON PARKWAY DURING THE AM AM PEAK PERIOD AND EASTBOUND WILLIAM HILTON PARKWAY DURING THE PM PEAK PERIOD ARE NOT EXPECTED TO EXPERIENCE SIGNIFICANT CONGESTION IN 2045.
I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT FOR PEOPLE TO KNOW.
UH, YES, IT'S TYPICAL FOR COMMUTER CORRIDORS SUCH AS THIS ONE TO HAVE A HEAVY DIRECTION IN, YOU KNOW, MORNING PEOPLE COMMUTING TO A PLACE, AND THEN THE OPPOSITE WILL BE TRUE FOR THE AFTERNOON WHEN THEY, YOU KNOW, RETURN HOME.
[02:15:01]
THAT IS, THAT IS TRUE FOR THIS CORRIDOR THAT MOST PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO TRAVEL EASTBOUND TO THE ISLAND AND THE AM AND RETURN HOME WESTBOUND IN THE PM.SO WHEN WE GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL, THE FIRST ORIGINAL COMMENTS DURING THE FIRST PART OF THE MEETING WHEN WE IDENTIFIED THAT THIS IS DURING PEAK HOURS THAT WE'RE HAVING ISSUES, AND IT'S DURING A TIME OF THE YEAR WHEN SCHOOL IS IN SESSION, UM, AND NOT YEAR ROUND AND NOT ALL DAY, SEVEN DAYS A WEEK, UM, THAT THERE ARE ISSUES.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE CLEAR ON THE PROBLEM THAT WE'RE TRYING TO SOLVE, RIGHT? WE'RE ALL FOCUSED ON THE SOLUTION.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS THE, THE PROBLEM THAT'S TRYING TO BE SOLVED IS DURING A VERY LIMITED AMOUNT OF TIME DURING THE WEEKDAY HOURS AND ONLY A PORTION OF THE YEAR THAT WE'RE ABOUT TO TAKE ALL OF THESE STEPS TO MANIPULATE AND TO CHANGE AND TO FOREVER, UM, IMPACT NEGATIVELY, I'LL SAY THE ENTIRE ISLAND WHILE WE'RE SPENDING CLOSE TO HALF A BILLION DOLLARS.
BUT I WANTED TO BE REALLY CLEAR ON THAT AND, AND HAVE IT POINTED OUT AGAIN, PEOPLE NEED TO MAKE A CALCULUS AT, RIGHT? THEY HAVE TO DO THE CALCULUS AT THE END.
THEY NEED TO UNDERSTAND THE PROBLEM AND HOW WE'RE SOLVING IT AND THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE SOLUTIONS THAT WE'RE COMING UP WITH.
HOW MANY MINUTES DOES THE 30% EQUATE TO I'D LIKE, THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION.
UM, THAT 16% AND THE 36%, CAN YOU GIVE THAT TO US IN MINUTES? AND REMEMBER THESE TIMES ARE DIFFERENT BECAUSE WE'RE NOT COMPARING APPLES TO APPLES.
WE HAVE FROM THE CBB REPORT, THE LOWER NUMBERS, WHICH ARE BASED ON A HIGHER, UM, A HIGHER, UM, CAPACITY, EXPECTATION OF GROWTH.
SO WHEN, WHEN YOU HEAR THESE NUMBERS VERSUS THE OTHERS, THESE ARE LOWER NUMBERS TO START OFF WITH BECAUSE YOUR GROWTH EXPECTATION IS LOWER, CORRECT? YES.
THESE NUMBERS ARE ALSO IN SYNCHRO, AND WE HAVE INFORMATION THAT WE PRESENTED TO THE COMMITTEE ON JUNE 12TH THAT HAVE ONE OF THESE OPTIONS IN VISIM, WHICH IS A MORE REFINED ANALYSIS, WHICH WE CAN GET TO IN A, IN A FEW SLIDES HERE.
UM, THAT ONE DOES HAVE MINUTES, BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, TO YOUR QUESTION EARLIER, THE DIFFERENCE IN TRAVEL TIME IN SECONDS IS IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS TABLE IN THE TWO MIDDLE COLUMNS.
SO 16% REDUCTION FOR ALTERNATIVE ONE FOR EXAMPLE, IS A SAVINGS OF 109 SECONDS, UM, WHICH WOULD BE LESS THAN TWO MINUTES.
WE ALSO WERE TASKED WITH EVALUATING THE BIKE AND PEDESTRIAN IMPACTS OF EACH OF THE FOUR ALTERNATIVES THAT WE BROUGHT THROUGH OUR ANALYSIS.
WE DID SO BY CONSIDERING THE PEDESTRIAN CROSSING DISTANCES, THE POTENTIAL FOR REFUGE ISLANDS, AND THE CONFLICT POINTS THAT PEDESTRIANS WOULD EXPERIENCE AS THEY CROSSED EACH ALTERNATIVE CONFIGURATION ALONG THE CORRIDOR.
UM, BEAR WITH ME HERE WHILE I FIND THE TABLE THAT I AM LOOKING FOR.
UM, YOU KNOW, I CAN CERTAINLY GO THROUGH EACH OF THOSE BOXES IN DETAIL IF YOU'D LIKE, BUT, UH, GENERALLY WE FOUND THAT THE ALTERNATIVE NUMBER ONE HAD THE, UH, LEAST AMOUNT OF BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN, UM, PROVISIONS PROVIDED, UH, FOLLOWED BY ALTERNATIVE TWO, ALTERNATIVE FOUR, AND THEN ALTERNATIVE THREE.
AND I REALLY WANT TO EMPHASIZE THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE PROVIDED AN OVERALL SCORING MATRIX TO THE COMMITTEE AS PART OF OUR WORK, WE GRADED EACH OF THESE ALTERNATIVES AGAINST ONE ANOTHER.
WE DID NOT BRING FORWARD, OR, UM, CONTINUE TO ANALYZE ANY ALTERNATIVE THAT WE, WE FELT FAILED IN ANY WAY.
SO WE THINK THAT EACH OF THESE FOUR ALTERNATIVES WERE WORTHY OF CONSIDERATION AND TO HOPEFULLY HELP, UH, DECISION MAKERS WITH THIS DECISION, WE GRADED THEM AGAINST ONE ANOTHER IN EACH OF THE CATEGORIES THAT WERE PRESENTED IN THE SCORING MATRIX THAT WE HAD, UH, PROVIDED PREVIOUSLY TO.
SO, BEFORE, BEFORE YOU LEAVE THAT SLIDE SLIDE, SORRY.
UM, I'M LOOKING AT A COPY OF THAT FROM PAGE 54 OF THE, THAT SECTION OF YOUR REPORT.
[02:20:01]
UM, AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR THE COMMUNITY TO NOTE, UM, THE OBSERVATIONS YOU LOOK AT PEDESTRIAN CROSSING DISTANCE AND ALTERNATIVE ONE, WHICH IS THE ONE BEING RECOMMENDED AS THE LONGEST PEDESTRIAN CROSSING DISTANCES, ESPECIALLY THROUGH STONY AND THE POTENTIAL FOR REFUGE ISLANDS.NO REFUGE ISLANDS ON NORTH, SOUTH CROSSINGS.
SO THERE'S NO REFUGE ISLANDS, NO PLACE FOR SOMEBODY TO STOP IF THEY'RE TRYING TO GET ACROSS A SIX LANE ROAD.
AND THE CONFLICT POINTS, MULTIPLE TURNING MOVEMENTS AND POTENTIAL CONFLICT POINTS ALONG EACH LEG.
SO THAT IS TRUE OF THE S-C-D-O-T MODIFIED PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE, IF I'VE GOT ALL THOSE WORDS IN THE RIGHT ORDER WITH ALTERNATIVE ONE THAT YOU'RE SUGGESTING, WHICH INCLUDES ADDITIONAL RIGHT OF WAY ON GUMTREE.
SO ACTUAL ACTUALLY THERE'S NO, UM, PROVISION FOR BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN SAFETY.
THERE IS THERE, THE SIGNAL CERTAINLY WILL BE TIMED TO HAVE THE APPROPRIATE PEDESTRIAN CLEARANCES.
UM, BUT THIS LARGELY PROVIDES A SIMILAR AMOUNT OF PEDESTRIAN BICYCLE AMENITIES, UM, AS THE, AS THE CORRIDOR DOES TODAY WITH THE EXISTING SIGNALS IN THE EXISTING FACILITIES.
HAVE YOU EVER TRIED TO CROSS AS A PEDESTRIAN OR A BICYCLIST THE ROAD AT SPANISH WELLS? I HAVE.
AND I'LL JUST COMMENT THAT THAT IS AN ISSUE, UM, THAT GOES TOWARDS SAFETY, RIGHT? SAFETY IS A PRIMARY CONCERN.
LATER, WE'LL BE EVALUATING THE VALUE TO YOU AS RESIDENTS FOR THIS PROJECT.
AND SAFETY IS ONE OF THE CRITICAL ELEMENTS, AND I THINK WE'RE MISSING THE MARK ON THAT.
CAN I ASK ONE OTHER QUESTION? HAS THERE BEEN, UM, A ROAD SAFE? SORRY? HAS THERE BEEN A ROAD SAFETY AUDIT PREPARED BY S-C-D-O-T FOR THIS PROJECT? I AM NOT AWARE OF THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION.
AS PART OF OUR ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE FOUR PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED ALTERNATIVES, WE ALSO DID A HIGH LEVEL VEHICLE SAFETY ANALYSIS.
AND TO DO SO, WE COMPARED THE CONFLICT POINTS.
UH, CONFLICT POINT WOULD BE, UM, A POSITION WITHIN AN INTERSECTION OR A ROADWAY CONFIGURATION WHERE TWO VEHICLES COULD POTENTIALLY OCCUPY THE SAME SPACE.
SO, ALTERNATIVE NUMBER ONE, UM, AT EACH INTERSECTION ALONG THE CORRIDOR, THERE ARE 32 POTENTIAL CONFLICT POINTS.
ALTERNATIVE TWO WOULD REDUCE THAT NUMBER TO 20 POTENTIAL CONFLICT POINTS.
ALTERNATIVE THREE, WHERE THE ECHELON OR THE CENTER TURN OVERPASS WOULD BE CONSTRUCTED, WHICH AGAIN, IS EITHER IT SQUIRE, POPE, OR SPANISH WELLS WOULD REDUCE THAT NUMBER TO 22 OR 24 CONFLICT POINTS RESPECTIVELY.
AND ALTERNATIVE FOUR, UM, WITH AN ELEVATED BYPASS, THERE IS NO MORE VEHICLE CONFLICT, UH, WITH, WITH CROSSING MOVEMENTS, BECAUSE THE ROAD, IT WOULD BE SEPARATED FOR THROUGH VEHICLES, THERE WOULD NO LONGER BE ANY CONFLICT POINTS AT SIGNAL ICE INTERSECTIONS FOR THOSE VEHICLES THAT WOULD USE THE BYPASS.
SO, UM, WE HAD AN ESTIMATION THAT THERE WOULD BE A POTENTIAL REDUCTION IN APPROXIMATELY 30 TO 50% OF THE CRASHES ALONG THE CORRIDOR IF AN ELEVATED BYPASS WAS PURSUED.
I AM GONNA PASS THE MICROPHONE DOWN TO LAUREN TO TALK ABOUT RIGHT OF WAY IMPACTS.
AS PART OF THESE, UH, ALTERNATIVES, WE LOOKED AT, UH, WHAT THE RIGHT OF WAY IMPACTS WOULD BE IN COMPARISON TO THE STATE OPTION.
SO KEEP IN MIND THAT ANY OF THESE AREAS IS IN, IN RELATION TO THE STATE'S PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE.
MAY, WHILE YOU'RE TAKING A BREATH IN BEFORE YOUR NEXT SENTENCE, AS PEOPLE ARE BEGINNING TO LEAVE, I WOULD JUST ENCOURAGE YOU ALL TO STAY ENGAGED.
UM, MUNICIPAL CONSENT WILL NOT BE VOTED ON TONIGHT.
IT'LL BE, UM, I BELIEVE THE 20TH THE MAYOR HAS SET FOR THAT DECISION BY COUNCIL.
PLEASE COME TO TOMORROW'S NIGHT'S COUNCIL MEETING, AND PLEASE COME TO THE, UM, JUNE 20TH COUNCIL MEETING AT THREE O'CLOCK HERE IN CHAMBERS.
[02:25:02]
OKAY.SO, UH, AND IN ADDITION, UH, WE'LL POINT OUT, AS KATE MENTIONED, THAT OUR STUDY ACTUALLY GOES BEYOND THE, UH, LIMITS OF THE STATE IMPROVEMENTS.
UH, WE LOOKED ALL THE WAY DOWN TO GUMTREE FOR OUR IMPROVEMENTS.
SO THE ALTERNATE ONE, WHICH IS ESSENTIALLY THE STATE OPTION WITH SOME MODIFICATIONS, DOES INCLUDE SOME ADDITIONAL RIGHT OF WAY TO PROVIDE A SECOND SOUTHBOUND LEFT TURN LANE AT GUMTREE TO HELP THE OPERATIONS OF THAT INTERSECTION.
AND THEN THE ALTERNATE TWO, UM, WHICH IS, UH, THE BOW TIE OPTION, UH, WE'VE GOT AN ADDITIONAL 1.1 ACRES THERE, AND THAT IS PRIMARILY TO PROVIDE THOSE ROUNDABOUTS, UH, FOR THE TURNAROUNDS.
