Plan Documentation

Submitted to

Submitted by

December 2006

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Section Title Page

1 Plan Development Process ...... 1-1 Process Overview...... 1-1 Coordination with Metropolitan Planning Process ...... 1-1 Data and Resources...... 1-2 Goals, Strategies and Performance Measures...... 1-2 Assessment of Needs...... 1-6 Figure 1 – Study Area...... 1-8 Public Involvement...... 1-9 2 Mount Pleasant Today...... 2-1 Figure 2 – 2003 Population by TAZ...... 2-2 Figure 3 – 2003 Employment by TAZ...... 2-3 System Review...... 2-5 Figure 4 – 2003 Base Year Volumes...... 2-8 Figure 5 – 2003 Base Year LOS...... 2-9 Figure 6 – Existing Transit Service...... 2-14 Figure 7- Existing Bicycle/Pedestrian Facilities ...... 2-15 Performance of the Existing System ...... 2-16 3 Mount Pleasant in 2030...... 3-1 Figure 8 – Proposed and Ongoing Major Developments...... 3-2 Figure 9 – 2003-2030 Population Change by TAZ ...... 3-3 Figure 10 – 2003-2030 Employment Change by TAZ ...... 3-4 4 Needs Assessment ...... 4-1 2030 Existing + Committed Projects...... 4-1 Figure 11 – 2030 “Committed” Projects...... 4-3 Figure 12 – 2030 E+C Volumes ...... 4-4 Figure 13 – 2030 E+C LOS ...... 4-5 Past Planned Projects Not Needed Based Upon Technical Analysis ...... 4-6 Future Projects Considered...... 4-6 Figure 14 – Projects Analyzed With the Travel Demand Model ...... 4-8

December 2006 i-1

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Section Title Page Transit Needs Analysis...... 4-13 Figure 15 – CARTA Routing Study Recommendations (March 2005) ...... 4-15 Figure 16 – Mount Pleasant Median Family Income (1999) ...... 4-16 Figure 17 – Mount Pleasant Mean Travel Time for Commuters (2000) .....4-17 Figure 18 – Mount Pleasant Population below Poverty Level (2000) ...... 4-18 Review of Projects from 2000 Transportation Plan ...... 4-19 Bicycle /Pedestrian Needs Analysis ...... 4-24 Figure 19 – Existing and Proposed Bicycle/Pedestrian Facilities ...... 4-26 5 Funding...... 5-1 Federal / State / Regional Funding Sources...... 5-1 Local Funding Sources...... 5-2 Figure 20 – Estimated 2030 Transportation Funding ...... 5-5 Figure 21 – Estimated Transportation Funding by Planning Period ...... 5-6 6 Implementation Plan ...... 6-1 Figure 22 – Recommended Phase I Projects ...... 6-7 Figure 23 – Recommended Phase II Projects ...... 6-8 Figure 24 – Volumes for Committed and Recommended Projects...... 6-9 Figure 25 – LOS for Committed and Recommended Projects ...... 6-10

APPENDIX

A. Summary of Public Comments

B. Analysis Results for Selected Potential Projects

C. JDB Mobility Study Summary and Town Council Action

December 2006 i-2

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

List of Tables

Table 1 – Transportation – Related Goal Statements and Goals for Town of Mount Pleasant: 2003 Comprehensive Plan Update Table 2 – Transportation – Related Implementation Strategies Adopted by Town of Mount Pleasant: 2003 Comprehensive Plan Update Table 3 – Transportation Elements, Related Goals and Performance Measures Table 4 – Place of Work for Mount Pleasant Workers over Age 16 Table 5 – Town of Mount Pleasant Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) Historical Summary Table 6 – Volume-to-Capacity Ratios for LOS Table 7 – 2003 Deficient Road Segments (LOS E or LOS F) Table 8 – 2002 to 2004 Crash Analysis Summary Table 9 – Differences in Socioeconomic Data Projections Table 10 – Committed Projects Table 11 – Future Projects Considered Table 12 – 2000 Plan: Status of Short-Range Recommended Projects Table 13 – 2000 Plan: Status of Mid-Range Recommended Projects Table 14 – 2000 Plan: Status of Long-Range Recommended Projects Table 15 – Potential Estimated Transportation Funding (2003-2030) Table 16 – Summary of Committed Funding by Project Table 17 –Recommended Phase I Projects Table 18 –Recommended Phase II Projects Table 19 – Summary of Systemwide Performance Measures

Appendix Table B-1 – Summary of Hungryneck Boulevard Phase III and IV Analytical Results Table B-2 – Potential Impacts from Hungryneck Boulevard Alternatives

December 2006 i-3

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

11 Plan Development Process

The Town of Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update is an 18-month study that evaluated the existing and future transportation system, its functional operation and condition. The plan assessment included updates from the previous 2000 Transportation Plan that were completed before the 2000 US Census data release and prior to completion of the 2030 Charleston Area Transportation Study (CHATS) Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP). The 2006 Plan Update used the most up-to-date data available, including 2030 socioeconomic (SE) data projections recently compiled by the Town Planning staff.

CHATS is the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for the region and is responsible for transportation planning. The 2006 Plan Update used the CHATS planning tools and data for initial evaluation of existing and future transportation needs, ensuring consistency with the regional planning process. The study effort refined the regional planning perspective using Town-generated population and employment data for both the 2003 base year and 2030 horizon year to more accurately identify transportation needs.

Process Overview

The 2006 Plan Update is a multimodal assessment of transportation facilities to include roadways, transit, bicycle, and pedestrian. In every case, accessibility to anticipated multimodal improvements was noted and considered in evaluating road project recommendations. The development of the 2006 Plan Update was completed using existing data sources available from the US Census, the South Carolina Department of Transportation (SCDOT), CHATS, Charleston County and the Town of Mount Pleasant.

Coordination with Metropolitan Planning Process

The Berkeley-Charleston-Dorchester Council of Governments (BCDCOG) manages the MPO process for the Charleston study area, including the Town of Mount Pleasant. A detailed study and plan was developed for the BCD region in the late 1960s, which formed the basis for the Charleston Area Transportation Study (CHATS). The CHATS area covers the three-county region’s most urbanized parts. Since 1977, BCDCOG has performed the planning and programming functions of CHATS, in collaboration with SCDOT, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and Federal Transit Administration (FTA).

The BCDCOG, in collaboration with the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (DHEC) Bureau of Air Quality (BAQ), is also responsible for regional air quality issues. The BCDCOG region currently meets the requirements for air quality standards and each of the three counties has entered into the statewide Early Action Plan to proactively address possible future air quality issues.

The Town of Mount Pleasant is an active member in the BCDCOG Regional Transportation Planning Process. It is represented in all three CHATS committees: Policy Committee (2 of 47 voting members from Town of Mount Pleasant), as well as the CHATS Policy Committee’s two standing advisory committees, the Study Team Advisory Committee (1 of 27 members from Town of Mount Pleasant), and Standing Enhancement Advisory Committee (1 of 12 members from Town of Mount Pleasant).

December 2006 1-1

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

It is the responsibility of the BCDCOG, as administrator of the CHATS, to analyze and prioritize regional transportation needs and develop the regional Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP). Federal, state and local transportation funds are programmed for transportation improvements across the region in the TIP and LRTP.

Data and Resources

Information from previous transportation and planning studies and relevant reports was incorporated into the 2006 Plan Update. Roadway inventory data included a combination of SCDOT and Town databases. Several visits to the field also produced important information on system operations at key locations. These findings were considered in evaluating quantitative results from the various planning tools used to identify transportation deficiencies. Town staff provided insight into the feasibility of the proposed recommendations and public comments from the recently completed Johnnie Dodds Boulevard Mobility Study contributed various perspectives from the community. Public comments on the 2006 Plan Update were taken into account in developing the final draft.

Goals, Strategies and Performance Measures

The Town’s 2003 Comprehensive Plan Update included transportation related goals and was used to guide the development of goals for the 2006 Plan Update. The 2006 Plan Update relied on previous transportation targets because of their importance to the transportation program. Table 1 includes a compilation of 2006 Transportation Plan Update related goal statements and the 2003 Comprehensive Plan Goals and together produces the goals for the 2006 Transportation Plan Update.

Table 1 Related Goal Statements and Goals Town of Mount Pleasant: 2003 Comprehensive Plan Update

2006 Transportation Plan Update 2003 Comprehensive Plan Goals Goal Statements • Encouraging a range of employment 1. Keep the Town of Mount Pleasant a place opportunities in close proximity to where families want to live and work residential areas to provide convenient through: access from home to work.

• Encouraging development of “infill” 2. Maintain Mount Pleasant as a unique properties to utilize infrastructure already business environment within the Charleston in place. Metro Area by: • Promoting safe and efficient access to commercial properties. • Maintaining undeveloped public green spaces to be used as passive parks 3. Facilitate local citizens’ ability to enjoy the in close proximity to and easily accessible local natural environment through: from neighborhoods. • Locating parks and other recreational facilities in close proximity to residential areas to improve accessibility to the facilities for residents of all ages.

December 2006 1-2

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Table 1 Related Goal Statements and Goals Town of Mount Pleasant: 2003 Comprehensive Plan Update

2006 Transportation Plan Update 2003 Comprehensive Plan Goals Goal Statements • Focusing attention on the long-term impacts of growth relative to transportation, traffic, congestion and motorist/pedestrian 4. Improve the safety and efficiency of the safety. Town’s transportation network by: • Encouraging use of alternate means of transportation where appropriate to minimize the number of vehicular trips using the roadway network.

In addition, the 2003 Comprehensive Plan Update included a listing of strategies to achieve the Plan’s transportation goals these are listed in Table 2. A considerable amount of thought and attention has been put into articulating and communicating the Town’s priorities and desires for transportation mobility in the 2003 Comprehensive Plan Update. These same strategies were used to further refine the 2006 Transportation Plan Update goals and to develop appropriate performance measures for evaluating and prioritizing recommendations.

Table 2 Related Implementation Strategies Adopted by Town of Mount Pleasant: 2003 Comprehensive Plan Update Transportation 2003 Comprehensive Plan Transportation Strategies Element • Continue to explore public transportation options and linking of residential areas, commercial areas and public lands with a vehicle/bicycle/pedestrian system. • Continue to support the recommendations of the East Cooper Alternate modes: Public Transportation Feasibility Study (1994) and the Mount Transit Pleasant Transportation Plan (1995), as amended. • Work with CARTA (Charleston Area Regional Transportation Authority) to support and increase public transportation opportunities to, from and within Mount Pleasant. • Implement public transportation improvements as well as pedestrian/bicycling needs.

December 2006 1-3

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Table 2 Related Implementation Strategies Adopted by Town of Mount Pleasant: 2003 Comprehensive Plan Update Transportation 2003 Comprehensive Plan Transportation Strategies Element • Provide vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian linkages between commercial and residential areas. • Focus attention on the long-term impacts of growth relative to transportation, traffic congestion and motorist/pedestrian safety. • Implement public transportation improvements as well as pedestrian/bicycling needs. Alternate modes: Bicycle and • Encourage pedestrian links between new developments and Pedestrian adjacent developed areas. Design and locate such new developments so as to make these pedestrian links a viable means of access and transportation. • Conduct a Town evaluation of trail/bikeway system opportunities to better link or connect parks to one another, increase resident accessibility to parks and provide an alternate transportation network for residents. Update Mount Pleasant Sidewalk Plan to reflect identified new opportunities.

Access • Minimize curb cuts to facilitate traffic flow and reduce traffic Management hazards. • Make every effort to utilize and expand on the existing grid street system between US 17 and Rifle Range Road in order to minimize traffic congestion on these roadways. Connectivity • Encourage grid design of streets and/or subdivision linkages where possible within the urban growth area to provide alternatives to US 17 and Rifle Range Road, and moderate linear development of such roads beyond the urban growth boundary. • Develop strategies, programs and coordination to maintain safe and effective traffic flow throughout Mount Pleasant, as well as Mobility between Mount Pleasant the rest of the Metro Area. • Focus attention on the long-term impacts of growth relative to transportation, traffic congestion and motorist/pedestrian safety. • Encourage mixed-use development. As development occurs, ensure that developers mitigate the traffic impacts of their projects through necessary road improvements and provision Transportation / for alternate means of travel, including multiple vehicular access points, as appropriate. Land Use Integration • Encourage pedestrian links between new developments and adjacent developed areas. Design and locate such new developments so as to make these pedestrian links a viable means of access and transportation.

December 2006 1-4

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Table 2 Related Implementation Strategies Adopted by Town of Mount Pleasant: 2003 Comprehensive Plan Update Transportation 2003 Comprehensive Plan Transportation Strategies Element • Develop funding opportunities from multiple sources to maintain the transportation network. Work to schedule funding of local projects through the local Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), Charleston Transportation Committee, Tax Increment Financing (TIF), or other methods which may become available. Funding • Administer and review traffic impact fees. • Refine the Capital Improvement Program, which considers all available funding sources and programs, transportation impact fees, C-Funds, and ISTEA Grants. • Develop concurrency requirements to be utilized when evaluating development proposals. Safety • Improve street design guidelines to ensure safe vehicular and pedestrian movement in neighborhoods. • Update the Transportation Plan. • Implement / establish policy guidelines for the Town to consider Transportation traffic calming requests in neighborhoods. Planning • Update the official Road Map to incorporate the recommendations of the 1998 Mount Pleasant Comprehensive Plan.

Many of these strategies were assessed, tested and woven into the set of recommendations contained in the 2006 Transportation Plan Update. Goals were paired with performance measures that could be used to assess progress toward achieving the goals. Performance measures are indicators of transportation operations and represent the efficiency of the system. Performance measures have many functions. They can be used to:1

• Frame what attributes of the transportation system are most important • Provide information on current conditions and trends • Evaluate the success of implemented and ongoing projects and programs • Provide a metric for communicating with decision makers and the public about past, current, and expected future conditions • Serve as criteria for investment decisions in the transportation planning process

The 2006 Transportation Plan Update relies on a balance of quantitative and qualitative analysis to identify recommendations for the 2030 horizon year. Quantitative analysis identified system deficiencies in safety, congestion and accessibility. These deficiencies reflected less than optimal conditions based on performance criteria for roadway operations and conditions. Qualitative evaluations incorporated local perspectives, including expectations of transportation service quality from the Town’s citizens and stakeholders. In

1 FHWA / FTA, Getting More by Working Together — Opportunities for Linking Planning and Operations, November, 2004.

December 2006 1-5

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

developing the methodology for evaluating transportation needs, performance measures were used to identify how well the system functioned.

Table 3 describes the performance measures and their relation to the transportation elements and related goals from the 2003 Comprehensive Plan Update.

Table 3 Transportation Elements, Related Goals and Performance Measures

Transportation Elements and Related Goals Performance Measure • Keep the TOMP a place where • Number of transit routes within Mount Pleasant families want to live and work • Transit ridership Alternate • Facilitate local citizens’ ability to Modes • Number of bicycle and pedestrian-related enjoy the local natural environment projects • Miles of bicycle and pedestrian-related projects • Maintain Mt. Pleasant as a unique Access business environment within the • Development of access management plans for Management Charleston Metro Area key corridors • Improve safety and efficiency of the Town’s transportation network • Maintain Mt. Pleasant as a unique • Block size business environment within the Connectivity • Number of access points per mile Charleston Metro Area

• Improve safety and efficiency of the Town’s transportation network • Maintain Mt. Pleasant as a unique • Per capita vehicle miles traveled (VMT) business environment within the • Per capita vehicle hours traveled (VHT) Charleston Metro Area • Peak period level of service (LOS) • Keep the TOMP a place where • Average congested roadway speed Mobility families want to live and work • Average trip time • Improve safety and efficiency of the • Development of typical roadway cross-section Town’s transportation network by facility type that utilize “Complete Streets” • Development of typical roadway concept cross-sections by facility type that utilize “Complete Streets Concept” • Keep the TOMP a place where • Increased density and mixed-use families want to live and work development • Maintain Mt. Pleasant as a unique Transportation • Reduction in the rate of growth in per capita business environment within the / Land Use VMT Charleston Metro Area Integration • Facilitate local citizens’ ability to

enjoy the local natural environment • Improve safety and efficiency of the Town’s transportation network Safety • Improve safety and efficiency of the • Crash rates Town’s transportation network

Assessment of Needs

Assessment of transportation needs relied on quantitative analysis of transportation operations. There are a variety of assessment tools that can be part of a transportation evaluation. The 2006 Plan Update used a number of different tools in identifying the

December 2006 1-6

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update transportation needs within the Town and potential solutions. Ultimately, a multimodal transportation needs analysis must address mobility, safety, access and identify existing and future needs. Planning tools provide valuable information which, when coupled with experience and knowledge of the area’s system, can point to potential solutions and improvement recommendations.

The Town of Mount Pleasant needs assessment used a refined TransCAD travel demand model developed as part of the Johnnie Dodds Boulevard Mobility Study. This refined model is based upon the regional CHATS TransCAD travel demand model, which includes 59 traffic analysis zones (TAZ) and was recently updated for the CHATS 2030 LRTP. CHATS model adaptations included the addition of 12 new TAZ’s that were created as subsets from the original CHATS model TAZ structure. Staff from the Town completed a thorough review of the CHATS 2003 base year SE data and 2030 horizon year forecasts. The CHATS SE data review led to a revision by Town staff of the 2003 and 2030 SE data sets applied to a more refined TAZ structure from that of the original CHATS model framework. Data used for the Town’s QRS II model (updated in 2005) was also used to supplement development of the 2006 Plan Update. Figure 1 presents the Town of Mount Pleasant study area, including overlaid TAZs used for the 2006 Plan Update.

