FINAL
October 2017
GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION
GSATS 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This report was developed in collaboration with the following entities:
Mark Hoeweler, Director Grand Strand Area Transportation Study 1230 Highmarket Street Georgetown, SC 29440 www.gsats.org
ADOPTED DATE
The preparation and publication of this report was financed in part through grants from the Federal Highway Administration and the South Carolina Department of Transportation. All opinions, findings, and conclusions presented in this report reflect the view of the Plan authors and do not necessarily reflect the official views or policy of the Federal Highway Administration or the South Carolina Department of Transportation.
This page is intentionally blank.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Objectives ...... 10 1 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 Goal 5: Modal Choices and Balanced System ...... 10 Objectives ...... 10 MTP Overview ...... 2 Goal 6: Safety and Security ...... 10 Objectives ...... 10 2 PLANNING CONTEXT ...... 3 Goal 7: Infrastructure Preservation and Maintenance ...... 10 Purpose of MTP ...... 3 Objectives ...... 10 Background/History of GSATS Region ...... 4 Goal 8: Congestion and Reliability ...... 10 GSATS Structure and Organization Responsibility ...... 5 Objectives ...... 10 Related Plans/Studies ...... 6 Performance Measures ...... 11 Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) ...... 6 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) ...... 6 4 STUDY AREA CHARACTERISTICS ...... 13 Congestion Management Process (CMP) ...... 6 Demographic Conditions ...... 13 Public Participation ...... 7 Steering Committee ...... 7 Existing Transportation System ...... 15 Public Meetings ...... 7 Roadways Facilities ...... 15 Interactive Online Mapping Application ...... 7 Capacity Analysis ...... 18 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities ...... 21 Consideration of State and Local Plans ...... 8 Transit Facilities ...... 22 Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Transit Levels of Service ...... 23 3 GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND PERFORMANCE Safety Analysis ...... 24 Vulnerable Road Users ...... 25 MEASURES ...... 9 Hurricane Evacuation ...... 26 Goal 1: Coordinated Land Use and Transportation ...... 9 Objectives ...... 9 5 ROADWAY MOBILITY ...... 27 Goal 2: Economic Competitiveness ...... 9 Objectives ...... 9 Project Identification ...... 27 Goal 3: Mobility and System Accessibility ...... 9 Project Scoring Criteria ...... 27 Objectives ...... 9 GSATS Project Scoring Criteria Breakdown ...... 28 Goal 4: Environmental Stewardship ...... 10 Traffic Volume and Congestion ...... 28 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Public Safety ...... 28 Air Cargo ...... 56 Livability ...... 28 Financial Viability and Maintenance Cost ...... 29
Functional Class (Truck Traffic) ...... 29 9 FINANCING AND IMPLEMENTATION ...... 57 Environmental Impact ...... 29 Roadway Funding Sources and Revenue Forecasts ...... 58 Consistency with Local Land Use Plans ...... 29 Federal and State Funding Sources ...... 58 Pavement Quality Index, Cost, and Total Reduction in Vehicle Miles Traveled* ... 30 Local Funding Source – RIDE III ...... 58 Roadway Recommendations ...... 30 Additional Funding Sources ...... 58 New Construction Recommendations ...... 30 Roadway Revenue Forecast ...... 58 Widening Recommendations ...... 32 Recommended Projects ...... 59 Access Management/Streetscape/Complete Streets Recommendations ...... 34 Project Prioritization ...... 35 South Carolina Act 114 ...... 65 Project Cost Estimation and Roadway Design Concepts ...... 41 North Carolina DOT SPOT 4.0 ...... 66 Strategic Corridors Network SC and NC ...... 42 GSATS’ Local Input Point Assignment ...... 66 Alternative Funding Strategies ...... 67 6 ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION ...... 43 Policy Recommendations ...... 67 Overview of Existing Facilities ...... 43 System Preservation...... 67 System Efficiency ...... 67 East Coast Greenway ...... 44 Safety and Security ...... 67 Safe Routes to School ...... 46 Travel Demand Management ...... 67 Land Use and Urban Design ...... 68 Active Transportation Recommendations ...... 46 Environmental Mitigation ...... 68 Technology ...... 68 7 TRANSIT ...... 49 Mobility Needs ...... 49 Existing Providers ...... 50 APPENDICES Coast RTA Ridership ...... 50 Appendix A – Public Meeting Summaries Brunswick Transit System ...... 50 Appendix B – Goals and Objectives Technical Memorandum Service Providers Outside GSATS Region ...... 50 Appendix C – Performance Measures Technical Memorandum Other Transportation Providers ...... 50 Appendix D – Level of Service Technical Memorandum Appendix E – GSATS Transportation Context Technical Memorandum Future Transit Outlook ...... 51 Appendix F – Environmental Context Technical Memorandum Transit Needs ...... 51 Appendix G – Pedestrian Walkways and Bikeways Technical Memorandum Transit Policy Recommendations ...... 51 Appendix H – Access to Non-Roadway and Transit Technical Memorandum Appendix I – Project Financing and Implementation Plan 8 GOODS MOVEMENT ...... 53 Highway Freight ...... 54 Rail Freight ...... 56 Port of Georgetown ...... 56
ii GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2-1: Federal Planning Factors ...... 3 Table 2-2: GSATS Policy Committee Voting Membership ...... 4 Table 2-3: GSATS-NCTCC Voting Membership ...... 4 Table 2-4: GSATS-NCTAC Voting Membership ...... 4 Table 3-1: Performance Measures ...... 12 Table 4-1: Myrtle Beach-Conway-North Myrtle Beach, SC-NC Metro Area Population Growth (2010 -2015) ...... 13 Table 4-2: Myrtle Beach, Peer Metro Areas and State Population Growth (2010 -2015) ...... 13 Table 4-3: GSATS Regional Demographics Overview ...... 13 Table 4-4: Traffic Growth in the GSATS Area, 2010-2015 ...... 17 Table 4-5: GSATS Let, Programmed, and Committed Projects ...... 20 Table 5-1: GSATS Road Widening Projects Criteria...... 27 Table 5-2: GSATS New Road Location Projects Criteria ...... 28 Table 5-3: Traffic Volume and Congestion Point Scale ...... 28 Table 5-4: Public Safety Point Scale ...... 28 Table 5-5: Financial Viability and Maintenance Costs Point Scale ...... 29 Table 5-6: Functional Class Point Scale ...... 29 Table 5-7: Environmental Impact Point Scale ...... 29 Table 5-8: New Construction Recommendations (South Carolina) ...... 30 Table 5-9: New Construction Recommendations (North Carolina) ...... 31 Table 5-10: Widening Recommendations (South Carolina) ...... 32 Table 5-11: Widening Recommendations (North Carolina) ...... 33 Table 5-12: Access Management/Streetscape/Complete Streets Recommendations (South Carolina) ...... 34 Table 5-13: Access Management/Streetscape/Complete Streets Recommendations (North Carolina) ...... 35 Table 5-14: South Carolina Roadway Projects Prioritization ...... 35 Table 5-15: North Carolina Roadway Projects Prioritization ...... 40 Table 7-1: Coast RTA Annual Ridership (2014 – 2016) ...... 50 Table 7-2: Future Transit Projects and Needs ...... 51 Table 9-1: South Carolina and North Carolina Roadway Revenue Forecast through 2040 ...... 58 Table 9-2: Horry County, South Carolina RIDE III Projects ...... 59 Table 9-3: South Carolina – New Construction Project Recommendations ...... 60 Table 9-4: South Carolina – Widening Project Recommendations...... 61 Table 9-5: South Carolina – Access Management/Streetscape/Complete Streets Project Recommendations ...... 62 Table 9-6: North Carolina – Project Recommendations ...... 63
iii GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LISTLIST OFOF FIGURESFIGURES
Figure 1-1: GSATS Study Area ...... 1
Figure 4-1: Population Change per Square Mile (2000 – 2014) ...... 14 Figure 4-2: Employment Change per Square Mile (2000 – 2014) ...... 14 Figure 4-3: Functional Classification of GSATS Roads ...... 16 Figure 4-4 Existing (2015) Peak Season Daily LOS ...... 18 Figure 4-5: Future (2040) Peak Season Daily LOS ...... 19 Figure 4-6: GSATS Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities ...... 21 Figure 4-7: GSATS Transit Facilities ...... 22 Figure 4-8: Fatal Crash Density in GSATS Region, 2012-2016 ...... 24 Figure 4-9: Vulnerable Road Users Crash Analysis ...... 25 Figure 4-10: Hurricane Evacuation Routes in Horry and Georgetown Counties, SC ...... 26 Figure 4-11: Hurricane Evacuation Routes in North Carolina ...... 26 Figure 5-1: Typical Cross-Sections ...... 41 Figure 5-2: Strategic Corridors within GSATS Study Area ...... 42 Figure 6-1: South Carolina East Coast Greenway System ...... 44 Figure 6-2: North Carolina East Coast Greenway System ...... 45 Figure 7-1: Coast RTA Fixed Route Annual Ridership ...... 50 Figure 8-1: GSATS Region Freight Transportation System ...... 53 Figure 8-2: National Highway System in GSATS Region ...... 54 Figure 8-3: South Carolina Strategic Freight Roadway Network ...... 55 Figure 8-4: NCDOT - North Carolina Truck Network (NCTN) in Brunswick County ...... 55 Figure 9-1: Project Recommendations by Horizon Year in Georgetown County, SC ...... 64 Figure 9-2: Project Recommendations by Horizon Year in Horry County, SC ...... 64 Figure 9-3: Project Recommendations by Horizon Year in Brunswick County, NC ...... 65
iv GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
1 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this Metropolitan Transportation Plan Figure 1-1: GSATS Study Area (MTP) is to provide systematic, long-range planning for transportation projects and programs in the Grand Strand Area Transportation Study (GSATS). The metropolitan transportation planning process requires the development of a MTP that addresses at least a 20-year planning horizon and includes both long- and short- range strategies or actions that lead to the development of an integrated, intermodal transportation system that facilitates the efficient movement of people and goods. This MTP was developed through a continuing, cooperative, and comprehensive planning process and identifies needs, financial resources, and priorities for the GSATS region. This chapter provides a general overview of the GSATS 2040 MTP.
GSATS serves as the designated Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) responsible for carrying out the federally mandated urban transportation planning and programming process for the Grand Strand Area. MPOs cover urbanized areas with populations of 50,000 or more. The GSATS MPO study area boundary shown in Figure 1-1 encompasses the northern coast area of South Carolina and the southern coastal area of North Carolina including portions of Horry and Georgetown counties in South Carolina and Brunswick County in North Carolina. The municipalities that are also within the boundary are: Myrtle Beach, Conway, North Myrtle Beach, Georgetown, Surfside Beach, Shallotte, Sunset Beach, Carolina Shores, Calabash, Holden Beach, Ocean Isle Beach, Varnamtown, Briarcliffe Acres, Atlantic Beach, and Pawleys Island.
1 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
1 INTRODUCTION
As the MPO, GSATS provides the forum for cooperative decision making in developing regional transportation plans and GSATS provides programs to meet changing needs. It is composed of elected the forum for and appointed officials representing local, state, and federal governments or agencies having interest or responsibility in cooperative comprehensive transportation planning. GSATS serves as the formal agency that plans and programs transportation decision making improvements in the GSATS area, which are then implemented by local and state jurisdictions. 2040 MTP Plan Focus Areas MTP OVERVIEW • Roadways Improvements – The GSATS 2040 MTP Update is a culmination of extensive public and partner participation, technical including widening, aesthetic analysis, population and employment projections, and local and regional needs assessment. This process improvements, and safer has resulted in recommendations for multimodal transportation improvements for the GSATS area. The document is organized into the following chapters: intersections • Chapter 1 – Introduction and MTP Overview • – including • Chapter 2 – Planning Context Biking and Walking • Chapter 3 – Goals, Objectives, and Performance Measures changes that make safer and • Chapter 4 – Study Area Characteristics • Chapter 5 – Roadway Mobility better places, where visitors and • Chapter 6 – Active Transportation residents want to live, work, • Chapter 7 – Transit • Chapter 8 – Goods Movement walk, and ride • Chapter 9 – Financing and Implementation • Public Transportation – reaching Appendices, under separate cover, provide additional information on the following topics: places for people with and • Appendix A – Public Meeting Summaries • Appendix B – Goals and Objectives Technical Memorandum without easy access to cars • Appendix C – Performance Measures Technical Memorandum • Appendix D – Level of Service Technical Memorandum • Regional Mobility – prioritizing • Appendix E – GSATS Transportation Context Technical Memorandum regional needs across all modes • Appendix F – Environmental Context Technical Memorandum • Appendix G – Pedestrian Walkways and Bikeways Technical Memorandum of transportation • Appendix H – Access to Non-Roadway and Transit Technical Memorandum • Appendix I – Project Financing and Implementation Plan
2 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
2 PLANNING CONTEXT In its earliest years, surface transportation planning in the United States focused on addressing national Table 2-1: Federal Planning Factors mobility needs by connecting the various areas of the nation through an interstate highway system. This Federal Planning Factors was officially known as the National Interstate and Defense Highways Act, which was enacted in 1956. 1 – Support the economic vitality of the metropolitan These issues were at the forefront, affecting transportation planning and projects in the wake of two area world wars and cold war threats. An interstate highway system was imperative for national defense 2 - Increase safety for motorized and non-motorized purposes in the event of a foreign invasion, which would require the quick mobilization of troops across users the country. 3 - Increase security for motorized and non-motorized In recent times, state and metropolitan transportation planning have been shaped and defined by a users series of federal transportation laws, regulations, and policies that encourage the development of a 4 - Increase accessibility and mobility for people and multimodal and performance-based transportation planning process. The significant federal freight transportation planning acts include the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 5 - Protect and enhance the environment, promote (ISTEA); the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century of 1998 (TEA-21); the Safe, Accountable, energy conservation, improve the quality of life, MAP-21 Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for All Users of 2005 (SAFETEA-LU); the Moving and promote consistency between transportation Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act of 2012 (MAP-21); and the most recent Fixing America's improvements and State and local planned growth Surface Transportation Act of 2015 (FAST Act). The FAST Act continues the Metropolitan Planning FAST Act and economic development patterns program under MAP-21, amends 23 U.S.C. 134, and expands the scope consideration of the metropolitan 6 - Enhance the integration and connectivity of the planning process. The FAST Act expands the eight planning factors identified under MAP-21 with the transportation system, across and between modes, addition of three additional factors: for people and freight 7 - Promote efficient system management and • Improving transportation resiliency and reliability operation • Reducing/mitigating stormwater impacts of surface transportation 8 - Emphasize the preservation of the existing • Enhancing travel and tourism transportation system. 9 - Improve the resiliency and reliability of the The GSATS 2040 Metropolitan Transportation Plan Update addresses and meets all MAP-21 and FAST Act transportation system planning requirements as provided by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit 10 – Reduce or mitigate stormwater impacts of surface Administration (FTA) shown in Table 2-1. transportation 11 - Enhance travel and tourism PURPOSE OF MTP Source: 23 USC 134: Metropolitan transportation planning http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title23-section134&num=0&edition=prelim The MTP outlines the transportation goals, objectives, and performance measures for the region, as well as addresses transportation related issues and impacts over a 23-year horizon. The MTP is federally- mandated and complies with the Statewide and Metropolitan Transportation Planning regulations issued by the US Department of Transportation (USDOT). This 2040 GSATS MTP Update is an update to the previous long-range transportation plan adopted in 2011.