AND THEN THE ALTERNATE THREE, THE ECHELON CENTER TURNOVER PASSES AT THOSE INTERSECTIONS.
UH, DUE TO THE CONFIGURATION OF THE INTERSECTIONS, THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME ADDITIONAL TURN LANES AND TURNAROUNDS PROVIDED TO PROVIDE FULL ACCESS.
AND AGAIN, THAT RESULTS IN 1.1 ADDITIONAL ACRES OF RIGHT OF WAY.
AND THE, UH, ELEVATED BYPASS BASED ON OUR PRELIMINARY LAYOUT, WE FEEL THAT IT COULD, DEPENDING ON WHAT SHOULDER WIDTHS ARE, WOULD BE USED, COULD, UH, FIT WITHIN THE, UH, STATE'S PROPOSED RIGHT AWAY WITH.
SO THERE WOULD BE NO ADDITIONAL RIGHT AWAY REQUIRED THERE.
AND, AND IN ADDITION TO THAT, BECAUSE IT'S ELEVATED PAST GUMTREE, THAT SECOND SOUTHBOUND TURN LANE AT GUMTREE IS NOT REQUIRED.
SO THAT, THAT THE 0.2 ACRES AT GUMTREE ISN'T REQUIRED THERE ALL EITHER COVER, TAKE THAT.
SO AS PART OF OUR, THE EVALUATION OF OUR FOUR ALTERNATIVES, WE ALSO, UM, LOOKED AT ENVIRONMENTAL OVERVIEW.
SO AGAIN, THIS IS STAYING HIGH LEVEL.
THIS DID NOT INCLUDE ANY TYPE OF FIELD INVESTIGATION, DID NOT INCLUDE ANY TYPE OF PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT OR ANYTHING OF THAT NATURE.
THE INTENT WAS TO BASICALLY USE DATA THAT WAS OUT THERE, ARCHIVAL RESOURCES, GIS RESOURCES, WHAT S-C-D-O-T, UH, HAD INCLUDED IN THEIR, UH, DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND SCREEN OUR FOUR ALTERNATIVES AND TO SAY, OKAY, THIS IS, THIS IS WHAT WE COULD BE LOOKING AT FROM AN IMPACT WISE.
AND THEN ALSO, WHAT DOES THIS MEAN IN TERMS OF SATISFYING NEPA? UM, THEN GOAL AFTER THIS PROCESS WOULD BE THAT, UM, WHATEVER ALTERNATIVE IS CARRIED FORWARD, UH, WOULD BE PRESENTED TO S-C-D-O-T, AND THEY WOULD INCORPORATE US FURTHER MODIFICATIONS INTO THEIR RECOMMENDED PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE.
AND THEIR CONSULTANT THAT'S ASSISTING WITH THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WOULD BE DOING THAT RESOURCE AGENCY COORDINATION IN THE DETAILED FIELD INVESTIGATIONS, ALL THOSE THINGS THAT HAVE TO BE DONE AS PART OF THE NEPA PROCESS, UH, TO UPDATE, UH, THE CURRENT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT.
OH, HE HAS ONE, DOESN'T HE? OKAY.
AS PREVIOUSLY REFERENCED, THE, THE SOUTHERN BYPASS, THAT'S A, UH, A TOPIC THAT'S BEEN BROUGHT FORTH BY MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS, UH, SINCE WE STARTED IN EARNEST.
UM, I DO, I DO THINK THERE WOULD BE BENEFITING ME, GIVING JUST A LITTLE BIT OF CONTEXT TO THE GROUP AS TO HOW DID LOCK MUELLER ARRIVE AT THE ALTERNATIVES THAT WE PUT FORTH.
UM, ON DECEMBER THE 12TH AT THE COMMITTEE MEETING, UM, WE APPROACHED THE COMMITTEE TO SEEK FEEDBACK FROM THEM TO HELP US DEVELOP A HIERARCHY OF MOST PALATABLE TO LEAST PALATABLE, BECAUSE WE WANTED TO UNDERSTAND, WE, WE FULLY APPRECIATE THAT THE GUIDING PRINCIPLES AND WHAT, QUITE FRANKLY, THE DIFFICULTY THAT, THAT THAT'S FACED HERE IN THAT THERE'S A DESIRE TO REDUCE CONGESTION ALONG THE MAIN LINE WITHOUT INCREASING CAPACITY.
AND THERE'S ALSO BEEN HESITANCY TO, UH, OR WANTING TO LIMIT RIGHT OF WAY AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE, WANTING TO PURSUE STANDARD INTERSECTIONS, GEOMETRIES, NO, UH, UNIQUE LEFT TURN TREATMENTS, NO CIRCUITOUS MOVEMENTS AND NO, UH, VERTICAL GRADE SEPARATIONS.
AND ALL OF THOSE ARE TYPICALLY USED IN SOME FORM OR FASHION
[02:30:01]
ON STANDARD CORRIDOR STUDIES.THIS IS DEFINITELY A UNIQUE AND SPECIAL PROJECT.
SO WE SOUGHT THE INPUT FROM THE COMMITTEE, AND THE, THE TOPIC THAT WAS REALLY ROSE TO THE TOP AND DIRECTED TO US WAS THE HIGHEST DESIRE WAS TO PUT RIGHT OF WAY PUBLIC OR PRIVATE TO NOT IMPACT THAT TO THE GREATEST EXTENT POSSIBLE.
AND THEN ON THE MEETING THAT TOOK PLACE ON FEBRUARY THE 14TH, UM, UM, A COMMITTEE MEMBER PUT FORTH A, UH, A MOTION FOR CONSIDERATION THAT MAYBE THERE'D BE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR AN ALTERNATIVE TO COMPLETELY ELIMINATE ANY RIGHT OF WAY TAKINGS AT ALL, AS COMPARED TO THE DOT'S ALTERNATIVE, WHICH, AS SEAN HAS MENTIONED, WAS AT THE TIME IN FEBRUARY, ABOUT 3.44.
UM, AND SO WHENEVER WE HEARD IN DECEMBER AND THEN IN FEBRUARY REITERATED THAT THAT'S THE TOWN, AT LEAST FROM THE COMMITTEE'S PERSPECTIVE, THE HIGHEST DESIRE IS TO LIMIT RIGHT OF WAY AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.
AND I DO WANNA NOTE THAT AT THE FEBRUARY MEETING, WE HADN'T BEGAN DEVELOPING OUR ALTERNATIVES.
SO THAT WAS REALLY KIND OF AT THE TOP OF OUR MIND, LIKE THAT'S WHAT OUR LENS WAS AS WE MOVED FORWARD.
SO THE, THE ALTERNATIVE THAT KATE WENT THROUGH, UM, WE DON'T HAVE A SLIDE THAT SHOWS THIS REALLY AVAILABLE, BUT THE, WE, WE COULD NOT FIND AN OPPORTUNITY TO COMPLETELY ELIMINATE RIGHT OF WAY TO ELIMINATE WHAT THE DOT HAD PROVIDED OR PROPOSED.
UM, BUT THE ALTERNATIVES THAT YOU SHOWED THAT WE SHOWED WOULD INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF RIGHT OF WAY PUT FORTH BY THE DOT BY APPROXIMATELY AN ACRE.
SO IT IS AN ACRE, NOT DRASTICALLY, BUT ADMITTEDLY IT WAS AN ANCHOR.
UM, SO THAT'S, THAT'S HOW WE, THAT WAS THE LENS THAT WE DID AND WHY WE CHOSE THE ONES THAT WE DID THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS.
UM, MEMBERS OF THE TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP AND COMMUNITY HAD HAD SENT US, UH, VARYING VERSIONS OF THE SOUTHERN BYPASS TO GO ALONG THE SOUTH SIDE OF WILLIAM HILTON PARKWAY.
AND WHILE WE APPRECIATED THE, UH, THE CORRESPONDENCE, WE, WE DID REVIEW THEM.
HOWEVER, UH, LOOKING AT THIS MAP, UM, ONE REASON WHY WE DID NOT INCLUDE THOSE IN OUR ALTERNATIVES THAT WE LOOKED AT IT FROM, AGAIN, FROM AN INDEPENDENT PERSPECTIVE, WAS BECAUSE GOING THROUGH TRADITIONAL CULTURAL PROPERTY ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF WILLIAM MELTON PARKWAY WOULD BE A, A SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN ACREAGE OVER WHAT SCD T'S ALTERNATIVE WAS.
AND SO WE KNOW THAT THERE, THROUGH THAT CORRESPONDENCE, THERE WAS A DESIRE TO HAVE TO MAXIMIZE THROUGHPUT TO CONNECT DIRECTLY TO THE CROSS ISLAND PARKWAY, WHICH THAT WAS REALLY KIND OF THE, UM, THE REASONING BEHIND PROPOSING AN ELEVATED BYPASS, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THAT DID.
IT REMAINED WITHIN THE EXISTING FOOTPRINT.
IT PROVIDED DIRECT ACCESS TO THE CROSS ISLAND PARKWAY.
IT IMPROVED OPERATIONS OF THE GUMTREE ROAD BECAUSE IT TOOK THE MAIN LINES OVER AND THEY CROSSED DOWN JUST WEST OF WILBURN.
SO IT, IT ACHIEVED ALL THOSE BYPASS OPTIONS THAT, THAT THE MEMBERS OF THE TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP HAD PUT FORTH, BUT JUST DID NOT INCUR AS MUCH RIGHT OF WAY IMPACTS AS, UM, UM, AS WHAT HAS SHOWN, AND AGAIN, IS ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT E'S ALTERNATIVE WAS.
SO THROUGHOUT THE COURSE OF THOSE, UM, COMMITTEE MEETINGS ON MARCH THE 27TH, APRIL THE 10TH, AND APRIL THE 22ND, UM, VARYING COMMENTS REMAIN, BUT WE REALLY GOT THE, UM, WE DECIDED AS AN INTERNAL TEAM FOLLOWING THE APRIL 22ND, BECAUSE THE, THE TOPIC KEPT, UM, BEING BROUGHT FORTH BY THE PUBLIC AND WANTING TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO PUT MORE DATA BEHIND, RESPONDING TO, FROM A CURSORY PERSPECTIVE, WHAT WE THOUGHT THAT THE IMPACTS WOULD BE AND MAYBE THE, THE HURDLES AND CHALLENGES THERE WOULD BE.
UM, WE DECIDED TO STEP OUTSIDE OF OUR SCOPE AND PREPARE A CURSORY OBSERVATION RELATED TO, UM, THIS VERSION OF THE SOUTHERN BYPASS.
UM, THIS IS ONE, AS OF THE DAY OF THE MEETING ON MAY 8TH, THIS WAS THE VERSION THAT WE HAD, UM, WHILE I WAS ACTUALLY TRAVELING TO THE ISLAND, I RECEIVED AN EMAIL WITH A MORE CURRENT VERSION, WHICH HAS SHOWN, UM, HERE, UM, ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW, COMING TO THE MEETING, WE DIDN'T HAVE A CHANCE TO LOOK AT THAT AND THE, THE FINDINGS THAT WE'LL GO THROUGH HERE RELATE TO APOLOGIZE THIS MAP ONE.
AND SO AGAIN, WE WENT ABOVE OUR SCOPE, WE PREPARED SOME DETAILED FINDINGS AND JUST OUTLINED SOME, SOME CHALLENGES FROM THE ENVIRONMENT, ENVIRONMENTAL ROADWAY RIGHT OF WAY IMPACTS.
AND, UM, UM, AGAIN, THESE ARE ITEMS THAT WERE SHARED AT THE, THE MAY 8TH MEETING, TALKING ABOUT THE INCREASED RELOCATIONS IMPACTS TO RIGHT OF WAY.
UM, AS YOU CAN SEE ON THIS, UH, SCREEN WITH THIS VERSION, THE, UM, IN THE MAGENTA COLOR, THOSE ARE, UM, SITES THAT AREN'T, WE WERE CONSIDERED TO BE IMPACTED BECAUSE THIS WOULD NEED TO BE AN ELEVATED BYPASS.
IF I WASN'T LIVING IN ONE OF THOSE HOMES PERSONALLY, I WOULD FEEL THAT I WOULD BE IMPACTED IF AN ELEVATOR ROADWAY WAS IN THAT AREA.
[02:35:01]
YELLOW DOTS ARE ONES THAT WE ANTICIPATED NEED TO BE RELOCATED.UH, IN THIS SCREEN YOU CAN SEE THE ONE YELLOW DOT JUST, UH, ABOVE THE OLD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PARK.
AND THEN THE ONES IN THE GREEN WOULD BE CONSIDERED PRIVATE PARCELS.
UM, AGAIN, JUST TO REITERATE WHAT CHAD HAS SAID BEFORE FROM A NEPA PROCESS, AND THIS BEING A FEDERALLY FUNDED PROJECT, RIGHT OF WAY IS RIGHT OF WAY.
UM, IT DOESN'T MATTER IF IT'S PUBLIC OR PRIVATE.
IF THIS WERE A LOCALLY FUNDED PROJECT, THEN THERE WOULD BE MORE LATITUDE IN BEING ABLE TO DO, UH, WHAT THE TOWN DESIRED.
HOWEVER, WITH THIS BEING FEDERALLY FUNDED THERE, THE RULES ARE, ARE QUITE STRINGENT.
