Hilton Head council approves MOA with Beaufort County and grants SCDOT municipal consent amid heated public debate

Hilton Head Island's Town Council approved a memorandum of agreement with Beaufort County and granted municipal consent to the South Carolina Department of Transportation for the William Hilton Parkway (US 278) Gateway Corridor project on June 28, 2024, after more than three hours of public comment and extended debate.

The council voted 6-1 to adopt the MOA, which lays out commitments on project design, protections and mitigation for the Stoney Historic Community, multimodal elements such as pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and a provision establishing at least $10 million in a reserve or escrow for Stoney-related community improvements. Council later amended and approved a municipal-consent resolution in the form SCDOT requested and voted 5-2 to deliver a 'clean' municipal consent; council simultaneously added a separate resolution expressing the town's expectations that the department and county implement the MOA elements and pursue further mitigation.

Council members and staff framed the decisions as a balance between controlling the design and protecting community interests while preserving state and federal funding. Senator Tom Davis, who addressed the council, said roughly $300 million in funding commitments exist across several sources and that an estimated project cost is about $460 million to $470 million, leaving a funding gap of roughly $160 million that the state and federal delegation would try to fill. "If this Council decides that more time is necessary, I would do my best to extend the environmental assessment," Davis said, adding he would work with DOT and the delegation to keep the $120 million allocation from the State Infrastructure Bank intact if possible.

Councilwoman Tammy Becker, who unsuccessfully moved to postpone the vote so the council could receive a not-yet-delivered independent study, told colleagues she had heard overwhelming public opposition. "Ninety-eight percent of the emails, texts, phone calls, and conversations that I have been party to are in favor of us saying no to this bridge," she said. Becker also said the town had not yet received an independent consultant report paid for with more than $400,000 in taxpayer money and argued the council should wait until that material was complete.

Town staff walked council through substantive MOA provisions during a lengthy staff presentation. Those provisions include: design commitments to limit impacts to private property and preserve cultural landmarks; pedestrian and bicycle safety measures; a multi-use pathway and separation of pedestrian from vehicular traffic; commitments to examine value engineering and reduce the bridge width where feasible; bridge clearance standards and resilience measures to address storm surge; and a process for town and county signatures on project approvals. The MOA also identifies the Stoney Historic Community as a priority for cultural preservation and economic sustainability planning in coordination with the Gullah Geechee Historic Neighborhoods Community Development Corporation.

Public comment was sharply divided. Opponents said the proposed single long-span bridge and corridor would visually and environmentally alter the island, risk displacing residents, and fail to solve congestion because it would ultimately attract more traffic. Proponents, including multiple small-business owners and longtime residents, emphasized aging bridge structures, safety, workforce access and emergency-evacuation needs, arguing that improved capacity and a safer, resilient crossing are necessary.

SCDOT had signaled a preference for a 'clean' municipal-consent resolution, saying in written correspondence that the environmental assessment would expire on June 28 without action and that SCDOT could move forward with plans to repair or replace the Mackay Creek span if municipal consent were not granted. Council members divided over whether attaching conditions directly to the municipal-consent resolution would be enforceable. In response, the town attorney prepared two complementary steps: (1) deliver a clean municipal-consent form acceptable to SCDOT so the EA would not expire and funding would remain available, and (2) adopt a separate "sense of council" resolution documenting the town's expectations and asking the county, DOT and the legislative delegation to implement the MOA commitments.

Mayor Alan Perry emphasized the need for cooperative implementation with Beaufort County and SCDOT and, after the votes, said the council had defined the town's expectations for the project and would remain engaged through design and construction phases. Council members cautioned that many details remain: design is only partially complete at roughly 30%, additional engineering work will follow, and further negotiations between town, county and DOT will be required.

What passed: the MOA and the municipal-consent delivery. The MOA, as amended, specifies the bridge and corridor elements the town expects; it also includes language that the parties will pursue mitigation, an economic sustainability plan for Stoney, traffic and pedestrian-safety measures, and value-engineering to reduce visual and funding impacts. The municipal consent adopted was the form SCDOT requested; council also adopted the separate resolution expressing its expectations for SCDOT and Beaufort County and requesting ongoing legislative support to fill funding gaps.

Next steps: council's approvals do not finalize project engineering. The town, county and SCDOT will continue negotiations, the DOT may proceed in federal and state processes contingent on municipal consent, and the legislative delegation has signaled it will work to secure additional funding. Several council members said they expected to stay closely involved as the design advances and to press for implementation of the MOA provisions and Stoney community commitments.

Votes at a glance: the MOA authorization passed 6-1; municipal consent (clean form) passed after amendment, 5-2. The council also approved a separate expression of council expectations to accompany the municipal consent.