3 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
2 PLANNING CONTEXT
BACKGROUND/HISTORY OF GSATS REGION GSATS was formed in 1985 to provide a forum for the coordination of regional transportation planning Expansion of the GSATS region also included the creation of two review committees for the North efforts affecting northeastern coastal South Carolina. In 1992, GSATS was designated as the MPO for the Carolina portion of the MPO. These are the GSATS North Carolina Technical Coordinating Committee Myrtle Beach Urbanized Area (UZA). With this designation, GSATS assumed responsibilities for the (NCTCC) and the GSATS North Carolina Transportation Advisory Committee (NCTAC). Representation of development of the area’s Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) and the identification and ranking of these committees are described and illustrated in Table 2-3 and Table 2-4. projects for funding through an adopted Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). Table 2-3: GSATS-NCTCC Voting Membership The 2010 Census reported continued growth for the area and, for the first time, the Myrtle Beach UZA Jurisdiction/ Jurisdiction or Agency Designated Member (renamed the Myrtle Beach-Socastee SC/NC Urbanized Area) extended into the southern portions of Agency Votes Brunswick County, North Carolina. As a result, in 2012, GSATS entered into a memorandum of Brunswick County One Planning Director understanding with the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), South Carolina Calabash One Town Administrator Department of Transportation (SCDOT), Brunswick County, and the towns of Calabash, Carolina Shores, Carolina Shores One Town Administrator Holden Beach, Ocean Isle Beach, Shallotte, Sunset Beach, and Varnamtown. The effect of this Holden Beach One Town Manager memorandum was to create a bi-state MPO with expanded representation on the GSATS Policy Ocean Isle Beach One Planning Director Committee (See Table 2-2). Shallotte One Planning Director Sunset Beach One Town Administrator Table 2-2: GSATS Policy Committee Voting Membership Varnamtown One Planning Director Jurisdiction/ Brunswick Transit System One Executive Director Jurisdiction or Agency Designated Member Agency Votes Cape Fear COG One Planning Director SOUTH CAROLINA POLICY COMMITTEE MEMBERS FHWA NC One Transportation Planner, Planning and Program Development Georgetown County Council One Chairman NCDOT Division One Division 3 Engineer or their representative NCDOT Transportation Horry County Council Two Council Chairman and Councilman One TPB GSATS MPO Coordinator Planning Branch City of Conway One Mayor WRCOG One GSATS MPO Director City of Georgetown One Mayor City of Myrtle Beach Two Mayor and Councilman Table 2-4: GSATS-NCTAC Voting Membership City of North Myrtle Beach One Mayor Jurisdiction/ Jurisdiction or Agency Designated Member Town of Atlantic Beach One Mayor Agency Votes County Commission Chair Town of Briarcliffe Acres One Mayor Brunswick County Two (one vote per member) Town of Pawleys Island One Mayor County Commissioner Calabash One Mayor Town of Surfside Beach One Mayor Carolina Shores One Mayor Legislative Delegation – Georgetown Legislative Delegation Senator and one (1) house Two County member Holden Beach One Mayor Legislative Delegation Senator and two (2) house Ocean Isle Beach One Mayor Legislative Delegation – Horry County Three members Mayor Shallotte Two Waccamaw Regional Transportation (one vote per member) One Chairman Town Alderman Authority Sunset Beach One Mayor South Carolina Department of District Commissioner and SCDOT Secretary of Two Varnamtown One Mayor Transportation Transportation or designee Brunswick Transit System One Board Chair NORTH CAROLINA POLICY COMMITTEE MEMBERS North Carolina Board of Transportation member as designated NCDOT One GSATS-NCTAC Two Two (2) NCTAC members by the Secretary of Transportation Brunswick County One County Commissioner District 17 Representative or, if reapportioned, House North Carolina House of One Member representing the largest geographic portion of the NC Department of Transportation One NCDOT Member Representatives Study Area
District 8 Senator or, if reapportioned, the Senator North Carolina Senate One representing the largest geographic portion of the Study Area
4 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
2 PLANNING CONTEXT
GSATS STRUCTURE AND ORGANIZATION RESPONSIBILITY GSATS is governed by a 24-person policy committee with representatives from jurisdictions and transportation agencies in North Carolina and South Carolina. GSATS includes eighteen jurisdictions, covers approximately 1,200 square miles, and encompasses a population of nearly 300,000. GSATS is made up of MPO Planning Staff and four committees. The functions and responsibilities are summarized as follows:
• MPO Planning Staff: The MPO planning staff carries out the activities of the Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP). Those activities include administration, planning, plan development, program development and maintenance.
• GSATS Study Team: The Study Team serves as a technical advisory committee and makes recommendations to the Policy Committee on proposed projects within the South Carolina portion of the study area.
• GSATS-NCTCC: The NCTCC reviews, evaluates, and recommends action on all proposed projects within the North Carolina portion of the GSATS’ Study Area. Recommendations from the NCTCC are forwarded to the NCTAC for action or recommendation to the Policy Committee.
• GSATS-NCTAC: The NCTAC serves as the principle review and recommending body to the Policy Committee on projects and issues affecting the North Carolina portion of the study area. For certain activities where issues are particular to North Carolina and/or NCDOT requirements, such as adoption of the Comprehensive Transportation Plan, the NCTAC can exercise final review and approval authority for the MPO.
• GSATS Policy Committee: The Policy Committee receives, reviews, and takes action (approves, denies, or sends back for reconsideration) on all issues and items brought to it by the MPO planning staff, the Study Team, or NCTAC. Review and approval responsibilities include the adoption of the MPO’s MTP. The policy committee annually programs approximately seven million dollars for local transportation improvements.
5 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
2 PLANNING CONTEXT
RELATED PLANS/STUDIES The GSATS is responsible for the development of several plans in addition to this MTP. Though separate documents with different ranges and update cycles, they are meant to inform one another so each will progress. Metropolitan Transportation Plan Transportation Improvement Congestion Management Process (MTP) Program (TIP) (CMP) Title 23, U.S.C. Section 134 (i) (1) states that MPOs shall prepare The 2015-2019 Transportation Improvement Program for the GSATS Metropolitan areas with populations exceeding 200,000 are and update their MTP every four or five years, depending upon area is a five-year program of transportation capital projects required by federal law to develop a Congestion Management whether the MPO is in attainment with the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. together with a three-year estimate of transit capital and Process (CMP) as part of their MPO planning activities. This 7407 (d)). If in attainment, the MPO is required to update the MTP maintenance requirements. While the TIP is usually approved requirement was originally introduced in the ISTEA of 1991 and has every five years; if designated as nonattainment, the MTP must be biennially, the document may be amended throughout the year. been incorporated into later surface transportation authorization updated every four years. In either case, the MPO may update the FAST Act, as well as the Metropolitan Planning Regulations, acts. Under the act(s) and subsequent FHWA directives, CMPs are plan more frequently if desired. GSATS is currently in attainment mandates that a TIP comprise the following: to address congestion management through a process that provides with air quality standards and the next update to the GSATS MTP for safe and effective integrated management and operation of the following this update is anticipated in 2022. In addition, MAP-21 1. Identify transportation improvement projects recommended multimodal transportation system. The development of a and FAST Act requires MPOs to establish regional performance for advancement during the program years. The projects congestion management process should result in multimodal system measures and targets in coordination with state and public required are those located within the study area and performance measures and strategies that can be reflected in the transportation providers, based on statewide goals. Some receiving any Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) or metropolitan transportation plan and the TIP. The CMP is a "living" preliminary performance measures are identified in Chapter 3 but Federal Transit Administration (FTA) funds. document, continually evolving to address the results of additional performance measures and targets are expected to be performance measures, concerns of the community, new objectives 2. Identify the criteria and process for prioritization for identified at a later date once federal and state guidance has been and goals of the GSATS, and up-to-date information on congestion inclusion of projects in the TIP and any changes from past provided. This will likely occur before the 2022 update cycle. issues. TIPs. In addition to these regional plans, the GSATS Public Participation 3. Group improvements of similar urgency and anticipated Plan was used to inform the MTP planning process. This document staging into appropriate staging periods. serves as the plan for involving all citizens and transportation 4. Include realistic estimates of total costs and revenue for the stakeholders in the public involvement process for metropolitan program period. transportation planning.
5. Include a discussion of how improvements recommended from the Metropolitan Transportation Plan were merged into the TIP.
6. List major projects from previous TIPs that were implemented and identify any major delays in planned implementation.
7. The TIP may also include regional highway projects that are being implemented by the State, City and County for which federal funding is requested.
6 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
2 PLANNING CONTEXT
provide comments on the draft PUBLIC PARTICIPATION MTP update prior to adoption. Interactive Online Mapping Developing MTPs requires extensive public and private partner In addition to the meetings, an Application participation and agency coordination throughout the entire online WikiMap was provided for In addition to public meetings and in concert with, an online planning process. GSATS is required by federal legislation to citizens to submit comments on interactive mapping tool called “WikiMap” was utilized. WikiMap is provide the public and interested stakeholders with reasonable and recommended transportation an easy-to-use, web-based interactive mapping platform tailored meaningful opportunities to be involved in the transportation improvements identified in the specifically to multimodal transportation planning initiatives. The planning process. The outreach activities conducted during the financially constrained plan. map allows for “crowd-sourcing” of anecdotal data that provides GSATS 2040 MTP Update are summarized below. Meeting summaries for each series of public meetings are an additional layer of insight and understanding to local concerns included in Appendix A. and desires. The WikiMap affords users the opportunity to view all Steering Committee data input by all users and to agree, disagree, and/or comment on The GSATS Steering Committee consists of federal, state, and local individual items. Participants at the public meetings could government representatives including the jurisdictional partners in experiment with the WikiMap tool and provide feedback. By the study area, South Carolina Department of Transportation providing an email address, participants can continue providing (SCDOT), North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), feedback after the meeting concluded from their personal and FHWA. The Steering Committee provides the overall direction computers or devices. Two iterations of the WikiMap were used; and guidance in the development of the technical aspects of the one for the first series of public meetings and the second for the MTP Update. The role of the individual Committee member is to second series of meetings. represent their organization relative to regional transportation issues, share information with their organizations, and encourage Screenshot of WikiMap comments public participation in the process. As a group, the Committee met 6 times at key milestones of the plan development. Public Meetings Two series of public participation meetings were conducted during the plan development to engage local residents on multimodal transportation needs in the region. The first series included four public meetings held on November 16 and 17, 2016 to initiate the 2040 Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) update. The meetings were an open house format held in Shallotte, North Carolina (NC); North Myrtle Beach, South Carolina (SC); Murrells Inlet, SC; and Carolina Forest, SC. In addition to the meetings, an online WikiMap was advertised for citizens to submit comments and identify locations in the GSATS for transportation improvements.
The second series of public meetings also included four public meetings over two days on July 19 and 20, 2017. The meetings were held in Shallotte, NC; North Myrtle Beach, SC; Murrells Inlet, SC; and Myrtle Beach, SC. Meeting attendees were asked to
7 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
2 PLANNING CONTEXT
CONSIDERATION OF STATE AND LOCAL PLANS The GSATS 2040 MTP Update is the most current transportation plan for the Grand Strand Area. As with most planning documents, it builds upon and incorporates the ideas, issues, and recommendations of past and current planning efforts. The following plans and studies completed since the 2035 LRTP served as valuable inputs into the development of this MTP Update:
• South Carolina (SCDOT) 2040 Multimodal Transportation Plan, 2014 • North Carolina (NCDOT) 2040 Statewide Transportation Plan, 2012 • GSATS 2035 Long Range Transportation Plan (2011) • Georgetown, SC Countywide Transportation Master Plan, 2008 • Georgetown County US 17 Corridor Study (2003) • ENVISION 2025 Horry County, SC Comprehensive Plan Update, Transportation Element, 2011 • Brunswick, NC County Comprehensive Transportation Plan, 2010 • Waccamaw Regional Transit and Coordination Plan, 2014 • City of Myrtle Beach Comprehensive Plan, 2011 • City of Conway Comprehensive Plan – Population Element 2035 • City of Conway Comprehensive Transportation Plan, 2008 • City of North Myrtle Beach Visioning Process, 2015 • City of North Myrtle Beach Comprehensive Plan, 2010 • City of North Myrtle Beach US 17 Corridor Study, 2003 • City of Georgetown Comprehensive Plan, 2011 • Town of Surfside Beach Comprehensive Plan 2013-2022, 2013 • Town of Carolina Shores Comprehensive Plan – Existing Conditions Chapter, 2017 • Town of Ocean Isle Beach 2009 CAMA Land Use Plan, 2009 • Town of Atlantic Beach CAMA Land Use Plan Update, 2010 • Brunswick County Greenway, Bikeway, and Paddle Trail Plan (in process) • East Coast Greenway Master Plan: Horry and Georgetown Counties, 2003 • Horry County Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan, 2012, amended 2016 • Horry County Envision 2025 (2008, last updated 2015
• Northeast Area Transportation Plan, 2008 • Kings Highway Corridor Study, 2008
8 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
3 GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND PERFORMANCE MEASURES Goals and objectives are important components of the MTP update. Goals and objectives are used to direct transportation investments and to translate the strategic vision of the GSATS MPO into something GOAL 1: COORDINATED LAND USE AND that can be measured and tracked. The GSATS 2040 MTP goals will define the overall direction of the GSATS long range transportation planning efforts in its area and guide the MPO in decisions regarding TRANSPORTATION multimodal transportation infrastructure investment. The goals provide a strategic framework for Develop a Plan that will protect and sustain a high quality of life by coordinating land use and organizing and articulating the objectives, priorities, and policies that will be established through the transportation planning in the region. plan development process.
