Hilton Head council says yes in big bridge vote, but with Pinckney access revisions
In a landslide vote, a revised joint resolution detailing the new Hilton Head Island bridge project passed Tuesday. The project now might not disrupt access to Pinckney Island, thanks to a new “design build” proposal from the South Carolina Department of Transportation.
After about 40 minutes of discussion during a town council meeting Tuesday, six members of the council voted in favor of the resolution, with Ward 4 council member Tamara Becker as the sole dissenter.
Under the new revisions:
- The project will be made into a “design build” project which would allow construction teams to propose alternate designs for the project.
- Alternative designs that include two-way access to Pinckney Island will be preferred.
- The word “lifeline” was removed from the project scope, allowing the bridge to touch down on Pinckney Island.
A revised design could still be completed under the current project budget of $298.5 million.
The revisions come after concerns were raised about a previously proposed design, which would have altered access to Pinckney Island for drivers coming from Bluffton. The proposed design would have prevented drivers from turning right directly into the public boat landing, and forced them to drive an extra mile to the Windmill Harbor intersection.
That re-route could have led to significant traffic and safety concerns, noted Ward 3 councilman Steve DeSimone during a Feb. 26 planning workshop.
Council members expressed strong opposition to the previously proposed resolution last week, leading to involvement of Sen. Tom Davis and SCDOT Secretary Justin Powell. In a Friday letter, Powell addressed Davis’ concerns and offered potential solutions, which were later incorporated into the town’s revisions.
Because the Beaufort County Council already approved the joint resolution on Feb. 24, the new revisions will be to sent back to the county. It is unclear whether the county leadership would take the revised resolution for a vote, according to comments shared by Mayor Alan Perry during the meeting.
Becker, who voted in opposition of the resolution, cited a long list of reasons why the revised resolution was still inadequate in addressing the concerns of residents. One of the concerns cited was community outcry about the magnitude of the bridge project, along with a lack of “definitive” language in the letter from SCDOT.
“Though I believe that we’ve made this particular resolution going back to the county as good as it can be for the future, in my mind we haven’t done justice to our residents or do to the future, and so I have to vote no,” Becker said.