AND THAT'S WHERE WE ARE, UM, LEANING ON CHAD AND PROVIDING YOU WITH THAT EXPERTISE TO PROVIDE YOU WITH THE DATA AND THE FACTS.
AND REALLY THAT'S ANOTHER CONCEPT WE WANTED TO BRING FORTH AS, AS WE ARE HERE, AS YOUR, UM, HOPEFULLY VIEWED UPON AS YOUR TRUSTED CONSULTANT TO PROVIDE YOU WITH FACTS TO MAKE INFORMED DECISIONS.
AND SO AT THE MEETING, WE, UH, PRESENTED THOSE AND, UH, CHAD WENT THROUGH SOME ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS, AND WE CAN CERTAINLY CIRCLE BACK TO THIS, UM, IF THE COUNCIL SO DESIRES.
UM, BUT DURING THE MEETING, UM, ONE OF THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE ASKED US, WOULD OUR RECOMMENDATION, UH, USE THE WRONG WORD THERE, OUR OBSERVATIONS, UM, AND CHALLENGES THAT WE SEE FROM A, AN ENVIRONMENTAL STANDPOINT.
WOULD THAT CHANGE IF WE LOOKED AT THE ALIGNMENT THAT'S SHOWN ON THE SCREEN? AND, UH, WE CAN UNDERSTAND AND APPRECIATE MAYBE THEM, UH, THE TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP WHO PREPARED IT, THAT IF WE BROUGHT IT A LITTLE BIT CLOSER TO WILLIAM HILTON PARKWAY, WOULD THAT MAYBE DECREASE THE IMPACTS IN? UM, AGAIN, WITH IT BEING WITHIN THE TRADITIONAL CULTURAL PROPERTY, THE AMOUNT OF ACREAGE WOULD REMAIN ABOUT THE SAME.
AND THEN IF YOU LOOK AT THE PARCEL, THE, UM, THE PARCEL THAT IS HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW CURRENTLY, IF WE MOVE THAT CLOSER TO WILLIAM HILL PARKWAY, THOSE WOULD, THOSE GREEN DOTS THAT ARE IMMEDIATELY ABOVE IT WOULD TURN INTO RELOCATIONS, UH, AS WELL.
AND AGAIN, THE ACREAGE WOULD REMAIN ABOUT THE SAME.
SO ALL OF THE ENVIRONMENT, THE CHALLENGES THAT WE WANTED TO INFORM YOU OF, UH, WOULD NOT CHANGE REGARDLESS OF ANY TYPE OF ALIGNMENT.
AND ALSO TOO, THAT WOULD REQUIRE, UM, CONNECTING INTO AND MORE MAYBE ALL THE WAY.
AND IF THERE'S A QUESTION THAT REGARD MAYBE THE, UM, WHERE IT WOULD ACTUALLY NEED TO CONNECT DIRECTLY INTO THE CROSS ISLAND, UH, PARKWAY, IT WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO CONNECT OR SHOWN.
AND THEN IN HERE, UH, DEFINITELY WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO CONNECT JUST RIGHT THERE.
THE, AND I DON'T THINK THAT'S THE INTENT OF THIS SLIDE.
THEY, THEY DO SAY DIRECT DOWN TO THE CROSS ISLAND PARKWAY, BUT THAT DISTANCE ROUGHLY FROM WEST OF SQUIRE PROBE ROAD TO AT SOME POINT ON CROSS ISLAND PARKWAY IS APPROXIMATELY 5,000 LINEAL FEET.
UM, AND THAT WOULD ALSO REQUIRE A, A GREATS SEPARATED INTERCHANGE AT SQUIRE ROAD.
UM, AND SO WE, WE COVERED THAT AT, AT MAY 8TH.
UM, THERE WAS A, UM, A DESIRE TO POTENTIALLY STUDY IT FURTHER.
UM, WE, THAT WAS OUTSIDE OF OUR SCOPE AND, UM, WE, BECAUSE IT WAS, WE DID NOT MOVE FORWARD.
AND DURING THE TIME ON JUNE 12TH AT OUR COMMITTEE MEETING, WE REITERATED THESE TOPICS.
REALLY NOTHING HAS CHANGED FROM THAT POINT.
SO, UM, APOLOGIZE FOR A LENGTHY CONVERSATION.
JUST WANTED TO PROVIDE SOME CONTEXT, UH, TO THAT.
UM, WE JUST SEE A LOT OF ENVIRONMENTALLY RELATED CHALLENGES WITH A, A BYPASS THAT GOES THROUGH BRAND NEW, UM, A BRAND NEW ALIGNMENT THROUGH THE TRADITIONAL CULTURAL PROPERTY CAUSING, UH, RELOCATIONS, UM, APPROXIMATELY SIX ACRES AS COMPARED TO, UM, SLIVERS OF RIGHT OF WAY ALONG WILLIAM HILTON PARKWAY.
UM, AGAIN, THROUGH THE EFFORTS OF, UH, IN COORDINATION WITH SEAN AND, UH, MKSK AND, AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE, REDUCING THAT NUMBER OF ACREAGE WEST SQUIRE PRO PRO TO 2.89 AS OPPOSED TO 3.4, UH, THAT'S REDUCED.
BUT IF YOU COMPARE THAT TO NEW, UM, ALIGNMENT THROUGH THE SOUTH SIDE, THAT WOULD INCREASE IT BY APPROXIMATELY SIX ACRES.
SO A DRASTIC INCREASE IN IN RIGHT OF WAY.
NATE, CAN WE JUMP AHEAD A LITTLE BIT? UM, I KNOW YOU HAVE, UM, A MATRIX OR TWO AND THEN THE SUMMARY OF FOND, I THINK YOU'VE COVERED MOST OF THESE.
UM, REDUCING FROM 2.89, UH, IS CURRENTLY, UM, WITH THE DIS WITH THE INTENT TO MAKE THE EASTBOUND MAKE IT A SINGLE EASTBOUND LEFT TURN ESQUIRE, POPE ROAD AND A SINGLE SOUTHBOUND RIGHT, AS OPPOSED TO THE ORIGINAL DUAL TURN LANES THAT WERE ORIGINALLY PROPOSED.
UM, ANY NEW ALIGNMENT ALONG THE SOUTH SIDE WOULD BE ON THE ORDER OF ABOUT SIX ACRES THROUGH TRADITIONAL CULTURAL PROPERLY REQUIRING RELOCATIONS REQUIRE A 2000 FOOT BRIDGE SPANNING THE MARSHLAND,
[02:40:01]
UM, SIGNIFICANTLY MORE EXPENSIVE THAN ALTERNATIVE ONE WOULD LEAD TO, UH, MOST LIKELY LEAD TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT AS OPPOSED TO THE EA UM, IMPACTS THE CULTURAL SECTION FOUR F AND, AND I DO WANNA POINT OUT AS WELL IS THAT WHEN WE PREPARED OUR, UM, CURSORY OBSERVATIONS, WE PREPARED THOSE INDEPENDENTLY, UM, BROUGHT THEM TO THE MEETING, AND THEN SEAN PREPARED, UH, PROVIDED A, A LETTER FROM THE DOT STATING THAT THEY ALSO EVALUATED IT SEPARATELY.AND IT TURNS OUT THAT THERE WAS A LOT OF SIMILAR FINDINGS.
AND SO HOPEFULLY THAT GIVES ASSURANCE THAT WE, WE HAVE THE BACKGROUND AND EXPERIENCE TO KNOW WHAT THE ANSWERS MOST LIKELY WILL BE.
AND THEN THEY VERIFIED THAT, HEY, CAN I, CAN I JUMP IN JUST FOR A SECOND? 'CAUSE I THINK, UH, WE CAN MOVE FORWARD TO THE FOUR F FINDINGS.
I, I WANNA MAKE A COUPLE OF, UM, OR, UM, COUPLE OF STATEMENTS.
UH, WE'VE HEARD THAT THE SOUTHERN BYPASS WOULD, WOULD NOT IMPACT, HAVE ANY IMPACT ON THE STONY COMMUNITY.
WE'VE HEARD FROM LOCK MUELLER, AND WE'RE GONNA HEAR FROM BRIAN KINSMAN AND MKSK, UM, ABOUT PROPERTY IMPACTS.
IT'S AT LEAST SIX, ROUGHLY SIX ACRES IN LOCK MUELLER'S ALIGNMENT EVALUATION OF WHAT WAS PROVIDED TO THEM.
AND MKS HAS A, UM, ANOTHER NUMBER DRAWN UP, UM, AT THE REQUEST OF THE TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP.
UM, MR. BAR HAS THAT WE HAD MK SK DRAWN ALIGNMENT.
THERE'S NO DISTINCTION BETWEEN PUBLICLY OWNED AND PRIVATELY OWNED PROPERTY WITHIN THE TRADITIONAL CULTURAL PROPERTY.
AND SO AGAIN, BACK TO THE AVOID, MINIMIZE, MITIGATE, UM, ANY SQUARE FOOT, ANY ACRE IMPACTED, WHETHER IT'S PUBLICLY OR PRIVATELY OWNED, THERE IS NO DISTINCTION WHEN IT GOES THROUGH FEDERAL HIGHWAYS FOR EVALUATION.
SO I JUST WANTED TO POINT THAT OUT.
AND THEN, NATE, WOULD YOU MIND ADVANCING TO THE NEXT COUPLE? UM, AND I'M GONNA HAVE BRIAN KINSMAN JUST EXPLAIN THIS, UH, EXPLAIN THIS AGAIN.
UM, I TALKED WITH, UM, STEVEN BEAR WITH A TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP.
HE ASKED BASED ON SUBMISSION OF THE PREVIOUS ALIGNMENT THAT WAS DISPLAYED, UH, NATE WENT THROUGH FOR THE SOUTHERN BYPASS, IF WE COULD HAVE MKSK DRAW AN ALIGNMENT, UH, THAT THEY THOUGHT MIGHT BE APPROPRIATE FOR A SOUTHERN BYPASS IN THIS AREA.
AND I'LL HAVE BRIAN ZAMAN RUN THROUGH AND, AND, AND BRIEFLY EXPLAIN WHAT, WHAT THE OUTCOME WAS.
THIS IS THE OVERVIEW PLAN, STARTING AT A TOUCHDOWN POINT THAT'S, UH, WEST OF SQUIRE POPE AND THEN GOING ALL THE WAY TO THE CROSS ISLAND AND TAKING THAT, UM, EXPRESS TRAFFIC, IF YOU WILL, OFF OF THE, UH, UH, EXISTING 2 78.
AS, AS NATHAN HAD MENTIONED, THERE IS, UH, GRADE SEPARATION.
SO WE'VE GOT BRIDGES, IF YOU WILL, OVER ROADWAY SYSTEMS. AND THEN SOME OF THIS ROADWAY IS ON, ON GRADE, BUT IT'S A, A, A A SYSTEM THAT'S SIMILAR TO WHAT WE SEE AT THE CROSS ISLAND AS IT CROSSES 2 78 BUSINESS.
IT'S SIMILAR SYSTEM TO WHAT YOU SEE ON THE, UM, BLUFFTON PARKWAY FLY OVER.
IT MAY BE ONLY ONE LANE IN WIDTH IN EACH DIRECTION, BUT IT STILL NEEDS BREAKDOWN LANES.
IT NEEDS STRUCTURE FOR THE ELEVATION, ELEVATED PORTIONS, AND ALSO FOR THE VIADUCT STRUCTURE.
SO IT IS RIGHT OF WAY, TAKE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.
UM, AND IT'S NOT INSIGNIFICANT.
UM, I'VE TRIED TO THREAD THE NEEDLE AS IT WERE, UH, LOOKING AT THIS FROM THE STONY NEIGHBORHOOD STANDPOINT, NOT HOW QUICKLY I CAN MOVE AN AUTOMOBILE FROM ONE POINT TO THE OTHER.
HOW WE WEAVE THROUGH, UH, THOSE, THOSE RESIDENTS AND THOSE BUSINESSES MISSING PARK PROPERTY TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE.
BUT AS NATHAN HAS SAID, THIS HAS RIGHT OF WAY IMPACT WHETHER IT'S PRIVATELY HELD OR PUBLICLY HELD GROUND.
SO THIS REPRESENTS, I THINK, NATHAN, IF YOU'D FLIP TO THE NEXT SLIDE, I THINK WE'VE GOT A BIT OF AN ENLARGEMENT, GIVES YOU A LITTLE BETTER, BETTER SENSE OF HOW YOU MARRY UP WITH THE EXISTING 2 78 SYSTEM.
THIS PARTICULAR ONE FLIES OVER, UH, UH, SPANISH WELLS AND THEN FINDS ITSELF SOUTH OF THE EXISTING PARKWAY.
SO IT'S A SERIES OF BRIDGES VIA DUCTS, SURFACE ROADWAYS, AND IT'S ABOUT 12 ACRES OF RIGHT OF WAY TAKE WHEN YOU START TO FIGURE IN THE RIGHT OF WAY NEEDED FOR CONSTRUCTION, FOR TRANSITION GRADING, UH, AND FOR MAKING THESE, THESE STRUCTURES WORK OVER ROADWAYS FEED.
YOU CAN SEE THE NEXT PIECE THAT AGAIN, TRAVERSES OVER THE TOP OF, OF, UH, THE PARKWAY OVER THE TOP OF SQUIRE POPE AND THEN BLENDS INTO WESTBOUND 2 78 GOING OFF ISLAND.
SO ONE LANE IN EACH DIRECTION, BUT IT'S WITH BREAKDOWN LANES.
