Beaufort Co. advancing 278 bridge plan. What happens to Hilton Head’s vision of 2 bridges?

Beaufort County is taking steps to move forward with the long-awaited U.S. 278 bridge project — without the cooperation of the Town of Hilton Head.

The Beaufort County Public Facilities Committee on Monday voted unanimously on a resolution to “narrow the scope” of the $320 million project. Similar to past proposals, the county’s plan includes the demolition of the Hilton Head bridges and replacing them with one six-lane bridge, spanning from the Moss Creek Drive intersection to Windmill Harbor.

Missing from the resolution is a variety of recommendations made by MKSK, a land planning firm hired by Hilton Head officials. Past proposals bundled the bridge plans with additional changes to be made on the island, including intersection alterations, the installation of adaptive traffic signals and a number of improvements in Big Stoney, a historic Gullah community located on Jenkins Island.

The largest difference between the town and the county lies in the bridge itself: While Beaufort County’s resolution calls for one six-lane bridge, the Town of Hilton Head wants two three-lane bridges, in order to “reduce bridge mass.” The two government entities have been at odds on this point for years.

The County Council will take up the resolution at its Sept. 12 meeting. If approved, the bridge’s three-year construction period could begin as early as winter 2023, finishing in late 2026 or early 2027.

The reduced scope should not dramatically affect the cost of the construction, Ophardt said, because the bridge expenses already represented a vast majority of costs in prior plans. The county still expects to use all $290 million of its funds for the project.

The county’s decision to move forward with the resolution came after Hilton Head’s Town Council on Aug. 16 approved a “memo of understanding” to commission another independent traffic study. This undertaking would delay the project’s start date by nearly a year, Beaufort County spokesman Chris Ophardt said.

Of the 26 recommendations from the Town of Hilton Head, 14 are met by Beaufort County’s resolution, and seven were not possible due to a lack of funding, Ophardt said.

The county’s proposed one-bridge solution is more economically feasible and environmentally friendly. Two bridges would cost an estimated $27.3 million more, widen the corridor and cast a larger environmental impact, Ophardt said. And inflation and cost overruns could add another $50 million to the project, county officials said.

The resolution marks the beginning of a schism between Beaufort County and the Town of Hilton Head, as the county proceeds with the bridge portion of the project and leaves the rest to the town.

“What we’re doing if we move forward with this action is we’re splitting the project up,” said Jared Fralix, assistant county administrator for infrastructure “And not in phases, but in separate projects.”

To dodge potential delays, Beaufort County decided to move forward with the project on their own — with the scope reduced to only county and federal property, excluding many of the island’s proposed improvements.

Is municipal consent needed?

Although the east end of the new bridge extends well into the municipality of Hilton Head, Ophardt said Beaufort County has the right to proceed with the project without the town’s agreement. This bypassing of “municipal consent,” he said, is possible because the South Carolina Department of Transportation has deemed three of the county’s four current bridges to be either “functionally obsolete” or “structurally deficient.”

“There has been no sense of urgency,” Public Facilities Committee member Mark Lawson said of the bridge project’s overall progress. “We need to move forward and start this process.”

But the county’s concerns are not just related to timeliness — some say there is also money at stake. Due to inflation and increasing demand for contractors in the region, delaying the project for six to nine months could cost the county an additional $50 million, according to Public Facilities Committee Chairman Stu Rodman.

“I think if you look at the potential cost overruns we are looking at, we are in a situation of high inflation and if we were to delay the project six to nine months, we are exposing ourselves to a $50 million cost increase,” said Rodman, of Hilton Head. “Stoney Community could benefit from an overall independent review, that way one would not hold up the other.”

“I encourage the Town to do the study to make the Stoney Community better,” Council Member Larry McElynn said. “This council agrees the one bridge is the best option to connect to 278 right before the Stoney gateway. This will ensure the least environmental impact on the area.”

Hilton Head Town Council member Tamara Becker said state Sen. Tom Davis has assured the town that the money was “secure,” advising Town Council members that “time is available” to collect sufficient data.

Davis told The Island Packet that the county’s potential losses don’t align with departmental data. According to SCDOT, the project’s estimated cost rose from $320 million in March to $328.5 million today. That’s an $8.5 million increase across five months — vastly different from Rodman’s predicted $50 million increase across six to nine months, Davis pointed out.

Considering those lower-than-expected costs of delay, Davis said, it’s the county’s duty to take the extra mile — even if it takes a few extra months.

“This is an iconic, once-in-a-generation project ... that is going to impact the island for decades to come,” he said. “We gotta get it right. And (the Town of Hilton Head’s traffic studies and simulations) are toward the aim of getting it right.”

Although Ophardt agreed the project’s funds are “secure,” he said the county risks more losses the longer they sit on the money.

As part of Beaufort County’s loan from the SC Transportation Infrastructure Bank to fund the project, the county signed an intergovernmental agreement with the bank, promising to complete construction by the end of 2028. If not, the county could be met with financial consequences — including full withdrawal of the bank’s $120 million loan.

Even still, Becker said she values the future of the island and the needs of its residents above potential financial losses.

“There’s a lot at stake here,” she said. “This is the future of Hilton Head Island.”

Is it a premature decision?

Becker said she believes Beaufort County is making a premature, uninformed decision, and that taking time to assemble more data is in the best interest of all parties.

“What’s good for Hilton head is good for the county and is good for the state,” she said.

Steven Baer, a former Beaufort County Council member, also opposes the county’s actions. Following the resolution’s unveiling, he created a petition Sunday to “reject and rethink” the SCDOT’s plans, calling the decision “a disaster and a textbook example of non-cooperation.”

The online petition had garnered nearly 9,000 signatures as of Tuesday morning.

Although the county is moving forward on its own, officials are encouraging the town to conduct its necessary research independently, as not to delay the start of the bridge’s construction.

Becker said that despite the “unfortunate” current circumstances, she hopes that Beaufort County and the Town of Hilton Head can find common ground before the Sept. 12 vote.

“I’m hopeful that between now and our next steps, that there’s an ability to come together and to work collaboratively for the best interests of Hilton Head’s future,” she said.