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

Old River Lock & Control Structure (Lettsworth, LA)

  The Old River Control Structure (ORCS) and its connecting satellite facilities combine to form one of the most impressive flood control complexes in North America. Located along the west bank of the Mississippi River near the confluence with the Red River and Atchafalaya River nearby, this structure system was fundamentally made possible by the Flood Control Act of 1928 that was passed by the United States Congress in the aftermath of the Great Mississippi River Flood of 1927 however a second, less obvious motivation influenced the construction here. The Mississippi River’s channel has gradually elongated and meandered in the area over the centuries, creating new oxbows and sandbars that made navigation of the river challenging and time-consuming through the steamboat era of the 1800s. This treacherous area of the river known as “Turnbull’s Bend” was where the mouth of the Red River was located that the upriver end of the bend and the Atchafalaya River, then effectively an outflow

Interstate 10S and the original Interstate 110 in California

Interstate 10S is a short spur of Interstate 10 along San Bernardino Freeway in downtown Los Angeles.  Interstate 10S begins at the Santa Ana Freeway (US Route 101) and extends east to Interstate 5 where it merges into mainline Interstate 10.  Interstate 10S is one of the oldest freeway segments in Los Angeles having been part of US Routes 60, 70 and 99 when it was part of the corridor of the Ramona Expressway.  The current corridor of Interstate 10S was assigned as Chargeable Corridor H following the passage of the 1956 Federal Highway Aid Act.  Interstate 110 was a short-lived designation which comprised the segment San Bernardino Freeway from US Route 101 to Interstate 5 between 1964-1968.  The original Interstate 110 was dropped as a Chargeable Corridor during 1965 and consolidated as Interstate 10S during 1968.   The original Interstate 110 can be seen as the blog cover photo as it was featured on the 1964 Division of Highways Map.  Below the entire 0.65-mile length of Interstate

Vicksburg Bridge (Vicksburg, MS)

  Located a few hundred feet downriver from the Old Vicksburg Bridge, the Vicksburg Bridge, or the “New” Bridge, serves as the city’s vehicular crossing of the Mississippi River on the main highway connecting Vicksburg with northeastern Louisiana to the west and the state capital of Jackson to the east. The completion of the original Vicksburg Bridge in 1930 was seen as a huge success and the bridge proved to be a profitable entity for both road and railroad interests along the path of the Dixie Overland Highway and the subsequent US Highway 80 corridor. In the years after the creation of the National Interstate Highway System, planning commenced on a new bridge at the site that would relieve the congestion on the existing bridge while providing for a more modern crossing of the river that would be safe for all vehicles. The construction of the new bridge at Vicksburg was completed in 1973 and its design intentionally mimics that of its predecessor nearby. This was due in large part