[02:45:02]
SO THAT IS MY, UM, AS ACCURATE OF MY INTERPRETATION OF WHAT THE COMMUNITY HAS BROUGHT FORWARD TO YOU FOR A SOUTHERN BYPASS.IS THERE A DISTINCTION, I UNDERSTAND THAT WITHIN THE FOUR F, UM, AREA THAT IT DOESN'T MATTER IF IT'S PRIVATELY OR PUBLICLY HELD LAND.
IS THERE A DISTINCTION THOUGH, AND I THINK YOU SAID SIX ACRES OF, UM, WHETHER THAT IS PRIVATELY OR PUBLICLY HELD LANDS.
IS THERE, HAVE YOU SEPARATED THAT? ARE THERE TWO DIFFERENT NUMBERS? UM, SEAN, I DON'T RECALL OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD WHAT THAT DISTINCTION IS.
I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN KNOWING, BECAUSE, UM, THE TOWN OWNED PROPERTY IS LARGELY UNDEVELOPED, RIGHT? THE SIGNIFICANT PORTION, WHILE WE HEAR THAT BIG NUMBER, UM, THAT WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT IS WHAT PORTION OF IT IS ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE STONY NEIGHBORHOOD AND THEIR IMPACTS NOT UNDEVELOPED TOWN OWNED LAND.
WELL, I, I, I THINK WHAT I'VE HEARD, UH, AND WHAT I BELIEVE IS THAT, UM, THE SOUTHERN BYPASS, WHETHER, UM, LOOKING AT THE GRAPHIC OR TWO THAT WAS DISPLAYED AS NATE PRESENTED, OR THE GRAPHIC THAT WE HAVE UP ON THE SCREEN IS ALL STONY COMMU COMMUNITY IMPACT.
SO AREAS IN ORANGE SHOWN THERE.
AND SO ALL, SO ALL OF THE, OF, ALL OF THE IMPACTS WITH REGARD TO THE SOUTHERN BYPASS ARE WITHIN THE STONY NEIGHBORHOOD THAT THAT'S CORRECT.
SO EVEN IN THE, I'M, I'M SORRY.
EVEN IN THE, WELL, THE MKSK ILLUSTRATION, THE, UM, OVERALL IMPACT OF THE TCP HAS INCREASED TO APPROXIMATELY 12 ACRES.
UM, BECAUSE WHAT THE, UH, PREVIOUS VERSION, UM, FROM THE, THAT WAS DISPLAYED THERE AND, AND ASSESSED, IT DIDN'T INCLUDE THE TIE-INS.
IT DIDN'T INCLUDE WIDTH FOR, UH, SHOULDERS, UM, UM, ALONG THE ELEVATED SECTIONS.
AND, AND SO THEREFORE THE RIGHT OF WAY KNEE WOULD BE, UH, WOULD BE GREATER THAN WHAT THEY, UH, HAD SUBMITTED.
SO, UM, AGAIN, ANY ADDITIONAL IMPACT WITHIN THE STONY COMMUNITY AND THAT TRADITIONAL CULTURAL PROPERTY THAT WAS DESIGNATED WOULD INCREASE THE, THE OVERALL IMPACT.
AND, AND, AND WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE DRAFT SUBMISSION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, UM, IT WOULD BE MORE IMPACTFUL THAN THE 2.8 ACRES THAT, UM, A, A PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD HAVE AN IMPACT ON.
WOULDN'T THE, UH, SUBJECT BYPASS THAT YOU'RE DESCRIBING HELP WORKERS BEGIN TO WORK FASTER BECAUSE ONES GOING NORTH DIRECTION? WELL, I, I'M TALKING ABOUT WHAT BENEFITS YEAH, AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER THAT.
SO, ONE OTHER THING, CAN WE GO BACK A COUPLE SLIDES, NATE? THE SOUTHERN BYPASS THAT'S BEING PROPO, THAT, THAT, THAT WAS PROPOSED OR ASKED FOR A REVIEW? UH, GO BACK A COUPLE MORE.
UM, WHAT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP? UM, IT BEGINS RIGHT BEFORE THE INTERSECTION OF SQUARE POPE ROAD, AND IT BYPASSES A SIX LANE SEGMENT THAT ALREADY EXISTS.
SO I WILL TELL YOU THAT TRAVEL TIMES BETWEEN SQUARE POPE ROAD OR WHERE THE BEGINNING OF THAT, UH, EXPRESS BYPASS EXISTS TO THE END OF THE EXPRESS BYPASS ARE, ARE VERY, ARE VERY MARGINAL AT BEST.
UM, ONCE YOU GET TO THAT POINT WITHIN THE CORRIDOR, THERE'S NOT A LOT OF SAVINGS BY TAKING A BYPASS.
BUT IF YOU DO THAT, AND YOU DON'T HAVE TO HAVE SIX LANES GOING THROUGH STONEY, THERE, THERE ARE ALREADY SIX LANES IN THAT SECTION THROUGH STONY.
BUT FROM S SQUARE, POPE ROAD, ALL THE WAY THROUGH SPANISH WELLS WILD OR ROAD ARE ALREADY SIX LANES AND SUBSECTIONS WITH TURN LANES, THERE ARE EVEN MORE LANES THAN SIX.
AND THEN PERHAPS WE COULD SOLVE THAT PROBLEM AND RETURN THE STONY, UM, PORTION OF THIS CORRIDOR BACK TO A MORE FAMILY ORIENTED, UM, ROADWAY.
BUT THERE ARE BENEFITS, UM, IT'S JUST A MATTER OF HOW YOU LOOK AT THEM.
W IN OUR EVALUATION OF THIS, YES, WE, WE AGREE A BYPASS IMPROVES TRAFFIC FLOW.
THERE'S NO QUESTION IT, IT COULD INCLUDE THE TRAFFIC FLOW, BUT THE IMPACTS TO CREATE THAT SOUTHERN BYPASS ARE MUCH, ARE, ARE, ARE SO GREAT THAT WE DON'T THINK IT WOULD EVER GET APPROVED.
AND IF IT, YOU KNOW, AND IF IT, EVEN IF IT DID GET APPROVED, IT WOULD EXTEND THE PROJECT TIMELINE SIGNIFICANTLY.
[02:50:01]
YOU'RE CREATING A BIGGER IMPACT TO THE STONY COMMUNITY BECAUSE YOU, WHETHER THE SIX LANES ARE ALL ON THE EXISTING ALIGNMENT OR THERE'S THE, THE ROAD STAYS AS IT IS ON THE EXISTING ALIGNMENT AND YOU ADD LANES TO THE SOUTH BYPASS, YOU'RE STILL ADDING LANES AND YOU'RE STILL TAKING MORE RIDE OF AWAY WITH THE BYPASS.SO IT'S NOT A NET BENEFIT TO THE STONY COMMUNITY, YOU'RE JUST SPLITTING THE TRAFFIC.
BRIAN, UM, YOU WERE GAVE A SOMEWHAT SANITIZED, UH, DESCRIPTION OF IMPACTS.
UM, I WOULD LIKE YOU TO BE A LITTLE BIT MORE EXPRESSIVE IN WHAT THIS WOULD ACTUALLY ENTAIL IN TERMS OF CONSTRUCTION, TREES, ELEVATIONS, QUALITY OF LIFE.
SO PLEASE, YEAH, YEAH, WHAT I MENTIONED IS CONSTRUCTABILITY OF A ROADWAY SYSTEM.
I THINK THE QUALITY OF LIFE THAT IS, IS LEFT EVEN IF YOU DO GET THE PERMITTING, EVEN IF YOU DO ABSORB THAT, UH, THAT INCREASED CONSTRUCTION PERIOD.
WE'VE GOT ELEVATED HIGHWAY, WE'VE GOT A, UM, UH, A TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM THAT LOOKS A LOT LIKE, UH, THE, THE INTERCHANGE GOING INTO THE CROSS ISLAND.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S COMMENSURATE FROM AN URBAN PLANNING STANDPOINT.
THAT'S, I DON'T THINK THAT'S COMMENSURATE WITH A LIVABLE NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE, WE TALK, UH, CONSTANTLY ABOUT THE HILTON HEAD LOOK, WE TALK ABOUT THE AESTHETICS OF WHAT WE'RE ANTICIPATING WITH THIS BRIDGE.
I CANNOT IMAGINE A VIA DUCK ELEVATED EXPRESSWAY GOING IN FRONT OF MY HOUSE.
AND THIS IS BISECTING ONE SECTION OF STONY THAT IS AT THE MOMENT INTACT.
SO I, I REALLY ENCOURAGE US TO THINK THROUGH WHAT A THREE DIMENSIONAL STRUCTURE GOING THROUGH STONY LOOKS LIKE.
CONCRETE, 14 TO 20 FEET HIGH TREES COMING DOWN, SHADOWS UNDERNEATH DIRT.
YOU KNOW, YOU JUST CAN'T ANTICIPATE WHAT IT'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE.
AND IN THE WORST PART OF IT IS I SEE THESE SAFE STONY SIGNS.
THIS IS BISECTING A SEGMENT OF THE COMMUNITY THAT WE'RE TRYING TO PROTECT, PRESERVE, AND ENHANCE OVER TIME.
SO SEAN OR, OR, OR JERRY, YOU KNOW, THERE'S BEEN CONVERSATION OVER THE PAST, UM, ABOUT IT BEING A TOLL ROAD.
AND IF YOU COULD EXPRESS OR SPEAK TO THE FACT OF HOW THE STATE FEELS ABOUT TOLL ROADS, I THINK THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL.
UH, TOLL ROADS ARE LIMIT, ARE, ARE, WELL, ONE, THEY'RE LIMITED TO ONLY NEW ROAD SEGMENTS.
UM, THE EXPERIENCE THE STATE HAS HAD WITH TOLL ROADS, MAYBE NOT HELPING THAT, BUT, UH, OTHER TOLL ROADS LOCATED WITHOUT THE STATE, UM, UM, DID NOT RESULT IN, IN FAVOR FAVORABLE RESULTS.
AND SO THEY'RE NOT, UM, THEY'RE NOT IN FAVOR OF ADDITIONAL TOLL ROADS.
UM, AND AGAIN, A TOLL ROAD, I'M TRYING I FOR THAT SHORT OF A SEGMENT, UM, THE, THE AMOUNT OF BENEFIT THAT YOU WOULD GAIN THROUGH THAT SHORT SEGMENT AT THE DETRIMENT OF THE STONY COMMUNITY, UH, I WOULD CERTAINLY NOT WANT TO PAY A DOLLAR, UH, TO SAVE MAYBE A FEW SECONDS TO GO, UM, FROM BASICALLY THE SQUIRE POPE INTERSECTION TO THE CROSS ISLAND.
UM, BUT YEAH, NEW TOLL ROADS ARE ONLY LIMITED TO NEW ROADS, AND THEY'RE NOT CURRENTLY, UM, LOOKED ON FAVORABLY BY SOUTH SOUTH COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION.
CAN WE MOVE FORWARD, NATE, TO THE, SO AT THE REQUEST OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE, WE, UH, WE, WE WERE ASKED TO SUBMIT THE ALTERNATIVES THAT LOCK MUELLER HAD, UM, PRESENTED DURING THE COMMITTEE MEETING.
SORRY, CAN I INTERRUPT YOU A MOMENT? ARE WE FINISHED WITH LOCK MUELLER MAKING THEIR REPORT? I, I'M, UH, I, I, BECAUSE WE'VE DONE THE INITIAL ALTERNATIVES, I WANT TO PROVIDE THE FEEDBACK THAT WE RECEIVED FROM S-C-D-O-T ON THE ALTERNATIVES THAT LOCK MUELLER PRESENTED.
YEAH, I, I HAVE SEVERAL QUESTIONS ABOUT THEM IN THE SCOPE OF SERVICES, SO I WANNA MAKE SURE WHEN I NEED TO DO THAT.
SO, SO THEN CAN I UNDERSTAND THAT LOCK MUER WILL, AFTER YOU FINISH YOUR PRESENTATION, SEAN, THAT LOCK MUELLER WILL COME BACK AND CONTINUE THEIR REPORT? YEAH, THEY WILL LOOK AT, UM, THE EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVE ONE WITH DESIGN MODIFICATIONS, UM, INCLUDING
[02:55:01]
THE DOWNSTREAM IMPACTS AND TRAVEL TIME, UM, IMPROVEMENTS BASED ON THE ALTERNATIVE ONE.SO I, UM, WHAT I STARTED TO MENTION WAS AT THE REQUEST OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE, UM, WE WERE ASKED TO TAKE THE ALTERNATIVES PRESENTED BY LOCK MUELLER AS WELL AS THE EXPRESS BYPASS AND GET FEEDBACK FROM S-C-D-O-T.
AND SO WE SUBMITTED THAT, UM, WE SUBMITTED IT JOINTLY WITH THE COUNTY TO S-C-D-O-T AND THEY PROVIDED A RESPONSE BACK TO LETTER, UM, MS, UM, IS LISTED HERE.
IT WAS ADDRESSED BACK TO BOTH JARED AND MYSELF WITH THE RESPONSES.
UM, I KNOW IT'S HARD TO SEE HERE, BUT THEY OBJECTIVELY EVALUATED ALL OF THE ALTERNATIVES, 2, 3, 4, AND THE EXPRESS BYPASS THREE A.
UM, THEY DID NOT ACCEPT NOR REJECT ANY ONE OF THE ALTERNATIVES.