CHATS socioeconomic data control numbers used in the travel demand model for Town of Mount Pleasant population, households and employment were adjusted to reflect Town estimates. The Town of Mount Pleasant’s estimated population in 2003 was about 62,000 and is expected to grow to over 90,000 by 2030. The Town’s established track record for fast paced population growth is expected to maintain into the future. The CHATS control totals agree and project the Town to have a population of over 90,000 by 2030.

According to Town of Mount Pleasant staff estimates, the study area employment in 2003 was over 20,506 and is estimated to grow to 38,000 by 2030. The CHATS control totals anticipate that the Town’s employment will be approximately 23,485 jobs by 2030. The 2006 Plan Update uses the Town employment figures, which results in transportation needs being identified earlier than would be anticipated if more conservative employment growth is assumed.

Using data from the Town of Mount Pleasant, SCDOT and CHATS, the study carried out a series of statistical assessments to evaluate the operations of the Town’s transportation network, including the following: • SCDOT Annual average daily traffic (AADT) data with special attention paid to traffic volumes by functional classification of the facility. • Volume to capacity (v/c) ratios are used to assess deficiencies in the transportation system. A v/c ratio is a measure of the amount of traffic on the road compared to the capacity of the road. The higher the v/c ratio, the more congestion. When the ratio of vehicles to capacity reaches 1.0, all capacity is being used and the system is congested. • Safety statistics analysis identified safety problems on the system. The location and frequency of crashes is used to identify intersections and roadways that should be considered for safety improvements. • VMT and VHT are useful measures for gauging congestion and change in trip lengths.

December 2006 1-7

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Figure 1 – Study Area

December 2006 1-8

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Average speed on freeways, arterials and collectors is a measure of roadway operations as well as an indication of congestion. The posted speed limits throughout the Town range from 25 mph to 55 mph, depending on the functional classification of the road. The travel demand model analyzed the change in speeds on different types of roads as traffic increased over time. Increased congestion typically results in lower speeds, longer trip times, and less efficient system operations.

Public Involvement

Qualitative input to the transportation plan update was provided by a myriad of sources. The Town of Mount Pleasant staff and Council, as well as documented positions of adopted plans, provided early and on-going guidance and direction. Public comments reflected in the media exposed concerns with transportation issues that demand attention. The results of public meetings to address needs, current conditions, anticipated future demands and community priorities also helped to form and shape the final recommendations for the 2006 Transportation Plan Update. Appendix A includes a summary of public information meetings held on July 9th and 10th as well as public hearing comments from the public involvement meeting held on August 8th.

December 2006 1-9

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

12 Mount Pleasant Today

The Town of Mount Pleasant is a vibrant and growing community with an established record for attracting new residential growth and commercial development to the South Carolina coast. Mount Pleasant is a prime destination for residential and employment relocation within the The Town of Mount Pleasant, with an estimated 2002 South Carolina Lowcountry and beyond. Figures population of 57,344, is one of the fastest growing municipalities in the Southeast. From 1995 to 2000, 2 and 3 depict the distribution of the 2003 the Town grew by 28%, becoming the sixth largest population and employment in Mount Pleasant.2 municipality in South Carolina. By 2010, the population growth, which has been established at 3%, Population and employment are distributed into will make Mount Pleasant the fourth largest 71 TAZs used by the 2006 Transportation Plan municipality in South Carolina, surpassing both Greenville and Rock Hill in population. Update for analysis. As presented in Figure 2, population within the Town is split by I-526, with Source: Town of Mount Pleasant approximately one-half of the population located east of the Interstate and the remaining population to the west. Similarly, as shown in Figure 3, approximately 39 percent of Mount Pleasant’s 2003 employment was located east of I-526 with the remaining 61percent to its west.

The transportation system within Mount Pleasant is composed of a multimodal network of facilities that serve motorists, transit riders, bicyclists and pedestrians. As the Town continues to grow, the cohesiveness and efficiency of the transportation system will be even more critical given the increased demand placed upon the existing system. The fast rate of recent population and employment growth continues to challenge the Town’s infrastructure system and services. The eastern portion of the Town has experienced substantial growth, accompanied by increasing demands for public infrastructure and services.

Travel patterns within Mount Pleasant are predominantly east-west, using Johnnie Dodds Boulevard and US 17 as the primary spine within the Town. Other major east-west roads, including Mathis Ferry Road, Coleman Boulevard/Chuck Dawley Boulevard, Rifle Range Road and Hungryneck Boulevard, also serve the primary east-west travel patterns. Daily work trips are especially important to the overall transportation system and its efficiency because the majority of work-related travel occurs during peak demand periods. Travel time, VMT and VHT are important metrics generated by the travel demand model as it evaluates current and future conditions and the impact of potential improvements on the transportation network. Table 4 shows where residents of Mount Pleasant work, providing some insight to the work travel patterns3. Increasingly, the transportation network within Mount Pleasant will serve through trips generated outside the Town. These trips will serve employment located in downtown Charleston as well as areas east and north of the Town. All indications show a continuing trend for development, employment and residents into the Town, and both new development in the eastern section of the Town, and re-development within the western parts. This growth will further tax the ability of the transportation network to provide mobility at a level of service expected by Town residents.

2 2003 is the base year utilized by the CHATS and Town of Mount Pleasant travel demand models. 3 The number of total workers over the age of 16 (24,685) as presented on Table 4 does not directly correlate to the total employment within Mount Pleasant, since not all eligible workers are employed, and of those that are employed, only about 1/3 work in Mount Pleasant.

December 2006 2-1

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Figure 2

December 2006 2-2

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Figure 3

December 2006 2-3

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Table 4 Place of Work for Mount Pleasant Workers over Age 16 Number Percent Total Workers Over Age 16 24,685 100% Worked Within Mount Pleasant 8,229 33.3% Worked Outside Mount Pleasant 16,456 66.7% Worked Within Charleston County 22,236 90.1% Worked Outside Charleston County and within South Carolina 1,948 7.9% Worked in South Carolina 24,184 98.0% Worked out of State 501 2.0% Source: Census 2000 Summary File 3 (SF 3) - Sample Data

Several roadways within Mount Pleasant serve statewide and national mobility, as well as local travel within Mount Pleasant. Three National Highway System (NHS)4 facilities cross Mount Pleasant, including: • Johnnie Dodds Boulevard/US 17, designated as a STRAHNET5 Connector as part of the NHS Strategic Highway Network for national security connectivity • I-526/Mark Clark Expressway, part of the Eisenhower Interstate System, connecting Mount Pleasant to I-26 and I-95 to the north • Isle of Palms (IOP) Connector, listed on the NHS as an “Other NHS Route”

Freight/truck travel within Mount Pleasant is another factor contributing to increasing congestion for the Town’s transportation network. The Wando Terminal, located in the northwestern section of town, is designated as one of 13 Official NHS Intermodal Connectors within South Carolina by FHWA. The opening of the new Ravenel Bridge connecting Mount Pleasant with Charleston provides some relief to I-526, which formerly served as the only truck route to/from Mount Pleasant due to truck/weight restrictions on the former Cooper River Bridge. SCDOT restricts trucks on facilities based upon weight. Generally, trucks are allowed on all state roadways.

Growth in truck traffic is expected to continue to pose a challenge for the Town of Mount Pleasant over the next several decades. The projections for intermodal traffic and the positive prospectus for international trade connected to the Ports ensure that truck traffic will continue to be a substantial portion of traffic traveling through town.

4 National Highway System - The National Highway System is a network of nationally significant highways approved by Congress in the National Highway System Designation Act of 1995. It includes the Interstate System and nearly 114,000 miles of arterial and other roads and connectors to major intermodal terminals. 5 STRAHNET- The Strategic Highway Corridor Network includes highways that are important to the US strategic defense policy and which provide defense access, continuity, and emergency capabilities for the movement of personnel, materials, and equipment in both peace and war time.

December 2006 2-4

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

System Review

The Town of Mount Pleasant’s transportation network includes roads, transit, bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Performance of each of these networks was evaluated using current data available from state and Town sources.

Roadway Network

The Town of Mount Pleasant model roadway network had 66.7 miles of roads in 2003. These are functionally classified as 5.6 miles of Interstate, 26.7 miles of principal arterial, and 6.2 miles of minor arterial, and 28.1 miles of collector. The model network includes approximately 52 miles of State roads and approximately 15 miles of local roads.6 Ownership of roads has implications for maintenance and improvements of the facilities. State roads are the responsibility of SCDOT, while local roads are the responsibility of the town or County.

Traffic has increased significantly on Town roads, impacting some facilities dramatically and reducing service on those roads to unacceptable ratings. Level of Service (LOS) is used to rate traffic operations from A to F with A being ideal travel conditions and F being extremely congested conditions. These LOS ratings were based on comparison of traffic volumes anticipated on the roadway network to roadway capacity thresholds.

Traffic counts are collected by SCDOT on a regular basis to assemble average daily traffic volumes at traffic count locations. The Town of Mount Pleasant also collects its own traffic counts as part of its Traffic Impact Assessment Process (TIAP).

Traffic growth within the Town has accelerated, increasing two and threefold for some facilities between 1994 and 2004. Comparison of 1994 to 2004 traffic volumes shows annual average percent change ranging from 2 to 30 percent. More recent data shows a continuing trend between 2002 and 2004, with very high rates of annual growth (10 percent or more per year) on select facilities including:

• Magrath Darby Boulevard between Johnnie Dodds Boulevard and Coleman Boulevard • Rifle Range Road between Hamlin Road and Six Mile Road • SC 41 between US 17/701 and Joe Rouse Road • SC 41 between Joe Rouse Road and the Berkeley County Line • US 17 from SC 41 to 15 Mile Landing/See Wee Road • Venning Road from US 17 to Rifle Range Road

Comparing ten-year annual average daily traffic (AADT) for 1994 through 2004 and three- year AADT for the period beginning in 2002 through the end of 2004 shows growth across the majority of roadways within the Town. Table 5 represents a historical summary on the AADT for select roads in Mount Pleasant. Traffic volume projection to 2030 is expected to continue to affect state, county and local roads, with existing and committed improvements struggling to maintain system operations.

6 Based upon the Town’s GIS network, there are approximately 480 miles of local roads within the Town; however, the majority of these minor facilities are not included as part of the travel demand model network.

December 2006 2-5

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Table 5 Town of Mount Pleasant Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) Historical Summary

1994- 1996- 2002- 1994-2004 2004 1996-2004 2004 2002-2004 2004 Absolute Annual Absolute Annual Absolute Annual Station Local Road Name Location Percent Average Percent Average Percent Average Change Percent Change Percent Change Percent Change Change Change 272 Ben Sawyer Blvd. Chuck Dawley Blvd. to Rifle Range Rd. n/a n/a 22% 3% 5% 2% 273 Ben Saywer Blvd. Rifle Range Rd. to Station 22 1/2 St. 21% 2% 5% 1% -2% -1% 643 Bowman Rd. Mathis Ferry Rd. to Johnnie Dodds Blvd. 16% 2% 25% 3% -4% -2% 644 Bowman Rd. Johnnie Dodds Blvd. to Old Georgetown Rd. n/a n/a 27% 3% 3% 1% 143 Chuck Dawley Blvd SC 703 to US 17 23% 2% 22% 3% 0% 0% 332 Houston Northcutt Rd. W. Coleman Blvd. to Wingo Way n/a n/a 8% 1% 7% 4% 2519 I-526 Long Point Rd. to Mathis Ferry Rd. 76% 8% 66% 8% 13% 6% 2521 I-526 Mathis Ferry Rd. to US 17 68% 7% 60% 7% 15% 7% 691 IOP Connector Rifle Range Rd. to US 17 36% 4% 5% 1% -3% -1% 693 IOP Connector Palm Blvd. to Rifle Range Rd. 43% 4% 23% 3% 10% 5% 338 Long Point Rd. Wando Park entrance to I-526 n/a n/a 100% 13% 11% 5% 339 Long Point Rd. I-526 to Whipple Rd. 500% 50% 136% 17% 13% 6% 340 Long Point Rd. Whipple Rd. to US 17/701 n/a n/a 140% 18% 13% 6% 326 Magrath Darby Blvd. Johnnie Dodds Blvd. to Wingo Way 39% 4% 33% 4% 19% 9% 327 Magrath Darby Blvd. Johnnie Dodds Blvd. to W. Coleman Blvd. 110% 11% 83% 10% 57% 29% 329 Mathis Ferry Rd. Wingo Way to Bowman Rd. 35% 3% 44% 6% 2% 1% 330 Mathis Ferry Rd. Bowman Rd. to Von Kolnitz Rd. 113% 11% 81% 10% -1% -1% 334 Mathis Ferry Rd. Von Kolnitz Rd. to US 17/701 n/a n/a -20% -3% 5% 2% 309 Rifle Range Rd. Ben Sawyer Blvd. to Bowman Road 32% 3% 24% 3% 3% 2% 310 Rifle Range Rd. Hamlin Rd. to Six Mile Rd. n/a n/a -64% -8% 10% 5% 311 Rifle Range Rd. Bowman Rd. to Venning Rd. 132% 13% 93% 12% -3% -2% 312 Rifle Range Rd. Venning Rd. to IOP Connector n/a n/a 100% 13% 0% 0% 313 Rifle Range Rd. Hamlin Rd. to US 17 357% 36% 284% 36% 20% 10% 314 Rifle Range Rd. IOP Connector to Six Mile Rd. n/a n/a 131% 16% 17% 8% 193 SC 41 US 17/701 to Joe Rouse Rd. 189% 19% 117% 15% 21% 11% 198 SC 41 Joe Rouse Rd. to Berkeley Co. 143% 14% 130% 16% 31% 16% 341 Six Mile Rd. US 17 to Rifle Range Rd. 28% 3% 33% 4% 7% 3% 129 US 17 W. Coleman Blvd. to Cottingham Rd. 30% 3% 12% 2% 10% 5% 131 US 17 Cottingham Rd. to I-526 40% 4% 25% 3% 3% 1% 132 US 17 I-526 to IOP Connector n/a n/a -11% -1% -13% -6% 133 US 17 IOP Connector to SC 41 74% 7% 42% 5% 6% 3% 135 US 17 SC 41 to 15 Mile Landing/See Wee Rd. 179% 18% 138% 17% 26% 13% 331 Venning Rd. US 17 to Rifle Range Rd. 290% 29% 239% 30% 152% 76% 323 Von Kolnitz Rd. Mathis Ferry Rd. to Bowman Rd. 65% 6% 47% 6% 12% 6% 335 Whipple Rd. Mathis Ferry Rd. to Wakendaw Rd. 34% 3% 24% 3% 5% 3% 337 Whipple Rd. Wakendaw Rd. to Long Point Rd. 125% 13% 85% 11% 16% 8% 605 Wingo Way Mathis Ferry Rd. to Magrath Darby Blvd. 300% 30% 300% 38% -8% -4%

December 2006 2-6

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

The Town of Mount Pleasant travel demand model was used to identify existing and future congestion on the transportation network. A base year of 2003 and horizon year of 2030 were utilized to coincide with the CHATS existing/approved travel demand models. The Town model was used to analyze v/c ratios (traffic volume to road capacity) to measure the amount of congestion on the system. As mentioned previously, the lower v/c ratio indicates less congestion while higher v/c ratio indicates that the road is approaching full capacity and is congested.

The CHATS travel demand model utilizes varying ranges of v/c (by roadway facility type) for identifying congestion. These ranges were also used for the 2006 Plan Update. Table 6 presents the v/c ratios and corresponding LOS levels.

Table 6 Volume to Capacity Ratios for LOS

Level of Service Facility Type A B C D E F Interstate ≤ 0.29 0.29-0.47 0.47-0.69 0.69-0.88 0.88-1.00 >1.00 Freeway ≤ 0.33 0.33-0.55 0.55-0.75 0.75-0.88 0.88-1.00 >1.00 Principal Arterial ≤ 0.30 0.30-0.50 0.50-0.70 0.70-0.84 0.84-1.00 >1.00 Minor Arterial ≤ 0.30 0.30-0.50 0.50-0.70 0.70-0.84 0.84-1.00 >1.00 Collector ≤ 0.31 0.31-0.52 0.52-0.72 0.72-0.83 0.83-1.00 >1.00

LOS E or F represents deficient conditions based upon Town of Mount Pleasant standards, while LOS D or better represents adequate traffic operations. The travel demand model results for the base year (2003) network showed that there were several segments of roadway with an LOS worse than LOS D (LOS E or F). The 2003 base year traffic volumes are presented on Figure 4 and reflect the distribution of traffic on the network. Road segments with LOS D or worse are shown on Figure 5 and presented in Table7.

December 2006 2-7

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Figure 4

December 2006 2-8

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Figure 5

December 2006 2-9

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Table 7 2003 Deficient Road Segments (LOS E or LOS F) 2003 Road Segment From To LOS Houston Northcutt Johnnie Dodds Blvd. Cooper River Bridges7 Boulevard / Mathis E Ferry Road Johnnie Dodds Blvd. Bowman Road I-526 E Long Point Road Whipple Road Rice Planters Drive E/F US 17 I-526/HNB IOP Connector E/F US 17 Long Point Road SC 41 E SC 41 US 17 Joe Rouse Road E Ben Sawyer Rifle Range Road Myrick Road E Boulevard Rifle Range Road Bowman Road Appling Drive E

Safety Analysis

Crash data for the years 2002-2004 provided by the Town of Mount Pleasant police department was reviewed and analyzed as part of the needs assessment. Data for major roadways within the Town was tallied by major segment (major intersection to major intersection). Although the numbers represent total crashes (and not crash rates normalized using average traffic count values), the summary gives a general indication of crash trends over the three-year analysis period (Table 8).