The GSATS 2040 MTP goals were Objectives developed in accordance with • Improve data collection and forecasting methods to ensure the identification of existing and FAST Act planning requirements as future areas of concern. well as in coordination with South • Develop and utilize Land Use Design Guidance to improve streetscaping and incorporate Complete Carolina and North Carolina Streets. statewide transportation plans and • Improve pedestrian and bicycle linkages to activity centers. the GSATS Congestion Management • Protect and preserve historic, cultural, and civic assets. System Plan (CMP). The eight goal areas for the GSATS 2040 MTP are: Coordinated Land Use and GOAL 2: ECONOMIC COMPETITIVENESS Transportation, Economic Develop a financially feasible plan that will advance the economic competitiveness of the GSATS region Competitiveness, Mobility and based upon sustainable development. System Accessibility, Environmental Stewardship, Modal Choices and Balanced System, Objectives Safety and Security, Infrastructure • Utilize the existing transportation system to facilitate enhanced freight movement to support a Preservation and Maintenance, and growing economy. Congestion and Reliability. Each • Use transportation investment to support economic development, job creation, and commerce. goal area lists measurable objectives to help meet the goals and measure future performance GOAL 3: MOBILITY AND SYSTEM ACCESSIBILITY of the multimodal transportation Develop a Transportation System that will increase accessibility and mobility throughout the region and system. Appendix B provides integrates modes to provide efficient movement of people and freight. further detail on the goals and objectives. Objectives • Improve access and mobility within the region by adopting and implementing access management, complete streets, and intersection design guidelines.
9 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
3 GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND PERFORMANCE MEASURES
• Provide equitable transportation options for all travelers, including transit-dependent populations and users of all capabilities. GOAL 6: SAFETY AND SECURITY Provide and promote a safe, secure, accessible, resilient, and efficient multimodal transportation GOAL 4: ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP system for residents, tourists, and commerce. Develop a transportation system that will enhance economic and social values, protect the natural environment, and minimize adverse impacts. Objectives • Provide for a safe and efficient transportation system. Objectives • Reduce highway fatalities and serious injuries. • Reduce bicycle and pedestrian and other vulnerable roadway users’ fatalities and serious injuries. • Provide a transportation system that is sensitive to the natural and man-made environment. • Reduce fatal or serious injury crashes at at-grade rail crossings. • Encourage modal partners to be proactive in considering and addressing environmental impacts of • Reduce fatal and serious injury crashes at intersections. their transportation infrastructure investments. • Encourage the protection and conservation of natural resources. GOAL 7: INFRASTRUCTURE PRESERVATION AND
MAINTENANCE Protect and preserve the existing public multimodal transportation system and facilities in a state of good repair. Objectives • Maintain or improve the current state of good repair for the National Highway System. • Reduce the percentage of remaining state highway miles (non-interstate/strategic corridors) moving from a “fair” to a “very poor” rating while maintaining or increasing the % of miles rated as “good”. • Improve the condition of the state highway system bridges.
• Maintain or improve the transit infrastructure in a state of good repair. GOAL 5: MODAL CHOICES AND BALANCED SYSTEM GOAL 8: CONGESTION AND RELIABILITY Establish a more balanced and livable transportation system that will increase modal choices by Reduce congestion and improve reliability of the multimodal transportation system. prioritizing transit, pedestrian, and bicycle travel throughout the region. Objectives Objectives • Reduce the number of system miles at unacceptable congestion levels. • Utilize the existing transportation system to facilitate enhanced modal options for a growing and diverse population and economy. • Improve travel time reliability (on priority corridors or congested corridors). • Improve transportation choice and mode selection. • Provide improvements to relieve congestion based on rational and objective criteria to ensure the wise and effective use of limited resources. • Improve intermodal connectivity.
10 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
3 GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND PERFORMANCE MEASURES
PERFORMANCE MEASURES The guiding principle behind the development and implementation The proposed performance measures for GSATS were determined The proposed performance measures in Table 3-1 will be further of performance measures for MPOs is to provide a means to assess by starting with SCDOT and NCDOT performance measures and then finalized in coordination with SCDOT and NCDOT as each state how the transportation system and/or the agency is functioning tailoring them for the GSATS area. Those considerations include finalizes their performance measures. SCDOT and NCDOT are and operating. Performance measures help inform decision‐making the following: anticipated to set performance targets for the federally required and create better accountability for efficient and effective performance measures as required by MAP-21 and the FAST Act program implementation. Performance measurements serve the • Data Availability – the data and analysis tools needed for during the remainder of 2017. According to the National following three functions: the measure should be readily available or easy to obtain. Performance Rule Making (NPRM), State DOTs and MPOs are to The data should be reliable, accurate, and timely. establish quantifiable statewide performance targets to be • Plan Development – Provide a means to quantify baseline achieved over a 4-year performance period, with the first system performance and impacts of plan options to support • Strategic Alignment – the measures should align well with performance period starting in 2018. MPOs may establish targets by trade‐off decisions and help communicate the anticipated the goals and objectives of the North Carolina’s Statewide either supporting the State DOT's statewide target, or defining a impacts of different investment strategies. Long Range Plan and South Carolina’s Statewide Multimodal target unique to the metropolitan planning area each time the Transportation Plan, and the National transportation policy. State DOT establishes a target. In accordance with MAP-21, the • Plan Implementation – Support plan implementation by NPRM proposed providing MPOs with an additional 180-day period • Understandable and Explainable – the measures should be emphasizing agency goals/ objectives and integrating them to set targets following the date on which the State DOT easy to understand and useful when communicating to into budgeting, program structure, project selection, and established their targets. The GSATS will continue to coordinate external partners. project/program implementation policies. with SCDOT and NCDOT during the target setting process and adoption of the GSATS targets will occur as an addendum to the • Accountability – Facilitate tracking and reporting on system • Causality – the measures should focus on the items under 2040 MTP. performance relative to plan goals and objectives to the transportation planning organizations and local support accountability for plan implementation and results. governments span of control. Further discussion on performance measures can be found in Appendix C. • Decision‐Making Value – The measures should provide predictive, diagnostic and reporting value to agency decision makers.
11 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
3 GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND PERFORMANCE MEASURES
Table 3-1: Performance Measures
GSATS 2040 MTP Goals GSATS 2040 MTP Objectives Proposed Performance Measures [potential source of data] • Improve data collection and forecasting methods to ensure the identification of existing and future areas of concern Coordinated Land Use & • Develop and utilize Land Use Design Guidance to improve streetscaping and incorporate • Number of lane miles of bicycle lanes and sidewalks [MPO Data] Transportation Planning Complete Streets • Align recommendations with Comprehensive Plans [Steering Committee partners] • Improve pedestrian and bicycle linkages to activity centers • Protect and preserve historic, cultural, and civic assets • Utilize the existing transportation system to facilitate enhanced freight movement to support a • Travel Time Reliability index [INRIX, SCDOT, NCDOT] Economic Competitiveness growing economy • Annual hours of truck delay on principal arterials [SCDOT, NCDOT] • Use transportation investment to support economic development, job creation, and commerce • Improve access and mobility within the region by adopting and implementing access • Number of completed projects incorporating access management, complete streets, and/or Mobility and System management, complete streets, and intersection design guidelines intersection design guidelines [MPO Data] Accessibility • Provide equitable transportation options for all travelers, including transit-dependent populations • Percent of non-Single Occupant Vehicle travel [U.S. Census Bureau, ACS] and users of all capabilities • Provide a transportation system that is sensitive to the natural and man-made environment • • MPO Air Quality Design Values [MPO Data] Environmental Stewardship Encourage modal partners to be proactive in considering and addressing environmental impacts of their transportation infrastructure investments • Annual hours of delay on principal arterials [INRIX, SCDOT, NCDOT] • Encourage the protection and conservation of natural resources • Percent increase in transit ridership [Coast RTA] • Utilize the existing transportation system to facilitate enhanced modal options for a growing and • Number of on-demand transit trips [Coast RTA] Modal Choices and Balanced diverse population and economy • Percent of population within ½ mile of transit route or facility connecting to regional activity System • Improve transportation choice and mode selection center(s) [Coast RTA] • Improve intermodal connectivity • Percent of population within ½ mile of bicycle facility connecting to regional activity center(s) [MPO Data] • Number and rate of fatalities (rate = # of fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles traveled) • Provide for a safe and efficient transportation system [SCDOT, NCDOT] • Reduce highway fatalities and serious injuries • Number and rate of serious injuries (rate = # of serious injuries per 100 million vehicle miles Safety and Security • Reduce bicycle and pedestrian and other vulnerable roadway users’ fatalities and serious injuries traveled) [SCDOT, NCDOT] • Reduce fatal or serious injury crashes at at-grade rail crossings • Number of Non-motorized fatalities [SCDOT, NCDOT] • Reduce fatal and serious injury crashes at intersections • Number of Non-motorized serious injuries [SCDOT, NCDOT] • Maintain or improve the current state of good repair for the National Highway System (NHS) • Reduce the percentage of remaining state highway miles (non-interstate/strategic corridors) Infrastructure Preservation moving from a “fair” to a “very poor” rating while maintaining or increasing the % of miles rated • Percent of state-maintained road miles in “good” condition [SCDOT, NCDOT] and Maintenance as “good” • Percent of state-maintained bridges in satisfactory condition [SCDOT, NCDOT, NBIS1] • Improve the condition of the state highway system bridges • Improve the state transit infrastructure in a state of good repair • Reduce the number of system miles at unacceptable congestion levels • Improve travel time reliability (on priority corridors or congested corridors) Congestion and Reliability • Travel time reliability index [INRIX travel time data or AADT-based level of service] • Provide improvements to relieve congestion based on rational and objective criteria to ensure the wise and effective use of limited resources 1 National Bridge Inspection Standards (NBIS)
12 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
4 STUDY AREA CHARACTERISTICS An understanding of existing conditions, trends, opportunities, and challenges is vital to planning for a Table 4-1: Myrtle Beach-Conway-North Myrtle Beach, SC-NC Metro Area transportation system that is able to meet the current and future needs of residents and visitors of the Population Growth (2010 -2015) Grand Strand area. Transportation is both affected by and affects many aspects of modern society. 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Net Growth % Change Population growth, employment and economic trends, education, tourism, and land use are all key components of urbanized areas that a transportation system must be able to serve in providing mobility 378,697 385,691 394,006 404,441 417,177 431,964 55,242 14.6% and access. Source: U.S. Census Bureau Table 4-2: Myrtle Beach, Peer Metro Areas and State DEMOGRAPHIC CONDITIONS Population Growth (2010 -2015) Despite the significant efforts of local jurisdictions, growth in the Grand Strand area continues to Geography Net Growth % Change outpace growth in infrastructure expansion. Recently released US Census Bureau data reveals that Horry, Myrtle Beach-Conway-North Myrtle Beach, SC-NC Metro Area 55,242 14.66% Georgetown, and Brunswick counties’ growth continues as quality of life and livability features attract Charleston-North Charleston, SC Metro Area 79,883 12.02% population and business. The population of the Myrtle Beach-Conway-North Myrtle Beach, SC-NC Columbia, SC Metro Area 42,591 5.55% Metropolitan Area as defined by the US Census was 431,964 in 2015. This same area saw a 14 percent Savannah, GA Metro Area 31,578 9.08% growth rate in the five years from 2010 to 2015 as shown in Table 4-1. Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia, NC-SC Metro Area 209,115 9.43% The high population growth experienced by the Myrtle Beach metro area is even more pronounced when South Carolina (Statewide) 270,745 5.85% compared with peer cities and the state averages for the same study period as shown in Table 4-2. North Carolina (Statewide) 507,110 5.32% Myrtle Beach has a higher growth rate than the Charleston, Savannah and Charlotte metro areas. In Source: U.S. Census Bureau addition, the 14 percent growth rate is nearly triple the state averages for South and North Carolina at around 5 percent each. Table 4-3: GSATS Regional Demographics Overview While not part of the permanent population, an additional consideration for GSATS is the large volume of seasonal population that visits the area during the summer and winter months. Recently released U.S. 10-Year Average Census Bureau data reveals that Horry, Georgetown, and Brunswick counties’ growth continues as quality County Population (2000) Population (2010) Population (2040) Growth Rate (2000-2040) of life and livability features attract population and business (Table 4-3). The Grand Strand area Horry County, SC 196,629 269,291 423,270 24.23% attracted approximately 18 million visitors1 in 2016, which is up from the 17 million visitors in 2015. The number of visitors in the GSATS region has continued to grow every year for nearly the past decade. The Georgetown, SC 55,797 60,158 67,999 8.06% growing resident population combined with high levels of seasonal visitors place high levels of demand Brunswick, NC 73,143 107,431 199,297 31.83% on transportation infrastructure. One of the great challenges faced by the Grand Strand area over the Source: WRCOG life of this plan will be providing and maintaining adequate transportation infrastructure to meet demand while balancing the finite resources available to do so. Horry and Georgetown Counties were in the top 50 fastest growing counties nationwide from 2010 – 2015
1 http://web.myrtlebeachareachamber.com/news/newsarticledisplay.aspx?ArticleID=925
13 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
4 STUDY AREA CHARACTERISTICS
Figure 4-1 shows the change in population density by Census Block Group from 2000 to 2014. The map Figure 4-2 provides a similar map measuring employment change per square mile for the same time shows the full range of population density change from a few areas with negative growth and others with period of 2010-2014. The map shows many of the same patterns for employment growth as described for growth of 3,000 or more persons per square mile. Areas with the highest growth include Surfside Beach, population growth. Myrtle Beach, and North Myrtle Beach. The areas of negative growth are also found in some of these same areas along the coast.
