Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Hilton Head Bridge Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
State Infrastructure Bank denies scaled proposal for Hilton Head bridge; county to attempt revised offer
Summary
Beaufort County staff said the State Infrastructure Bank unanimously denied the county's proposal to scale the Hilton Head/Bluffton Parkway project; County Council directed staff to continue negotiations while DOT gave the county a 30-day deadline to propose an alternative or DOT may move ahead with a single-span replacement.
Jared, county staff project lead, told the Beaufort County Transportation Committee the State Infrastructure Bank (SIB) voted unanimously to deny the county’s scaled proposal for the Hilton Head–Bluffton Parkway bridge project and that the county is preparing a revised plan.
The project originally proposed a six-lane bridge with an estimated cost of about $490 million; county staff had identified roughly $300 million available, leaving a $190 million shortfall. After a failed local sales-tax referendum, staff and local leaders proposed a reduced project—replacing the eastbound span and constructing a three-lane eastbound bridge—to reduce cost. Jared said the SIB board denied the county’s submitted proposal at its May 12 meeting.
Why this matters: the bridge is structurally important and has an aggressive schedule set by South Carolina Department of Transportation (DOT). Jared said DOT, through Secretary Powell, gave the county 30 days to reach agreement with the SIB on an amended proposal or DOT would terminate the existing intergovernmental agreement and proceed on a single-span replacement.
County Council reviewed options and directed staff to continue negotiations with the SIB to see whether an alternate scaled proposal can be accepted. "We were asked by the SIB what are you gonna do now?" Jared said, describing the post-referendum planning. He added staff is preparing an amended proposal that attempts to address SIB concerns, which included project sequencing, cost backstops for overruns, timing and local contributions.
The committee was told staff will present the alternate proposal to County Council at its next meeting and then submit it to the SIB, which could call a special meeting to act. Jared said the SIB did not terminate the larger intergovernmental agreement at the May meeting; rather, it rejected the county’s proposed change and invited additional proposals within a short window.
Ending: Staff said they will bring an amended plan back to Council for approval and then submit it to the State Infrastructure Bank; if no agreement is reached within the DOT-imposed schedule, DOT may proceed with the minimum feasible bridge replacement.