Overall, the majority of the segments have constant or decreasing crash totals for the three years analyzed. The following segments have moderate increases in total crashes between 2002-2004:

• US 17 from Dragoon Dr. to I-526 • SC 703 from the Ravenel Bridge to Chuck Dawley Boulevard • Whilden St./Royal Ave. from SC 703 to McCants Dr. • Houston Northcutt Blvd. from Coleman Blvd. to US 17

Increases in crash totals for these segments may be attributed to one or more of the following factors: 1) increases in total traffic volumes, 2) anomalies in the crash data for a single year, or worst case, 3) a result of an underlying geometric design issue that may require future mitigation.

7 The former Cooper River Bridges were decommissioned in July 2005 with the opening of the new Ravenel Bridge

December 2006 2-10

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Table 8 2002-2004 Crash Analysis Summary Number of Crashes Facility Segment 2002 2003 2004 Segment 1: Bridge to Houston Northcutt Blvd. 90 95 67 Segment 2: Houston Northcutt to Dragoon Dr. 33 46 36 Segment 3: Dragoon Dr. to I-526 101 80 113 US 17 Segment 4: I-526 to Mathis Ferry Rd 126 111 94 Segment 5: Mathis Ferry Rd. to IOP Connector 125 118 72 Segment 6: SC 517 to SC 41 117 118 86 Segment 7: SC 41 to Town Limit 36 16 44 Segment 1: Bridge to Chuck Dawley Blvd. 79 103 107 SC 703 Segment 2: Chuck Dawley Blvd. to Town Limits (Sawyer Blvd) 49 42 35 Chuck Dawley Segment 1: Coleman Blvd. to 17 80 64 75 Blvd. Whilden St./Royall Segment 1: SC 703 to McCants Dr. 4 7 10 Ave. McCants Dr. Segment 1: Royall Ave. to SC 703 7 4 6 Houston Northcutt Segment 1: Coleman Blvd. to US 17 13 16 24 Blvd. Mathis Ferry Segment 1: US 17 (W) to Bowman Rd. 35 42 35 Rd. Segment 2: Bowman Rd. to US 17 (E) 40 45 23 Rifle Range Segment 1: SC 703 to 517 47 54 54 Rd. Segment 2: 517 to Porcher's Bluff Rd. 24 21 21 Segment 1: Mathis Ferry Rd. to US 17 8 7 18 Bowman Rd. Segment 2: US 17 to Chuck Dawley Blvd. 48 44 31 Segment 3: Chuck Dawley Blvd. to Rifle Range Rd. 4 10 4 Segment 1: Town limits to Long Point Rd. 24 20 31 I-526 Segment 2: Long Point Rd. to US 17 (includes 536 spur) 39 43 41 Long Point Segment 1: Town Limits to I-526 18 11 14 Rd. Segment 2: I-526 to 17 76 92 80 Whipple Rd. Segment 1: Mathis Ferry Rd. to Long Point Rd. 40 29 28 Venning Rd. Segment 1: US 17 to Rifle Range Rd. 7 3 16 SC 517 Segment 1: US 17 to Town Limits 41 65 43 Six Mile Rd. Segment 1: US 17 to Rifle Range Rd. 4 3 2 Hamlin Rd. Segment 1: US 17 to Rifle Range Rd. 1 6 1 SC 41 Segment 1: US 17 to Town Limits 15 10 14 Porchers Bluff Segment 1: US 17 to Rifle Range Rd. 0 0 1 Rd. Note: Crash data not available/included for the month of August 2004

December 2006 2-11

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Transit Services

One of the primary transportation goals listed in the Town’s 2003 Comprehensive Plan Update was to “Improve the safety and efficiency of the town’s transportation network by encouraging use of alternate means of transportation where appropriate to minimize the number of vehicular trips using the roadway network.” Multimodal mobility was also an important consideration of the recently completed Johnnie Dodds Boulevard Mobility Study, and is a key element of the 2006 Plan Update.

As part of the 2006 Plan Update study, current CARTA transit service within the Town was assessed. CARTA currently offers one transit route (#40) daily (including Saturday and Sunday) connecting the Town of Mount Pleasant with downtown Charleston. Route 40 travels from Mary Street/Meeting Street in downtown Charleston to US 17/Hwy 41, making stops at Patriots Point, US 17/Walmart, Mt. Pleasant Town Centre and Target/Seaside Farm before reaching the end of the route at US 17/Hwy 41. Headways along Route 40 are approximately one hour, with the first bus leaving Mary Street / Meeting Street at 6:38 AM and the last bus ending at Mt. Pleasant Town Centre at 9:46 PM. CARTA continues to work on developing an express route (park and ride) that will eventually use the Johnnie Dodds Boulevard corridor. CARTA also operates four other local circulation routes within the Town:

• Route 401 – Sullivan’s Island • Route 402 – Isle of Palms • Route 410 – Long Point FLEXROUTE • Route 4N – East Cooper Late Night Flex Route

These routes operate as “flex routes.” The flex route transports passengers within a designated zone to any other point within the zone. Flex routes operate as a demand- response service and the route traveled by the flex route varies from trip to trip. Passengers call CARTA to make a reservation for service. All of the routes are operated weekdays and Saturday; Route 401 also operates on Sunday. Route 4N operates at night, from 10:30 PM to 1:00 AM, weekdays and Saturday.

Figure 6 presents the existing CARTA route locations within the Town. CARTA has recently added bicycle racks as an additional multimodal enhancement on all of its buses. The racks hold two bikes, are simple to use, and accommodate most single-rider bicycles (including children’s and all-terrain bikes). CARTA routes are monitored regularly to assure that they respond to the market demands. The routes listed are current as of the time of the report.

Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities

The Town of Mount Pleasant has a network of 11.6 miles of bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Recent expansions to the Town’s bicycle and pedestrian system include the multipurpose lane along the new Ravenel Bridge and completion of the Patriot’s Point Nature Trail. As part of the 2006 Plan Transportation Update study, sidewalks and bicycle facility locations were identified. Figure 7 presents the existing bicycle and pedestrian facilities within the Town. Existing pedestrian facilities along major roadways within the Town include: • Coleman Boulevard • Chuck Dawley Boulevard • Ben Sawyer Boulevard • Hungryneck Boulevard

December 2006 2-12

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

• Isle of Palms Connector • Rifle Range Road • Long Point Road • Venning Road • Six Mile Road • Hamlin Road • Park West/Dunes West Boulevards • SC 41 Phillips Community • Mathis Ferry Road • Whipple Road

Several newer residential developments, including the neo-traditional I’On development, incorporate sidewalk facilities in their design. Many existing local streets also have sidewalk facilities. All future residential developments will also include sidewalk construction based on the current Mount Pleasant development ordinance. Bicycle facilities within the Town include the Coleman Boulevard bicycle lanes and a multipurpose lane along the new Ravenel Bridge. Additional on-street bicycle amenities exist throughout the various residential streets within the Town.

The South Carolina State Trails Plan (2002) identifies several proposed trails within the vicinity of Mount Pleasant. The East Coast Greenway hiking/mountain biking trail is a proposed trail that will connect Florida to Maine, running through Mount Pleasant and Charleston County. A specific route within Mount Pleasant has not been identified.

December 2006 2-13

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Figure 6

December 2006 2-14

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Figure 7

December 2006 2-15

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Performance of the Existing System

Early in the development of the 2006 Transportation Plan Update, several performance measures were selected as indicators of system performance. The following paragraphs provide an overview of the current performance measure applied to assess multi-modal systems in the Town.

Roadway Network

Performance of the roadway system is often analyzed using LOS measures, trends in growth of traffic volumes and overall safety statistics. The LOS ranges from A to E, and at times to F, in those portions of the system where congestion is worse. Growth in traffic volumes has been especially strong along Johnnie Dodds Boulevard, US 17 and US 41, producing LOS E along each facility. Reduced traffic speeds and longer trip times are consequences of congested traffic road conditions.

Transit Service

Performance of transit service is often measured qualitatively by the number of available transit routes and trends in transit ridership. CARTA service has increased since completion of the 2000 Transportation Plan, when service included only two fixed routes in addition to demand-response services. The March 2005 CARTA Routing Study and “New CARTA Plan” developed by Wilbur Smith and Associates, Inc., led to transit system enhancements for Mount Pleasant effective Jan 1, 2006. Specific enhancements included the addition of “Dial-a-Ride” service, including late services for the East Cooper & James Island area. The need for improving transit service, both regular bus service and travel demand management alternatives (vanpool, carpool and express bus service), has been identified in other studies.

Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities

Performance of the bicycle and pedestrian network is often measured quantitatively by the number and mileage of bicycle and pedestrian projects completed, under construction and programmed. The Town of Mount Pleasant has been actively increasing their bicycle and pedestrian network as a means of providing alternate travel options to the single-occupant vehicle.

Each of these performance measures were used to evaluate current and public transportation conditions and to identify recommendations.

December 2006 2-16

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

13 Mount Pleasant in 2030

The Town of Mount Pleasant is expected to continue to grow at a fast rate over the next 25 years. There are 15 proposed and/or ongoing major developments within Mount Pleasant at the present time. The 15 developments are spaced equally, with half located east of I-526 and the other half west (of an imaginary line from I-526 extending southwards.) This current program of development is expected to result in the following:

• Almost 17,000 new residential units (single-family and multi-family homes, town homes and condominiums) • Approximately 1.9 million square feet of commercial and retail space • Approximately 1,250 new hotel rooms • Expansion of the East Cooper Regional Medical Center near east of Bowman Road and north of Johnnie Dodds Boulevard

Figure 8 presents the location and relevant data about each of the 15 proposed and ongoing major developments.

As presented in Section 1 – Plan Development Process, SE data control totals used for analysis in the Town of Mount Pleasant travel demand model included population, households and employment adjusted to reflect Town estimates. Differences between the Town of Mount Pleasant and CHATS projections do not impact the results; the differences affect how soon the identified transportation improvements will be needed. Table 9 provides the different projections. Table 9 Differences in Socioeconomic Data Projections CHATS Model Town of Mount Pleasant 2003 2030 2003 2030 Population 62,700 97,900 *62,000 95,000 Employment 20,500 23,485 20,506 38,000 *The Town’s planning staff developed the SE data for the town model using the existing land use plan and specific information about developable land.

According to Town of Mount Pleasant staff estimates, the population in 2003 was approximately 62,000, and is forecast to grow to approximately 95,000 persons by 2030. Figure 9 presents the projected 2003-2030 population change by TAZ. As indicated on Figure 9, approximately 70 percent of the Town’s population will reside west of the imaginary line extending south from I-526, while the remaining 30 percent of the population is projected to reside east of this imaginary line.

The Town of Mount Pleasant estimates employment in 2003 was approximately 20,506 jobs, and is expected to grow to more than 38,000 jobs by 2030. The CHATS control totals anticipate that the Town’s employment will be approximately 23,485 by 2030. Figure 10 presents the 2003-2030 employment change by TAZ. As indicated on Figure 10, approximately 60 percent of the Town’s jobs will be located west of the imaginary line extending south from I-526, while the remaining 40 percent of the jobs are projected to be located east of this imaginary line. The 2006 Transportation Plan Update uses the more aggressive employment figures, which results in transportation needs being identified earlier than would be anticipated if more conservative employment growth were assumed.

December 2006 3-1

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Figure 8

December 2006 3-2

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Figure 9

December 2006 3-3

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Figure 10

December 2006 3-4

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

14 Needs Assessment

Assessment of transportation needs for the road system was guided by current and future performance of the system. Both Figure 5 and Table 7 (previously shown) showed the results of the existing conditions assessment with roadway segments currently over capacity in the 2003 model base year. As growth continues through 2030, road travel conditions are expected to worsen unless necessary improvements are implemented.

2030 E + C Network

Several improvements are currently programmed to provide relief for specific congestion “hot spots.” The 2030 Existing plus Committed (E+C) network is comprised of the existing roadway network plus programmed or “committed” projects. The Existing plus Committed projects are “existing” projects included in the model network that have been completed or under construction since 2003, plus “committed” projects in the program for which funding has been secured for right-of-way acquisition or construction. A listing of the committed projects for the 2006 Plan Update is presented in Table 10 and on Figure 11. These projects are part of the CHATS TIP, the Town’s Transportation Capital Improvement Program, or are required development mitigation projects, and are expected to be completed and open to the public. As the Travel demand model projects 2030 traffic conditions, the assumption is that E+C improvements to the system may not be sufficient to meet future demands.

Figures 12 and 13 present the 2030 E+C traffic volumes and LOS results, respectively. Deficient road segments (conditions worse than LOS D) are summarized below:

• Johnnie Dodds Boulevard from Ravenel Bridge to I-526 • US 17 from I-526 to SC 41 • Mathis Ferry Road from Anna Knapp to Whipple Road • Rifle Range Road from Appling Drive to Bowman Road • Hungryneck Boulevard Phase I • Ben Sawyer Boulevard from Center Street to Palm Boulevard • Isle of Palm Connector from Rifle Range to the Town line • Long Point Road from Whipple Road to US 17 • Rifle Range Road from IOP Connector to James Jefferson Road • US 17 from Porchers Bluff Road to Darrell Creek Trail • SC 41 from US 17 to Parker’s Island Road

Completion of the committed improvements will facilitate network operations, but the projected growth in population and employment will continue to burden the roadway system. Travel demand model results show approximately 34 percent of the regionally- significant roadway miles within the Town in congested conditions (LOS E or F)8 in 2030.

8 34 % is based upon 29.0 miles of the 84 miles of regionally-significant roadways included in the Town of Mount Pleasant travel demand model being at LOS E or F for the 2030 E+C scenario. Regionally-significant roads are those that provide regional connectivity.

December 2006 4-1

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Table 10 Committed Projects

Lanes

Road Type Project Description Termini Existing Planned Included LRTP in CHATS Project ID E+C Plan Widen existing 4-lane facility to 1 US 17 Widening I-526 IOP Connector 4 6 X 6-lane Widen existing 2-lane facility to 2 IOP SB/EB Widening US 17 Rifle Range Road 2 3 X 3 lanes Hungryneck New location (3 lanes) 3 Boulevard New Road extending west to Bowman Rd HNB Phase I Bowman Road 0 3 X Phase II from existing alignment Hungryneck New location (3 lanes) 4 Boulevard New Road extending east to Six Mile Rd. IOP Connector Six Mile Road 0 3 X Phase III from existing alignment Widen existing 2-lane facility to Mathis Ferry 5 Whipple Road Widening Long Point Road 2 3 X 3 lanes Road New location (3 lanes) Wingo Way Existing Wingo 6 New Road connecting Wingo Way to Patriots Point Road 0 3 Extension Way Patriots Point Widen existing 2-lane facility to Mathis Ferry 7 Bowman Road Widening US 17 2 3 X 3 lanes Road Widen existing 2-lane facility to Hungryneck 8 Bowman Road Widening US 17 2 5 X 5-lane Boulevard Phase II Porchers Bluff Widen existing 2-lane facility to 9 Widening US 17 2200 ft from US 17 2 3 X Road 3 lanes South Morgan’s Point Frontage New location (2-lane) frontage South Morgan’s 10 New Road Porchers Bluff Road 0 2 X Road road south of US 17 Point Road Extension New location (2-lane) north of Carolina Park 11 Park Boulevard New Road Park West 0 2 X US 17 Boulevard

December 2006

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Figure 11

December 2006 4-3

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Figure 12

December 2006 4-4

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Figure 13

December 2006 4-5

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Past Planned Projects Not Needed Based Upon Technical Analysis The Bowman Road widening project (from Hungryneck Boulevard Ph. II to Rifle Range Road) that was identified on the 2000 plan is not recommended based upon results of the travel demand model. Future Projects Analyzed In addition to the committed projects listed above, projects from several other sources were also considered for evaluation. These sources included the following: • CHATS 2030 financially-constrained LRTP • CHATS 2030 “Vision” plan project list • Other projects identified by the Town through past planning efforts and/or needs analysis • Projects suggested through Community Input

Figure 14 presents the projects analyzed with the travel demand model.

Roadway Operational Analysis

As discussed earlier, the Plan Update utilized a refined TransCAD travel demand model developed as part of the Johnnie Dodds Boulevard Mobility Study. The refined travel demand model was used to determine future needs for the roadway transportation network, as well as testing transportation improvement projects. As previously discussed, the socioeconomic (SE) data utilized for the refined Town model was developed by the Town planning staff.

Level-of-service (LOS) was the primary performance measure utilized to determine the effectiveness of potential transportation improvement projects. As part of the testing procedures, “pairs” of model runs were completed (both with and without each respective transportation improvement project) to assess project effectiveness. LOS results for each model run pair were analyzed side-by-side to determine the LOS improvement respective to each project tested. LOS results for the model pair runs were reviewed to identify LOS improvements both within the immediate vicinity of each improvement, as well as area-wide changes (e.g. to assess the impacts of tested projects on other nearby roadway facilities). Table 11 presents a listing of the future transportation projects considered; Appendix B presents a detailed summary of the results of the transportation project tests completed.

Intersection Operational Analysis

Although the travel demand model is not meant to replace more detailed micro-simulation intersection analyses, the travel demand model can be used as a screening tool to identify potential “critical” intersections requiring further study. Specifically, these “critical” intersections are identified as those intersections with LOS deficiencies isolated to roadway segments immediately adjacent to these intersections. Another method currently used by the Town to identify deficient intersection operations at “critical” intersections is the Town’s Traffic Impact Assessment Process (TIAP) and Quick Response System (QRS) II travel demand model. The Town’s TIAP provides a means for TOMP staff to identify roadway segments that may adversely be impacted by new developments (although the TIAP is not intended to replace more detailed traffic impact analyses for proposed developments).

December 2006 4-6

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Travel demand model analyses for the 2006 Plan Update indicate several isolated locations where deficiencies (LOS E or F) conditions exist. While all of these locations may not warrant full-roadway widening, intersection operations may be improved through implementation of intersection-only projects such as installation of turn lanes and/or improvements to intersection traffic control. Specific locations of such “critical intersections” include the following locations:

• Coleman Boulevard / Ben Sawyer Boulevard / Chuck Dawley Boulevard – Future improvements along this segment will follow recommendations included in the Coleman Boulevard Revitalization Plan.