Figure 4-1: Population Change per Square Mile (2000 – 2014) Figure 4-2: Employment Change per Square Mile (2000 – 2014)
Source: US Census Bureau Source: US Census Bureau
14 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
4 STUDY AREA CHARACTERISTICS
The GSATS region is served by two expressways and several arterials. Figure 4-3 illustrates the location of EXISTING TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM the area’s major roadway infrastructure and a brief description of each corridor is provided below: The existing transportation system in the Grand Strand area provides area residents and visitors with the • SC 31 is a restricted access expressway that spans north and south running parallel to US 17. SC 31 ability to travel for work, school, shopping, and recreation. The efficiency with which these trips can be starts at SC 544 and intersects US 501, SC 22, and terminates at SC 9. This six-lane divided roadway made determines the effectiveness of the current roadway network. A few major roadways that act as links borders the outer edge of Myrtle Beach and North Myrtle Beach. between the various communities in the GSATS region dominate the network. While some existing mobility options such as bicycle lanes, sidewalks, and transit service are present in the region, increased • SC 22 is a restricted access expressway that begins at US 17 between Myrtle Beach and North Myrtle accommodation is necessary for residents and tourists alike as travel demand increases. This creates Beach. Traveling northwest, this roadway intersects SC 31 and US 701 before bypassing Conway and challenges for cities, counties, and the states in the GSATS region as each must continue to manage their connecting to US 501 north of the town of Aynor. existing facilities while planning for anticipated growth. • US 17 is the study area’s principal north to south roadway. The corridor extends through Roadways Facilities Georgetown, Horry, and Brunswick counties and connects the area to major cities such as Virginia Beach, VA, Wilmington, NC, Charleston, SC, Savannah, GA, Jacksonville, FL, and Ft. Myers, FL. The roadway network is the most important aspect of the MPO planning area transportation system as it bears the burden of transporting the majority of goods and people throughout the region. The region’s • US 501 is a principal arterial that begins at US 17 Business in Myrtle Beach and ends in Buena Vista, economic vitality is dependent on this roadway network, which makes the region accessible for commuter, VA. US 501 passes through Myrtle Beach, Conway, and Aynor. industrial, commercial, tourism and other day-to-day uses. This system should be viewed as an indispensable regional economic asset that requires constant reinvestment to protect the economic stability of the region. • SC 9 is a principal arterial in the North Myrtle Beach area that extends east to west. SC 9 Maintenance of the roadway network is a critical factor in ensuring the safe and efficient travel of both interconnects US 17, SC 31, SC 65, and SC 90. residents and visitors alike. • SC 544 is a principal arterial roadway that spans east to west in Horry County. SC 544 starts at US 17 Functional Classification Business just south of Myrtle Beach. This roadway connects local arterials including US 17, US 17 Functional classification is the process by which roadways are grouped into categories according to the Business, US 501, SC 707, and SC 31. character of service they are intended to provide. Individual roads do not serve travel independently; most • US 378 is a principal arterial that begins in Washington, GA and ends in Conway, SC at US 501. travel involves movement through a network of roads. Functional classification examines the channelization of traffic throughout a roadway network and defines the role that each roadway plays in serving traffic flow. • US 521 is a principal arterial that starts in Georgetown, SC and ends in Charlotte, NC connecting to I- Two important variables define roadway function: mobility and access. At one end of the spectrum, 485. freeways provide the highest level of mobility and the lowest level of access, serving long distance trips with minimal access to abutting land uses. Local streets, on the other hand, have numerous driveways and • US 17 Business is a minor arterial roadway that serves Murrells Inlet, Garden City Beach, Surfside connections to provide local access to businesses and residences and are not intended for use over long Beach, Myrtle Beach, and Shallotte. US 17 Business runs through the center of these communities. distances. • SC 707 is a minor arterial roadway that runs north to south in Georgetown and Horry counties. SC 707 The functional classification for the GSATS roadways utilize the SCDOT and NCDOT roadway classification connects to the arterials US 17 and SC 544. system according to the following classes: Over the past twenty years, the area has experienced notable improvements to the roadway network. These • Freeways/Expressways improvements have included the construction of Carolina Bays Parkway and Grissom Parkway, the widening • Principal Arterials of SC 544, and improvements to SC 22, 10th Avenue North, 21st Avenue North, 29th Avenue North, and • Minor Arterials Harrelson Boulevard. Despite these improvements, area growth (both population and tourism) has in several • Collector areas strained the capacity of the study area’s roadway network. This has resulted in increased traffic and • Local Roads corresponding congestion on many of the area’s roadways.
15 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
4 STUDY AREA CHARACTERISTICS
Figure 4-3: Functional Classification of GSATS Roads Roadway Network Usage Annual average daily traffic (AADT) volumes for the region were obtained from SCDOT and NCDOT for the years 2010 and 2015, shown in Table 4-4. The location with the highest daily traffic volume in 2015 was on US 17 Bypass S. between SC 707 and US 501, with a volume of 63,824. The location with the highest growth rate in the SC portion of the GSATS region was State Highway 22 between SC 319 and US 701. Several locations within the NC portion of the GSATS region also experience high growth rates.
Sources: GSATS, SCDOT and NCDOT
16 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
4 STUDY AREA CHARACTERISTICS
Table 4-4: Traffic Growth in the GSATS Area, 2010-2015
2010 2015 10-15 10-15 2010 2015 10-15 10-15 Route Location Route Location AADT AADT Growth Inc / Yr AADT AADT Growth Inc / Yr HORRY COUNTY S Kings Highway L 73 to S 326, L 326 24,800 32,367 23.38% 5.65% US 17 Bypass S Georgetown County Line to SC 544 35,800 35,302 -1.41% -0.28% N Kings Highway S 326, L 326 to US 501 24,400 29,506 17.30% 3.96% US 17 Bypass S SC 544 to SC 707 41,700 47,048 11.37% 2.48% GEORGETOWN COUNTY US 17 Bypass S SC 707 to US 501 56,400 63,824 11.63% 2.54% S Fraser St S 23 to S 18 14,100 13,605 -3.64% -0.71% N Kings Highway US 17 BUS to S 469 55,300 63,088 12.34% 2.71% Church St US 17 ALT, US 701 to S 80 22,100 21,439 -3.08% -0.60% N Kings Highway S 469 to S 227 52,600 61,126 13.95% 3.11% Church St S 80 to S 759 23,300 22,312 -4.43% -0.86% N Kings Highway S 990 to S 94 45,700 35,426 -29.00% -4.81% Highmarket St S 119 to US 17, US 701 17,900 17,568 -1.89% -0.37% US Highway 17 SC 179 to North Carolina State Line 15,100 12,866 -17.36% -3.09% N Fraser St US 17, US 17 ALT to S 514 21,300 24,781 14.05% 3.13% US Highway 17 S 266, S 758 to S 449 28,800 32,778 12.14% 2.66% Carolina Bays Pkwy US 501 to SC 544 11,300 11,806 4.29% 0.88% US Highway 17 S 449 to S 362 32,700 33,878 3.48% 0.71% Carolina Bays Pkwy S 1315 to US 501 18,300 20,897 12.43% 2.73% Carolina Bays Pkwy SC 22 to S 1315 27,700 33,326 16.88% 3.85% US Highway 17 S 392 to Horry County Line 32,400 36,540 11.33% 2.47% Carolina Bays Pkwy SC 9 to SC 22 21,400 24,881 13.99% 3.12% BRUNSWICK COUNTY State Highway 22 SC 90 to SC 31 16,300 15,641 -4.21% -0.82% Beach Drive W of SR 1164 12,000 19,753 39.25% 11.11% State Highway 22 US 701 to SC 905 7,900 7,900 0.00% 0.00% Old Georgetown Road E of SR 1164 8,000 11,736 31.83% 8.33% State Highway 22 SC 905 to SC 90 12,100 10,965 -10.36% -1.93% Old Ocean Highway N of SR 1401 6,700 9,268 27.71% 6.97% State Highway 22 SC 319 to US 701 5,100 6,923 26.34% 6.54% Seaside Road S of SR 1163 11,000 18,857 41.67% 12.12% Sea Mountain Highway US 17, S 20 to SC 65, S 209 21,800 23,329 6.55% 1.38% Sunset Blvd W of SR 1162 6,800 15,996 57.49% 20.59% State Highway 9 E S 20 to US 17, SC 90 25,900 26,911 3.76% 0.77% US Highway 17 N of NC 211 20,000 21,706 7.86% 1.67% US Highway 501 S 1315 to US 17 BUS 21,300 25,146 15.29% 3.44% US Highway 17 W of NC 211 27,000 30,450 11.33% 2.47% US Highway 501 Horry County Line to S 1315 33,500 39,806 15.84% 3.58% US Highway 17 N of NC 130 21,000 26,340 20.27% 4.76% US Highway 501 SC 31 to Horry County Line 65,600 74,412 11.84% 2.59% US Highway 17 Bus E of NC 130 13,000 14,727 11.73% 2.56% US Highway 501 SC 544 to SC 31 48,600 49,437 1.69% 0.34% Church St US 501 BUS, S 133 to US 701 28,200 30,240 6.75% 1.42% Village Point Road N of SR 1145 10,000 23,040 56.60% 20.00% Sources: SCDOT and NCDOT Church St S 165 to US 501 BUS, S 133 29,900 31,938 6.38% 1.34%
US Highway 701 SC 319 to SC 410 10,500 9,369 -12.07% -2.22% Main St US 501 BUS, S 153 to SC 319 20,300 17,576 -15.50% -2.79% 4th Ave S 110, L 110 to US 378 12,800 13,649 6.22% 1.30% Dick Pond Rd US 17 to US 17 BUS 32,800 37,475 12.47% 2.74% SC 544 S 616 to SC 707 25,000 27,571 9.32% 2.00% US Highway 501 Bus US 501 BUS to S 955 19,200 21,083 8.93% 1.91% State Highway 707 Georgetown County Line to S 616 18,600 21,195 12.24% 2.69% State Highway 707 S 616 to US 17 24,600 24,935 1.34% 0.27% US Highway 17 S US 17 CON to S 51 27,100 32,918 17.67% 4.06% US Highway 17 N S 1240, L 70 to SC 544 30,700 35,931 14.56% 3.26%
17 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
4 STUDY AREA CHARACTERISTICS
Capacity Analysis Level of Service (LOS) is a scale used to evaluate how the Figure 4-4 Existing (2015) Peak Season Daily LOS use of a roadway compares to the number of vehicles it was designed to accommodate. Transportation planners derive LOS for a roadway by examining its traffic volumes, operating capacity (the number of vehicles per hour the roadway can handle without creating congestion), and estimated or observed vehicle speeds. When the roadway traffic volume exceeds the capacity of the roadway, the facility loses its ability to efficiently move traffic and becomes congested.
A planning level capacity assessment of existing roadway system traffic conditions was developed using the regional travel demand model. This model was updated to a base year of 2015 and attempts to estimate travel conditions in the region by looking at both the supply of and demand for transportation. The supply dimension of the model is reflected in the roadway network, while population and employment data drive the demand side of the equation.
SCDOT has established the LOS goal of C when measured as a Peak Season Daily LOS for state roads. NCDOT has established the target LOS goal of D for system level planning analysis. Like the state DOTs, roadway LOS goals are also used by GSATS to establish the desired operating conditions of the roadway network. A LOS goal of D is proposed for this MTP update. The appropriate degree of congestion (or LOS) to be used in planning and designing highway improvements is determined by considering a variety of factors. These factors include the desires of motorists, adjacent land use type and development intensity, environmental factors, and aesthetic and historic values. These factors must also be weighed against the financial resources available for infrastructure improvements. Figure 4-4 illustrates the LOS of GSATS roadways for existing conditions in 2015. Appendix D provides more detailed information on the LOS for the Source: GSATS Travel Demand Model GSATS transportation system.
18 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
4 STUDY AREA CHARACTERISTICS
The future conditions are obtained under the assumption Figure 4-5: Future (2040) Peak Season Daily LOS that historical traffic growth rates will continue and are based on updated demographic and land use projections conducted as part of the MTP update. Figure 4-5 provides the 2040 future conditions peak season daily LOS.
Committed projects include those contained in the North and South Carolina Statewide Transportation Improvement Programs (STIP), the Waccamaw Council of Governments Rural Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP), the current GSATS 2015-2019 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and the Horry County RIDE III referendum. A listing of committed projects is included in Table 4-5.
Source: GSATS Travel Demand Model
19 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
4 STUDY AREA CHARACTERISTICS
Table 4-5: GSATS Let, Programmed, and Committed Projects Road Name Project Description Year Black River Road Intersection improvements and sidewalks from US 17 to US 701 along Black River Road. 2015-2019 SC 31 Extend SC 31 four miles to the southeast (from SC 544) to intersect with SC 707. SC 65 Widen Ocean Dr. to a three-lane cross section from 28th Ave. South to 17th Ave. south, to match previous improvements to the south. 2017 SC 707 Widen SC 707 to a five-lane cross section with sidewalk from Enterprise Rd. to US 17 in Georgetown County. This project involves the installation of a traffic circle to resolve the geometric issues with the intersection of Singleton Ridge Rd., Technology Singleton Ridge Rd. 2015 Pkwy. and William Findlayson Rd. Close US 17 median breaks between SC 544 and Melody Lane. Modify intersections to accommodate U-turns, interrupt flow on frontage roads at Surfside Beach Frontage Rd. signals and coordinate traffic signals. Third Ave. Widen to three lanes with bike lanes and sidewalk from US 501 to US 17 Business. 2016 US 17 Widen US 17 from four to six lanes from Shetland Ave. to SC 707/Farrow Pkwy. 2019 US 17 Widen Glenns Bay Rd. from two lanes to three from US 17 to US 17 Bus. With an interchange at US 17 and Glenns Bay/Holmestown Rd. US 501 Add a third lane to US 501 Southbound from Gardner Lacey to SC 31. (Widen to 6 lanes) Smith Ave. This project is the Shallotte Bypass and includes an upgrade of the intersection to an interchange. 2023 Waterway Parkway Four Lane Divided Parkway 2018 SR 1184 SR 1184 (Ocean Isle Beach Rd.) to NC 179. Construct two lanes on new location. 2016 RIDE III Projects Conway Perimeter Rd Phase II El Bethel Road Extension from US 378 to US 701 South to provide north-south capacity in Conway Safety and capacity improvements at three intersections in Garden City (US 17 @ Mt. Gilead Rd., US17 @ Atlantic Ave., US17 @ Garden City US 17 Business in Garden City Connector) Palmetto Point Boulevard Extension Palmetto Pointe Boulevard extension to SC 544 Hwy 501 Widening Hwy 501 Widening and signalized intersection improvements from SC 31 to SC 544, including bicycle and pedestrian facilities 1. Extend Postal Way to Waccamaw Pines to the south, including bicycle and pedestrian facilities and transit potential Hwy 501 Corridor Improvements 2. Extend Middle Ridge Avenue east from Myrtle Ridge Drive to West Perry Road and west from Walmart to Singleton Ridge Road, including bicycle and pedestrian facilities with transit potential Carolina Forest Boulevard Widen Carolina Forest Boulevard including turn lanes at major intersections and construct multi-purpose path Forestbrook Road Widen Forestbrook Road including turn lanes at major intersections and construct multi-purpose path Southern Evacuation Lifeline (SELL) Environmental Studies and Right of Way Carolina Bays Parkway Extension Extension of SC 31 (Carolina Bays Parkway) to US 17 in N. Carolina (Hwy 57 / NC 1303 improvements) SELL to SC 31 Connector Connection between southern termini of SC 31 to eastern termini of SELL to relieve SC 707 Hwy 501 Realignment Roadway and intersection improvements associated with realignment of Hwy 501 at Broadway St intersection to connect 7th Ave North at Oak St. Fred Nash Boulevard Extension New connection to extend Fred Nash Boulevard to Harrelson Boulevard, includes bicycle facilities Sources: NC and SC STIP, WRCOG RTIP, GSATS TIP, and Horry County RIDE III Referendum
20 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
4 STUDY AREA CHARACTERISTICS
Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities The GSATS region currently has a number of bike and Figure 4-6: GSATS Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities pedestrian facilities throughout the jurisdictions of its member governments. Figure 4-6 shows the existing and planned facilities throughout the region. Several bikeways are proposed primarily within the urban areas within the region. The East Coast Greenway, a planned urban trail system from Maine to Florida, will also provide a significant active transportation connection for bicyclists and pedestrians when fully implemented. The completed and planned segments of the ECG within the South Carolina and North Carolina portions of GSATS are shown in Chapter 6 and Appendix G. Bicycle and pedestrian projects will be ranked when they are submitted to GSATS for funding.