THEY PROVIDED INPUT THAT WOULD NEED TO BE CONSIDERED.
UM, UM, IF ANY OF THOSE WERE TO ADVANCE, THEY DID POINT OUT THAT THE, UM, CORRESPONDING AGENCIES, FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION AND THE STATE HISTORICAL, UM, PRESERVATION OFFICE, UM, WOULD, WOULD, WOULD NOT SUPPORT ADDITIONAL IMPACT WITHIN THE TCP.
AND SO ALTERNATIVES TWO AND THREE HAD ADDITIONAL IMPACTS.
UM, THE ELEVATED BYPASSES PRESENTED BY LOCK MUELLER, THE ASSESSMENT BY S-C-D-O-T WAS THAT LOCK MUELLER HAD UN HAD UNDERESTIMATED THE IMPACT BASED ON TIE-INS AND BRIDGE STRUCTURE THAT WOULD LIKELY SHIP, UM, A ADDITIONAL RIGHT OF WAY OUTSIDE OF THE EXISTING WITH THE, WITHIN THE TCP.
AND THEN THE EXPRESS BYPASS, UM, UH, COMMENTS WERE AGAIN THAT IT WOULD SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASE IMPACTS WITHIN THE TCP AND RIGHT OF WAY REQUIREMENTS, UH, WOULD, LIKE, WOULD ELIMINATE THAT ALTERNATIVE.
UM, THERE'S SOME OTHER POINTS THERE, BUT THEY'RE ALL REALLY RELATED TO, UH, TCP IMPACT INCREASED COST, UH, IMPACT THE COMMUNITY.
UH, THEY ALSO MENTIONED THE FLYOVER HEIGHT NEEDED TO, UM, TIE BACK IN, UH, EACH END WOULD LIKELY NEED TO BE 20 TO 24 FEET, UH, IN HEIGHT, UH, TO ACCOUNT FOR THE DEPTH OF THE, OF THE STRUCTURE.
SO WE GOT THE FEEDBACK AND WE PRESENTED THAT BACK TO THE COMMITTEE AND WE PROVIDED THAT INFORMATION, UM, RESPECTIVELY, BOTH TO, UH, BEAUFORT COUNTY AND TOWN COUNCILS.
SO WITH THAT, WE ASKED LOCK MUELLER.
I ASKED LOCK MUELLER TO EVALUATE ALTERNATIVE ONE WITH SOME PREFERRED DESIGN CHANGES.
UM, WHEN THE, THE TOWN AND THE COUNTY MET S-C-D-O-T IN COLUMBIA, UM, THERE WERE THREE PROVISIONS, DESIGN PROVISIONS THAT WERE ASKED FOR S-C-D-O-T TO RESPOND TO.
SO CAN YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE FOR ME? THOSE THREE DESIGN PROVISIONS WERE AS FOLLOWS, UM, REDUCTION OF TWO LEFT TURN LANES, UH, FROM WINDMILL PARKWAY ONTO SQUIRE POPE, ONE ROAD TO ONE LEFT TURN LANE TO REDUCE RIGHT OF WAY IMPACT PROPERTY IMPACT, REDUCE TWO RIGHT TURN LANES FROM SQUIRE POPE ROAD ONTO WESTBOUND WINDMILL PARKWAY, UH, AGAIN TO REDUCE OVERALL RIGHT OF WAY NEED AND PROPERTY IMPACT.
AND THEN THE THIRD WAS CONSIDERATION TO RELOCATE THE LEFT HAND WESTBOUND TURN MOVEMENT AT THE CRAZY CRAB FURTHER WESTWARD.
AND THE IDEA FOR THESE WAS TO REDUCE THE RIGHT OF WAY, UH, PROFILE CROSS-SECTION WITHIN THE AREA OF STONY AND REDUCE PROPERTY IMPACTS.
UM, WE RECEIVED A, UM, A, A RESPONSE BACK FROM, UM, SECRETARY JUSTIN POWELL, SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION, JUSTIN POWELL, UM, THAT ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THESE, UH, DESIGN MODIFICATIONS WOULD HAVE SOME IMPACT ON PERFORMANCE, BUT THEY WOULD SUPPORT THESE DESIGN MODIFICATIONS AS SUBMITTED, UM, BY THE COUNTY AS PART OF THE OVERALL PROJECT.
UM, THE, THE ADVANTAGES WHEN WE LOOK AT PROPERTY IMPACTS AND IMPACTS OF THE TOTAL OR TRADITIONAL CULTURAL PROPERTY, UH, REDUCED THAT 3.4 ACRES OF TOTAL IMPACT DOWN TO 2.78 AND THE 1.21 ACRES OF PRIVATE PROPERTY IMPACT DOWN TO 0.89.
SO, UM, ELIMINATED OVER TWO ACRES OF TOTAL IMPACT FROM THE ORIGINAL AND, UM, AND ABOUT SIX 10TH OF AN ACRE IN PRIVATE PROPERTY.
UM, I'VE INCLUDED THE COPY OF THE LETTER, UM, THAT WAS PART OF THAT, UM, UH, BEFORE YOU LEAVE THAT YOUR LETTER, WE'VE NOT SEEN THAT LETTER.
YOU'VE ONLY DISTRIBUTED, YOU HAVEN'T DISTRIBUTED THE LETTER, YOU REQUEST CHANGES.
WE'VE NOT SEEN THAT TEENTH, WE HAVE COMMUNICATED THE CHANGES WERE SUPPORTED BY S-E-D-O-T AND TOWN COUNCIL IS AWARE
[03:00:01]
OF THAT LETTER.YOU SAID, YOU TOLD US YOU SUBMITTED CHANGES, BUT WE HAVEN'T TOLD SUBMISSION.
THIS HAS NEVER BEEN PUBLISHED AT THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE.
MAY 16TH, FIRST TIME I'VE SEEN IT, WE'VE GOT THE MAY 2ND.
I'M NOT SAYING YOU CORRECTLY REPRESENTING IT, BUT WE'VE NOT SEEN IT TO READ IT OURSELVES.
UM, WELL, THE PURPOSE OF THIS WORKSHOP IS TO SHARE THIS INFORMATION SO EVERYONE HAS IT, UM, AVAILABLE, BUT TO THE POINT THAT'S BEING MADE, IT'S A DOCUMENT THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN PRESENTED, I BELIEVE IF I'M NOT SPEAKING OUT OF TURN TO THE COMMITTEE FOR ITS, UM, VIEWING AND CONSIDERATION NOT PRESENTED AFTER THE COMMITTEE HAS, UM, WELL, I THINK IT'S DEBATABLE, BUT FINISH THEIR WORK.
MY MY FOLLOW UP QUESTION IS, UH, WITH REGARD TO THE FIRST TWO BULLETS, UM, ABOUT THE, UH, REDUCTION OF THE LEFT HAND TURN AND RIGHT HAND TURNS ON AND OFF THE SQUARE, POPE, UM, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THE BUSINESSES AND RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITIES ALL ALONG SQUARE POPE KNOW ABOUT THAT.
UM, AND, AND I WANNA KNOW IF WE'VE RECEIVED, IF, IF ANYONE'S PROVIDED ANY INPUT ON THAT PROPOSAL.
WHILE I APPRECIATE THE REDUCTION, UM, IN THE IMPACT OF THE RIGHT OF WAY IN THE STONY AREA, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE, UH, MADE IT CLEAR, UM, THAT THIS IS IN THIS PROPOSAL, AND TO SEE IF THERE'S ANY COMMENTS FROM ANY RESIDENTIAL OR BUSINESSES, UH, RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITIES OR BUSINESSES ALONG SCARF.
HOPE I'LL, I'LL JUMP IN AND ANSWER THAT.
UH, THOMAS BOX LEE, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF GULLAH GEECHEE HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOODS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION.
WE HAVE HAD ONGOING DISCUSSIONS WITH BUSINESS OWNERS AND PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERS, SOME OF WHO ARE PRESENT TONIGHT TO INFORM THEM OF THE OUTCOMES AND WHAT THE CONVERSATION HAS BEEN.
AND WHILE, UM, DURING THOSE CONVERSATIONS, THEY HAVE EXPRESSED, UM, SOME THANKS AND GRATITUDE TO THE FACT THAT REDUCING THE IMPACT WORKING TO CONTINUE TO REDUCE THAT IMPACT AS WELL.
AND THAT'S A RESPONSE FROM THOSE IN THE STONY COMMUNITY? CORRECT.
AND IF THIS, THIS IS JUST A PROPOSAL, IF THIS MOVES FORWARD AS THE MODIFIED MODIFIED PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE, THEN THERE WOULD BE AN UPDATE.
DOT HAS A WEBSITE WHERE THEY HOST ALL THEIR PROJECT MATERIALS, THEY WOULD UPDATE THAT ACCORDINGLY, AND THEN THERE WOULD BE A COMMENT PERIOD AVAILABLE AND, AND THAT, THAT TIMING WOULD OCCUR, UM, AFTER OUR, UH, PROPOSED ACTION ON JUNE 20TH ON MUNICIPAL CONSENT.
AND, UM, JUST TO BE SPECIFIC, BECAUSE, UM, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING FROM A MEETING JUST LAST WEEK THAT, UM, PARKER'S, FOR INSTANCE, THE CURB CUT THERE IS TAKEN AWAY ON 2 78 AND I'M SORRY, WHERE, SO THERE WOULD NO LONGER BE AN ENTRANCE EXIT FROM THAT BUSINESS ONTO 2 78 INSTEAD, YOU'D HAVE TO GO DOWN THE SIDE ROAD.
HAVE THEY BEEN NOTIFIED? I'M NOT FAMILIAR.
UM, BUT WE CAN HOW THEY MAINTAIN THAT.
YEAH, I, I WENT, I, I'VE GONE BACK AND REVIEWED IT.
UM, AND I HAVE, I HAVE, WE HAVE A COUPLE MORE SLIDES HERE.
UM, CURB CUT, UM, THAT LOCATION ALONG WILLIAM PARKWAY GOES AWAY.
PARKER'S CURB CUT ALONG WILLIAM MOUNTAIN PARKWAY REMAINS AS DOES THE SECONDARY AXIS OFF, UM, WILDHORSE ROAD.
SO WHEN DID THAT CHANGE? BECAUSE IT PART OF WHEN DID WE MEET ON THURSDAY? WHEN, WHEN DID WE MEET? THURSDAY, TUESDAY LAST WEEK.
AND, UM, WHEN THE VIDEO THAT, ARE WE GONNA GET AN OPPORTUNITY TO SEE THAT VIDEO? YEAH, THE VIDEO'S COMING UP HERE SHORTLY.
THAT WAS A SPECIFIC QUESTION THAT I TALKED THE CURB CUT TO THOSE IN THAT MEETING ABOUT THE FACT THAT IN THAT VIDEO, IT SHOWS THAT THAT CURB CUT IS CLOSED.
WE, WE TALKED ABOUT IT, BUT NOW IT'S DIFFERENT.
IT'S CHANGED AGAIN, THE, ON THE VIDEO, UM, THE CURB CUT REMAINS AT PARKER'S ALONG WINDELL PARKWAY.
WE, WE TALKED ABOUT IT AND IT DIDN'T
UM, LA LASTLY, WE MAILED OUT, UM, UH, ABOUT APPROXIMATELY 140
[03:05:01]
DIRECT MAILINGS TO NOTIFY, UM, PROPERTY OWNERS AND BUSINESS OWNERS IN THE STONY COMMUNITY, UH, REGARDING THIS WORKSHOP.UM, I ALSO CONVENED, UM, A MEETING WITH THE GENERAL MANAGERS FROM THE, UM, THE PUDS TO SHARE INFORMATION RELATED TO THE PROJECT AND AS WELL AS TO NOTIFY THEM OF THIS MEETING AS WELL.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, MOVING FORWARD I ADVISED, UM, LOCK MEER TO, TO MOVE FORWARD WITH ALTERNATIVE ONE, UM, AND TO INCLUDE THAT IN ASSESSMENT TO INCLUDE IT INTO THE VISIM MODEL, UH, WHICH HAD HIGHER CONFIDENCE AND PREDICTABILITY.
AND I'M GONNA LET THEM RUN THROUGH THEIR ASSESSMENT OF, OF ALTERNATIVE ONE.
AS SEAN MENTIONED, WE COMPLETED THIS ANALYSIS USING BISSO MODELING SOFTWARE.
SO THE PREVIOUS TRAVEL TIME TABLE THAT WAS SHOWN AS PART OF THIS PRESENTATION WAS USING SYNCHRO SOFTWARE.
THE SAME TRAFFIC VOLUMES WERE USED IN BOTH SOFTWARE SYSTEMS, BUT BIEM IS A MICRO SIMULATION TOOL BASED ON, UH, A REAL TIME SIMULATION OF AN ENTIRE HOUR.
WHEREAS, UM, I SAID BEFORE, SYNCHRO IS BASED ON, UH, THEORETICAL EQUATIONS THAT ARE SUPPORTED BY THE HIGHWAY CAPACITY MANUAL.
SO THE RESULTS OF THIS ALTERNATIVE ONE DO INCLUDE THE PROPOSED CHANGES THAT WE JUST SPOKE OF WITH THE REDUCTION OF THE EASTBOUND, UH, LEFT TURN LANE AT SQUIRE POPE FROM TWO LANES TO ONE, AS WELL AS THE REDUCTION IN THE SOUTHBOUND RIGHT TURN LANE AT THE SAME LOCATION FROM TWO LANES TO ONE LANE.
