York County workshop maps five‑year plan to raise road quality, target 15 miles of paving

York County Council members heard a briefing Sept. 9 on a county road strategic framework that aims to increase annual paving, prioritize 60 higher‑volume “connector” county roads and raise the county’s average pavement condition from the high‑50s to about 70 within five years.

The plan, presented by Assistant County Manager Tom Couch and Assistant County Engineer Patrick Hamilton, centers on three funding buckets: the county’s Pennies for Progress sales‑tax program, state “C funds” distributed from the gas tax, and the county’s capital maintenance fund (account 1422). “When Penny’s 5 is completed, there will be over $1,500,000,000 worth of investment in the transportation system within the county,” Hamilton said. Couch told the council the county will combine C funds and 1422 money, expand in‑house paving where cost‑effective, and bid larger packages to get better unit pricing.

Nearly a third of county roads were identified in “poor” condition and the county’s average pavement rating declined from 59 in 2022 to 57 in the latest survey, presenters said. The county has identified about 60 connector‑type county roads — higher‑volume links that are not simple cul‑de‑sac neighborhood streets — and plans to collect traffic counts and other data to prioritize those first. “We’ve gone through all the county roads and identified approximately 60 roads that we would consider connector streets,” Hamilton said, adding the county will use traffic counts, number of houses and businesses, and public‑works request data to set priorities.

Staff described a phased approach to increase annual miles paved to roughly a 15‑mile target in coming years by combining funds, expanding Public Works’ in‑house capacity and bidding larger packages. Public Works currently paves roughly 2 miles per year in‑house at about $300,000 per mile for mill‑and‑fill or overlay work, while deeper reclamation of roads in the “poor” category was estimated as a substantially higher, ballpark cost. County management said it will analyze the marginal productivity of expanding in‑house work and present budget options; the county manager said management intends to propose raising the 1422 allocation from $2,000,000 to $4,000,000 annually during the next budget cycle.

Speakers and several council members pressed staff on coordination with the South Carolina Department of Transportation and with municipal partners. Staff noted all C funds are currently committed to SIB projects including Exit 82, Exit 85 and Exit 90, and that C funds average about $7,500,000 a year but are already largely committed in the near term. On DOT‑maintained segments such as a problematic under‑interstate section of Carowinds Boulevard, staff explained paving is part of a larger DOT bid package and schedule, and while the county can raise timing concerns with DOT before bids, contractors determine the order of work unless the contract specifies otherwise.

Council members also asked about longer‑term policy tools such as impact fees, adequate public‑facilities ordinances and whether the county should accept responsibility for fewer subdivision roads. Couch said evaluating the policy of not accepting new subdivision roads is a year‑2 initiative that county staff will study and bring recommendations forward. The county will return to council with the prioritized connector list, traffic counts and a budget proposal after further analysis; no formal vote was taken on the framework at the workshop.

The county’s next steps include completing traffic counts on the 60 identified connector roads, refining capital and cash‑flow projections for Pennies 5 projects, analyzing the cost‑benefit of increasing Public Works’ paving capacity (including equipment and staffing needs), and presenting a budget request to support the plan in the next fiscal cycle.