21 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
4 STUDY AREA CHARACTERISTICS
Transit Facilities Within the Grand Strand area, transit service provides transportation and mobility options for the residents each day. Not only do the residents of the Grand Strand area Figure 4-7: GSATS Transit Facilities rely on these options, but so do tourists which represent a significant amount of the population during the peak tourist season. Access to jobs, medical care, shopping, recreational activities, needed services, and all other aspects of daily life are provided by these options. These needs increase tremendously during the peak tourist season and continue through the remaining off-peak season. As the area’s population has grown, and continues to do so, convenient and reliable transit service will become an even greater necessity.
The GSATS MPO anticipates the automobile to continue to be the dominant mode of transportation in the foreseeable future for the area, both in number of trips and the distance traveled. However, transit and other modes will continue to play an increasingly important and beneficial role in the overall transportation network. Supporting and encouraging transit and other modes will reduce congestion and air pollution in the area, as well as consumption of natural resources.
Figure 4-7 illustrates the transit system in the region.
22 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
4 STUDY AREA CHARACTERISTICS
Although each community will have goals that are context sensitive, there are several broad goals that Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Transit Levels of Service encompass more detailed and targeted goals. The Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) Guidebook As GSATS plans for accommodating bicyclists, pedestrians, and transit within the region a number of for Developing Pedestrian & Bicycle Performance Measures identifies seven community goals along with factors must be considered when developing standards. Establishing goals and priorities within the local explanations of each goal that can be used in determining the standards for bikes, pedestrians, and or regional context should drive the standards adopted for bikes, pedestrians, and transit. Key transit. These seven goals, along with short descriptions, are provided below. considerations during the goal setting process with respect to transportation are:
• Transportation mode shift goals CONNECTIVITY – interconnected pedestrian and/or bicycle transportation facilities that • Priority networks for bikes and pedestrians allow people of all ages and abilities to safely and conveniently get where they want to • Crash data go. • Traffic generators • Existing multimodal networks ECONOMIC – describes how transportation decisions impact the economic health of a • Street classifications municipality or region. • Priority user goals for networks or individual streets Each of these considerations will influence the goal setting process. For example, if pedestrians are ENVIRONMENT – environmental measures promote the creation and maintenance of a transportation system that minimizes and/or mitigates impacts to the natural identified as a priority user for certain networks or streets within an area, the standard for LOS for environment. Air quality impacts are the most common type of environmental measure, vehicles may not be as high in order to keep speeds slow and increase visibility and safety for but others evaluate impervious surface and stormwater and noise pollution. pedestrians. Additionally, goals to see a transportation modal shift or more of a modal split may encourage adopting standards that accommodate all modes equally by encouraging the implementation EQUITY – recognizing the disparate costs and impacts of transportation decisions on of complete streets within a community, network of streets, or individual roadway or intersection. populations of different income levels, agencies are beginning to calculate equity factors. Households without access to vehicles are not usually well-served by auto- Bicycle routes are another good example as regional bicycle routes are an important part of a connected oriented transportation solutions and require walking, bicycling, and transit transportation network within the Grand Strand Area. These routes should be thoughtfully designated infrastructure. One component of equity is ensuring that pedestrian facilities along based upon the characteristics of roadways to increase comfort and safety for bicyclists. Characteristics public rights-of-way are accessible so they do not discriminate against people with such as posted speed limit, shoulder width, percentage of trucks, and frequency of property access (i.e. disabilities and serve people of all ages and abilities. driveways) should all be considered. Some regional bike route connections may best align with rural HEALTH – public health impacts of transportation decisions typically include changes to roads or roads that have higher posted speed limits. The use of rumble strips on these levels of physical activity, safety, and air quality. Increases in walking and bicycling are types of roads is common and can be effective in reducing roadway departure crashes. However, rumble correlated with higher levels of public health. strips can cause damage to bicycles and/or loss of control for a bicycle user. If rumble strips will be applied to roadways that are also bicycle routes, consider the following to increase the safety and LIVABILITY – quality of life impacts of transportation systems are evaluated by many comfort of bicyclists: local jurisdictions. Livability measures directly acknowledge the trade-offs between the demands of auto travelers passing through an area and those living adjacent to • Alternative bicycle route options transportation infrastructure. Measures that reflect public opinion are also included • Clear signage for bicycle users to make users aware of the location of rumble strips within this category. • Periodic bicycle gaps (i.e., short breaks in the rumble strip to allow the bicycle user to navigate across the rumble strip area) SAFETY - addresses the safety of the transportation system for all users. Safety performance measures typically track crashes, injuries, and fatalities, though some are • More than 4 feet of paved shoulder outside of the rumble strip area based on estimated changes in numbers of crashes. • Narrower rumble strips
• Place the rumble strip on top of the edge of travel lane stripe rather than in the shoulder area • Targeted location for rumble strip application, specifically areas that have had issues with For additional detail the full document can be found at the following link: vehicle roadway departure https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/publications/performance_measures_guide book/
23 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
4 STUDY AREA CHARACTERISTICS
SAFETY ANALYSIS Fatal crash data for the GSATS region were obtained from Figure 4-8: Fatal Crash Density in GSATS Region, 2012-2016 SCDOT and NCDOT. Figure 4-8 illustrates the fatal crash density in the GSATS region between 2012 and 2016. Several of the high crash locations are located along portions of US 17 throughout the region. The MPO takes safety very seriously and will continue to work with its planning partners to reduce the number of crashes and improve the safety of the region’s roadway system.
24 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
4 STUDY AREA CHARACTERISTICS
Vulnerable Road Users Crash data provided by the SCDOT and NCDOT also identified location and nature of bike- and pedestrian- Figure 4-9: Vulnerable Road Users Crash Analysis related street crashes. Out of the 124-reported bike and pedestrian crashes in South Carolina from 2011 to 2014, 35 resulted in fatalities, while 2 fatalities occurred out of the 50 reported crashes in the North Carolina portion of the study area. Crashes involving cyclists and pedestrians occurred throughout the GSATS region in several of the municipalities and within unincorporated areas, as shown in
Figure 4-9. Crash density is shown to more clearly identify locations where bike and pedestrian crashes occurred with greater frequency. In addition to illustrating the locations of crashes,
Figure 4-9 provides insight into the areas that people are already biking and walking within the study area, and the need for enhancements that provide a safe bike and pedestrian network for users.
25 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
4 STUDY AREA CHARACTERISTICS
HURRICANE EVACUATION In addition to serving daily travel demand, the regional roadway network is also the primary means of Each year on average, ten tropical storms (of which six become hurricanes) develop over the Atlantic departure during emergency evacuations. Consequently, development and maintenance of evacuation Ocean, Caribbean Sea, or Gulf of Mexico. Many of these remain over the ocean. However, about five routes are an important element of this Metropolitan Transportation Plan. Hurricanes and tropical storms hurricanes strike the US coastline every three years. Of these five, two will be major hurricanes often make landfall and cause damage to the United States’ East Coast, including the South Carolina and (Category 3 or greater on the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Scale). The coastal counties of Georgetown, North Carolina coastlines. Hurricanes range in size and intensity, and the accompanying high winds, Horry, and Brunswick are vulnerable to extensive flooding during hurricanes. During such potential storm surge, rainfall, and tornadoes cause significant loss of life and property damage. disasters, the safe and timely evacuation of coastal and floodplain areas is crucial to ensure public safety. Evacuation routes for South Carolina and North Carolina are illustrated in Figure 4-10 and Figure 4-11.
Figure 4-10: Hurricane Evacuation Routes in Horry and Georgetown Counties, SC Figure 4-11: Hurricane Evacuation Routes in North Carolina
Source: South Carolina Emergency Management Division Source: NC DOT
26 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
5 ROADWAY MOBILITY Population growth, high automobile availability and usage, and auto-oriented land use development indicate that residents and visitors are heavily dependent upon the automobile as their primary mode of PROJECT SCORING CRITERIA transportation in the GSATS region. Based upon an evaluation of the regional roadway system over the During the previous 2035 LRTP process, GSATS developed project prioritization criteria for evaluating next 23 years, it is evident that increasing demands will be placed on the existing roadway network. The projects to establish local priorities in the GSATS region. The GSATS prioritization criteria is compliant regional roadway system cannot indefinitely sustain this growth in demand without substantial with the South Carolina Act 114 statewide framework for evaluating and funding projects in South investment. However, funding levels are not keeping pace with investment needs. Preserving the Carolina and the North Carolina DOT SPOT 4.0 Prioritization Process for projects in North Carolina. [The existing system in a state of good repair, increasing its operational efficiency, enhancing its safety, Act 114 and SPOT process and their relationship to the identified projects in this MTP are further managing future travel demand, and promoting the use of alternative modes of transportation are all described in Chapter 9 of this document.] The 2040 MTP continues these same prioritization criteria strategies that will need to be employed in order to relieve the pressure on the regional roadway system outlined in Tables 5-1 and 5-2. Table 5-1 lists the prioritization criteria for widening, corridor and advance the goals of this plan. improvements, interchange, and large intersection projects. Table 5-2 lists the prioritization criteria for new capacity projects. Each set of criteria totals 100 maximum points.
PROJECT IDENTIFICATION Table 5-1: GSATS Road Widening Projects Criteria During the 2040 MTP Update, a list of projects was initially generated from the previous GSATS 2035 2040 Project Prioritization Maximum Points GSATS 2040 Goal Area Long Range Transportation Plan process. Member jurisdictions were then asked to review the previous Criteria list to update any change in information as well as provide new projects for consideration in the 2040 Traffic Volume and Congestion 30 • Congestion and Reliability MTP. Projects from the 2035 list that were constructed or were deemed no longer practical by the Public Safety 20 • Safety and Security sponsoring jurisdiction were removed. Additionally, new projects were identified using the public • Modal Choices and Balanced System • Economic Competitiveness feedback received through the online WikiMap application during the public meetings held in Fall 2016. Livability 20 Improvements were also identified to address estimated demand and safety concerns in the region, • Coordinated Land Use and Transportation based on available data compiled as part of this planning process. A final list of projects for • Mobility and System Accessibility Financial Viability and consideration were submitted to the Steering Committee in March 2017 for approval. The projects to be 10 • Infrastructure Preservation and Maintenance Maintenance Costs ranked were categorized by type of improvement as follows: Environmental Impact 10 • Environmental Stewardship Functional Class (Truck Traffic) 5 • Congestion and Reliability • New Capacity Consistence with Local Land Use • Coordinated Land Use and Transportation 5 • Widening Plans Planning • Access Management/Streetscape/Complete Streets • Modal Choices and Balanced System • Economic Competitiveness Alternative Transportation Livability • Coordinated Land Use and Transportation Solutions, Economic Development Planning • Mobility and System Accessibility Pavement Quality Index, Cost, Considered when • Infrastructure Preservation and Maintenance and Reduction in Vehicle Miles funding comes • Congestion and Reliability Traveled available
27 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
5 ROADWAY MOBILITY
Table 5-2: GSATS New Road Location Projects Criteria Table 5-3: Traffic Volume and Congestion Point Scale 2040 Project Prioritization Maximum Points GSATS 2040 Goal Area Points Criteria Project Type 1 to 5 6 to 10 11 to 15 16 to 20 21 to 25 26 to 30 31 to 35 36 to 40 Traffic Volume and Congestion 40 • Congestion and Reliability • Modal Choices and Balanced System Widening & • Economic Competitiveness Interchange/ 0.105154 0.368039 0.630924 0.893809 1.156694 1.419579 NONE NONE Livability 20 • Coordinated Land Use and Transportation Large Planning Intersection • Mobility and System Accessibility New Location 0.013487 0.134870 0.296714 0.404610 0.539480 0.674350 0.809220 0.944090 Financial Viability and 20 • Infrastructure Preservation and Maintenance Maintenance Costs Environmental Impact 10 • Environmental Stewardship Functional Class (Truck Traffic) 5 • Congestion and Reliability Public Safety Consistence with Local Land Use • Coordinated Land Use and Transportation 5 Plans Planning Public safety is a quantifiable criterion based on observed accident data provided by SCDOT and NCDOT. • Modal Choices and Balanced System A weighted point assignment is based on the number of crashes for existing roads from 2011-2015 for • Economic Competitiveness North Carolina and South Carolina roads divided by the length in feet of the improvement. Projects to Alternative Transportation Livability • Coordinated Land Use and Transportation Solutions, Economic Development improve roads with higher crash rates receive more points, supporting the plan goals of improving safety Planning on the regional infrastructure. This point scale is presented in Table 5-4. • Mobility and System Accessibility Pavement Quality Index, Cost, Considered when • Infrastructure Preservation and Maintenance Table 5-4: Public Safety Point Scale and Reduction in Vehicle Miles funding comes • Congestion and Reliability Traveled available Points Project Type 0 to 0.999 1 to 5.999 6 to 10.999 11 to 15.999 16 to 20 Widening and GSATS PROJECT SCORING CRITERIA BREAKDOWN Interchange/ Large 0.00000 0.000468 0.002808 0.005148 0.007956 The following subsections describe the scoring process and point scale for each criterion. Intersection
Traffic Volume and Congestion Livability The traffic volume and congestion score is a quantifiable criterion based on estimated future traffic volumes and the associated level-of-service (functionality and operational characteristics) of the The livability score is a quantifiable criterion based on distance from defined public roadways. Future traffic volume and congestion levels are used to evaluate the long-term performance facilities/destinations and the project’s ability to improve access, connectivity, and mobility for other, of the highway network, along with the identification of deficiencies and recommended projects. Prior non-auto, modes of travel. Projects can receive a total of 20 points. Projects receive two points to programming projects in the GSATS Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), current day traffic maximum for being within 1/2 mile and one point maximum for being within one mile of schools, public volumes and congestion will also be considered in the ranking process for the cost constrained portion of buildings, parks, libraries, hospitals, transit, and other destinations. An additional maximum of two the Metropolitan Transportation Plan, as well as any other candidate projects to support a “worst-first” points are possible for each project’s ability to support and a maximum one point each for “somewhat” approach to project selection. A weighted point assignment is based on projected 2040 volume to ability to support each of the following: complete streets, improve connectivity, and create walkable capacity ratio from the GSATS 2040 model, with more points going to the more congested roadways, as neighborhoods. Walkable neighborhoods are those with sidewalks or shared-use paths. A GIS buffer detailed in Table 5-3. analysis was conducted to determine the point allocation.