• Rifle Range Road / IOP - Model results indicate that IOP south of Rifle Range Road will experience LOS “E” conditions in 2030 after implementation of the committed projects (2030 E+C model run). The segment of IOP north of Rifle Range to US 17 will be widened from two to three lanes (committed project), and is projected to experience LOS “C” or better conditions by 2030.

The 2000 transportation plan recommended a 2-to-4 lane widening on IOP from US 17 to the bridge, and a study of feasibility of restriping the bridge as a three or four lane facility. Although the results of the technical analysis indicate the IOP south of Rifle Range will operate between LOS D and E, there are several other related factors that may warrant the recommendations in the 2000 plan. Specifically, the high volumes of weekend beach traffic as well as the fact that IOP is a hurricane evacuation route, should also be considered as part any future improvement considerations for IOP. The 2000 plan recommendations are, therefore, valid and recommended as part of this plan update.

• Rifle Range Road / Porchers Bluff – This project is programmed for completion in early 2007.

• JDB – The JDB Mobility Study included an intensive analysis of existing and future operations along the JDB corridor (from the new Ravenel Bridge to I-526). Appendix C presents a summary of the analyses completed for the JDB Mobility Study and a copy of the Town Council action taken subsequent to the Study.

It should be noted that other segments showing up as deficient may be mitigated through well-designed intersection improvements. There are several cases where such intersections operational improvements need to be considered:

a) Segments not recommended for widening or without connections to new alignments b) Segments associated with recommended widening or connection to new alignments that will require satisfactory intersection design to accommodate projected traffic volumes

Finally, not all intersection improvements will prove to be feasible due to location-specific constraints and issues (e.g. constructability, environmental, cultural, cost, etc.) that may render certain improvements prohibitive. An example of this is the Long Point Road / Whipple Road intersection.

December 2006 4-7

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Figure 14

December 2006 4-8

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Table 11 Future Projects Analyzed Lanes Included in CHATS Plan Road Type Project Description Termini LRTP Existing Planned Project ID

New urban interchange and I-526/US 17 New X 12 bridge connecting I-526 and I-526/HNB US 17 - - (financially- Interchange Interchange HNB Ph. 1 over US 17 constrained plan) Park West Widen existing 2-lane facility Current End Bessemer 13 Widening 2 4 Boulevard to 4-lane of 4-lane Road JDB Grade separations at Houston- Improvements Houston-Northcutt/Mathis North Corridor Ferry and Bowman Rd with Bowman 14 Boulevard/ 4 4 Improvements JDB maintaining 4-lane Road Mathis Ferry between these two Road interchanges Widen existing 4-lane facility IOP X 15 US 17 Widening SC 41 4 6 (financially- to 6-lane Connector constrained plan) Hungryneck New location (3 lanes) Six Mile Porchers 16 Boulevard Phase New Road connecting Six Mile Rd. to 0 3 Road Bluff Road IV Porchers Bluff Rd. SC 41 Widen existing 2-lane facility US 17 Bessemer X 17 Widening 2 4 (financially- to 4-lane Road constrained plan) SC 41 Widen existing 2-lane facility County Line / X 18 Widening Dunes West 2 4 (financially- to 4-lane Bridge constrained plan) IOP Connector Widen existing 2/3-lane 20 Widening US 17 Bridge 2/3 4 facility to 4-lane I-526/US 17 NB Interchange Add ramp on NB I-526 from T1 ramp from WB US 17 WB I-526 NB - - Modification WB US 17 US 17 I-526/Mathis Ferry Road New Partial Add partial interchange at Mathis Ferry T2A I-526 - - Partial Interchange Mathis Ferry Road and I-526 Road Interchange

December 2006

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Table 11 Future Projects Analyzed Lanes Included in CHATS Plan Road Type Project Description Termini LRTP Existing Planned Project ID

I-526/Mathis Add partial interchange at Ferry Road New Partial Mathis Ferry Road and I-526, Partial Mathis Ferry T2B Interchange with Mathis Ferry Road I-526 - - Interchange with Road with Widening widening from I-526 on-ramp Mathis Ferry to Whipple Road Rd.Widening New location (5-lane) on Hungryneck existing Hungryneck IOP Porchers T3A Boulevard Phase New Road 0 5 Boulevard alignment to Connector Bluff Road III and IV Porchers Bluff Rd. New location (5-lane) on existing Hungryneck Hungryneck Boulevard alignment to IOP Porchers T3B Boulevard Phase New Road Porchers Bluff Rd. with direct 0 5 Connector Bluff Road III and IV SC 41 connection from Hungryneck Boulevard Phase IV Hungryneck Boulevard Phase IV aligned north of US 17 New location (3 lanes) Long Point T4A Between Long New Road connecting Long Point Rd. to SC 41 0 3 Road Point Road and SC 41 north of US 17 SC 41

Hungryneck New location (3 lanes) Boulevard Phase connecting Long Point Rd. to Long Point T4B New Road SC 41 0 3 IV aligned north SC 41 north of US 17 and Road of US 17 with direct connection from

December 2006

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Table 11 Future Projects Analyzed Lanes Included in CHATS Plan Road Type Project Description Termini LRTP Existing Planned Project ID

direct connection Porchers Bluff Road and SC from Porchers 41 north of US 17 Bluff Rd. to SC 41 Hungryneck Boulevard Phase IV aligned north of US 17 between Long Point Road and New location (3 lanes) SC 41, with Long Point T4C New Road connecting Long Point Rd. to SC 41 0 3 realignment of Road SC 41 north of US 17 Long Point Road to the north, and direct connection to Hungryneck Boulevard Phase III south of US 17

Johnnie Dodds Grade separations at Boulevard Houston Northcutt Houston widening to 6- Blvd/Mathis Ferry Rd.and Northcutt X Lane with 4-Lane Corridor Bowman T5 Bowman Rd (4 lane) with Boulevard / 4 6 (Vision urban Improvements Road JDB widening to 6-lanes Mathis Ferry Plan) interchanges at between these two Road Houston interchanges Northcutt Blvd. and Bowman Road

December 2006

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Table 11 Future Projects Analyzed Lanes Included in CHATS Plan Road Type Project Description Termini LRTP Existing Planned Project ID

I-526 exit ramp Add exit ramp off I-526 SB into vicinity of Interchange T6 connecting into new hospital East Cooper Modification road and Bowman Road Medical Center Von Kolnitz / Old Add Johnnie Dodds Georgetown Boulevard flyover ramp from Old Rd.connector and Von Kolnitz Rd. connecting to Von Kolnitz T7A New Road Georgetown 0 2 overpass at Old Georgetown Road with Road Road Johnnie Dodds overpass at Johnnie Dodds Boulevard Boulevard and Bowman Road Von Kolnitz / Old Add Johnnie Dodds Georgetown Boulevard flyover ramp from Rd.connector Old Von Kolnitz Rd. connecting to Von Kolnitz T7B without the New Road Georgetown 0 2 Old Georgetown Road Road overpass at Road without the overpass at JDB JDB/Bowman and Bowman Road Road US 17/SC 41 New New interchange at US 17 T8 US 17 SC 41 - - Interchange Interchange and SC 41 Widen existing 4-lane facility I-526 Hungryneck T9 US 17 Widening 4 6 to 6 lanes Overpass Boulevard Widen existing 2-lane facility Bessemer Dunes West X T10A SC 41 Widening 2 4 (financially- to 4 lanes Road Boulevard constrained plan) Widen existing 2-lane facility Bessemer Dunes West T10B SC 41 Widening 2 3 to 3 lanes Road Boulevard Widen existing 4 lanes facility Porchers T11 US 17 Widening SC 41 4 6 to 6-lane Bluff Road Construct frontage road Frontage Road Park West T12 New Road extension of Park Boulevard SC 41 0 2 North of US 17 Boulevard to SC 41

December 2006

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Transit Needs Analysis

The 2000 Plan referenced the East Cooper Transportation Feasibility Study (ECTFS) and its recommendations for several transit improvements that would increase transit service within Mount Pleasant. In the year 2000, service was limited to two fixed routes and demand- response service. The ECTFS recommended the addition of three new transit circulators and two new seasonal circulators, in addition to several other service enhancements such as increased headways. These recommendations would significantly expand existing CARTA service, which includes one direct route linking Mount Pleasant with downtown Charleston, and four local demand response circulators within the Town.

The transit service plan designated the “New CARTA Plan”, was developed as part of the CARTA Routing Study (March 2005) completed by Wilbur Smith Associates (WSA). The New CARTA Plan enhancements were intended to improve service to a higher level than that prior to service cuts conducted in 2003. The recommended transit service network includes four primary types of service: express routes, local routes, neighborhood circulators, and demand- response “zone” services. The plan recommendations for the Mount Pleasant area are summarized below:

• Express Routes: o East/West route connecting Mount Pleasant, downtown Charleston, and West Ashley; and o East/North route connecting Mount Pleasant, Daniel Island, and North Charleston • Demand-Response Service Zones: o Mount Pleasant Area • Late-Night Demand-Response Service Zones: o Mount Pleasant Area

A summary of the operating characteristics of the East Cooper recommended routes of the “New CARTA Plan” follows:

Hours of Operation Frequency (min) Route Weekday Saturday Sunday Peak Off-Peak 4 – North/East 6-9 AM No Service No Service 30-60 No Express 3-6 PM Service 40 – Mount 6 AM – 10 6 AM – 10 9 AM – 9 PM 60 60 Pleasant PM PM 401 – 6 AM – 8 9 AM – 8 PM 9 AM – 6 PM 60 60 Sullivan’s PM Island 402 – Isle of 6 AM – 8 9 AM – 8 PM 9 AM – 6 PM 60 60 Palms PM 410 – Long 6 AM – 8 9 AM – 8 PM 9 AM – 6 PM 60 60 Point D-R PM Zone 4N – Late 8 PM – 1 8 PM – 1 AM 6 PM – 1 AM No Service 60 Night Zone AM Service Bold = Recommended for Phase I Implementation of “New CARTA Plan”

December 2006 4-13

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Figure 15 presents the locations of the WSA Study recommended routes and services.

Off-model analyses of transit need considered a combination of 2000 US Census SE data and existing CARTA service. The study considered the potential markets for express bus/vanpool services and for additional local service. Express bus/vanpool services typically serve commuter trips. The study analyzed the geographic correlation between higher income population distribution and non-retail employment clusters/ activity centers. The intent of the analysis was to determine the potential for express bus service that could be marketed to typical population groups that use the service. Figure 16 presents Mount Pleasant median family income distribution (based upon 2000 US Census information). The figure indicates the census tracts with median income below and above the Town average of $58,927.

The concentration of households with higher income levels indicates a potential for possible express bus/vanpool services marketed to target communities in the Town of Mount Pleasant. Generally, the majority of Census tracts within Mount Pleasant in 1999 had median family income above the US average of $50,046. The more affluent areas in Mount Pleasant, with the most potential for express bus/vanpool services, generally include areas lying north of US 17 in the study area.

Information from the CHATS 2030 LRTP indicates that the areas with the highest employment density/greatest concentration of employment centers are located in the western parts of Mount Pleasant, downtown Charleston, and areas of North Charleston. Typically, successful destinations for express bus service are areas with high concentrations of non-retail employment. These target destination areas were identified using maps provided in the CHATS 2030 LRTP.

Mean travel time to work information from the 2000 US Census was also reviewed to assess trip times for Mount Pleasant commuters. Figure 17 presents the mean travel times for Mount Pleasant residents, which indicates the highest mean travel times (greater than 30.9 minutes) were experienced by residents east of Long Point Road and Hamlin Road. Express bus and vanpool services in the Town of Mount Pleasant have potential for providing needed service and should be explored further by the Town in coordination with CARTA.

Analysis of the need for additional local transit service included a review of low income demographic data against the existing CARTA service area. The intent of the review was to determine the adequacy of service coverage based upon locations of transit dependent populations (usually those with low income). Figure 18 shows the concentrations of persons below poverty level in the Mount Pleasant area from the 2000 Census. Based upon this assessment, the following areas had the highest percentage of persons below the poverty level, and likely the greatest need for transit services: south of US 17 east of Hamlin Road, and south of Shem Creek and west of Ben Sawyer Boulevard.

December 2006 4-14

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Figure 15

December 2006 4-15

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Figure 16

December 2006 4-16

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Figure 17

December 2006 4-17

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Figure 18

December 2006 4-18

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

In general, the need for improved transit service is greatest along corridors that are expected to experience severe congestion. Major commute corridors expected to operate primarily at LOS E or F in 2030 include:

• US 17 east of I-526 • Long Point Road east of Whipple Road • SC 41 south of Bessemer Road

Based upon existing service, the WSA Study recommendations and the express bus/vanpool and local transit service analyses, several findings identified are presented below:

• Low income areas west of I-526 are generally served by existing bus routes, but could benefit from improved service/frequency. • The East/West express route (connecting Mount Pleasant, downtown Charleston & West Ashley) included in the “New CARTA Plan”, should be implemented. • Opportunity exists for vanpool service from middle/high income areas to secondary non- retail employment centers (East Cooper Regional Medical Center, Port terminals, and commercial districts along Johnnie Dodds Boulevard and Coleman Boulevard).

Review of Projects from 2000 Transportation Plan

The recommended projects from the 2000 Transportation Plan were reviewed to identify the current status. Tables 12, 13 and 14 present a summary and status of the 2000 Plan projects by short, medium and long-range projects, respectively, as recommended in the 2000 Plan.

Select projects recommended from the 2000 plan and already completed were marked as “existing” for the 2006 Update Plan. Other 2000 plan projects currently programmed in the regional transportation planning process with committed funding were marked “committed.” Other identified projects that do not yet have a dedicated funding source, which the analysis showed are still needed, were marked as “recommended” by the type of project (roadway capacity, roadway operational, and/or bicycle and pedestrian). Those 2000 plan projects, recommended (or not recommended) in the 2006 Plan Update, are also noted accordingly.

December 2006 4-19

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Table 12 2000 Plan: Status of Short-Range Recommended Projects Project Status

Not Recommended for 2006 LRTP Update Committed Recommended 2006 LRTP Project (estimated completion Roadway Roadway Time Period Project Description Existing year) Operations Intersection Bicycle / Pedestrian Short-Range Operations / warrant study and signalization (2000-2002) at two intersections: SC 41 at Dunes West Blvd. x Whipple Rd. at Mathis Ferry Rd. x Center turn lane on Whipple Rd. 2007 Bike lanes on Whipple Rd. 2007 Intersection improvements at six locations: Rifle Range Rd. at Venning Rd. X Rifle Range Rd. at Six Mile Rd. x Rifle Range Rd. at Hamlin Rd. x Mathis Ferry Rd. at Muirhead Rd. x / roundabout x / monitor for Mathis Ferry Rd. at Anna Knapp Blvd. x / turn lanes signal warrant x / likely with hospital Mathis Ferry Rd. at Von Kolnitz Rd. expansion Hungryneck Blvd. from US 17 to Isle of Palms Connector x Realignment of Mathis Ferry Rd. approach at US17; x center turn lane between US 17 and I-526 overpass Widening of Long Point Rd. to five lanes from Wando x Terminal to Whipple Rd. Widening of Patriots Point Rd. and intersection x / additional improvements at improvements at Coleman Blvd. Coleman likely New connecting road between Paul Foster Dr. and Long Point Rd. x / Belle Point Drive Subarea study in vicinity of Wando High School x Subarea study in vicinity of Patriots Point x Signal timing / coordination study along US 17 corridor x Signal timing / coordination study along SC 703 corridor 2007 or sooner

December 2006

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Table 13 2000 Plan: Status of Mid-Range Recommended Projects Project Status

Not Recommended for 2006 LRTP Update Committed Recommended 2006 LRTP Project (estimated completion Roadway Intersection Time Period Project Description Existing year) Operations Operations Bicycle / Pedestrian Mid-Range Extension of Wingo Way to Patriots Point Rd. with bike lanes and turn (2003-2007) lane improvements 2007 open to traffic On-ramp from SB Wingo Way to SB US 17 at Cooper River x Flyover ramps to/from I-526 and Hungryneck Blvd. at US 17 x Widening US 17 (six lanes and median) from I-526 to Isle of Palms Connector June 2006 completion

Widening Isle of Palms Connector (four lanes and median) from Additional EB lane on IOP from X Seaside Farms entrance to US 17 US 17 to Rifle Range; completed June 2006 New roadway (two lanes) parallel to US 17 between Darrel Creek Rd. and Park West Blvd. 2008 completion between Park West and Carolina Blvd Bowman Rd. corridor improvements: Widening (5 lanes) from HNB Phase II to US 17 2008 Center turn lane from US17 to Mathis Ferry Rd. 2008 Section from Rifle Center turn lane from Rifle Range Rd. to Hungry Neck Blvd., Range to HNB Ph II not Phase II recommended Signalizing intersection at Mathis Ferry Rd. x x (sidewalks to be installed on each side in Bike lanes along entire length on each side widening)

New roadway (HNB Phase II - 3 lanes) between Hungryneck Blvd. 2007 open to traffic; Ph. I to intersection of Bowman Rd. south of Stuart Engals Blvd. alignment connects south of Stuart Engals Blvd Reconstruction of SC 41 and US 17 intersection x Complete gaps in bicycle facility network: Upgrade / extension of existing Mathis Ferry Rd. path x Will be evaluated as part of Coleman Blvd Extension of existing bike lanes on Coleman Blvd. Revitalization Project X (HNB will serve as east-west bike/ped Bike lanes on Rifle Range Rd. (Ben Sawyer to IOP) "spine") North / south bicycle corridor from SC 703 to Long Point Rd. X Center turn lane on Magrath Darby Rd. X Isle of Palms Connector restriping feasibility study X

December 2006

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Table 14 2000 Plan: Status of Long-Range Recommended Projects Project Status

Not Recommended for 2006 LRTP Update Committed Recommended 2006 LRTP Project (estimated completion Roadway Intersections Time Period Project Description Existing year) Operations Operations Bicycle / Pedestrian Long-Range Reconstruction of US 17 from Cooper River to I-526 as (2008-2015) a controlled access parkway with interchanges at: Implementation of Magrath Darby Rd. / Houston Northcutt Blvd. JDB Mobility Study Shellmore Blvd. Recommendations Anna Knapp Blvd. Bowman Rd. Upgrading US 17 parallel access roads in conjunction with parkway development x Widening US 17 (six lanes with median) from Isle of Palms Connector to SC 41 x Widening SC 41 (four lanes with median and bike lanes) x (4 lanes from US 17 to Bessemer Road; 3 lanes from Bessemer to Dunes from US 17 to Dunes West Pkwy. West Blvd) x Extension of Hungryneck Blvd. (four lanes with median and bike lanes) from Isle of Palms Connector to SC 41 xx x (Recommend subarea study to analyze specific needs to Park West Blvd/Dunes West Widening of Park West Blvd. (four lanes with median) Blvd vicinity) X (Frontage Road design will include Multi-use path along US 17 from SC 41 to Park West Blvd. bike/ped treatments)

December 2006

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Since the completion of the 2000 LRTP, there have been several major studies completed and/or changes in proposed project specifications. The following summarizes the major differences between the 2000 Transportation Plan and the 2006 Plan update.