SO, UM, A LITTLE, A LITTLE BIT OF REVIEW UNDER THE 2045, NO BUILD SCENARIO, WHICH WOULD BE, UM, ASSUMING NO CHANGES ARE MADE TO THE CORRIDOR, UH, BUT THE PROJECTED TRAFFIC GROWTH STILL COMES, IT'S EXPECTED THAT IT WOULD TAKE APPROXIMATELY 26.3 MINUTES TO TRAVEL EASTBOUND ALONG HILTON PARKWAY BETWEEN MOSS CREEK AND INDIGO RUN DURING THE A M PEAK HOUR, AS IS SHOWN IN THE TABLE.
WE WOULD EXPECT THAT WITH THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 2045 MODIFIED ALTERNATIVE, ONE THAT WOULD BE REDUCED BY APPROXIMATELY 60% IN THE MORNING, WHICH EQUATES TO, UM, THE, THE TRAVEL D WOULD BE REDUCED TO APPROXIMATELY 10.5 MINUTES UNDER MODIFIED ALTERNATIVE ONE.
SIMILARLY, IN THE PM PEAK HOUR, UH, IF NOTHING IS DONE TO THE CORRIDOR IN THE 2045 NOBEL SCENARIO, IT'S EXPECTED THAT IT WOULD TAKE APPROXIMATELY 25.7 MINUTES TO TRAVEL WESTBOUND ALONG HILTON PARKWAY BETWEEN MOSS CREEK AND INDIGO RUN DURING THE P AND PEAK HOUR.
AND WITH THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS MODIFIED ALTERNATIVE, ONE, IT'S EXPECTED THAT THAT THAT TRAVEL TIME WILL BE REDUCED TO APPROXIMATELY 10.3 MINUTES UNDER THE MODIFIED ALTERNATIVE.
SO I, I'M SORRY, BEFORE, CAN YOU BACK UP TO THAT PREVIOUS SLIDE? UM, SO I, CUTTING OFF ON ME.
UM, SO WHEN YOU MADE THE STOP, GO
UM, LAMEER PRESENTED TO THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON MAY 8TH USING SYNCHRO, THE AM PEAK.
THE DIFFERENCE IN TRAVEL TIME IS 109 SECONDS, WHICH TRANSLATES INTO 1.82 MINUTES.
UM, AND IN THIS ONE, IN THE AM UNDER VIM, THE DIFFERENCE IN TRAVEL TIME SUBTRACTING THOSE TWO NUMBERS YOU JUST READ OUT IS 15.8 MINUTES.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND THOSE TWO SIMULATION SYSTEMS. I'LL BE THE FIRST TO ADMIT THAT.
AND, AND I'M CERTAINLY NOT A TRAFFIC ENGINEER, ALTHOUGH THE HILTON HEAD SUN REPORTED AT ONE TIME, I WAS, I, I KNOW A LOT OF PEOPLE TRY TO BE TRAFFIC ENGINEERS, BUT I'M CERTAINLY NOT, NEVER HAVE TRIED TO BE A TRAFFIC ENGINEER.
SO, AND THEN WHEN I LOOK AT THE PM PEAK TIME, UM, ON THE MAY 8TH PRESENTATION TO THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE USING SYNCHRO, UH, THAT DIFFERENCE IN TIME IS 276 SECONDS, WHICH DIVIDES, UH, BY 60 IS 4.6 MINUTES.
BUT ON THIS CHART, THE DIFFERENCE IN TIME, UM, EQUATES IN PM PEAK USING VM TO 15.4 MINUTES.
SO MY QUESTION IS, IS SYNCHRO THAT BAD OR IS VM THAT GOOD? AND WHY IS THERE SUCH A LARGE DIFFERENCE IN IN, IN REPORTING ABOUT THE CHANGE IN TRAVEL TIME? IT'S VERY COMMON FOR US TO USE BOTH SOFTWARE SYSTEMS IN CORRIDOR STUDIES LIKE THIS BECAUSE THEY'RE BOTH GOOD AT DIFFERENT THINGS.
SYNCHRO IS REALLY GOOD AT LOOKING AT INTERSECTIONS, SINGULARLY
[03:10:01]
VERY GOOD AT SIGNAL TIMING ASSESSMENTS, BUT IT FALLS SHORT ANALYZING A CORRIDOR SYSTEM FROM END TO END WITH RESPECT TO REPORTING ACCURATE TRAVEL TIMES.IT'S VERY GOOD AT REPORTING INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE APPROACH, LEVEL OF SERVICE, MOVEMENT, LEVEL OF SERVICE.
BUT WHEN WE MEASURE END-TO-END QUARTER TIMES SUCH AS TRAVEL TIME, IT FALLS SHORT A LITTLE BIT.
UM, AND WE HAVE LESS CONFIDENCE IN THOSE RESULTS, WHICH IS WHY WE FELT IT WAS VERY IMPORTANT TO ALSO DO A EM MODEL OF EACH OF THESE ALTERNATIVES.
WE DID BOTH SYNCHRO AND EM OF EXISTING, WE DID BOTH SYNCHRO AND EM OF NO BUILD.
AND, UM, NOW WE'VE COMPLETED BOTH, UH, SYNCHRO AND EM OF THIS MODIFIED ALTERNATIVE ONE.
SO BOTTOM LINE IN LANGUAGE I CAN UNDERSTAND
SO WHICH NUMBER AM I TO BELIEVE? IS IT GONNA SAVE ME AN AM PEAK 1.82 MINUTES, OR IS IT GONNA SAVE ME 15.8 MINUTES FOR $488 MILLION?
SYNCHRO DOES NOT ALLOW FOR THE SAME LEVEL OF DEPTH IN CALIBRATION.
UH, MY PROFESSIONAL OPINION IS THAT THE MORE DATA THAT WE HAVE TO INFORM AN ANALYSIS, THE MORE RELIABLE THAT RESULT WILL BE.
NOW BEING A TRAFFIC ENGINEER, I AGREE WITH MORE DATA IS HELPFUL, BUT, UM, AS A POLICY MAKER, I'M TRYING TO DECIDE WHAT TO BELIEVE.
SO, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO HIGHLIGHT, UM, THE POINT BEING MADE AT BEST CASE SCENARIO.
REGARDLESS IF YOU'RE USING VM OR SYNCHRO BEST CASE CASE SCENARIO, YOUR, YOUR TOTAL SAVINGS WOULD BE MAYBE 15 MINUTES, CORRECT? CORRECT.
I HOPE OUR COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE LISTENING TO THAT.
MAXIMUM SAVINGS IS 15 MINUTES, APPROXIMATELY AT THE COST OF SOMEWHERE AROUND A HALF A BILLION DOLLARS.
AND THEN CALCULATING THE IMPACT TO STONY AND THE IMPACT TO EACH AND EVERY ONE OF US AS THIS CREATES MORE ISSUES FOR US TO DEAL WITH IN THE FUTURE DOWN INTO THE ISLAND.
YOU DO THE MATH, I'LL CONTINUE WITH OUR ANALYSIS OF THE DOWNSTREAM IMPACTS TO, UH, SOME OF THE OTHER INTERSECTIONS WITH THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ALTERNATIVE ONE.
THIS SLIDE IS A LITTLE BIT OF A REVIEW.
WE SPOKE A LITTLE BIT ABOUT, YOU KNOW, HOW WE ANALYZE A CORRIDOR, WHAT MEASURES DO WE LOOK AT, HOW DO WE DEEM IT ACCEPTABLE OR NOT? WE LOOK AT A NUMBER OF THINGS, LEVEL OF SERVICE, WHICH IS TIED TO DELAY.
THOSE DELAY VALUES ARE SHOWN IN THE TABLE ON THE SLIDE.
WE ALSO LOOK AT Q LENGTH, NOTABLY THE 95TH PERCENTILE Q LENGTH OR MAXIMUM Q.
UH, THAT VALUE IS THE APPROXIMATE LENGTH, UM, THAT IS TYPICALLY EXCEEDED ONLY ONCE OR TWICE DURING THE DAY.
SO IT'S A CONSERVATIVE ESTIMATE.
IF YOU CAN HANDLE THE MAXIMUM Q LENGTHS, THE 95TH PERCENTILE Q LENGTHS, IT'S VERY UNLIKELY THAT THE QUEUES DURING THE REST OF THE DAY ARE GOING TO SPILL PAST THE PROVISIONS OF, OF THAT LENGTH.
AND WE ALSO LOOK AT LANE CAPACITY, WHICH IS THE VOLUME TO CAPACITY RATIO I SPOKE OF EARLIER, WHICH IS A, UH, A NUMBER EITHER LESS THAN GREATER THAN ONE.
UH, IF THE VOLUME TO CAPACITY RATIO IS ONE, IT MEANS THAT THEORETICALLY, UH, THE LANE CONFIGURATION PROVIDED IS AT CAPACITY.
IT CANNOT PROCESS ANY MORE CARS.
IF THE NUMBER IS A DECIMAL LESS THAN ONE.
THEORETICALLY THAT LANE CONFIGURATION, UM, HAS A SURPLUS OF CAPACITY OR THE VOLUME, UH, THE DEMAND DOES NOT EXCEED THE CAPACITY THAT'S PROVIDED.
SO THESE METRICS, THESE MEASURES OF EFFECTIVENESS ARE GOING TO BE REPORTED IN THE FOLLOWING TABLES AS WE DISCUSS THE IMPACTS
[03:15:01]
TO DOWNSTREAM INTERSECTIONS.BUT BEFORE WE GET TO THOSE TABLES, WE HAVE SOME VIDEOS FROM THE VISIM SIMULATION SOFTWARE THAT WILL HIGHLIGHT SOME OF THE EXPECTED IMPACTS ALONG THE CORRIDOR BEFORE YOU START THE VIDEO.
WHILE YOU'RE LOOKING FOR IT, I'M GONNA JUMP IN WITH THIS, WITH THIS FROM PAGE FOUR OF YOUR REPORT.
WHAT ARE WE CURRENTLY OPERATING UNDER? UM, INTERSECTION PERFORMANCE OR TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ARE QUANTIFIED BY SIX LEVELS OF SERVICE LOS, WHICH RANGE FROM A, A FREE FLOW TO LOS OF F FULLY SATURATED, LOSD IS CONSIDERED ACCEPTABLE OR FOR PEAK PERIOD CONDITIONS IN URBAN AND SUBURBAN AREAS.
HOWEVER, AT SIDE STREET CONTROLLED INTERSECTIONS, A LEVEL OF E AND LEVEL OF F IS A COMMON OCCURRENCE FOR PEAK PERIOD CONDITIONS IN URBAN AND SUBURBAN AREAS, AS IT IS TYPICAL FOR DELAYS TO BE LONGER ON THE SIDE STREETS.
SO WHAT I'M GATHERING, AND CORRECT ME IF I'VE MISINTERPRETED, UM, IS THAT THOSE LOWER LEVELS, D AND F ARE ACCEPTABLE LEVELS OF, UH, SERVICE IN URBAN AND SUBURBAN, UM, AREAS.
AND WE UNFORTUNATELY NOW ARE CONSIDERED AN URBAN AREA.
AND SO IF WE WERE LOOK AT WHERE WE ARE TODAY, AS I RECALL, WE'RE IN THAT SAME RANGE, WHICH IS ACCEPTABLE LEVELS OF SERVICE.
SO WHAT IS THE IMPROVEMENT GIVEN THE TIME? IF YOU WERE LOOKING AT TIME, MAXIMUM TIME SAVINGS UP TO 15 MINUTES AND LEVEL OF SERVICE, IF YOU WERE LOOKING AT IT FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE, NO BETTER THAN WHERE WE ARE TODAY, WHICH IS AN ACCEPTABLE LEVEL OF SERVICE ACCORDING TO YOUR REPORT.
SO WHAT IS IT AGAIN, COUNSEL THAT WE'RE DOING HERE? WHAT ARE WE DOING? WE'VE IDENTIFIED A PROBLEM MAYBE, AND OUR SOLUTION DOESN'T SEEM TO BE, UM, ACCEPTABLE.
UM, YOU DO THE ANALYSIS OF THE COST VERSUS THOSE SAVINGS AND THE IMPACT, AND I DON'T KNOW WHERE YOU COME OUT VOTING YES ON THIS.
I WILL CLARIFY THAT TYPICALLY FOR US TO CONSIDER SOMETHING ACCEPTABLE WITH A LEVEL OF SERVICE, E OR F, THAT WOULD BE A SIDE STREET MOVEMENT.
UM, SO WE, WE WOULD NOT, UM, PREFER TO SEE THAT ON MAINLINE MOVEMENTS WHEN WE DO, WHEN WE DO ANALYSIS.
DO YOU START, BUT THAT'S, OH, THAT IT SAYS QUANTIATIVE LEVELS OF SURFACE AND IS CONSIDERED ACCEPTABLE.
THE F AND THE D YOU DON'T TALK ABOUT SIDE STREETS AND LEVELS OF SERVICE OF E AND F UNTIL THE SECOND LINE OF THAT PARAGRAPH.
SO I'M, I'M GONNA STAND BY MY, MY STATEMENT.
AND I'D LIKE TO JUST MAKE A A ANOTHER POINT OF CLARIFICATION.
THE TOWN'S ADOPTED LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARD FOR INTERSECTIONS IS LEVEL OF SERVICE.