28 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
5 ROADWAY MOBILITY
residencies, commercial sites, other relocations, environmental justice impacts, noise receptors, and Financial Viability and Maintenance Cost visual impacts. The number of criteria impacted is then translated into the potential environmental The financial viability and maintenance cost score is a quantifiable criterion based on estimated project documentation required: preparation of a Categorical Exclusion (CE), Environmental Assessment (EA) and construction and 20-year maintenance costs with consideration of the six-year Transportation Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI), or Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The higher number of Improvement Program (TIP) budget. Additional consideration will be given to projects supplemented impacts resulting in more extensive environmental documentation and mitigation, the lower with local project funding and/or other federal and state funding, should it be available. Point environmental impact scoring. The point allocation is detailed in Table 5-7 assignment is based on the ratio of the planning level cost estimate to the current level of funds available in the TIP over a six-year period, $45.6 million. This results in high cost projects receiving Table 5-7: Environmental Impact Point Scale fewer points than lower-cost projects. This point scale is presented in Table 5-5. Points Project Type 0 to 1 2 to 4 5 to 8 9 to 10 Table 5-5: Financial Viability and Maintenance Costs Point Scale Widening and EIS with major EA and Finding of No Significant Categorical Points Interchange/ EIS mitigation Impact (FONSI) Exclusion Project Type Large 0 1 to 5 6 to 10 11 to 15 16 to 20 EIS with major EA and Finding of No Significant Categorical New Location EIS Widening and Interchange/ mitigation Impact (FONSI) Exclusion $45,600,000 $41,600,000 $21,600,000 None None Large Intersection
New Location $45,600,000 $43,600,000 $33,600,000 $23,600,000 $13,600,000
Functional Class (Truck Traffic) The function class (truck traffic) score is a quantifiable criterion based on functional class (Expressway, Ramp, Principal Arterial, Minor Arterial, and Collector). In situations where facilities that provide an alternative to a route operating at a level of service “F,” the functional classification of the failing route will be used. In all other situations, point assignment is based on the functional class of the road being improved or constructed. The scoring is as follows: five points for an Expressway, four points for a Ramp, three for a Principal Arterial, two for a Minor Arterial, and one point for a road classified as a Collector. This point scale is shown in Table 5-6.
Table 5-6: Functional Class Point Scale Points Project Type 0 1 2 3 4 5
Widening and Interchange/ Minor Principal Local Collector Ramp Expressway Large Intersection Arterial Arterial Minor Principal New Location Local Collector Ramp Expressway Arterial Arterial Consistency with Local Land Use Plans The consistence with local land use plans is a quantifiable criterion based on support of future land use, Environmental Impact comprehensive plan objectives, and established communities. Point assignment is based on the local government’s (city, town, or county) input regarding a project’s compatibility with the adopted future The quantifiable environmental impact criterion is based on a project level assessment of potential land use map, comprehensive plan, contribution to walkable communities, open space, or established impacts to natural, social, and cultural resources. Point assignment is based on 22 environmental criteria communities. With each of the five factors offered, one point is possible, giving each project a maximum including: the potential for impacting threatened and endangered species, forested habitat, wetlands, potential score of 5 points. drainage crossings, floodplains, outstanding resource water, uplands, HAZMAT sites, Parks/Refuges/WMA 4(f)/6(f), historic structures, archeological sites, farmland, communities, residencies, planned
29 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
5 ROADWAY MOBILITY
Pavement Quality Index, Cost, and Total Reduction in New Construction Recommendations Vehicle Miles Traveled* Major investment in the regional roadway network is essential if current and future demand for automobile use in the region is to be satisfied. There are limitations on new roadway construction, such The pavement quality index, cost, and total reduction in vehicle miles traveled is to be considered and as natural and man-made barriers that hinder roadway improvements. These barriers often include quantified when funding becomes available. Based on the SCDOT and NCDOT schedule for resurfacing in factors that determine when and how fast improvements can be made to roadways, such as the relation to a project’s scope, funding available compared with funding required, and the total reduction processes used to obtain funding for transportation projects, environmental review requirements, and in vehicle miles traveled when a project is included in the GSATS existing plus committed travel demand other government regulations. New construction recommendations are listed separately for South model. This criterion was not evaluated for this MTP update. (* Considered when funding becomes Carolina and North Carolina, respectively, in Table 5-8 and Table 5-9. These projects are sorted based available in the TIP.) on their geographical location, not in order of prioritization. These recommended projects form the basis for the eventual lists of prioritized projects selected for funding. ROADWAY RECOMMENDATIONS The GSATS 2040 MTP Update includes a variety of recommendations. This section summarizes the list of suggested roadway recommendations organized by three project types: New Construction, Widening and Large Interchange Projects, and Access Management/Streetscape/Complete Streets projects.
The GSATS MPO is committed to investing in a variety of projects that preserve the existing system, expand system capacity, enhance efficiency and safety, and improve its overall quality. Improvements in this MTP focus on adding new capacity, improving traffic flow and system efficiency, increasing safety, enhancing regional gateways, and spurring economic development.
Table 5-8: New Construction Recommendations (South Carolina)
Proj # Local Government Location Description 1 Town of Atlantic Beach/City of Wiley Connector Extend 30th South to Wiley Drive in North Myrtle Beach North Myrtle Beach 2 Town of Atlantic Beach/City of Madison Connector Connect Madison Drive to Poinsett Street in North Myrtle Beach North Myrtle Beach 12 City of Conway Medlen Parkway Extension Medlen Parkway Extension: Realign western terminus at US 501 to continue straight to US 378 13 City of Conway Powell St Extension Extend Powell Street from 1st Avenue to Marina Drive and install sidewalks in Conway 14 City of Conway 2nd Avenue Extension 2nd Avenue Extension to S-723 (US 501 exit ramp to 3rd Avenue) 17 City of Conway 1st / 2nd Avenue at US 501 Underpass connecting 1st / 2nd Avenue to US 501 ramps for access to downtown Conway 18 City of Conway SC 90 Extension Extend SC 90 from US 501 Bus to intersect US 501 east of Conway 19 City of Conway US 501 / SC 544 US 501 / SC 544 Interchange improvements 20 City of Conway Conway Perimeter Rd. Phase II El Bethel Road Extension from US 378 to US 701 South to provide north-south capacity in Conway East of Conway (New Bridge over Waccamaw 22 City of Conway New Bridge over Waccamaw River, which would link US 501 and SC 90 with SC 905 east of Conway River) 25 Georgetown County St Paul / Sandy Island Road Connector Extend St Paul Place to Sandy Island Road and connect at Boyle Drive in Georgetown County 29 Georgetown County Parkersville Road Extension of Parkersville Road from Baskerville Road north to Gilman Road in Litchfield 31 Georgetown County Arcadia /Debordieu Arcadia East Connector east of US 17 in Georgetown County 32 Georgetown County Petigru Drive Extension of Petigru Drive from north of MLK Rd north to Aspen Loop in Litchfield 33 Georgetown County Murrells Inlet Road Connect South 1st St with Murrells Inlet Road (County Road-S22-188) E of US 17 in Murrells Inlet 35 Georgetown County Beaumont Drive Connect Beaumont Dr with Petigru Dr W of US 17 in Pawleys Island 36 Georgetown County Georgetown Bypass Georgetown Bypass from US 701 north of SC 51 to US 17 (north of Sampit River)
30 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
5 ROADWAY MOBILITY
Proj # Local Government Location Description 39 Horry County Palmetto Point Boulevard Extension Palmetto Pointe Boulevard extension to SC 544 Interchange and Intersection Improvements at Hwy 17 Bypass & Hwy 544 interchange from Beaver Run Blvd to South Strand Commons 40 Horry County Hwy 17 Bypass & Hwy 544 Including bicycle and pedestrian facilities 1. Extend Postal Way to Waccamaw Pines to the south with bicycle and pedestrian facilities and transit potential 41 Horry County Hwy 501 Corridor Improvements 2. Extend Middle Ridge Avenue east from Myrtle Ridge Drive to West Perry Road and west from Walmart to Singleton Ridge Road, including bicycle and pedestrian facilities with transit potential 55 Horry County Scipio Lane Scipio Lane Extension from Holmestown Road to Big Block Road with multipurpose path 57 Horry County 707 Connector Proposed left turn lanes on 707 Connector for traffic queuing onto SC 544 ramps 60 Horry County Postal Way extension to Atlantic Center Extend Postal Way to the north to Atlantic Center, including bicycle and pedestrian facilities with transit potential 63 A new connector between US 17 Bypass and US 17 Bypass in Garden City north of the Garden City Connector and South of Glenns Bay Road, Horry County New US 17 and US 17 Business connector including bicycle and pedestrian facilities 68 Horry County Augusta Plantation Extension Extend Augusta Plantation to Carolina Forest Blvd with an interchange at SC 31 69 Horry County Southern Evacuation Lifeline (SELL) Environmental Studies and Right of Way 70 Horry County Carolina Bays Parkway Extension Extension of SC 31 (Carolina Bays Parkway) to US 17 in N. Carolina (Hwy 57 / NC 1303 improvements) 75 Horry County/City of North Myrtle Champions Blvd Connector New road connecting Water Tower Road and Long Bay Rd, with multipurpose path connecting to Waterlily and Watertower Road Beach 76 Horry County/City of North Myrtle Sandridge Road Extension Extend Sandridge Rd/Old Sanders Dr to Bourne Trail all the way to Long Bay Rd, with dedicated bicycle lanes Beach 78 Horry County/City of North Myrtle Connector from US 17 and Champions Blvd Construct connector between US 17 and Champions Blvd in North Myrtle Beach, between 17th & 21st Ave Beach 84 City of Myrtle Beach B&C Blvd Widen B&C Blvd from R Grissom Parkway to Oak Street with pedestrian, bicycle, and transit improvements 99 City of North Myrtle Beach Champions Blvd New parkway between Long Bay Road and Champions Boulevard as 2 lanes divided with multipurpose path on 5 lane ROW 101 City of North Myrtle Beach Edge Parkway to Sand Ridge Rd connector Connect Sandridge Rd to Edge Parkway signal 102 City of North Myrtle Beach Outrigger Rd / Hilton Drive Connector Connect Outrigger Road with Hilton Drive near 27th South. 122 Horry County Fred Nash Boulevard Extension New connection to extend Fred Nash Boulevard to Harrelson Boulevard, includes bicycle facilities 72 Horry County I-73 I-73 to NC State Line* * This project is not located within the GSATS region, however it is adjacent to the GSATS boundary and is listed for information only.
Table 5-9: New Construction Recommendations (North Carolina)
Proj # Local Government Location Description 3 Brunswick County Persimmon Rd SW / NC 179 Intersection improvements at Persimmon Rd and NC 179 7 Brunswick County Carolina Bays Parkway Proposed new freeway from US 17 (Shallotte Bypass / Seaside) to South Carolina State Line Brick Landing Rd to Shallotte Blvd (New 106 Town of Ocean Isle Beach New Bridge from Brick Landing Road (SR 1143) to Shallotte Blvd (SR 1202) Bridge) 110 Town of Shallotte New Road (Smith to Bridgers) A new interconnection between Smith Ave (SR 1357) to Bridgers Road (SR 1349) 111 Town of Shallotte New Road (South Main to Village) A new interconnection between South Main Street near Shallotte Park to NC 179 and Village Point Road 115 Town of Shallotte New Road (North Main to Smith) New interconnection between US 17 Business/Main Street (SR 1434) to Smith Ave (SR 1357)
31 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
5 ROADWAY MOBILITY
Widening Recommendations Widening recommendations are projects on existing roadways that may require additional right-of-way acquisition. Similar to the new construction projects, these are listed in order of geographical location. Roadways identified for widening in South Carolina and North Carolina, are listed, respectively, in Table 5-10 and Table 5-11.