• JDB Recommendations: The completion of the JDB Mobility Study in March 2006 provided a detail set of findings and recommendations for this corridor (Houston Northcutt Boulevard to Bowman Road) in addition to the JDB frontage roads. Appendix C presents the Executive Summary from the JDB Mobility Study and copy of subsequent Town Council motion and action on the specific study recommendations. The corresponding projects for the 2006 Plan update are No. 14/T5 on Figure 14, with No. T5 recommended (Figure 23).

• US 17 Widening from I-526 overpass to HNB Phase I: The results of the technical analysis for the 2006 Plan Update indicates that a 6-lane widening of US 17 from the I- 526 overpass to HNB Phase I provides improved LOS. Additional detailed operational analysis is recommended to address the interchanges at each end of this segment. The corresponding project for the 2006 Plan update is No. T9 on Figures 14 and 23.

• SC 41 Widening: The widening of SC 41 from US 17 to the County line has been analyzed as part of the 2006 Plan Update through project Nos. 10A/10B and 17 on Figure 14 (No. 10B and 17 are recommended on Figure 23). Results of the technical analysis completed as part of the 2006 Plan Update indicates that SC 41 from US 17 to Bessemer Road should be widened from 2 to 4 lanes, and the section from Bessemer Road to Dunes West Boulevard should be widening from 2 to 3 lanes. Widening from Dunes West Boulevard to the County Line is not recommended based upon the results of the technical analysis, and should be modified as such in the CHATS LRTP.

• Improvements East of SC 41: Several projects were analyzed as part of the 2006 Plan Update in the vicinity east of the SC 41 / US 17 intersection including:

o Nos. 9 – Porchers Bluff Road widening o Nos. 10 – S. Morgan’s Point Road extension (connecting to Porchers Bluff Road) o No. T3A and T4B – Included direct connection from Porchers Bluff to SC 41 o No. T12 – Frontage Road north of US 17.

Projects Nos. 9, 10 are recommended Phase I projects in the 2006 Plan Update (Figure 22), and projects T3A and T12 recommended Phase II projects (Figure 23).

• Park West Boulevard: Results of the technical analysis for the 2006 Plan Update does not indicate the need for a 2 to 4 lane widening of Park West Boulevard. However, due to the presence of several schools and associated peak period congestion along the corridor, a more refined “sub-area” study and analysis is recommended to determine specific roadway and intersection improvements that may be warranted. The recommended sub-area study should be completed prior to initiation of the next plan update.

• Magrath Darby Widening: Results of the technical analysis for the 2006 Plan Update does not indicate the need for widening Magrath Darby Boulevard, as included in the 2000 Plan. However, intersection operational improvements and frontage road

December 2006 4-23

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

recommendations from the JDB Mobility Study are recommended, as presented in Appendix C. Additional detailed operational analysis is recommended to determine the need for widening of this roadway in light of the JDB Mobility Study recommendations and Council action.

Several other projects included in the 2000 Plan may also have merit for further consideration. These projects include intersection operational improvements at Mathis Ferry Road at Anna Knapp Boulevard, Mathis Ferry Road at Von Kolnitz Road, sub-area studies in the vicinity of Wando High School and Patriots Point, and the feasibility of re-striping the IOP bridge.

Bicycle / Pedestrian Needs Analysis

Several bicycle and pedestrian projects where included in the 2000 Transportation Plan; the following sections provide a status of these previously proposed projects:

2000 Plan Projects Completed • Multi-use path on new Ravenel Bridge • HNB Phase I multi-use path completed in 2004 • Mathis Ferry Road corridor: sidewalk upgrade and extension completed

2000 Plan Planned Projects Not Yet Completed • HNB Phase II multi-use path will connect to HNB Phase I multi-use path • HNB Phase III and IV multi-use path will connect to HNB Phase I multi-use path • Whipple Road bicycle lanes and sidewalks (scheduled for 2007 completion) • Wingo Way / Waterfront Memorial Park: sidewalks and other bicycle/pedestrian facilities anticipated • Coleman Boulevard: extension of bicycle lanes under consideration as part of Coleman Boulevard Revitalization Plan • Bowman Road bicycle lanes will be not be constructed, however sidewalks will be installed along both sides • SC 41 bicycle lanes / multi-use path if feasible as part of proposed roadway capacity expansion projects, and pursuant to Charleston County Complete Streets Ordinance

2000 Plan Planned Projects Not Recommended • North-south multi-use path from Chuck Dawley to Long Point Road – not feasible • Rifle Range Road bicycle lanes from Ben Sawyer Boulevard to IOP – HNB Phase I and II multi-use facility will serve as east-west bicycle spine in this vicinity • US 17 from SC 41 to Park West Boulevard – proposed US 17 frontage road will include multi-use facility to accommodate east-west bicycle mobility in this vicinity • Park West Boulevard bicycle lanes – not recommended due to existing 5-foot offline sidewalk along entire Park West Boulevard / Dunes West Boulevard corridor

Other proposed bicycle and pedestrian projects include the following: • Development of an east-west multi-use trail “spine” network along the existing and future phases of Hungryneck Boulevard; a secondary system of multi-use trails, bicycle lanes, and/or sidewalks is proposed to feed into the main HNB spine. • Sidewalk on IOP connector from bridge to Rifle Range Road • Sidewalk on Long Point Road from Needle Rush Parkway to US 17

December 2006 4-24

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Figure 19 presents the existing and proposed pedestrian facilities within the Town. The 2006 Transportation Plan Update recommendations increase the amount of bicycle and pedestrian facilities to 111.45 miles from the 11.6 miles included in the 2003 inventory of facilities.

The concept of “Complete Streets” ensures that all new and future roadway transportation improvement projects provide multi-modal treatments (e.g. sidewalks, multi-use paths, etc) where feasible. The Charleston County Transportation Advisory Board recently recommended that Charleston County adopt the proposed “Complete Streets” Ordinance ensuring such multi- modal enhancements on all new and retrofit roadway improvement projects.

The concept of “complete streets” is not new to the Town of Mount Pleasant. Completed projects such as Hungryneck Boulevard Ph. I, and planned projects such as the Whipple Road bike lanes and sidewalks (in concert with the addition of a third roadway lane) show the Town’s dedication to enhanced pedestrian and cyclist mobility as an alternative to motorized transportation.

The recently completed JDB Mobility Study is another example of the Town’s commitment to bicyclist and pedestrian mobility. The analyses and subsequent recommendations included in the JDB Mobility Study focused on both vehicular and pedestrian/bicycle mobility and safety. All future roadway improvement projects within the Town (SCDOT, County and Town sponsored projects) will continue to emphasize the “Complete Streets” concept, where feasible.

December 2006 4-25

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Figure 19

December 2006 4-26

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

15 Funding

Funding for transportation programs comes from a combination of federal, state and local sources. Federal funds flow through the regional transportation planning process administered by BCDCOG. Local sources typically include various general funds and special taxes programmed for transportation improvements, as well as private sector contributions for projects that represent economic development initiatives. As an active participant of the region’s planning process, the Town’s projects are programmed into the CHATS TIP. The following presents an overview of the federal, state and local funding sources available to Mount Pleasant for transportation improvement projects.9

Federal / State / Regional Funding Sources

Guide Share – This federal funding is available to each of the South Carolina MPOs and to Councils of Governments (COGs). The dollar amount is distributed based on population (the Town of Mount Pleasant is currently home to about 11 percent of the three-county area population). The CHATS allocation has been stable at $13.993 million per year. However, approximately $7 million per year of Guide Share funds through 2021 is committed to the CHATS Bonding Program. Additionally, CHATS committed the balance of its Guide Share funds through 2024 to cost-sharing agreements for the Charleston and Dorchester County transportation sales tax programs. Therefore, only a portion of Guide Share funding from 2025 to 2030 is assumed for use on Mount Pleasant projects. Guide Share funds are one of two dedicated funding sources at the State level allocated to the three-county BCDCOG (including CHATS area).

Enhancements – This federal funding is for projects that improve the transportation experience through landscaping, bicycle and pedestrian treatments, streetscapes, historic preservation, and visual enhancements along the transportation network. The CHATS enhancement funding totals $995,000 annually. Enhancements funding is the second of two dedicated funding sources for CHATS transportation improvements; however, enhancement funds are not included in the revenue analysis for the 2006 Transportation Plan Update since enhancement projects are not specifically recommended and enhancement funds are not usable for capacity improvements.

C-Funds – These state gas tax funds are allocated by SCDOT to each county for the purpose of transportation improvements. State law dictates that 25 percent of the funds be used on the State system roads located within the County. Charleston County administers its own funds and typically allocates about $1 million per year for intersection improvements.

CHATS Bonding Program – This program is part of SCDOT’s “27 in 7” bonding initiative. The CHATS LRTP has expended approximately $56 million in bond funding for projects within the BCDCOG area completed over the past ten years. Within Mount Pleasant, the Long Point Road widening from the State Ports Authority terminal to Whipple Road project was completed using funds from this program, as well as committed funds which are allocated for the US 17 widening from I-526 to the Isle of Palms Connector project.

9 Many of the definitions presented are taken from the CHATS 2030 LRTP.

December 2006 5-1

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

SC Transportation Infrastructure Bank (SIB) – The Transportation Infrastructure Bank selects and assists in financing major qualified projects by providing loans and other assistance for construction and improving highway and transportation facilities. The SIB recently assisted the newly constructed Ravenel Bridge project and has also committed funding towards the interchange at I-526 and Hungryneck Boulevard, which is expected to cost $40 million.

Charleston County (Half-Cent) Sales Tax - The Charleston County Transportation Sales Tax was approved in a county-wide referendum on November 2, 2004, with implementation by Charleston County business establishments beginning in May 2005. The one-half cent sales tax was approved for 25 years and is expected to generate $1.3 billion for Charleston County’s transportation system, including $847 million for roads, $235 million for public transportation, and $221 million for greenbelts.

The voters also approved $113 million in general obligation bonds ($36 million for greenbelts and $77 million for roadways), payable from proceeds of the Sales Tax program. Of this amount, $25 million is allocated to begin the right-of-way and engineering process for the proposed Johnnie Dodds Boulevard improvements from the Ravenel Bridge to the I-526 overpass. The County’s Comprehensive Transportation Plan proposes that an additional $35M be committed to completion of the Johnnie Dodds Boulevard improvements.

In addition to bonded funding from the Sales Tax program, the County’s Comprehensive Transportation Plan proposes a $2 million annual allocation towards intersection improvements, for a total of $48 million during the life of the sales tax.

Earmarks

In addition to the funding committed by the SIB and the Charleston County (Half-Cent) Sales Tax, the Town has several earmarks for 2006 Plan Update recommended projects, including:

• Bowman Road: $8.1 million (federal earmark) • Wingo Way Extension: $1.0 million (state earmark)

Other Fund Sources

There are a number of federal funding sources from the FTA that assist in implementation of transit projects, including carpooling, vanpooling, express bus and other transit services. FTA funds are used by CARTA for system operation and capital purchases of transit vehicles, but are not available for roadway improvements.

Local Funding Sources

The Town of Mount Pleasant has available funding sources for needed transportation projects, including:

Hospitality Tax (HT) – Hospitality tax revenues are utilized for various projects, such as a regional recreation center, visitor center, police, fire and public safety operations as well as road improvement projects.

December 2006 5-2

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Accommodations Tax (AT) – This tax revenue can be used to fund a variety of projects at the discretion of the Town Council. Transportation projects, including roadways, bicycle and pedestrian projects are potential applications.

General Fund (GF) – General funds have not historically been committed for road improvement projects.

Tax Increment Financing (TIF) – Revenues from this source have been used for transportation improvements. However, the TIF district revenue cap has been met and future funds are not available from this source.

Transportation Impact Fees (IF) – Revenues from transportation impact fees have funded and will continue to fund transportation improvements needed due to growth.

Other Funding – Revenues from Development Agreement commitments and funding anticipated from approved development impact assessment commitments fall into this category.

Table 15 presents a summary of the potential estimated transportation funding from 2006 to the 2030 horizon year. Forecasting funding sources is a difficult exercise and should always be approached with understanding of the assumptions that have been used in the development of the future prospectus. Estimates of future funding are conservative and utilize the best available data and assumptions. A summary of assumptions used in forecasting the Town of Mount Pleasant future funding follows:

• Federal funds are anticipated to increase 1.6 percent per year. This is the percent of growth for FHWA STP (Surface Transportation Program), which is the source for a majority of transportation improvements for urbanized areas. The assumption is made that the allocation of Guide Share funds to the BCDCOG area (including the Town of Mount Pleasant) from formula funds will track federal source changes. Since the Town of Mount Pleasant’s population is approximately 11 percent of the total area population, the assumption was made that 11% of funds would be assigned to Town projects. The 11% value was assigned to the uncommitted Guide Share funds that will be available between 2025 and 2030. • C-Funds are utilized for intersection improvement projects ($100K - $400K) and not for major infrastructure improvements. Historically, the Town of Mount Pleasant has received approximately 20 percent of the $1 million C-Fund annual appropriation. However, only a limited number of the 2006 Plan Update recommended projects are intersection improvement projects. Therefore, only $2 million of the $5 million in C-Funds expected to be allocated to Mount Pleasant between 2006 and 2030 was assumed for expenditure on Plan recommended intersection improvement projects and/or major infrastructure/capacity-type projects. • Although the Charleston County (Half-Cent) Sales Tax is expected to generate significant revenue for road improvements, the County’s Comprehensive Transportation Plan proposes only $70 million of bonded funds be spent on major capacity-type projects in Mount Pleasant. With regard to the Sales Tax annual intersection improvement allocation, only $3 million of the $7 million expected to be allocated to Mount Pleasant between 2006 and 2030 was assumed for expenditure on Plan recommended intersection improvement projects and/or major infrastructure/capacity-type projects.

December 2006 5-3

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Table 15 Potential Estimated Transportation Funding (2006-2030)

Funding by Source Federal State / County Local

Funding Period TOTAL C-FUNDS Earmarks Agreements Impact Fees Guide Share Programmed Programmed TOTAL LOCAL Hospitality Tax Appropriations State Earmarks STATE/COUNTY TOTAL FEDERAL 1/2-cent Sales Tax Other Development Development Other Phase I $ - $ 8,097,000 $ 8,097,000 $ 1,500,000 $750,000 $8,000,000 $10,250,000 $ 8,164,251 $ 1,375,000 $ - $ 17,260,000 $ 26,799,251 (2006-2011) Phase II $ 13,630,450 $ - $ 13,630,450 $ 71,500,000 $1,250,000 $33,000,000 $105,750,000 $ 81,502,451 $ 51,530,000 $ 5,375,000 $ 3,214,000 $ 141,621,451 (2012-2030) Total (2006-2030) $ 13,630,450 $ 8,097,000 $ 21,727,450 $ 73,000,000 $ 2,000,000 $ 41,000,000 $ 116,000,000 $ 89,666,702 $ 52,905,000 $ 5,375,000 $ 20,474,000 $ 168,420,702

Grand Total$ 306,148,151

December 2006

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

• Local funds were estimated based upon information provided by the Town. Impact fee revenue through 2013 is based upon the current uncommitted revenue schedule of $275,000 per year. For 2014-2030, a conservative 7% annual growth in revenue is assumed due to variations in commercial and residential construction, and the potential for impact fee credits for certain projects. Hospitality Tax revenue is based upon a 36% allocation for capacity-type improvements, and is assumed to have a 7.7% annual growth rate (based upon historical data). Other local revenues assumed through development agreements and approvals are $1.5 million for the widening of Park West Boulevard and $3.875 million for the widening of US 17 north of the IOP Connector to SC 41. The Town also has approximately $20.474 million that is already committed/appropriated for Plan projects. Accommodations Tax and General Funds have typically not been used for capacity-type improvements and are not utilized in the revenue forecast. Enhancement projects were not evaluated as part of the revenue analysis. The TIF district revenue cap has been met and is not utilized for the revenue forecast. • Federal funds for transit projects were not projected. The CHATS LRTP assumes that funding for CARTA will remain stable through 2030. Additional transit services to the Town of Mount Pleasant will require coordination with CARTA and decisions regarding potential state/local funding sources as well as the amount of funding that could be used for that purpose. • Funding for bicycle and pedestrian projects is available through Enhancement funds that are programmed in CHATS. The assumption was made that Enhancement funds would increase at the same pace as the STP funds referenced above, but will only be used for non-capacity-type improvements.

