Skip to main content

I-73 Wetland Proposal Delayed to May 18

SCDOT's wetland mitigation proposal to the SC Department of Natural Resources has been delayed two weeks to May 18. The proposal was to be announced on May 3.

Both the DOT and the DNR said that they weren't close enough to an agreement, but they continue to work towards a resolution. Both agencies want to have as detailed and complete a proposal as possible.

At the same time, the Heritage Trust Board is preparing a report on the impact the I-73 project, specifically a bridge near SC 917 that crosses the Little Pee Dee Heritage Preserve. The highway and bridge would impact 27 acres.

After the DOT's proposal is presented, a special meeting of the Heritage Trust Board will be called to review and consider the DOT's proposal. In the past, the Heritage Trust Board and the DNR have expressed concern on the environmental impact of the Interstate, but they have expressed a strong interest in working with the DOT because of the necessity of the project to the region.

The Trust Board's decision is not binding.

Story:
I-73 compensation plan delayed ---Myrtle Beach Sun News

See Also:
SCDOT to present wetland replacement proposal on May 3rd
SC: I-73 wetland trade halted
SC: Heritage Trust Board won't fight I-73 but expects compensation

Commentary:

In a story that describes that the DOT and DNR are working to make sure they have all their bases covered, I noticed one thing. Comments by David Farren of the Southern Environmental Law Center. His comments about the damage to Little Pee Dee Heritage Preserve and suggestions that I-73 be built along existing SC 9 or US 501 isn't anything different. But he continues to point out that Federal law prohibits the damage to the wetlands.

In the last story, Farren mentioned that the law prohibits highways from disturbing nature preserves unless there are no other viable options. Which he considers SC 9 or US 501 to be. In the most recent article, he states that this decision would be a precedent-setting one.

The DOT counters that the other alternatives -- SC 9 and US 501 specifically -- would do more environmental damage than the current route. And that they have the numbers to prove it. The DOT also claims that they continue to do field studies and that the results have confirmed their position.

So, what does this all mean. I believe that if the DNR and DOT come to an agreement on a wetland compensation package that the Southern Environmental Law Center will try to block the route. After the May 30, 2006 selection of the current preferred route, the SELC sent a letter to SCDOT voicing their concerns on July 28th.

In the letter, the SELC voice their concerns over the thoroughness of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) completed by the DOT. 1) The DOT did not weigh all the environmental impact concerns when choosing the preferred corridor. 2) Consideration of the fragmentation of habitat, specifically 45 miles of new highway on undeveloped coastal plain. In addition, the DOT did not consider upgrades to SC 38, US 501 and SC 9 as a possibility. 3) Ignoring Section 4(f) of the Federal Transportation Act of 1966. This specifically deals with their objections to the Little Pee Dee Bridge at SC 917 and the impacts to the Wildlife Preserve. 4) That the state ignored where the northern part of I-73 (from I-95 to the North Carolina Line) will be routed and how to tie the two highways together. They state that the DOT prematurely eliminated a corridor along SC 9 that the DOT's CAT tool showed as having the least environmental impact.

The letter which is 16 pages long can be found here.

In reading this letter, which I hope to dissect in a later blog entry, voices strong objections to the selected route and the thoroughness of the DEIS. That along with statements made in the press by the SELC is why I think that there will most likely be a legal challenge to I-73

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The story on how the unbuilt US 40 Expressway in Brownsville took 40 years to complete.

For nearly four decades, the four lane US 40 just east of Brownsville came to an abrupt end - shown in the photo above - at Grindstone Road in Redstone Township.   In the late 1960s, what was then the Pennsylvania Division of Highways (PennDOH) extended a new four lane alignment of US 40 eastwards from Broadway Street slightly over one mile to Grindstone Road where an incomplete diamond interchange was built.  Earlier in the decade, PennDOH had built a four lane US 40 in Washington County into Brownsville complete with a new crossing over the Monongahela River known as the Lane Bane Bridge.  This new highway and bridge allowed US 40 to bypass the older Intercounty Bridge and downtown Brownsville. 

After this new highway opened, nothing would happen to it for nearly forty years.  US 40 traffic would use the ramps for this planned diamond interchange and then jog on Grindstone Road briefly before continuing towards Uniontown on the original National Road. 
What is unknown (at least to…

The story of the Boy Scout Ramps on Interstate 79 North in NW Pennsylvania

If you are traveling on Interstate 79 North of Pittsburgh, you may notice the remnants of a set of off and on ramps at mile 100 just north of Exit 99 (US 422).  There's a story behind these ramps.  Forty years ago, these ramps were built specifically for two Boy Scout Jamboree's that were held at Moraine State Park - 1973 and 1977.  The ramps purpose were to provide access to the north shore of Lake Arthur where the bulk of the festivities and campsite for the Jamboree were located.  (Lawrence County Memories has a great write up and map of the festivities on its site.)

Not long after the Jamboree ended the ramps were abandoned.  There are still remnants of the Boy Scout Ramps today.



Above: Sattelite view of the Boy Scout Jamboree Ramps. 
Below: A view of the ramps from I-79 South.



The google street view image above gives a view along West Park Road of where the set of ramps intersected the highway.  The ramps provided direct access to North Shore Drive (which is the right tur…

The few clues of the Northern Durham Parkway

Sometimes when you look through a box of maps for the first time in five years, you come across something you may have easily over looked.  Such was the case when I found a 2004 (so rather recent) map of Raleigh.  This map was made by the Dolph Map Company for WakeMed.  In the Northwestern corner of Wake County, there were two items to the map showing roads that are still not in existence 13 years later.

The road is the Northern Durham Parkway - this is a proposed 19 mile highway from US 501 north of Durham to the Raleigh-Durham International Airport.  The first proposals for this highway date back to 1967 when Eno Drive-Gorman Road was listed on the Durham Area Thoroughfare Plan. (1)  Other proposals called the highway the Northwest and Northeast Durham Loop. (2)  The route would serve as a northern and eastern bypass of Durham almost serving as a near loop.  The route was fought vigorously for three decades by the Eno River Association citing concerns for the the Eno River, nearby n…