Table 5-10: Widening Recommendations (South Carolina)
Proj # Local Government Location Description 21 City of Conway Cultra Road Widen Cultra Road from Church to Main St with center median and multi use path 24 Georgetown County Kings River and Willbrook Widen Kings River and Willbrook with multipurpose path 27 City of Georgetown Anthuan Maybank Drive Widen and extend Anthuan Maybank Drive 28 Georgetown County Old Kings Hwy & Wesley Road Widen Old Kings Hwy (from SC 707 to Turntable Road) & Wesley Road in Murrells Inlet and build new connection 30 Georgetown County US 17 Widen US 17 from the Horry County Line to the BUS split 34 Georgetown County Pennyroyal Road Widen Pennyroyal Rd from E of Montford Drive to US 17 in Georgetown 44 Horry County Carolina Forest Boulevard Widen Carolina Forest Boulevard including turn lanes at major intersections and construct multi-purpose path 45 Horry County Garden City Connector Widen Garden City Connector to include turn lanes at major intersections and construct multi-purpose path to improve capacity and safety 46 Horry County Big Block Widen and Realign Big Block Rd and Include bicycle and pedestrian facilities 47 Horry County SC 90 Widen SC 90 from 17 to Robert Edge Parkway Intersection with bicycle and pedestrian facilities 49 Horry County Myrtle Ridge Drive Widen Myrtle Ridge Drive from US 501 to SC 544 50 Horry County SC 57 Widen SC 57 from SC 90 to SC 9 with bicycle and pedestrian amenities 51 Horry County River Oaks Drive Widen River Oaks Drive including turn lanes at major intersections to improve capacity and safety and construct multi-purpose path 52A Horry County US 17 Bypass - Back Gate to Hwy 544 Widen US 17 Bypass from Back Gate to Hwy 544 Horry County US 17 Bypass – Hwy 544 to Horry 52B Widen US 17 Bypass from Hwy 544 to Horry County line County Line 53 Horry County Forestbrook Road Widen Forestbrook Road including turn lanes at major intersections and construct multi-purpose path Install Additional Lanes on Bus 17/Eliminate Frontage Roads Between Myrtle Beach and Surfside, match existing section in MB and extend East Coast 54 Horry County US 17 Business Greenway 56 Horry County SC 179 Improve and widen 179 from US 17 to NC 179 to multilane facility with multipurpose path 58 Horry County Singleton Ridge Road Widen Singleton Ridge Road from US 501 to SC 544 with multipurpose path in Conway 59 Horry County US 17 Business / SC 544 Intersection improvements for right turn congestion and queuing onto SC 544 61 Horry County SC 90 Widen SC 90 from SC 22 to International Drive, including bicycle and pedestrian facilities 62 Horry County SC 90 Widen SC 90 from International Drive to US 501, including bicycle and pedestrian facilities 65 Horry County SC 90 Widen SC 90 from Robert Edge Parkway to SC 22, including bicycle and pedestrian facilities 66 Horry County Water Tower Road Widen Water Tower Road from SC 31 to SC90 and Widen Long Bay Road, including bicycle and pedestrian facilities 67 Horry County Hwy 501 Widening Hwy 501 Widening and signalized intersection improvements from SC 31 to SC 544, including bicycle and pedestrian facilities Horry County/Georgetown 73 US 701 Widen US 701 from Georgetown to Conway County Horry County/City of North 74 Little River Neck Road Widen Little River Neck Road with multipurpose path in North Myrtle Beach and construct roundabout north of Hill St Myrtle Beach Horry County/City of North 77 US 17 Bridges in North Myrtle Beach Widen US 17 Bridges at SC 9, SC 90, and Sea Mountain Highway with additional grade separation at SC 9 Myrtle Beach 87 City of Myrtle Beach US 17 Bypass Widen US 17 Bypass from Back Gate Bridge to Harrelson Blvd with sidewalk 88 City of Myrtle Beach US 17 Bypass Widen US 17 Bypass from 29th Avenue N northwards to Grissom with interchange improvements 90 City of Myrtle Beach Seaboard St Widen Seaboard St between US 501 and Mr. Joe White Ave in Myrtle Beach including bicycle and pedestrian improvements. 91 City of Myrtle Beach 38th Avenue North Widen 38th Ave North from Robert Grissom Parkway to North Kings Highway with bike lane, and sidewalk 92 City of Myrtle Beach 29th Avenue North Widen 29th Ave North from Robert Grissom Parkway to North Kings Highway with sidewalk (Limit project to the Oak Street intersection) 94 City of Myrtle Beach Hwy 501 Bridge Replace and widen HWY 501 Intracoastal Waterway bridge 97 City of North Myrtle Beach Hwy 17 - Windy Hill Widen for dual left at intersections
32 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
5 ROADWAY MOBILITY
Proj # Local Government Location Description 98 City of North Myrtle Beach 2nd Avenue N Widen 2nd Avenue North in North Myrtle Beach with bike lane, and multipurpose path Edge Parkway / SC 31 interchange ramp improvements. Convert existing signalized diamond interchange to diverging diamond interchange to improve 100 City of North Myrtle Beach Edge Parkway / SC 31 interchange traffic floc and eliminate left turn conflicts
Table 5-11: Widening Recommendations (North Carolina) Proj # Local Government Location Description 4 Brunswick Country Holden Beach Rd Widen NC 130 to a multi-lane facility from Smith to Sabbath Home Intersection with multipurpose path 5 Brunswick County Hickman Rd Widen Hickman Road (SR 1303) to a multi-lane facility from US 17 to State Line 6 Brunswick County Longwood Rd Widen NC 904 to a multi-lane facility from Etheridge Road (SR 1308) to US 17 8 Town of Calabash Beach Dr Widen NC 179 to a multi-lane facility from the South Carolina State Line to Old Georgetown (SR 1163) with a multipurpose path 9 Town of Carolina Shores Ocean Hwy Upgrade roadway to superstreet from the NC-904 to the South Carolina State Line 37 Town of Holden Beach Holden Beach Rd Widen NC 130 to a multi-lane facility from Sabbath Home Intersection to the end of state maintenance with sidewalks 104 Town of Ocean Isle Beach Beach Dr Widen NC 179 BUS to a multi-lane facility from Ocean Isle Beach Road SW (SR 1184) to the NC 904 (Seaside Road) with multipurpose path 105 Town of Ocean Isle Beach Ocean Isle Beach Rd Widen Ocean Isle Beach Road (SR 1184) to a multi-lane facility from US 17 to NC 179 (Beach Drive) 107 Town of Shallotte Village Rd Widen NC 179 to a multi-lane facility from US 17 BUS to Hale Swamp Road (future NC 179) with multipurpose path 108 Town of Shallotte Whiteville Rd Widen NC 130 to a multi-lane facility from McMilly Road (SR 1320) Village Road (NC 179) with sidewalks 114 Town of Shallotte Brick Landing / Beach Dr Widen NC 179 to a multi-lane facility from Hale Swamp Road (future NC 179) to Ocean Isle Beach Road (SR 1184) with sidewalks 116 Town of Shallotte White St Widen White Street to a multi-lane facility from Smith Avenue (SR 1357) to Mulberry Street (SR 1357) 117 Town of Sunset Beach Seaside Rd Widen NC 904 to a multi-lane facility from US 17 to NC 179 (Beach Drive) with sidewalks 118 Town of Sunset Beach Old Georgetown Rd Widen NC 179 to a multi-lane facility from NC 904 (Seaside Road) to Beach Drive (179B) with sidewalks 119 Town of Sunset Beach Sunset Blvd Widen NC 179 BUS to a multi-lane facility from NC 904 (Seaside Road) to the Sunset Blvd Bridge
33 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
5 ROADWAY MOBILITY
Access Management/Streetscape/Complete Streets Recommendations Access management, streetscape, and complete streets recommendations seek to improve mobility, Complete streets are designed and operated to enable safe access for all users, including pedestrians, alleviate congestion, and accommodate all users within the existing transportation system. They bicyclists, motorists and transit riders of all ages and abilities. Complete Streets make it easy to cross typically involve roadway improvements that increase capacity, optimize traffic operation, or apply the street, walk to shops, and bicycle to work. Generally, implementation of these strategies can be traffic calming in residential areas. Access management includes a broad set of techniques designed to completed at relatively low cost, requiring minimal right-of-way, and often can be accomplished improve roadway capacity, mobility, and safety by limiting the accessibility of vehicular traffic. The quickly. Table 5-12 and Table 5-13 lists the access management, streetscape, and complete streets techniques usually control and regulate the location, spacing, and design of driveways, medians, median recommendations for South Carolina and North Carolina, respectively. These recommendations are openings, traffic signals, and freeway interchanges. Furthermore, when combined with streetscape ordered by geographical location, not in order of prioritization. improvements, access management techniques can also contribute to attractive multimodal environments.
Table 5-12: Access Management/Streetscape/Complete Streets Recommendations (South Carolina) Proj # Local Government Location Description 10 City of Conway Hwy 501 Bypass 4th Avenue to 16th Avenue - Coordinate Access Management, Aesthetic Improvements w/ Underground Wiring Project 11 City of Conway Church Street Safety/Access Management improvements from 16th to Mill Pond 15 City of Conway 2nd/3rd/4th/Powell/Wright Realign road segments to allow for better capacity, function, flow and safety 16 City of Conway 4th and 3rd Avenues Intersection improvements at 4th Ave and 3rd Ave (Hwy 701) 23 Georgetown County/Horry County US 17 Bus Access management improvements from Belin Rd to Tadlock Rd 26 Georgetown County US 521 New cross section for the portion of US 521 (Highmarket and St. James Streets) from N. Fraser Street to Church Street in the City of Georgetown 38 Horry County US 17 Business in Garden City Safety and capacity improvements at three intersections in Garden City (US 17 @ Mt. Gilead Rd., US 17 @ Atlantic Ave., US 17 @ Garden City Connector) Access management improvements from SC 57 to US 17 Interchange including plantable median between intersections and bicycle and pedestrian 42 Horry County SC 9 facilities Improve Tournament Blvd between McDowell Shortcut and Hwy 17 Bypass, including bike and pedestrian facilities and intersection improvements at 43 Horry County Tournament Blvd McDowell Shortcut Sea Mountain Highway (SC 9 to Improve alignment of Sea Mountain Highway (SC 9 to the Intracoastal Waterway Bridge) in Horry County to two-lane undivided minor arterial standards, 48 Horry County Intracoastal Waterway Bridge) including bicycle and pedestrian amenities with turning pockets at major intersections 57 Horry County 707 Connector Proposed Left turn lanes on 707 Connector for traffic queuing onto SR 544 ramps 59 Horry County US 17 Business / SC 544 Intersection improvements for right turn congestion and queuing onto SC 544 Improve alignment of Mt Zion Road (SC 90 to SC 57) to two-lane undivided minor arterial standards, including bicycle and pedestrian amenities with 64 Horry County Mt. Zion Road (SC 90 to SC 57) turning pockets at major intersections City of Myrtle Beach/ Horry 79 Kings Highway Improve Kings Highway from 67th Ave. N (MB) to 48th Ave S (NMB) with Bike/Ped/Transit improvements County/City of North Myrtle Beach 80 City of Myrtle Beach Kings Highway Improve Kings Highway from 31st N to 67th Ave. N with Bike/Ped/Transit improvements 81 City of Myrtle Beach Kings Highway Improve Kings Highway from Farrow Parkway to 31st N with Bike/Ped/Transit improvements 82 City of Myrtle Beach 8th Avenue North Improve alignment of 8th Avenue N from N Kings Hwy to Broadway including bicycle and pedestrian facilities and turning pockets 85 City of Myrtle Beach North Kings Hwy Improve alignment of North Kings Hwy from 6th Ave North to 10th Ave North in coordination with realignment of Hwy 501, 8th Ave N, and 9th Ave N 86 City of Myrtle Beach Broadway Street Improve alignment of Broadway from HWY 501 to 9th Ave N including bicycle and pedestrian facilities and turning pockets 9th Avenue North and North 89 City of Myrtle Beach Intersection improvement in coordination with roadway realignment improvement Kings Hwy 93 City of Myrtle Beach Hwy 501 Realignment Roadway and intersection improvements associated with realignment of Hwy 501 at Broadway St intersection to connect 7th Ave North at Oak St. 9th Avenue North and Broadway 95 City of Myrtle Beach Intersection improvement in coordination with realignment roadway improvement. St 96 City of Myrtle Beach 9th Avenue North Improve alignment of 9th Avenue North from North Kings Hwy to Broadway include bicycle and pedestrian facilities with turn lanes at major intersections 120 Town of Surfside Beach Sandy Lane Improve Azalea Drive and Sandy Lane to Improve Backside Access in Surfside Beach 121 Town of Surfside Beach Surfside Industrial Drive Improve Surfside Industrial Drive to enhance Backside Access in Surfside Beach
34 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
5 ROADWAY MOBILITY
Table 5-13: Access Management/Streetscape/Complete Streets Recommendations (North Carolina) Proj # Local Government Location Description 3 Brunswick County Persimmon Rd SW / NC 179 Intersection improvements at Persimmon Rd and NC 179 109 Town of Shallotte Ocean Hwy Upgrade roadway to superstreet from NC-211 to US 17 B (Main Street) 112 Town of Shallotte Ocean Hwy Upgrade roadway to superstreet from US 17 B (Main Street) to NC-904 113 Town of Shallotte Ocean Hwy Upgrade roadway to superstreet from the US 17 B (Main Street) to US 17 B (Main Street)
Project Prioritization Using the project scoring criteria described above, each project recommendation was scored for each ranked independently of one another due to the different funding and state level ranking processes. The specific metric and a total score out of 100 points was determined. Recommendations for South Carolina recommendations are sorted numerically, with the highest ranking, or scoring, projects first. All three and North Carolina are presented, respectively, in Table 5-14 and Table 5-15, providing the detailed project types are found in the tables with information about each found in the description column. scoring for each project recommendation. Projects in South Carolina are listed in separate tables and Projects in yellow bold italics are funded by RIDE III.