The total amount of funds potentially available for the Town of Mount Pleasant’s transportation program through 2030 is estimated at $ 306.148 million from federal, state, county and local sources. This value does not take into account the potential for bonding, the potential for additional private sector participation in select projects, or the use of local funds to leverage other funding sources. Figure 20 presents a summary of the anticipated 2030 available funding. Figure 21 presents the anticipated funding for the two planning period phases: Phase I (2006- 2011), and Phase II (2012-2030).

Figure 20 Estimated 2030 Transportation Funding $21,727,45

TOTALTOTAL FEDERAL FEDERAL TOTALTOTAL STATE/COUNTY STATE/COUNTY TOTAL LOCAL TOTAL LOCAL

$168,420,70 $116,000,00

December 2006 5-5

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Figure 21 Estimated Transportation Funding by Planning Phase

$160,000,000 Phase I (2006-2011)

$140,000,000 Phase II (2012-2030)

$120,000,000

$100,000,000

$80,000,000

$60,000,000

$40,000,000

$20,000,000

$- TOTAL FEDERAL TOTAL TOTAL LOCAL STATE/COUNTY

A summary of known funding commitments for the 2006 Plan Update recommended projects is presented as Table 16 along with estimated project costs. The total committed funding for Phase I and II recommended projects is approximately $175.5 million and the total projects costs is approximately $239.5 million, which results in an uncommitted cost remaining of almost $64 million. Note that the following assumptions were made for project costs as they relate to Town Council decisions on specific projects:

• Hungryneck Boulevard Phase II – The committed funding and project cost estimates assumes the Town constructs the entire portion of this roadway from Bowman Road to Hungryneck Boulevard Phase I. At the time of the 2006 Plan Update’s adoption, a portion of the roadway traverses parcels being proposed for development through a development agreement. Because of this, the final funding and costs may differ from those presented in Table 16.

• Hungryneck Boulevard Phases III and IV – Although the 2006 Plan Update recommends a 5 lane facility for these two phases of Hungryneck Boulevard, at the time of the 2006 Plan Update’s adoption, Town Council recommended these phases be constructed as a 3 lane facility.

December 2006 5-6

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Table 16 Summary of Committed Funds and Project Costs1 by 2006 Plan Update Recommended Project

LRTP Committed Funds Uncommitted Project PE, ROW, Project Cost Cost ID Project Description and/or CONST Source Estimate Remaining Phase I (2006-2011) 1 US 17 Widening (COMPLETED) $26,357,000 CHATS Guide Share$ 26,357,000 $ - 2 IOP Widening (COMPLETED)2 CHATS Guide Share$ - Town of Mount Pleasant and 3 HNB II3 $5,942,000 Developer Commitment $ 5,942,000 $ - 4 HNB III4 $3,553,000 Town of Mount Pleasant$ 3,553,000 $ - 5 Whipple Road $3,285,000 Town of Mount Pleasant$ 3,285,000 $ - 6 Wingo Way Extension $1,194,000 TOMP/SCDOT$ 1,194,000 $ - 7 Bowman Road (Mathis Ferry to US 17) $3,000,000 TOMP/Fed Earmark$ 3,000,000 $ - 8 Bowman Road (US 17 to HNB II) $9,100,000 TOMP/Fed Earmark$ 9,100,000 $ - 9 Porchers Bluff $1,000,000 Developer Committed$ 1,000,000 $ - 10 S. Morgan's Point Road extension $1,629,000 Developer Committed$ 1,629,000 $ - 11 Park Blvd $1,900,000 Carolina Park Dev. Agreement $ 1,900,000 $ - T13 Rifle Range Road / Ben Sawyer$ 600,000 $ 600,000 T14 Rifle Range Road / Bowman Road$ 600,000 $ 600,000 T15 Rifle Range Road / IOP $ 600,000 $ 600,000 T16 Rifle Range Road / Hamlin Road$ 600,000 $ 600,000 T17 Rifle Range Road / Six Mile$ 600,000 $ 600,000

Phase II (2012-2030) 12 I-526/US 17 Interchange $40,000,000 State Infrastructure Bank$ 40,000,000 $ - 13 Park West Boulevard $1,500,000 Carolina Park Dev. Agreement $ 1,800,000 $ 300,000 Carolina Park Dev. Agreement 15 US 17 Widening (IOP to SC 41) $3,875,000 and Developer Committed $ 17,050,000 $ 13,175,000 SC 41 Widening (US 17 to Bessemer 17 Rd) $ 9,220,000 $ 9,220,000 20 IOP Widening $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 21 IOP Bridge Restriping Study$ 15,000 $ 15,000 T3A HNB III and IV to 5L5 $3,214,000$ 16,380,000 $ 13,166,000 JDB Widening to 6-lanes With 4-lane Charleston County 1/2 cent T5 Urban Interchange at Bowman Road $70,000,000 sales tax $ 70,000,000 $ - T9 US 17 I-526 to HNB $ 7,620,000 $ 7,620,000 T10B SC 41 Widening (Bessemer to DWB)$ 3,500,000 $ 3,500,000 T12 SC 41 to Porcher and frontage road$ 12,500,000 $ 12,500,000

TOTAL $175,549,000$ 239,545,000 $ 63,996,000

Notes: 1 Costs in 2006 Dollars 2 Funds and costs included as part of Project 1 3 Funds and costs reflect Town completing entire portion of Hungryneck Phase II with potential to reduce this cost through a development agreement 4 Cost reflects 3L improvement based on Town Council decision 5 Cost reflects maintaining Hungryneck Phase III as 3L and Hungryneck Phase IV as 3L improvement based on Town Council decision

December 2006 5-7

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

16 Implementation Plan

The 2006 Transportation Plan Update provides the Town of Mount Pleasant with a “road map” for implementation of long-range multimodal transportation improvements. The Plan Update includes recommendations that are based upon Town supported transportation elements and related goals, including:

• Alternate modes • Access Management • Connectivity • Mobility • Transportation / Land Use Integration • Safety

Specific performance measures were established for each element / goal, and used as a basis for development of the 2006 Plan Update draft recommendations. Community input was incorporated into the planning process with review and comment of the draft plan in July 2006.

The development of a Town travel demand model was a primary tool utilized to analyze existing and future transportation needs. Socio-economic data developed by the Town planning staff was incorporated directly into the model to assess system performance and identify corridor- level and sub-area transportation deficiencies. Safety data provided by the Town was also analyzed to identify potential safety issues. Multimodal system data was reviewed and analyzed, including CHATS system service plans, bicycle and pedestrian plans. Transportation funding was also reviewed to determine historical trends and to forecast future revenue streams. A program of projects was developed in addition to list of transportation policies to guide short and long-range transportation improvements within Mount Pleasant.

Program of Projects

Selection of projects for implementation has relied on the goals and measure established for the 2006 Plan Update, which were developed based upon similar goals included in the Town’s Comprehensive Plan and in other Town plans.

The list of recommended projects for the 2006 Plan Update was developed utilizing the following selection criteria:

• Projects from the 2000 Town of Mount Pleasant Transportation Plan that have not yet been implemented, but are still needed • Projects currently programmed in the CHATS Plan (either the TIP or the LRTP) that are technically supported through analysis completed for the 2006 Plan Update • Additional Town of Mount Pleasant projects that have been identified through concurrent planning processes, and/or are part of an adopted program (such as the Roadwise Program sponsored by Charleston County)

Tables 17 and 18 present the Phase I (2006-2011) and Phase II (2012-2030) recommended transportation improvements for the 2006 Plan Update. The Phase I projects represent the committed projects in addition to identified intersection/operational projects.

December 2006 6-1

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Table 17 Recommended Phase I Projects

Phase I Recommended Projects

LRTP Road Termini Lanes Project ID Length Existing Planned (mi) 1 US 17 I-526 IOP Connector 4 6 1.4 2 IOP SB/EB US 17 Rifle Range Road 2 3 0.7 3 Hungryneck Boulevard Phase II HNB Phase I Bowman Road 0 3 0.8 4 Hungryneck Boulevard Phase III IOP Connector Six Mile Road 0 3 0.8 5 Whipple Road Mathis Ferry Road Long Point Road 2 3 1.1 6 Wingo Way Extension Existing Wingo Way Patriots Point Road 0 3 0.8 7 Bowman Road Mathis Ferry Road US 17 2 3 0.5 8 Bowman Road US 17 Hungryneck Boulevard Phase II 2 5 0.8 9 Porchers Bluff Road US 17 2200 ft from US 17 2 3 0.4 10 S. Morgan's Point Road Extension S. Morgan's Point Road Porchers Bluff Road 0 2 1.1 11 Park Boulevard Carolina Park Boulevard Park West Boulevard 0 2 1.2 T13 Rifle Range Coleman / Ben Sawyer - Operational Improvements --- T14 Rifle Range Bowman Road - Operational Improvements --- T15 Rifle Range IOP Connector - Operational Improvements --- T16 Rifle Range Hamlin Road - Operational Improvements --- T17 Rifle Range Six Mile Road - Operational Improvements --- Phase I Total

December 2006

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Table 18 Recommended Phase II Projects

Phase II Recommended Projects

LRTP Road Termini Lanes Project ID Length Existing Planned (mi) 12 I-526/US 17 Interchange I-526/HNB US 17 - - - 13 Park West Boulevard Current end of 4-lane Bessemer Road 2 4 1.7 15 US 17 IOP Connector SC 41 4 6 2.5 17 SC 41 US 17 Bessemer Road 2 4 1.4 20 IOP Widening US 17 Bridge 2/3 4 1.64 21 IOP Bridge Restriping Feasibility Study -- -- 2 4 2.2 T3A Hungryneck Boulevard Phase III and IV IOP Connector Porchers Bluff Road 0 5 3 JDB Widening to 6-lanes With 4-lane Urban Houston-North Boulevard/Mathis Ferry T5 Interchanges at Bowman Road Road Bowman Road 4 6 2.5 T9 US 17 I-526 HNB 4 6 0.55 T10B Widening SC 41from 2 to 3 lanes Bessemer Road Dunes West Boulevard 2 3 1.6 T12 Frontage Road north of US 17 SC 41 Park West Boulevard 0 2 1.4 Phase II Total

December 2006

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Phase II projects are those identified as needed through technical analysis and other performance criteria. Figures 22 and 23 present the location of the recommended Phase I and Phase II projects, respectively.

Figure 24 and 25 presents the traffic volumes and resulting LOS after completion of the committed and Phase I and II recommended projects. As these figures indicate, the Transportation Plan Recommendations result in several roadway network benefits, including:

• The plan accommodates through traffic along Johnnie Dodds Boulevard while maintaining community goals for corridor determined through the Johnnie Dodds Boulevard Mobility Study. (See Appendix C for a summary of the Johnnie Dodds study and City Council action). • The plan accommodates heavy traffic growth along the US 17 corridor east of I-526 through Porchers Bluff Road. A combination of three key improvements will assist in moving traffic along this section of US 17: o Extension of Hungry Neck Boulevard south of US 17 as a five-lane divided road. o Widening of US 17 to a six-lane divided road o Construction of parallel circulation roads north and south of US 17 east of SC 41 • The plan provides additional intersection capacity at key locations along Rifle Range Road. This improvement, combined with the extension of Hungry Neck Boulevard prevent the need for future widening • The plan provides capacity for access to the growing medical center area via Bowman Road and Whipple Road improvements.

Even with the improvements indicated, there are several areas where continuing traffic congestion is predicted for year 2030 conditions. These include the following areas:

• US 17 east of I-526 through Porchers Bluff Road – This section will experience reduced levels of congestion with a larger portion of the corridor remaining at LOS D or E conditions. However, a substantial portion of this section of US 17 will experience LOS E or F conditions. Implementation of access management standards along this section of US 17 in conjunction with capacity improvements could increase effective capacity and throughput to prevent significant delays for through traffic in this area. Additionally, Hungryneck Phases III and IV provide additional capacity to attract trips from the US 17 corridor, thereby mitigating LOS E or F conditions. • Hungryneck Boulevard from US 17 to Isle of Palms Connector – This section is expected to improve from LOS F to LOS E conditions (near capacity) while at the same time serving longer distance trips due to extension of Hungryneck Boulevard to the east. This extension will help provide relief to US 17 and most importantly Rifle Range Road, which would otherwise experience LOS F conditions. • Long Point Road from US 17 to I-526 – This direct travel route from US 17 to I-526 will continue to experience LOS F conditions. Historic properties and residential character of this road preclude major capacity expansion. • Isle of Palms Connector south of Rifle Range Road – As the island served by the Isle of Palms Connector continues to grow, traffic volume demands will increase. The Isle of Palms Connector widening will improve LOS along most of the corridor that is deficient in year 2030. Additional improvements immediately south of Rifle Range Road would be necessary to provide LOS D conditions along the entire roadway section. • Ben Sawyer Boulevard south of Center Street – This area continues to experience LOS E overall. However, the existing 2-lane road had few high volume cross streets in this area, increasing the effective capacity and reducing the impact of delays.

December 2006 6-4

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Implementation of the transportation plan improves mobility and decreases overall delay. The plan increases year 2030 overall vehicle miles traveled by 44,000 per day while decreasing vehicle hours traveled by 10,000 per day. This results in a significant decrease in the percent of road miles that are congested. Table 19 indicates these results and other improvements in performance. Table 19 Summary of Systemwide Performance Measures

2030 Existing Plus 2030 with Plan Performance Measure Committed (E+C) Recommendations

Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) 2,108,000 2,152,000 Vehicle Hours Traveled (VHT) 74,000 64,000 Average Speed (mph) 28 34 Miles of Congested Roads 29 20 Total Centerline Miles of Roads 84 92

Percent of Road Miles Congested 35% 22%

Other Recommendations

In addition to the specific program of projects recommended for implementation, several other recommendations have been developed that are not project-specific. These other recommendations are a result of information obtained throughout the plan development and community participation phases of the project.

• Crash Management System Development: The development of a crash management system / data base analysis tool would be beneficial to analyze historic crash data and trends. Results of the tool could be used to develop safety mitigation enhancements tied to specific locations. • “Complete Streets” Initiative: The Town should continue with the proactive implementation of Charleston County’s Complete Street initiative. The development of multi-modal corridors such as Hungryneck Boulevard Phases I and II should be continued as the “spine” of the bicycle and pedestrian network throughout northern Mount Pleasant. Mount Pleasant’s current policies on sidewalks within residential subdivisions should also be continued, and expanded as feasible. • Dunes West Boulevard / Park West Boulevard Small Area Study: A study of the transportation network and specific needs throughout this sub-area should be analyzed. Issues including peak period congestion resulting from school traffic should be further assessed as part of the final recommendation regarding the widening of Park West Boulevard. • JDB Mobility Study Recommendations: The recommendations for JDB addressed multi- modal connectivity within the JDB corridor, frontage road system, and adjacent intersections. Although Town Council has taken action on certain major recommendations of the study, all recommendations developed for this corridor should be evaluated as part of new development and re-development within the JDB corridor. • Closed Loop Signal System: The Town should study the feasibility of a closed loop signal system and other Intelligent Transportation System improvements to increase the efficiency of the traffic signal system.

December 2006 6-5

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Transportation Funding

As presented, the sum of the estimated total project costs for the Phase I and II recommended projects is approximately $240 million. The estimated total committed project funding for the Phase I and II recommended projects is approximately $176 million, resulting in approximately $64 million needed, but not yet committed (refer to Table 16). Identification and allocation of these additional funds is necessary to accomplish the projects recommended in the transportation plan. As indicated in Section 5 - Table 15, the potential estimated transportation funding for the Town of Mount Pleasant is $306 million, greater than the $240 million total cost for recommended projects.

December 2006 6-6

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Figure 22

December 2006 6-7

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Figure 23

December 2006 6-8

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Figure 24

December 2006 6-9

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Figure 25

December 2006 6-10

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

APPENDIX A Summary of Public Comments

September 2006

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Public Outreach Comments

The following is a summary of the public outreach activities and results for:

Event: Public Information Meetings

Monday, July 10, 2006 Tuesday, July 11, 2006 Mount Pleasant Town Hall Cario Middle School 5:30 – 8:00 pm 5:30 – 8:00 pm

Media Outreach:

Media advisories and press releases were sent to the following local newspapers, radio and television stations.

Post and Courier – Prentiss Findlay Post and Courier – Lucia Walinchus Post and Courier – Jill Coley Post and Courier – Michael Gartland Post and Courier – Shirley Greene Post and Courier – David Quick Post and Courier – [email protected] Moultrie News – Sully Witte Moultrie News – Bill Walker Charleston Regional Business Journal Citadel Communications WTMA 1250-AM, WSUY 100.5, WSSX 95.1, WTMZ 910-AM, WRFQ, WBUB, WJZK, WSSP, WXTC Coffee News Lowcountry I'On - Cynthia Rosengren Octavia Mitchell The Chronicle WCBD - TV 4 (CHANNEL 2) WCIV - TV 4 (CHANNEL 4) WCSC - TV 5 (CHANNEL 5) WEZL 103.5, WXLY 102.5; WPAL AM 730/FM 100.9 WTMA Radio

Information Presented:

Participants were given a thirty minute presentation on the study background and process, needs assessment, recommendations and other potential improvements. Identified needs were presented in five areas: Roadway Capacity, Bike/Ped, Transit, Safety and Traffic Operations. Following the presentation, participants were able to ask questions and view study information displays. Town staff and the consultant team were available to answer questions.

A-1 December 2006

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Meeting Results:

A total of 44 people signed in for the Public Information Meetings. (41 for the meeting at the Town Hall and 13 for the meeting at Cario Middle School)

A total of six comment forms were submitted, they are summarized below.

