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

Sierra Vista Scenic Byway Part 1; Sierra National Forest Route 10

This past month I partook in camping out in Sierra National Forest.  My route into Sierra National Forest was on Forest Route 10 which is a segment of the Sierra Vista Scenic Byway.


Sierra Vista Scenic Byway is an 82.7 mile loop of much of Sierra National Forest along the western flank of the San Joaquin River basin.  The Sierra Vista Scenic Byway was created in 1989 from the following Forest Routes:

-  From CA 41; northeast on Road 632/Sky Ranch Road to the boundary of Sierra National Forest where the road becomes Forest Route 10/Forest Road 6S10.
-  Forest Route 10 north of Fresno Dome to where the designation moves to Forest Road 6S10X/Beasore Loop.
-  Forest Route 10 to Forest Route 7/Beasore Road on Forest Road 5S07.
-  Forest Route 7 northeast Forest Route 81/Minarets Road on Forest Road 4S81 at Clover Meadow.
-  Forest Route 81 to the boundary of Sierra National Forest where it becomes Road 225 near North Fork.

The Sierra Vista Scenic Byway has several lengthy dirt segments in …

Chisholm Ferry/Bridge Location and early Legislative Route Number 10

This past month while viewing the site of Chisholm Ferry along the Kings River of Kings County I noticed that route being illustrated resembled an early Californian State Highway.  My suspicions proved correct as the location of Chisholm Ferry was part of the original alignment of Legislative Route Number 10; a precursor to California State Route 198.


The Facebook in question above was posted on the Antique Images from the Collection of Michael J. Semas and can be viewed below:

Michael J. Semas on Chisholm Ferry and Bridge

The location of Chisholm Ferry is located just south of Jackson Avenue/Old CA 198 on the Kings River about 4 miles west of Lemoore near Avenal Cut-Off Road.  This particular section of the Kings River was once the northern most extent of Tulare Lake.

Tulare Lake was once the largest fresh water lake west of the Great Lakes by surface area.  Tulare Lake was first surveyed at an approximately 570 square miles in 1849 and was later surveyed to be 690 square miles in …

California State Route 118

This past month I drove the entirety of California State Route 118 from Ventura County east into Los Angeles County.


CA 118 is a major 47 mile State Highway which begins in the City in Ventura County and traverses east into Los Angeles County by way of Simi Valley and Santa Susana Pass.  From Santa Susana Pass CA 118 continues eastward through San Fernando Valley within the City of Los Angeles and terminates at Interstate 210.  CA 118 contains within it's right-of-way some of the most historic highway corridors in California history.

The precursor route of CA 118 was Legislative Route Number 9 which was first added to the State Highway System during the First State Highway Bond Act of 1909.  The original definition of LRN 9 was from San Bernardino westward to LRN 4 in San Fernando. LRN 9 was extended westward to LRN 2 near Montalvo (modern day Ventura) in 1933.

In a August 1934 Department of Public Works Guide the Signed State Highways were announced.  CA 118 was announced to be a…