THAT'S A DECISION THAT'S BEEN MADE.
UH, IN ORDER TO IMPROVE LEVEL OF SERVICE, UH, TO LEVEL OF SERVICE GREATER THAN D, C, OR B, THE AMOUNT OF INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WOULD BE NEEDED TO PROVIDE THAT FLOW, UH, WOULDN'T, WOULD NOT BE ACCEPTABLE.
SO LEVEL OF SERVICE D IS THE ADOPTED STANDARD BY THE TOWN.
THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.
IT CERTAINLY HELPS MY ARGUMENT.
SO AS YOU WATCH THESE, AS YOU WATCH THIS VIDEO, THIS IS OF THE AM PEAK HOUR IN THE EASTBOUND DIRECTION ON HILTON PARKWAY.
UM, AS YOU CAN SEE, THE TRAFFIC IS FREE FLOWING FOR EASTBOUND.
AND, UM, THE, THE MERGE ONTO THE BRIDGES FROM BLUFFTON PARKWAY, UH, DOESN'T EXPERIENCE ANY CONGESTION.
AND AS WE CONTINUE ACROSS THE BRIDGE, UM, YOU CAN SEE SOME PLATOONS OF CARS BEGINNING TO FORM AND BEGINNING TO COLLECT TOGETHER AROUND THE WINDMILL HARBOR AREA.
BUT STILL, WE'RE STILL FREE FLOWING AT THIS POINT.
[03:20:14]
AS WE PROGRESS FURTHER TO THE EAST, YOU CAN SEE THAT THE NUMBER OF VEHICLES ON THE PARKWAY CONTINUES TO INCREASE AS WE HEAD FURTHER ONTO THE ISLAND.AND AGAIN, YOU CAN SEE THAT WE HAVE SOME VEHICLES THAT ARE STOPPED AT THE SPANISH WELLS INTERSECTION.
AND ONCE WE PASS THE SPANISH WELLS INTERSECTION, UH, THIS IS WHERE THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE MODIFIED ALTERNATIVE ONE.
UM, THERE, THERE ARE NO FURTHER IMPROVEMENTS PASSED SPANISH WELLS.
SO AS YOU CAN SEE, QUEUING PAST GUMTREE AT 56% OF TRAFFIC GOES THAT, UH, THAT SIMULATION THAT'S SHOWING LESS THAN 50% GO BACK.
THIS IS, UH, AS SEAN ALLUDED TO EARLIER WITH PICTURES, THIS IS A SNAPSHOT IN TIME FROM DURING THE PEAK HOUR OF OUR MODEL.
LET, LET'S, LET'S LET HER FINISH.
PLEASE WAIT THREE AND A HALF HOURS.
WHEN, WHEN ARE WE GONNA HAVE A TO SPEAK? IT WILL COME AROUND AFTER THE PRESENTATION IS COMPLETE.
DO YOU KNOW WHEN THAT IS? IT DIDN'T GET MINUTES.
THIS VIDEO IS AGAIN OF THE A M PEAK HOUR AND INTENDS TO SHOW THE SOUTHBOUND MOVEMENTS ON THE CROSS ISLAND PARKWAY.
AND AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF CARS FLOWING ALONG, UM, PARTICULARLY AT THE TOP END OF THE SCREEN.
AND AS WE CONTINUE DOWN THE PARKWAY AND GET CLOSER TO THE SEA PINE CIRCLE AREA, YOU'LL START TO SEE SOME SIGNIFICANT SOUTHBOUND QUEUING ALONG PALMETTO BAY DUE TO THE ROUNDABOUT AT SEA PINE CIRCLE.
AND THIS QUEUING IMPACTS OTHER INTERSECTIONS UPSTREAM, SUCH AS THE TARGET INTERSECTION.
UH, BUT WE BELIEVE THAT ONCE IMPROVEMENTS ARE IDENTIFIED TO THE ROUNDABOUT THAT WE CAN EXPECT THAT THE QUEUING WILL BE MITIGATED AND THOSE SIDE STREET DELAYS WILL BE RESOLVED.
SO WE HAVE TWO MORE VIDEOS, AGAIN, UH, SIMILAR QUARTER FLYOVER, BUT THIS TIME FOR THE PM PEAK HOUR, THIS VIDEO IS IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION.
AS YOU CAN SEE, THE KEYS APPEARED NEAR PEMBROKE AND WILBORN, UH, BUT THEN WILL DISSIPATE PAST GUMTREE, UH, ONCE THE VIDEO GETS THERE.
I'M SORRY, I DON'T RECOGNIZE RUSH HOUR HERE.
AND AS WE PROGRESS PAST GUMTREE, YOU CAN SEE THAT WE'RE CATCHING UP TO ANOTHER PLATOON OF VEHICLES IN THE SIMULATION.
UM, AS THEY PROGRESS THROUGH SPANISH WELLS AND WILDHORSE, YOU CAN SEE THAT IT CONTINUES ON THROUGH OLD HOR, OLD WILDHORSE ROAD AND SQUIRE POPE.
AS YOU CAN SEE, UH, AS YOU COULD SEE THE EASTBOUND, UH, OR THE SOUTHBOUND RIGHT TURN QUEUE AT SQUIRE POPE WAS BACKED UP A LITTLE BIT, UH, AGAIN, SHOWING THE IMPACTS OF REDUCING THAT LANE FROM PROVIDING TWO LANES TO ONE LANE.
THEN NATE, WE CAN, WE CAN STOP IT THERE.
[03:25:01]
UM, I WASTED A LOT OF MONEY AND TIME ON THAT, MEANING RIGHT NOW IF WE COULD.AND LET, LET'S NOT DO THE NEXT TWO VIDEOS.
UM, SHOWING THE PM P UM, LOCK MILLER WAS ASKED TO ASSESS DOWNSTREAM IMPACTS WHAT UNDERSTAND CONSULTANTS WERE ASKED TO, TO, UM, TO MODEL AND PROVIDE FINDINGS ON DOWNSTREAM IMPACTS INTERSECTIONS.
UM, THEY'VE DONE THAT, THEY HAVE THE RESULTS HERE IN THE PRESENTATION.
UM, NATE AND KATE, IF YOU COULD JUST HIGHLIGHT THE COUPLE OF INTERSECTIONS WHERE THERE ARE, UM, SOME LEVEL OF, OR, OR SORRY, LEVEL OF SERVICES THAT ARE LOWER THAT MIGHT HAVE AN APPROACH THAT'S, UM, LESS THAN THE YES, CERTAINLY THE TABLES THAT YOU'LL SEE ON THESE SLIDES SHOW THE OVERALL INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE AND THEN EACH APPROACH, LEVEL OF SERVICE AND QUEUE.
HOWEVER, WE'VE ALSO HIGHLIGHTED INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENT LEVELS OF SERVICE OR OPERATING CONDITIONS ON THE GRAPHIC THAT WE FEEL ARE NOTABLE.
IN PARTICULAR, THE EASTBOUND LEFT TURN WOULD BE EXPECTED TO OPERATE WITH LEVEL SERVICE F DURING THE A M PEAK HOUR AT SQUIRE POPE.
BUT AGAIN, THAT'S DUE TO THE REDUCTION IN THE NUMBER OF LEFT TURN LANES PROVIDED FROM TWO TO ONE.
SIMILARLY, THE SOUTHBOUND RIGHT TURN LANE WOULD BE EXPECTED TO HAVE QUEUES OF OVER 500 FEET DURING THE PM PEAK HOUR.
WE HAVE LEFT TURN MOVEMENTS THAT WILL BE OPERATING WITH LEVEL OF SERVICE F AT A NUMBER OF OTHER INTERSECTIONS, INCLUDING SPANISH WELLS AND GUMTREE ROAD.
THIS PORTION OF THE CORRIDOR, UH, WE HAVE INCLUDED IN THIS ANALYSIS WITHOUT ANY PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS.
THAT IS A NEXT STEP IN OUR PROCESS TO SEE WHICH IMPROVEMENTS COULD POTENTIALLY BE MADE TO MITIGATE THESE IMPACTS, IF ANY POP UP.
BUT THIS EFFORT IS, SEAN NOTED, WAS, UH, THE, THE PURPOSE WAS TO SEE IF THERE ARE ANY NEGATIVE IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH IMPLEMENTING THE MODIFIED ALTERNATIVE ONE TO THESE DOWNSTREAM INTERSECTIONS.
THE CUES THAT ARE HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW ARE A BIT A BIT LONG.
THEY'RE ALSO ASSOCIATED WITH LEVELS OF SERVICE B AND C, WHICH HIGHLIGHTS, UH, MY POINT EARLIER THAT WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THE ENTIRE PICTURE AND NOT JUST ONE MEASURE OF EFFECTIVENESS WHEN DEEMING SOMETHING AN ACCEPTABLE CONDITION.
FURTHER DOWN, UH, THE CROSS ISLAND PARKWAY AT THE SEA PINE CIRCLE, UM, YOU KNOW, DUNCAN'S ALLEY AND TARGET ROAD, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF SIDE STREET APPROACHES THAT HAVE MUCH, UM, VERY DEGRADED LEVELS OF SERVICE.
UM, YOU KNOW, VERY POOR OPERATING CONDITIONS.
BUT AGAIN, AS WAS NOTED IN THE VIDEO, WE BELIEVE THAT A LOT OF THESE ARE SECONDARY SYMPTOMS TO THE REAL PROBLEM, WHICH IS A, UM, YOU KNOW, UNDER CAPACITY AT SEA PINE CIRCLE.
SO AS WE STEP INTO THE NEXT PART OF OUR ANALYSIS AND ANALYZE POTENTIAL IMPROVEMENTS WE COULD MAKE TO THESE PARTS OF THE CORRIDORS, IF SEA PINE CIRCLE, UM, CAPACITY IS, IS ADDRESSED AT THAT LOCATION, WE BELIEVE THAT THE REST OF THE, UH, NEGATIVE IMPACTS TO SOME OF THE SIDE STREETS IN THE VICINITY WOULD BE MITIGATED.
THEN KATE, I THINK YOU'VE COVERED THE NEXT FEW SLIDES.
I, SO, UM, SO BASED ON THE, UM, THE DESIGN MODIFICATIONS THAT WERE SUBMITTED TO S-C-D-O-T, UM, THE EVALUATION OF LOCK MUELLER ON THE ALTERNATIVE, UM, WHAT WE'VE GOT, UH, THE NEXT SECTION TO GO THROUGH HERE IS PROPOSED PROJECT DEFINED.
AND I'VE GOT A VIDEO THAT SHOWS, UM, BASED ON THE CURRENT GEOMETRY OF THE ROADWAY AND DESIGN MODIFICATIONS, WE RECOMMENDED WHAT IT COULD LOOK LIKE, UH, BASED ON THAT.
AND SO, SORRY, IS THIS A TIME WE SHOULD, WE CAN ASK QUESTIONS OF BLACKMAILER ABOUT THEIR REPORT BEFORE WE SEE THIS VIDEO? 'CAUSE I WAS ASKING ABOUT THAT TIME EARLIER.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE IT'S THE RIGHT TIME.
LET'S, CAN WE GO THROUGH THE VIDEO FIRST?
[03:30:02]
UH, DID WAS THIS VIDEO CREATED BY LOCK MILLER? UM, IT WAS CREATED BY MODELERS THROUGH MKSK.BUT NOT BASED ON THE PROJECT DESIGN.
IT WASN'T CREATED BY LOCK MEER.
IS THERE GONNA BE ANOTHER, UH, REPORT BY LOCK MEER AFTER THIS ANOTHER? I'M JUST TRYING TO FIND OUT WHEN'S THE RIGHT TIME TO ASK LOCK MEER QUESTIONS.
NO, AND I'M, I'M WANTING FOR YOUR RESPONSE.
IS THERE ADDITIONAL REPORTS FROM LOCK MILLER? NO.
THEN, THEN I WOULD SAY NOW'S A GOOD TIME TO ASK THOSE QUESTIONS.
I'LL, I'LL TRY TO BE BRIEF AS I CAN.
UM, THANK YOU FOR THE WORK THAT YOU'VE DONE.
I DO, I I, I HAVE BEEN AT MOST OF THE COMMITTEE MEETINGS.
I THINK THERE WAS ONE WHERE I WAS ABLE TO WATCH A VIDEO, AT LEAST LOOK AT THE MINUTES.
UM, BUT I WANNA ASK YOU ABOUT SOME OF YOUR TASK.
I KNOW AT THE LAST COMMITTEE MEETING YOU, UH, I BELIEVE YOU REPORTED THAT YOU'RE ABOUT 75% FINISHED WITH THE SCOPE OF WORK EX, AND THERE WAS SOME THAT ARE 50.
I THINK THERE WAS ONE TASK THAT WAS 50% COMPLETED, UH, SOME OF WHICH HAS TO DO WITH COMING HERE TONIGHT,
SO I APPRECIATE YOU'RE NOT COMPLETE BECAUSE THIS IS PART OF THAT TASK.
BUT I WANNA ASK YOU ABOUT A COUPLE OF THE TASKS AND THE SCOPE OF WORK.
UM, AND, AND THE FIRST ONE I'M GONNA ASK ABOUT IS 3.7 IN YOUR SCOPE OF SERVICES, WHICH SAYS PARTICIPATE IN ONE DESIGN CHARETTE SLASH PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE MEETING, FOR INSTANCE, IF REQUIRED WITH STONY COMMUNITY RESIDENCE.