Comments/ Responses

Comment 1: Can we divert some traffic that currently uses Mt. Pleasant streets, so we don’t have to widen streets/highways in Mt. Pleasant?

Response 1: Providing a new road on new alignment to bypass Mt. Pleasant is likely to be costly and could have negative environmental impact.

Comment 2: In ten years, Clements Ferry Road will be a major employment center.

Response 2: The plan includes the consideration for impacts on the road network from future employment centers. The plan is updated every five years and reviewed on a regular basis to assess if the programmed improvements are sufficient to meet transportation demands.

Comment 3: Biggest challenge is traffic that comes from outside the town. (i.e. Daniel Island, Unincorporated County). Park West Blvd. – Major Road in NW part of town will be a major connector. Need a better look at Park West Blvd.

Response 3: Good comment – will look at it regarding increasing priority. The travel demand model can help to identify routes. Also may need to complete a more “refined” analysis of this sub-area.

Comment 4: What is the recommendation for alleviating congestion on Bowman Road?

Response 4: Widen Bowman Road & interchange w/ US 17

Comment 5: Facility between Long Point & SC 41 is configured to zigzag. Who laid this out, why was this done?

I live in the community on SC 41 – since most of this traffic is through traffic, we don’t feel our community should bear the impact of widening US 41. The plan should look at alternatives that do not impact the community.

A-2 December 2006

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Response 5: There may be some benefit to traffic flow on SC 41 from improving Bessemer Road. At this time, we don’t see the need to widen SC 41 in this area.

Comment 6: I don’t see a new road being planned to take truck traffic off Mt. Pleasant. Need a new route from US 17 over to Clements Ferry Road outside of Mt. Pleasant.

Response 6: The model for Mt. Pleasant provides good information on truck movements. CHATS model and study has more information on trucks. We can discuss this with CHATS.

Comment 7: Other towns have truck bypass routes. With I-73 coming, will there be more trucks through Mt. Pleasant?

Response 7: Due to wetlands and other environmental impacts, developing a truck bypass that can serve truck travel patterns will be difficult. City truck routes provide better connectivity for trucks and will most likely continue to attract truck traffic.

Comment 8: What is the connection between this plan and the comprehensive plan?

Response 8: This plan will be adopted into the comprehensive plan or the transportation element outlining transportation needs.

Comment 9: What is the plan for frontage roads on the northern part of US 17 that works well in the south?

Response 9: Plan shows a more refined parallel route that should provide good service to the north and south parts of US 17.

Comment 10: Don’t you need additional roads? When US 17 was first built, it was only two lanes, now we need eight lanes. Shouldn’t we have planned more roads?

Response 10: The transportation plan has reviewed needs and what is a realistic program to solve needs vs. cost & environmental impacts, taking into account our goals for transportation in Mt. Pleasant.

A-3 December 2006

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

General comments:

Safety - Please consider that any major roadway should be constructed away from residential areas and be placed in commercial or professional zonings.

Roadway Capacity - Too many cars, too few roads - More overpasses for uninterrupted traffic flow - Improve Hwy 41 from Bessemer Road to Dunes West Blvd. to three lanes, with drainage and sidewalks.

Traffic Operations - Improve traffic signal timing - Add sensors in road - Extend turn lanes at certain locations - Improve traffic flow on Highway 17 - Redirect some traffic that currently uses Mt. Pleasant streets so that we don’t have to widen streets/highways in Mt. Pleasant. - What is in the plan to alleviate congestion at Bowman Road - Don’t think that the community around US 41 should bear the impact of widening US 41 since most of the traffic is through traffic. - Can we re-direct some traffic that currently uses Mt. Pleasant streets so we don’t have to widen streets/highways in Mt. Pleasant.

A-4 December 2006

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Additional Public Meeting Comments

A-5 December 2006

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

APPENDIX B Analysis Results for Selected Potential Projects

A-1 December 2006

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Analysis Results for Selected Potential Projects

Several other projects that showed potential for improving transportation operations and mobility were also analyzed using the travel demand model. These projects include a series of interchange modifications, new interchanges, road widenings, new roads, and corridor improvements. The “tests” were run assuming completion of the “committed” projects with the exception of those test projects that are modifications to projects already on the “committed” list. Descriptions of these other projects analyzed with the travel demand model were included on Table 10, and presented on Figure 14. These additional potential projects are shown in Table B-1. The travel demand model results for the other projects analyzed are summarized below.

I-526 Interchange Modifications (Test #T1, #T2A, #T2B, and #T6):

Several tests were run to analyze potential improvements facilitating I-526 access to Mount Pleasant.

• Test #T1 evaluated the addition of a new northbound ramp onto I-526 from westbound US 17. Results of this analysis indicated very low volumes on the ramp, with no benefits elsewhere on the roadway network.

• Test #T2A and #T2B evaluated the addition of a partial interchange at I-526 and Mathis Ferry Road; Test #T2B is a modification of Test #T2A with the widening of Mathis Ferry Road from Whipple Road to the I-526 on-ramp. There was some traffic reduction observed with Test #T2A on Long Point Road near Whipple Road, on Whipple Road, and on I-526 approaching US 17. Reductions do not relieve capacity deficient segments on those facilities and attract increased traffic to Mathis Ferry Road. Results of Test #T2B indicate degraded LOS on Mathis Ferry Road from I-526 to Whipple Road and increased traffic attracted to other capacity-deficient segments along Mathis Ferry Road.

• Test #T6 evaluated the addition of an exit ramp from I-526 in the vicinity of East Cooper Medical Center. The results of this test were inconclusive without more detailed operations/design analysis. Detailed operational/design analysis will be accomplished as part of the JDB / Bowman Road interchange design.

Hungryneck Boulevard Phases III and IV (Test #T3A, #T3B, #T4A, #T4B, #T4C and #16):

Several alternative analyses were run to analyze proposed modifications to HNB Phase III and Phase IV included in the “committed” list:

• Test #T3A evaluated Hungryneck Boulevard Phases III and IV as a 5-lane facility from HNB Phase I to Porchers Bluff Road; Test #T3B repeated #T3A with the addition of a direct SC 41 connector from Hungryneck Boulevard Phase IV. Test #T3A results show traffic relief for US 17 and Rifle Range Road, and additional capacity remains available for Hungryneck Boulevard. Test #T3B results did not show significant benefit compared to Test #T3A, and may increase intersection loading at SC 41/US 17 due to traffic on direct connectors with no Porchers Bluff Road connections to SC 41 north of US 17.

December 2006 B-1

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Table B-1 Other Projects Analyzed With Travel Demand Model Lanes

ID Road Type Project Description Termini Existing Planned Test Project Test Project I-526/US 17 NB ramp from WB Interchange T1 US 17 Modification Add ramp on NB I-526 from WB US 17 US 17 WB I-526 NB - - I-526/Mathis Ferry Road Partial New Partial Add partial interchange at Mathis Ferry Mathis Ferry T2A Interchange Interchange Road and I-526 Road I-526 - - I-526/Mathis Ferry Road Partial New Partial Add partial interchange at Mathis Ferry Interchange with Interchange Road and I-526, with Mathis Ferry Road Mathis Ferry with widening from I-526 on-ramp to Whipple Mathis Ferry T2B Rd.Widening Widening Road Road I-526 - - Hungryneck New location (5-lane) on existing Boulevard Phase Hungryneck Boulevard alignment to Porchers T3A III and IV New Road Porchers Bluff Rd. IOP Connector Bluff Road 0 5 New location (5-lane) on existing Hungryneck Boulevard alignment to Hungryneck Porchers Bluff Rd. with direct SC 41 Boulevard Phase connection from Hungryneck Boulevard Porchers T3B III and IV New Road Phase IV IOP Connector Bluff Road 0 5 Hungryneck Boulevard Phase IV aligned north of US 17 Between Long Point Road and SC 41 New location (3 lanes) connecting Long Long Point T4A New Road Point Rd. to SC 41 north of US 17 Road SC 41 0 3

December 2006

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Table B-1 Other Projects Analyzed With Travel Demand Model Hungryneck Boulevard Phase IV aligned north of US 17 with direct connection New location (3 lanes) connecting Long from Porchers Point Rd. to SC 41 north of US 17 and Bluff Rd. to SC direct connection from Porchers Bluff Long Point T4B 41 New Road Road and SC 41 north of US 17 Road SC 41 0 3 Hungryneck Boulevard Phase IV aligned north of US 17 between Long Point Road and SC 41, with realignment of Long Point Road to the north, and direct connection to Hungryneck Boulevard Phase New location (3 lanes) connecting Long Long Point T4C south of US 17 New Road Point Rd. to SC 41 north of US 17 Road SC 41 0 3

Johnnie Dodds Boulevard widening to 6- Lane with 4-Lane urban interchanges at Houston Houston Grade separations at Houston Northcutt Northcutt Northcutt Blvd. Corridor Blvd/Mathis Ferry Rd.and Bowman Rd (4 Boulevard / and Bowman Improvement lane) with JDB widening to 6-lanes Mathis Ferry Bowman T5 Road s between these two interchanges Road Road 4 6 I-526 exit ramp Interchange Add exit ramp off I-526 SB connecting T6 into vicinity of Modification into new hospital road and Bowman Road

December 2006

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Table B-1 Other Projects Analyzed With Travel Demand Model East Cooper Medical Center Von Kolnitz / Old Georgetown Add Johnnie Dodds Boulevard flyover Rd.connector and ramp from Von Kolnitz Rd. connecting to overpass at Old Georgetown Road with overpass at Old Johnnie Dodds Johnnie Dodds Boulevard and Bowman Von Kolnitz Georgetown T7A Boulevard New Road Road Road Road 0 2 Von Kolnitz / Old Georgetown Rd.connector without the Add Johnnie Dodds Boulevard flyover overpass at ramp from Von Kolnitz Rd. connecting to Old JDB/Bowman Old Georgetown Road without the Von Kolnitz Georgetown T7B Road New Road overpass at JDB and Bowman Road Road Road 0 2 US 17/SC 41 New T8 Interchange Interchange New interchange at US 17 and SC 41 US 17 SC 41 - - Hungryneck T9 US 17 Widening Widen existing 4-lane facility to 6 lanes I-526 Boulevard 4 6 Bessemer Dunes West T10A SC 41 Widening Widen existing 2-lane facility to 4 lanes Road Boulevard 2 4 Bessemer Dunes West T10B SC 41 Widening Widen existing 2-lane facility to 3 lanes Road Boulevard 2 3 Porchers T11 US 17 Widening Widen existing 4 lanes facility to 6-lane SC 41 Bluff Road 4 6 Frontage Road Construct frontage road extension of Park Park West T12 North of US 17 New Road Boulevard to SC 41 Boulevard SC 41 0 2 End of existing Dunes West T13 Park West Blvd Widening Widening existing 2-lane facility to 4-lanes 4-lane section Boulevard 2 4

December 2006

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

• A select link analysis was completed on US 17 between Long Point Road and SC 41 to test alternative #T3A versus #T3B. The results of the select link analysis indicate that #T3A results in increased volumes along SC 41, increased volumes along Hungryneck Boulevard Phase III, decreased volumes along US 17 east of SC 41 versus that of #T3B, and no difference in volumes at US 17 west of SC 41.

• Test #T4A evaluated HNB Phase IV aligned to the north of US 17 connecting Long Point Road and SC 41; Test #T4B repeats #T4A with a direct connection from Porchers Bluff Road to SC 41; Test #T4C is the same as #T4A with the realignment of Long Point Road to the north connecting into Hungryneck Boulevard Phase IV (north of US 17) and with a direct connection to Hungryneck Boulevard Phase III to the south of US 17. Results for Test #T4A and #T4C indicate increased traffic on Long Point Road, and create operational issues at US 17, Six Mile Road and Long Point Road. This alternative does not offer the same relief on US 17 and Rifle Range Road as does the alignment south of US 17. Results of Test #T4B show no significant change to traffic service implications from that assessed under Test #T4A; therefore, any benefits in relief of US 17 congestion for these tested scenarios are not as significant as the recommended alignment south of US 17. Additionally, these tested scenarios would introduce intersection and segment deficiencies within the area (versus that of the alignment south of US 17) which will require more complex and costly design solutions.

A select link analysis was completed on US 17 between Long Point Road and SC 41 to test alternatives #T4A versus #T4B. The results of the select link analysis indicate that #T4A results in slightly increased volumes along Long Point Road, greatly increased volumes along Hungryneck Boulevard Phase III and direct connection to US 17, decreased volumes along SC 41, and increased volumes along US 17 west of Long Point Road.

• Test #16 evaluated HNB IV as a three-lane facility versus a five-lane facility. Results of the analysis indicates that a five-lane facility will operate at LOS C versus LOS D for the three-lane facility; Test #16 is not recommended over the five-lane (Test #3A) alternative.

Table B-2 presents a summary of the travel demand model results for the overall corridor, including the various Hungryneck Boulevard Phases III and IV alternatives, US 17 and Rifle Range Road. These are shown graphically in Figure B-1.

December 2006 B-5

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Table B-2 Summary of Hungryneck Boulevard Phase III and IV Analytical Results

Facility Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 HNB South of HNB South of HNB North of HNB North of US 17 as three- US 17 as five- US 17 as three- US 17 as three- lane facility lane facility lane facility lane facility, (#16) (#T3A) (#T4A/#T4B) and HNB South of US 17 as three-lane (#T4C) US 17 (Six-lane) 1.15 (66,700)* 1.04 (60,200) 1.15 (67,000) 1.15 (66,900) HNB 0.76 (14,700) 0.60 (23,000) 0.78 (14,300) 0.81 (15,500) Rifle Range 0.93 (12,600) 0.80 (10,900) 1.00 (13,500) 0.93 (12,600) Road (two-lane)

* V/C ratio (Volume)

Based upon these results presented in Table B-2 and Figure B-1, the five-lane HNB provides the best overall mobility to this corridor, including relief to US 17 and with minimal impacts to Rifle Range Road. Location of the Hungry Neck Boulevard on the south side of US 17 is critical to facilitate its use for medium to long trip lengths, facilitated by the connectivity to I-526 and Coleman Boulevard to the south. The location of Hungry Neck Boulevard north of US 17 will facilitate movement of additional traffic onto Long Point Road, which is a residential corridor that is already operating well over capacity. Therefore, implementation of a five-lane Hungry Neck Boulevard south of US 17 is recommended.

Johnnie Dodds Boulevard Corridor Improvements (Tests #14 and #T5):

Test #T5 evaluated the proposed Johnnie Dodds Boulevard improvements (grade separation at Houston Northcutt Boulevard and Bowman Road) with widening of Johnnie Dodds Boulevard from a four-lane (Test #14) to a six-lane facility (#T5). The six-lane alternative showed an improved LOS for Johnnie Dodds Boulevard and traffic reductions for Mathis Ferry Road, Coleman Boulevard, Chuck Dawley Boulevard, and Rifle Range Road.

Recent Town Council actions (Appendix C) have approved the interchange recommendation from the Johnnie Dodds Boulevard Mobility Study at the Bowman Road intersection, but Council action did not include a grade separation at the Houston Northcutt Boulevard/Mathis Ferry Road intersection. The Town Council action also recommended the implementation of a multi-lane boulevard concept for the remainder of JDB with remaining intersections to have at-grade improvements (excluding multi-lane roundabouts). See sub-section Review of Projects from 2000 Transportation Plan under Section 4 “Needs Assessment” for more information regarding the JDB Mobility Study Results.

December 2006 B-7

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Von Kolnitz Alternatives (Test #T7A and #T7B):

Several alternative tests were completed to analyze potential improvements in the area south of Mathis Ferry Road, east of Bowman Road, west of I-526 and north of Rifle Range Road.

• Test #T7A evaluated a fly-over connection from Von Kolnitz to Old Georgetown Road, including a grade-separation at Bowman Road. Model results for this alternative showed minor traffic reductions on Bowman Road, but not enough to eliminate the need for an interchange at Bowman Road

• Test #T7B evaluated the same fly-over improvement as in #T7A, but without the Johnnie Dodds Boulevard /Bowman Road interchange. Model results for this alternative showed decreased LOS for traffic movements at Bowman Road/US 17.

US 17 / SC 41 (Test #T8)

Test #T8 evaluated a potential new interchange at SC 41 and US 17, including a fly-over ramp from US 17 eastbound to SC 41 northbound. Model results indicate that this will reduce traffic at the at-grade intersection of US 17 and SC 41; however, additional detailed operational analysis is required before a final recommendation can be made. Monitoring of this intersection through future plan updates is recommended to determine whether recommended projects in this vicinity will alleviate the need for a future grade-separated improvement at this intersection.

US 17 Improvements (Test #T9 and #T11)

Several alternative analyses were completed to analyze improvements to US 17 east of I-526. • Test #T9 evaluated widening US 17 from I-526 to HNB Ph. I from four to six lanes. Model results indicate that this alternative provides improved LOS. Additional detailed operational analysis is needed to address the interchange designs at each end of this segment of US 17.

• Test #T11 evaluated widening US 17 from SC 41 to Porchers Bluff Road from four to six lanes. Model results indicate that LOS improves along the widened segment of US 17; however, the critical segment may be northeast of the Porchers Bluff Road intersection with US 17. This segment of US 17 northeast of Porchers Bluff should be monitored through future plan updates to address performance of system with recommended US 17 / frontage road improvements in place.

SC 41 Improvements (Test #T10A and #T10B)

As part of the CHATS planning study with the Phillips Community, several alternative analyses were completed to test improvements to SC 41 north of US 17:

• Test #10A evaluated the widening of SC 41 from Bessemer Road to Dunes West Blvd. from two to four lanes. Model results indicate improved LOS on SC 41 and significant traffic relief for Bessemer Road.

• Test #10B evaluated the widening of SC 41 from Bessemer Road to Dunes West Blvd. from two to three lanes. Model results indicate some improvement in LOS (not

December 2006 B-8

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

sufficient to achieve LOS D) and some traffic redistribution on Bessemer Road. There is also additional capacity available on Bessemer Road.

• Test #18 evaluated the widening of SC 41 from Dunes West to the County Line/bridge as a four-lane facility. Model results do not indicate the need for a four-lane facility within this segment.

US 17 North Frontage Road Improvements (Test #T12)

Several alternative analyses were completed to analyze a frontage road improvement from the terminus of Park Boulevard at Park West Boulevard to SC 41. Model results indicate some minor benefit and reduction of traffic along US 17 with the construction of the frontage road, with minor increases to traffic along Porchers Bluff Road to the south of US 17. Several model alternative tests were completed to analyze various local access connections associated with the proposed US 17 frontage road. The connections (model centroid connectors) tested model traffic loading to SC 41, the proposed frontage road, and US 17. The model results indicate that the addition of a frontage road system north of US 17 provides some relief to SC 41 just north of US 17 by dispersing traffic throughout the frontage road system. However, increased access from the frontage road system to US 17 may also slightly increase congestion along US 17 to the east of SC 41. More detailed microsimulation of the sub area should be conducted to include future development planned in this area.

Park West Boulevard Improvements (Test #T13)

The travel demand model results indicate that the widening improvement is not required from a capacity standpoint. However, the presence of several schools and associated peak period congestion, may justify a two to four lane widening. A more refined “sub-area” analysis of the Park West Blvd/Dunes West Blvd vicinity is recommended prior to completion of the next plan update.

December 2006 B-9

Mount Pleasant 2006 Transportation Plan Update

Appendix C JDB Mobility Study Summary and Town Council Action

September 2006

Johnnie Dodds Boulevard Mobility Study – Mt. Pleasant, SC

Executive Summary

Study Purpose and Background

The purpose of the Johnnie Dodds Boulevard (JDB) Mobility Study was to conduct detailed transportation planning and concept engineering analyses on proposed intersection and roadway improvements for JDB. The study team and Town of Mount Pleasant staff initiated the JDB Mobility Study under the Town Council’s request to fully assess travel needs along the corridor, identify existing and future deficiencies, and recommend improvements to provide for future safety and mobility needs. For purposes of this study, the corridor includes Johnnie Dodds Boulevard (US 17) from the new Ravenel Bridge extending to the east of I-526 in the vicinity of Mathis Ferry Road, east of I-526. The JDB Mobility Study included detailed technical evaluation of five key JDB intersections including Houston Northcutt Boulevard and Bowman Road (designated the “bookend” intersections) and Shelmore Boulevard, Dragoon Drive, Anna Knapp Boulevard (designated the “middle” intersections).

JDB/US 17 provides important national security connectivity as a NHS Strategic Highway Network (STRAHNET) route as well as freight connectivity as a federally designated Surface Transportation Assistance Act (STAA) route. JDB/US 17 also serves as a state designated hurricane evacuation route and over-dimension/over- weight freight route. Each of these designations requires an emphasis on mobility and provision for truck movement along the corridor.

The JDB Mobility Study was a multifaceted and complex study that integrated technical analysis and community input throughout the corridor plan development process. To facilitate the study process, activities were divided into two phases. During the first phase, the existing and future conditions within the corridor and study area were assessed and preliminary concepts defined. During the second phase, the improvement concepts were refined and a financially constrained implementation program was developed. Extensive public outreach was conducted throughout the JDB Mobility Study, including two public information meetings, a series of small group meetings (including business owners, homeowners associations and other stakeholders), two meetings of the Technical Advisory Group (TAG), and several Town Council briefings. Two public hearings concluded the study in February 2006.

Study Goals and Evaluation Measures Goal 1: Balance local access needs with travel on Five goals were developed by the JDB Mobility Study team, and were finalized after review and comment by the Town Council and public. Specific qualitative and quantitative evaluation measures for each goal were also developed to assess the performance of the JDB Mobility Study improvement alternatives. The following lists the JDB Mobility Study Goals and associated evaluation measures. JB

Goal 1: Balance local access needs with travel on JDB

• Potential for induced demand - Increased VMT & VHT versus no-build • Queuing and delay on JDB

December 2006 C-1

Johnnie Dodds Boulevard Mobility Study – Mt. Pleasant, SC

• Queuing and delay on side streets • Travel time along JDB from Houston Northcutt to Veining (year 2030) • Travel time from JDB to/from key destinations via frontage roads • Route to access businesses and other key destinations from JDB • Number/spacing of road connections across JDB • Travel time for local connections across JDB al 2: Connect the community through the use of alternative travel modes, including transit bicycle Goal 2: Connect the community through the use of alternative travel modes, including transit, pedestrian and bicycle

• Unprotected pedestrian conflicts for JDB crossing • Distance for crossing JDB • Number/spacing of pedestrian and bicycle connections across JDB • Major destinations connected via bicycle and pedestrian paths • Quality of bicycle/pedestrian experience • Ability to accommodate transit serving destinations on or near JDB

Goal 3: Maintain or enhance safety of corridor

• Potential for reduction of crash rates (total conflict points) • Potential for future crashes (conflict points not protected by signal phase)

Goal 4: Support Town’s urban development pattern objectives

• Supportive of Town’s future land use plan • Supportive of development proposals currently under consideration

Goal 5: Develop effective corridor recommendations while minimizing adverse impacts

• Parcel impacts and right-of-way costs • Construction costs • Operating costs • Number of businesses, homes, and developments displaced • Constructability / maintenance of traffic • Economic implications of future development • Environmental / permitting

Comparative Evaluations

One of the primary components of the JDB Mobility Study included a review of the study goals and evaluation measures against the improvement options developed for the key JDB intersections. Six improvement options were analyzed for implementation at the two JDB “bookend” intersections (roundabouts, grade separations, continuous flow intersections (CFI), Superstreets, Six-lane signalized intersections, and eight-lane signalized intersections). Four improvement options were analyzed for implementation at the two JDB “middle” intersections (roundabouts, modified continuous flow intersections (MCFI), Superstreets and Six-lane signalized intersections).

December 2006 C-2

Johnnie Dodds Boulevard Mobility Study – Mt. Pleasant, SC

Tables E-1 and E-2 present the results of the scoring and ranking completed for the key JDB intersections.

Table E-1 Comparative Evaluation Results for the JDB “Bookend” Intersections

Basis for Improvement Option Comparative Score Grade Six Lane Eight Lane Roundabout CFI Superstreet Analysis Separation Signalized Signalized

Average -1.51 1.57 -0.19 -0.20 -1.05 -0.39 Average of Goal Overall Rank Averages 6 1 2 3 5 4 (1=best, 6 = worst) Average of Average -3.89 4.33 1.00 -0.78 -2.22 -0.44 Key Mobility / Safety Overall Measures Rank 6 1 2 4 5 3 (1=best, 6 = worst)

Table E-2 Comparative Evaluation Results for JDB “Middle” Intersections

Basis for Improvement Option Comparativ Score Roundabo Modified Six Lane Superstreet e Analysis ut CFI Signalized Average -1.21 0.07 -0.01 -0.13 Average of Overall Goal Rank Averages (1=best, 6 = worst) 4 1 2 3 Average of Average Key -2.78 1.44 0.00 0.44 Mobility / Overall Safety Rank Measures (1=best, 6 = worst) 4 1 3 2

JDB Mobility Study Recommendations Recommendations for the JDB Mobility Study were developed based upon the results of the comparative evaluation supported by extensive technical analysis and public / stakeholder outreach. The study recommendations are presented below.

Intersection Recommendations The recommendations for the JDB study corridor intersections, including the key “bookend” and “middle” intersections, are presented in Table E- 3.

December 2006 C-3

Johnnie Dodds Boulevard Mobility Study – Mt. Pleasant, SC

Table E-3 Intersection Recommendations Intersection Location Recommended Improvement Concept JDB “Bookend” Intersections Grade separation (4-thru lanes) • Houston Northcutt Boulevard

• Bowman Road JDB “Middle” Intersections Six lane widening as needed for • Dragoon Drive signalized intersection operations / • Shelmore Boulevard auxiliary turning or • Anna Knapp Boulevard modified CFI JDB at Magrath Darby Boulevard Right-in/right-out North frontage road at Magrath Darby Boulevard, Roundabout or Houston-Northcutt Road, Shelmore Boulevard, Signalization Anna Knapp Boulevard, and Bowman Road South frontage road at Magrath Darby Boulevard Roundabout or and Shelmore Boulevard stop control South frontage road at Bowman Road Stop control, right-in/right-out/left-in South frontage road at Houston Northcutt Boulevard Roundabout or and Anna Knapp Boulevard signalization

Frontage Road Recommendations The intersection recommendations presented above do not require relocation of any of the existing frontage roads along JDB Boulevard. However, as travel demand along the side streets increases over time, several design enhancements associated with the frontage roads provide benefits to mobility and accessibility, including:

• Restriction of parcel access points along the JDB side streets between JDB and the frontage road intersections to right-in and right-out only. • Signalization of JDB side street/frontage road intersections (when warranted based on MUTCD criteria) or installation of roundabouts (as presented above in Table E-3 “Intersection Recommendations”). • Relocation of select segments of frontage roads to increase spacing with JDB (e.g. frontage roads south of JDB between Magrath Darby Boulevard and Houston Northcutt Boulevard; northwest and southwest frontage roads at Bowman Road) • Replacement of existing frontage road system with back access roadways with future redevelopment, or development of back and side access roadways to supplement existing frontage road system.

Corridor Recommendations

As presented in Table 10, the segment of JDB between the two “bookend” intersections is proposed to be widened to six lanes, as needed for signalized intersection operations / auxiliary turning. The frontage roads are recommended to remain as two-way, as presented above with enhancements including bicycle lanes, wide pedestrian sidewalks

December 2006 C-4

Johnnie Dodds Boulevard Mobility Study – Mt. Pleasant, SC

and/or multi-purpose pathways. All of these proposed elements would be feasible along this segment of JDB within the existing 200-foot right-of-way; supplemental enhancements or recommendations that would encroach upon the existing 200-foot right-of-way and result in additional costs/damages have not been considered as part of this Study.

Corridor Design Speed Recommendation

The retention of the existing 45 mph speed currently posted on the corridor is recommended to promote safe operations and provide a community oriented environment. The grade, horizontal alignment, clear zone, and shoulder should be designed to meet the 45 mph speed requirements.

Supplemental Recommendations

In addition to the major project recommendations listed previously, several design and aesthetic improvements are also recommended for the JDB corridor and surrounding local circulatory network. Table E-4 presents these supplemental recommendations.

Table E-4 Supplemental Recommendations Element Recommended Improvement Road Network • Develop grid network of interconnected streets Enhancements • Encourage use of frontage roads and backage roads Pedestrian • Construct sidewalks on all new roadways and eliminate ‘gaps’ in Network existing system Enhancements • Construct wide (up to 12’) sidewalks in areas with higher pedestrian traffic • Consider additional pedestrian connections across JDB, including humps (raised JDB), tunnels and/or pedestrian bridges to provide mid-block crossings and link related land uses as redevelopment occurs • Enhance pedestrian pathing/routing network parallel to JDB • Provide pedestrian enhancements in high pedestrian activity areas, including lighting, landscaping, sidewalk furniture, and aesthetic construction materials • Clearly designate pedestrian crossings with pavement markings, signage, and signal phases as appropriate Bicycle Network • Construct bicycle lanes where appropriate on new and existing Enhancements roadways (directional bicycle lanes should be four feet wide, or six feet wide if adjacent to parallel parking facilities) • Enhance Town’s existing multi-purpose path system (including Ravenel Bridge) to form an inter-connected network • Install adequate bicycle racks near transit stops and multimodal transfer locations Transit System • Consider use of bus pullouts for access to parallel pedestrian

December 2006 C-5

Johnnie Dodds Boulevard Mobility Study – Mt. Pleasant, SC

Element Recommended Improvement Enhancements network along adjacent frontage roads near intersections and at mid- block activity areas • Consider use of signal-preemption for transit vehicles or queue jumping applications • Provide transit system user amenities (shelters, trash receptacles, way finding, etc.) Aesthetic • Maximize use of aesthetically-based construction and finishing Enhancements materials • Maximize use of landscaping (including hardscapes) to reduce visual and audible impacts • Create a pedestrian oriented environment at high pedestrian activity areas near the grade separated or at-grade intersections

Cost Summary

Cost estimates for the improvement options recommended for JDB corridor including the two “bookend” and three “middle” intersections, are presented in Table E-5.

Table E-5. Construction Cost of Improvements Intersection or Segment Location Recommended Improvement Construction Concept Cost Estimate “Bookend” intersection of Houston Grade separation $27,000,000 Northcutt Blvd. at JDB (4-thru lanes) “Bookend” intersection of Bowman Road Grade separation $36,000,000 at JDB (4-thru lanes) “Middle” intersection of Dragoon Drive at $1,500,000 Modified CFI JDB “Middle” intersection of Shelmore $1,500,000 Modified CFI Boulevard at JDB “Middle” intersection of Anna Knapp $1,500,000 Modified CFI Boulevard at JDB JDB between “Bookend” intersections of Auxiliary Lanes Houston Northcutt Blvd. and Bowman (1.4 miles – excluding $4,300,000 intersections) Total $71,800,000

Improvements to frontage roads are not required, but may provide benefit with increased re-development over time. An estimate for frontage road improvements (including curb and gutter, drainage, parking, sidewalks and streetscapes) is approximately $1,200,000 per mile per section of frontage road on one side of JDB. Although not required, an additional 12 feet of right-of-way could also be obtained to implement wider landscaped

December 2006 C-6

Johnnie Dodds Boulevard Mobility Study – Mt. Pleasant, SC medians, thereby providing aesthetic and enhanced safety benefits. The cost for the frontage road improvements with the additional 12 feet of right-of-way (excluding costs for business relocations) is approximately $2,300,000 per mile per section of frontage road on one side of JDB. Total frontage road construction costs for the 2.1 miles between the two “bookend” intersections would be $5,040,000 within the existing JDB right-of-way, and $9,660,000 with the additional 12 feet of right-of-way.

The total construction, design and construction management costs are estimated at $71.8 million (2005 costs - not including optional frontage road improvements). Assuming annual construction cost increases of 6-8 percent, the total construction, design and construction management costs in five years are estimated between $96.1 and 105.5 million (2011 costs – not including optional frontage road improvements). In addition to these construction costs are costs for maintenance of the improvements:

Maintenance: The maintenance costs for the roundabouts are similar to that for a standard intersection. Since separate pedestrian signals would be needed with the multilane roundabout option, the annual operations and maintenance cost for signals at a grade separation would be approximately the same at $7,000 per year for two signal installations. The annual maintenance cost for bridges, at $0.05 per square foot per year equates to $1,000 per year for the two recommended bridge installations.

Implementation of the grade separations provides user benefits in terms of reduced delay:

• The grade separated option reduces AM and PM peak period through movement delay (three hours surrounding each of AM and PM peak hours) by 3,700 vehicle-hours per day over the no-build condition for a user benefit of $15 million per year (assuming a vehicle occupancy of 1.1 and a cost of $15/hour). As this data indicates, five years of through movement delay benefits alone (assuming 2030 traffic volumes) are greater than the recommended improvements construction costs. • The grade separated option reduces AM and PM peak period delay by 900 vehicle-hours per day over the roundabout option for a user benefit of $3.8 million per year.

December 2006 C-7

Johnnie Dodds Boulevard Mobility Study – Mt. Pleasant, SC

Summary of City Council Action

Excerpt from Meeting Minutes SPECIAL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 5, 2006

Mayor Hallman called the meeting to order at 12:00 noon. Council members in attendance were Kruger Smith, Gary Santos, Paul Gawrych, Joe Bustos and Thomasena Stokes-Marshall. Absent from the meeting were Larry Carr and Bobby Utsey.

Staff members in attendance were Mac Burdette, Allen Young, Colleen Jernigan, Joel Ford, Jody Peele, Chief Williams, Major Sewell, Sally Phipps and Eric DeMoura.

Mayor Hallman recognized Mr. Jim Hutto, Director of Charleston County Public Works, Mr. Bob Probst and Dan Moses with LPA. He thanked them for attending the meeting.

Mr. Gawrych indicated that Council met a few weeks back with eight members in attendance and discussed flyovers, roundabouts, and other suggestions.

Mr. Gawrych made a motion to look at having a flyover at the Bowman and Highway 17 intersection and all other intersections being at-grade; seconded by Mr. Santos. The motion carried with a vote of 5-1 with Mr. Bustos opposing.

Mr. Gawrych stated that based on the motion he would like to move forward with looking at the flyover and the at-grade intersections, have staff work with the County and LPA to begin narrowing down a process for at-grade intersections. He stated that he would like to talk about how everyone feels about the process.

Mr. Smith stated that he is not opposed to a workable at-grade intersection; however, he did ask Mr. Wilburn if any at-grade intersections would work and he said “no”. He stated that the Town must have Mr. Wilburn identify something that will work prior to moving forward with any decision regarding at-grades. There may be modifications to the super street that will work, but does not believe Council will vote for something that will not work. He wants Council to look at the at-grades as carefully as possible and have the traffic consultant say that these modifications will work.

Mr. Gawrych concurred with Mr. Smith’s comments. He stated that Council has been going through this for one and half years and Council just agreed in theory with the flyover and everything else at-grade and to further study that. He added that he was trying to think how the Town can move past what was done with the Town’s consultant and begin to work with the County and their consultant, because these are the individuals who are going to be involved with the build out design and process of the road.

Other comments followed - Refer to Town of Mount Pleasant Meeting Minutes for a copy of the entire meeting minutes.

December 2006 C-8