AND THEN IT GOES ON TO DESCRIBE THE MEETING WOULD BE ORGANIZED BY TOWN STAFF AND HAS SOME SUBSECTIONS.
SO MY QUESTION IS, WAS THERE EVER A DESIGN CHARETTE PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE MEETING WITH STONY COMMUNITY RESIDENCE AND LOCK MILLER IN, IN COORDINATION WITH SEAN? UM, WE VIEWED THIS AS THE OPPORTUNITY TO ALLOW EVERYBODY FROM THE COMMUNITY TO COME OUT AND ASK THE QUESTIONS AND, UM, SERVE AS THE SAME PURPOSE.
UH, DID YOU PRESENT THAT OPTION TO THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR THEM TO MAKE THE DETERMINATION WHETHER OR NOT IT WAS REQUIRED AND HOW IT SHOULD BE DONE? YOU HAVEN'T HAD ANY CHANCE TO ASK QUESTIONS? NO.
SO THE ANSWER IS THIS IS A, A DESIGN CHARETTE IN, IN COORDINATION WITH SEAN.
THAT'S WHAT WE WERE, THIS IS A DESIGN ETTE.
IT'S AN UNUSUAL DESIGN CHARETTE.
SO THIS IS A PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE MEETING.
I THOUGHT IT WAS CLASSIFIED AS A TOWN COUNCIL WORKSHOP, WHICH IS DIFFERENT.
SO THE COMMITTEE WAS NEVER ASKED ABOUT THAT? NO.
UM, AND THEN LET ME ASK ABOUT, UM, SUBSECTION 3.4 0.4, PREPARE ENVIRONMENTAL INVENTORY REGISTRY FOR THREE TCP INTERSECTIONS.
AND THAT'S THE TRADITIONAL CULTURAL PROPERTY INTERSECTIONS THAT YOU'VE IDENTIFIED PREVIOUSLY AS SQUIRE PO.
OLD WILDHORSE AND SPANISH WELL SLASH WILDHORSE.
UH, WHERE IS THAT? IN THE REPORT THAT WE RECEIVED AS A PART OF THE TASK THREE DELIVERABLE, THERE WAS AN ATTACHMENT WITH SHED'S DETAILED ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS IN SHED.
AND I'LL LET YOU WEIGH IN, BUT THAT WAS INCLUDED AS A PART OF YOUR YEAH.
UM, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE ATTACHMENT NUMBER IS, BUT THERE IS A DETAILED ATTACHMENT OF OUR HIGH LEVEL REVIEW OR CURSORY REVIEW, AGAIN, PROVIDING, UH, INPUT ON THE RESOURCES THAT WERE IDENTIFIED WITHIN THE STREET TCP INTERSECTIONS AND GENERAL QUANTITY IMPACTS, AND THEN ALSO THE RISK ASSOCIATED WITH THEM.
IS THAT WHERE YOU LOOK AT THE ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ANALYSIS? UH, I BELIEVE IT IS COVERED IN THERE, YEAH.
AGAIN, EVERYTHING YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL, JUST JUSTICE ANALYSIS, IT'S AGAIN, VERY CURSORY HIGH LEVEL, RIGHT? YEAH.
IN, IN ORDER TO DO THAT, DID YOU LOOK AT THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, PARTICULARLY APPENDIX D ENTITLED ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ANALYSIS? YES.
UM, AND, AND HERE'S ONE OF MY FAVORITE PARTS OF IT.
AND SECTION 5.0, IT SAYS, THE STONY COMMUNITY ON HILTON AND ISLAND IS THE ONLY EJ POPULATION EJ STANDING FOR ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE WITHIN THE STUDY AREA TO MINIMIZE IMPACTS THROUGH THE STONY COMMUNITY.
THE RECOMMENDED PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE, FOUR A FOLLOWS THE EXISTING US 2 78 QUARTER.
DO YOU AGREE THAT THAT MINIMIZES IMPACTS THROUGH THE STONY COMMUNITY
[03:35:01]
COMPARED TO WHAT? WELL, I DON'T KNOW.IT'S, IT'S IN AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT.
WELL, LET ME ASK YOU ANOTHER QUESTION FROM IT.
IN SECTION 5.4 OF THE SAME DOCUMENT, COMMUNITY COHESION, IT STATES THE RECOMMENDED PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE FOR A WOULD NOT DISRUPT COMMUNITY COHESION CAUSING ISOLATION OR ALTERING OR HINDERING ACCESS TO COMMUNITY SERVICES AND FACILITIES.
ADDITIONALLY, ANOTHER ONE OF MY FAVORITE PARTS, THE PROJECT WOULD ULTIMATELY IMPROVE COMMUNITY COHESION THROUGH THE US 2 78 QUARTER BY PROVIDING A MULTI-USE PATH LANDSCAPING, IMPROVED SIGNAGE, AS WELL AS IMPROVING ACCESS TO COMMERCIAL, RESIDENTIAL, AND RECREATIONAL PROPERTIES.
THE PROJECT WILL INCLUDE THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN OPEN AIR PAVILION ON TOWN ON PROPERTY IN THE STONY COMMUNITY TO HIGHLIGHT THE HISTORY OF THE STONY COMMUNITY AND OTHER GULLAH NEIGHBORHOODS ON HILTON ISLAND.
DO YOU AGREE WITH SECTION 5.4 THAT THE S-E-D-O-T RECOMMENDED PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE FOUR A WOULD NOT DISRUPT COMMUNITY COHESION AND IN FACT WOULD APPROVE IT? DO YOU AGREE WITH THAT? I DON'T THINK IT'S A FAIR QUESTION TO ASK OF ME WHEN I WASN'T PART OF THOSE COORDINATION EFFORTS IN THAT.
UM, I CAN SAY IT'S BASED ON OTHER PROJECTS I'VE BEEN PART OF IN OTHER PARTS OF THE STATE, UM, THERE IS USUALLY IN DEPTH COORDINATION WITH COMMU AFFECTED COMMUNITIES AND DISCUSSION ABOUT MITIGATION SOLUTIONS BASED ON WHAT S-C-D-O-T AND THEIR CONSULTANT PROVIDED IN THE DRAFT.
DAI BELIEVE THAT ALIGNS WITH WHAT I'VE PUT INTO PRACTICE IN OTHER AREAS OF THE COUNTRY.
UM, THEN WITH REGARD TO SECTION, UH, SUBSECTION 3.4, 0.5 OF THE SCOPE OF SERVICES ENTITLED IDENTIFYING MITIGATION CONSIDERATIONS MM-HMM.
WHAT COMMITTEE MEETING IS IT IN YOUR REPORT? THERE IS A SECTION ABOUT MITIGATION STRATEGIES.
SO IN SECTION FIVE, TABLE 10, WE TALK ABOUT MITIGATION STRATEGIES.
A LOT OF IT ALIGNS WITH WHAT S-E-D-O-T PROPOSED EXPANDED A LITTLE BIT ON SOME OPTIONS.
SO YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT WHAT S-E-D-O-T PROPOSED AND THAT IS THE PAVILION.
SOME SIGNS AND, AND THE, UM, ONLINE NARRATIVE.
WE WEREN'T TALKING ABOUT PAVILION.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, UM, POSSIBLE INCORPORATION OF GULLAH GEEGEE ART INTO, UH, THE PROJECT FOOTPRINT.
UM, OPPORTUNITIES TO RECONNECT THE NORTH SIDE OF 2 78 WITH THE SOUTH SIDE OF 2 78, WHETHER THAT'S WITH MULTI-USE PASS OR WHATEVER.
UM, TRYING TO ESTABLISH THAT RECONNECTION, THAT COMMUNITY COHESION THAT WAY.
WE ALSO HAD, UH, RECOMMENDED THAT THERE COULD BE AN OPPORTUNITY TO REALLY TELL THE ORAL HISTORY OF THE GO GEECHEE COMMUNITY, UM, AND, AND DOCUMENT THAT AND HAVE THAT, UH, AT, UH, FACILITY IN THE AREA.
I'M LOOKING AT YOUR JUNE 10 REPORT, UM, AND I'M LOOKING AT THE TABLE OF CONTENTS.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY IS VERY BRIEF.
THE NEXT SECTION IS FOUR LANE VIABILITY MEMORANDUM.
I'M GUESSING IT'S NOT IN THAT, I DON'T THINK IT'S IN THE SEISMIC STUDY, WHICH IS THE NEXT IN THE TABLE OF CONTENTS.
I DON'T THINK IT'S IN THE TRAFFIC FORECASTING MEMORANDUM.
IS IT IN CARTER ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS MEMORANDUM, OR I DON'T THINK IT'S IN DOWNSTREAM IMPACTS.
'CAUSE THAT'S AWAY FROM STONY AND IT'S NOT THE SOUTHERN BYPASS.
SO WHERE IS IT IN THIS REPORT? HIS ATTACHMENT IS A PART OF THE
[03:40:01]
CORRIDOR ANALYSIS.UM, IT'S PART OF THE TASK 3.6.
UM, THEN, UM, YOU HAVE AN ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW, TECHNICAL MEMO, APPENDIX H, UM, AND THERE'S A RISK ASSESSMENT ABOUT ADDITIONAL TIME AND MONEY TO ADD RIGHT AWAY.
UM, AND SO YOUR RECOMMENDATION, I THINK YOU CALL IT ALTERNATIVE, ONE OF THE FOUR ALTERNATIVES, UM, THAT YOU LOOKED AT PLUS THE BYPASS.
UM, SO, UM, WE'RE TOLD THAT THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT RUNS, UM, BY THE END OF THIS MONTH.
SO WOULD, UM, THE ADDITION OF THAT RIGHT OF WAY ALONG GUMTREE MEAN THAT THERE HAS TO BE, UH, A NEW ASSESSMENT AND WOULD IT COST MORE MONEY AND TIME TO DO THAT? YES, THERE WOULD NEED TO BE TIME TO INCORPORATE TIME BY S-C-D-O-T AND THEIR CONSULTANT TO INCORPORATE.
CHAD, LET, LET'S JUMP IN BECAUSE IT'S OUTSIDE, IT'S OUTSIDE OF THE CURRENT PROJECT AREAS DEFINED BY S-C-D-O-T.
IT'S A ELEMENT THAT WOULD NEED TO BE PURSUED OUT, PURSUED OUTSIDE OF THE PROJECT.
SO THERE SEEMS TO BE A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION HERE.
NO, THE, IF IT WAS PART OF THE PROJECT, BUT IT WOULD BE, YES, BUT IT'S NOT, IF THAT IMPROVEMENT IS DONE, IT WOULD BE DONE BY CITY.
IT WOULD BE PART OF THE PROJECT.
UH, AND JUST WANTING TO MAKE SURE, BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF PRESSURE ON US TO MAKE A DECISION BY THE END OF JUNE BECAUSE OF THE EXPIRATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT.
AND IF WE ARE TO ADOPT THAT RECOMMENDATION, THEN MY BOTTOM LINE QUESTION IS, DOES THAT MEAN IT EXTENDS THE TIME? NO.
ANY PROJECT THAT'S BEYOND THE PROJECT IZED DEFINED IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WOULD BE SEPARATE AND ABOVE AND BEYOND THIS PROJECT.
SO IF THERE'S IMPROVEMENTS THAT COME THROUGH THAT WOULD NOT BE INCORPORATED IN THE CORRIDOR PROJECT AS DEFINED AS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TONIGHT.
SO IT'S NOT IN THE PROJECT, BUT WE'RE RECOMMENDING THAT IT BE INCLUDED IN THE PROJECT.
I, I, THOSE ARE RECOMMENDATIONS IN ADDITION TO WHAT'S DEFINED AS THE PROJECT TODAY, UM, DOWNSTREAM FROM THE VIM MODEL DOWNSTREAM IMPROVEMENTS BEYOND THE, THE CORRIDOR PROJECT AS IT, SO OKAY.
AND SO EXCLUDED FROM THE COST NOW ESTIMATED TO BE $488 MILLION? YES.
THAT WOULD BE A, A SEPARATE COST AND A SEPARATE PROJECT.
BUT A REAL TIME CONSEQUENCE OF WHAT THIS PROJECT WILL MEET.
AND SO THEREFORE, IF THERE WAS MUNICIPAL CONSENT GIVEN WHAT WE'RE ACTUALLY LAYING DOWN FOR THE TOWN AND FOR THE RESIDENTS IS A NEXT PROJECT TO SOLVE THE PROBLEMS THAT THIS PROJECT WILL CREATE AT THE TOWN'S OWN EXPENSE.
AGAIN, I HATE TO BE REDUNDANT.
HOW DOES ANY OF THIS MAKE SENSE TO ANYONE SITTING ON THIS COUNCIL? SO, I'M SORRY.
I DO HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION FOR LAMEER.
UM, I, I REALLY APPRECIATE, UM, THAT YOU'RE INDEPENDENT FROM THE S-E-D-O-T PROJECT.
THAT WAS ONE OF OUR GOALS, AND I APPRECIATE THAT VERY MUCH.
AND I APOLOGIZE, I HAD TO ASK YOU A FEW QUESTIONS ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT BECAUSE I FIGURED YOU AT LEAST HAD TO READ THAT.
UM, BUT DID YOU HAVE, UH, AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT, UM, THE, UH, UH, TRAFFIC ANALYSIS THAT'S ON THE, UM, S-E-D-O-T WEBSITE FOR THIS