Table 5-14: South Carolina Roadway Projects Prioritization Financial Traffic Land Public Livability Viability & Functional Env. Total Proj # Local Government Location Description Volume & Use Safety Total Maintenance Classification Impact Scores Congestion Total Costs Palmetto Point Boulevard 39 Horry County Palmetto Pointe Boulevard extension to SC 544 40 0 5 20 1 9 0 75 Extension Improve alignment of 8th Avenue N from N Kings Hwy to 82 City of Myrtle Beach 8th Avenue North Broadway including bicycle and pedestrian facilities and turning 28 0 18 10 2 8 3 69 pockets Scipio Lane Extension from Holmestown Road to Big Block Road 55 Horry County Scipio Lane 32 0 5 20 1 8 2 68 with multipurpose path 49 Horry County Myrtle Ridge Drive Widen Myrtle Ridge Drive from US 501 to SC 544 38 0 4 20 1 3 0 66 Postal Way extension to Extend Postal Way to the north to Atlantic Center, including 60 Horry County 34 0 7 20 1 1 2 65 Atlantic Center bicycle and pedestrian facilities with transit potential Interchange and Intersection Improvements at Hwy 17 Bypass & 40 Horry County Hwy 17 Bypass & Hwy 544 Hwy 544 interchange from Beaver Run Blvd to South Strand 30 8.1 8 10 2 6 0 64.1 Commons including bicycle and pedestrian facilities Improve Kings Highway from 31st N to 67th Ave. N with 80 City of Myrtle Beach Kings Highway 16 7.1 17 10 2 10 2 64.1 Bike/Ped/Transit improvements City of Myrtle Beach/ Improve Kings Highway from 67th Ave. N (MB) to 48th Ave S 79 Horry County/City of Kings Highway 16 7.1 17 10 2 10 2 64.1 North Myrtle Beach (NMB) with Bike/Ped/Transit improvements Improve Kings Highway from Farrow Parkway to 31st N with 81 City of Myrtle Beach Kings Highway 16 7.1 17 10 2 10 2 64.1 Bike/Ped/Transit improvements Widen Garden City Connector to include turn lanes at major 45 Horry County Garden City Connector intersections and construct multi-purpose path to improve 28 6.5 12 10 2 5 0 63.5 capacity and safety Improve Tournament Blvd between McDowell Shortcut and Hwy 43 Horry County Tournament Blvd 17 Bypass, including bike and pedestrian facilities and 30 0 12 10 2 7 2 63 intersection improvements at McDowell Shortcut
35 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
5 ROADWAY MOBILITY
Financial Traffic Land Public Livability Viability & Functional Env. Total Proj # Local Government Location Description Volume & Use Safety Total Maintenance Classification Impact Scores Congestion Total Costs Town of Atlantic Beach/ 1 Wiley Connector Extend 30th 29 0 2 20 1 5 5 62 City of North Myrtle Beach South to Wiley Drive in North Myrtle Beach Extend SC 90 from US 501 Bus to intersect US 501 east of 18 City of Conway SC 90 Extension 32 0 3 20 2 3 0 60 Conway 9th Avenue North and North Intersection improvement in coordination with roadway 89 City of Myrtle Beach 23 7.6 10 10 1 6 2 59.6 Kings Hwy realignment improvement Improve alignment of North Kings Hwy from 6th Ave North to 85 City of Myrtle Beach North Kings Hwy 10th Ave North in coordination with realignment of Hwy 501, 8th 24 9.2 10 10 2 2 2 59.2 Ave N, and 9th Ave N Connect Beaumont Dr with Petigru Dr W of US 17 in Pawleys 35 Georgetown County Beaumont Drive 23 0 10 20 1 5 0 59 Island 4th Avenue to 16th Avenue-Coordinate Access Management, 10 City of Conway Hwy 501 Bypass 24 6.5 13 10 3 2 0 58.5 Aesthetic Improvements w/ Underground Wiring Project Access management improvements from SC 57 to US 17 42 Horry County SC 9 Interchange including plantable median between intersections 14 7 14 10 3 10 0 58 and bicycle and pedestrian facilities Horry County/City of Widen Little River Neck Road with multipurpose path in North 74 Little River Neck Road 24 0.5 12 10 1 5 5 57.5 North Myrtle Beach Myrtle Beach and construct roundabout north of Hill St Extension of Parkersville Road from Baskerville Road north to 29 Georgetown County Parkersville Road 23 0 7 18 1 7 0 56 Gilman Road in Litchfield 31 Georgetown County Arcadia /Debordieu Arcadia East Connector east of US 17 in Georgetown County 24 0 3 20 1 8 0 56 Medlen Parkway Extension: Realign western terminus at US 501 12 City of Conway Medlen Parkway Extension 25 0 5 20 1 5 0 56 to continue straight to US 378 Improve alignment of Broadway from HWY 501 to 9th Ave N 86 City of Myrtle Beach Broadway Street 21 0 12 10 2 8 3 56 including bicycle and pedestrian facilities and turning pockets Widen and Realign Big Block Rd and Include bicycle and 46 Horry County Big Block Rd. 30 0 9 10 1 6 0 56 pedestrian facilities Widen 29th Ave North from Robert Grissom Parkway to North 92 City of Myrtle Beach 29th Avenue North Kings Highway with sidewalk (Limit project to the Oak Street 19 6.9 12 10 1 6 1 55.9 intersection) Widen 2nd Avenue North in North Myrtle Beach with bike lane, 98 City of North Myrtle Beach 2nd Avenue N 12 8.2 14 10 1 5 5 55.2 and multipurpose path Safety/Access Management improvements from 16th to Mill 11 City of Conway Church Street 22 6.9 6 10 3 7 0 54.9 Pond Intersection improvements for right turn congestion and 59 Horry County US 17 Business / SC 544 27 6.6 2 10 4 5 0 54.6 queuing onto SC 544 Install Additional Lanes on Bus 17/Eliminate Frontage Roads 54 Horry County US 17 Business Between Myrtle Beach and Surfside, match existing section in 30 0.8 6 10 2 5 0 53.8 MB and extend East Coast Greenway Improve and widen 179 from US 17 to NC 179 to multilane 56 Horry County SC 179 28 0 4 9 1 8 3 53 facility with multipurpose path Extend Augusta Plantation to Carolina Forest Blvd with an 68 Horry County Augusta Plantation Extension 36 0 8 0 2 5 2 53 interchange at SC 31 97 City of North Myrtle Beach Hwy 17 - Windy Hill Widen for dual left at intersections 22 0 8 10 3 5 5 53 Georgetown County/Horry 23 US 17 Bus Access management improvements from Belin Rd to Tadlock Rd 27 0.6 7 10 2 6 0 52.6 County
36 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
5 ROADWAY MOBILITY
Financial Traffic Land Public Livability Viability & Functional Env. Total Proj # Local Government Location Description Volume & Use Safety Total Maintenance Classification Impact Scores Congestion Total Costs Safety and capacity improvements at three intersections in 38 Horry County US 17 Business in Garden City Garden City (US 17 @ Mt. Gilead Rd., US 17 @ Atlantic Ave., 23 0.6 14 3 2 10 0 52.6 US 17 @ Garden City Connector) Widen Carolina Forest Boulevard including turn lanes at 44 Horry County Carolina Forest Boulevard 24 0.4 14 7 2 5 0 52.4 major intersections and construct multi-purpose path Horry County/City of Connector from US 17 and Construct connector between US 17 and Champions Blvd in 78 33 0 4 7 1 2 5 52 North Myrtle Beach Champions Blvd North Myrtle Beach, between 17th & 21st Ave Proposed Left turn lanes on 707 Connector for traffic queuing 57 Horry County 707 Connector 27 0 8 10 1 6 0 52 onto SC 544 ramps Edge Parkway to Sand Ridge Rd 101 City of North Myrtle Beach Connect Sandridge Rd to Edge Parkway signal 22 0 5 18 1 1 5 52 connector Widen Seaboard St between US 501 and Mr. Joe White Ave in 90 City of Myrtle Beach Seaboard St 28 0 3 7 1 10 3 52 Myrtle Beach including bicycle and pedestrian improvements. Widen SC 90 from 17 to Robert Edge Parkway Intersection with 47 Horry County SC 90 14 6.8 12 9 2 8 0 51.8 bicycle and pedestrian facilities Improve alignment of Sea Mountain Highway (SC 9 to Intracoastal Waterway Bridge) in Horry County to two-lane Sea Mountain Highway (SC 9 to 48 Horry County undivided minor arterial standards, including bicycle and 18 6.7 10 10 2 5 0 51.7 Intracoastal Waterway Bridge) pedestrian amenities with turning pockets at major intersections Widen 38th Ave North from Robert Grissom Parkway to North 91 City of Myrtle Beach 38th Avenue North 20 0 12 10 2 6 1 51 Kings Highway with bike lane, and sidewalk St Paul / Sandy Island Road Extend St Paul Place to Sandy Island Road with connection to 25 Georgetown County 12 0 10 20 1 7 0 50 Connector Boyle Drive in Georgetown County
US 17 Bypass - Back Gate to 52A Horry County Widen US 17 Bypass from Back Gate to Hwy 544 24 0.4 8 6 3 8 0 49.4 Hwy 544
US 17 Bypass - Hwy 544 to Horry 52B Horry County Widen US 17 Bypass from Hwy 544 to Horry County line 24 0.4 8 6 3 8 0 49.4 County Line Widen US 17 Bypass from Back Gate Bridge to Harrelson Blvd 87 City of Myrtle Beach US 17 Bypass 24 0.4 8 6 3 8 0 49.4 with sidewalk Widen SC 90 from SC 22 to International Drive, including 61 Horry County SC 90 27 0.2 5 7 2 6 2 49.2 bicycle and pedestrian facilities New parkway between Long Bay Road and Champions 99 City of North Myrtle Beach Champions Blvd Boulevard as 2 lanes divided with multipurpose path on 5 lane 9 0 11 20 1 3 5 49 ROW New road connecting Water Tower Road and Long Bay Rd, with Horry County/City of 75 Champions Blvd Connector multipurpose path connecting to Water Lilly and Water Tower 11 0 6 20 1 5 5 48 North Myrtle Beach Rd Extend Powell Street from 1st Avenue to Marina Drive and 13 City of Conway Powell St Extension 7 0 12 20 1 8 0 48 install sidewalks in Conway Improve Azalea Drive and Sandy Lane to Improve Backside 120 Town of Surfside Beach Sandy Lane 21 0 8 10 1 5 3 48 Access in Surfside Beach Widen US 17 Bypass from 29th Avenue N northwards to Grissom 88 City of Myrtle Beach US 17 Bypass 23 0.4 6 7 3 8 0 47.4 with interchange improvements Town of Atlantic Connect Madison Drive to Poinsetta Street in North Myrtle 2 Beach/City of North Madison Connector 14 0 2 20 1 5 5 47 Beach Myrtle Beach
37 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
5 ROADWAY MOBILITY
Financial Traffic Land Public Livability Viability & Functional Env. Total Proj # Local Government Location Description Volume & Use Safety Total Maintenance Classification Impact Scores Congestion Total Costs A new connector between US 17 Bypass and US 17 Business in New US 17 and US 17 Business 63 Horry County Garden City north of the Garden City Connector and South of 23 0 7 10 1 4 2 47 connector Glenns Bay Road, including bicycle and pedestrian facilities 14 City of Conway 2nd Avenue Extension 2nd Avenue Extension to S-723 (US 501 exit ramp to 3rd Avenue) 12 0 6 20 1 7 0 46 1. Extend Postal Way to Waccamaw Pines to the south, including bicycle and pedestrian facilities and transit Hwy 501 Corridor potential. 2. Extend Middle Ridge Avenue east from Myrtle 41 Horry County 7 0 10 20 1 5 2 46 Improvements Ridge Drive to West Perry Road and west from Walmart to Singleton Ridge Road, including bicycle and pedestrian facilities with transit potential Widen River Oaks Drive including turn lanes at major 51 Horry County River Oaks Drive intersections to improve capacity and safety and construct 18 0.6 12 8 2 5 0 45.6 multi-purpose path New cross section for the portion of US 521 (Highmarket and 26 City of Georgetown US 521 St. James Streets) from N. Fraser Street to Church Street in the 9 0.4 13 10 3 10 0 45.4 City of Georgetown Widen B&C Blvd from R Grissom Parkway to Oak Street with 84 City of Myrtle Beach B&C Blvd 21 0.3 10 10 1 3 0 45.3 pedestrian, bicycle, and transit improvements Widen Forestbrook Road including turn lanes at major 53 Horry County Forestbrook Road 21 0 10 10 1 3 0 45 intersections and construct multi-purpose path Widen SC 57 from SC 90 to SC 9 with bicycle and pedestrian 50 Horry County SC 57 16 0.1 14 10 1 3 0 44.1 amenities Connect South 1st St with Murrells Inlet Road (County Road-S22- 33 Georgetown County Murrells Inlet Road 9 0 7 20 1 7 0 44 188) E of US 17 in Murrells Inlet El Bethel Road Extension from US 378 to US 701 South to 20 City of Conway Conway Perimeter Rd Phase II 18 0 4 17 2 3 0 44 provide north-south capacity in Conway Roadway and intersection improvements associated with 93 City of Myrtle Beach Hwy 501 Realignment realignment of Hwy 501 at Broadway St intersection to 19 0 10 6 2 5 2 44 connect 7th Ave North at Oak St. Widen SC 90 from International Drive to US 501, including 62 Horry County SC 90 18 7.8 7 4 2 3 2 43.8 bicycle and pedestrian facilities 9th Avenue North and Broadway Intersection improvement in coordination with realignment 95 City of Myrtle Beach 9 6.7 10 10 2 4 2 43.7 St roadway improvement. Extension of Petigru Drive from north of MLK Rd north to Aspen 32 Georgetown County Petigru Drive 8 0 7 20 1 7 0 43 Loop in Litchfield Horry County/City of Extend Sandridge Rd/Old Sanders Dr to Bourne Trail all the way 76 Sandridge Road Extension 21 0 3 12 2 2 3 43 North Myrtle Beach to Long Bay Rd, with dedicated bicycle lanes 19 City of Conway US 501 / SC 544 US 501 / SC 544 Interchange improvements 28 6.6 3 0 2 3 0 42.6 30 Georgetown County US 17 Widen US 17 from the Horry County Line to the BUS split 20 0.5 10 6 3 3 0 42.5 Widen Singleton Ridge Road from US 501 to SC 544 with 58 Horry County Singleton Ridge Road 13 0.5 12 10 2 5 0 42.5 multipurpose path in Conway Improve alignment of 9th Avenue North from North Kings Hwy 96 City of Myrtle Beach 9th Avenue North to Broadway include bicycle and pedestrian facilities with turn 0 7.4 16 10 2 5 2 42.4 lanes at major intersections Edge Parkway / SC 31 100 City of North Myrtle Beach Edge Parkway / SC 31 interchange ramp improvements 15 0 6 10 4 2 5 42 interchange Outrigger Rd / Hilton Drive 102 City of North Myrtle Beach Connect Outrigger Road with Hilton Drive near 27th South. 7 0 4 20 1 5 5 42 Connector
38 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
5 ROADWAY MOBILITY
Financial Traffic Land Public Livability Viability & Functional Env. Total Proj # Local Government Location Description Volume & Use Safety Total Maintenance Classification Impact Scores Congestion Total Costs Horry County/Georgetown 73 US 701 Widen US 701 from Georgetown to Conway 16 6.5 14 0 2 3 0 41.5 County Realign road segments to allow for better capacity, function, 15 City of Conway 2nd rd th 19 0.4 7 10 3 2 0 41.4 /3 /4 /Powell/Wright flow and safety Improve alignment of Mt Zion Road (SC 90 to SC 57) to two-lane undivided minor arterial standards, including bicycle and 64 Horry County Mt. Zion Road (SC 90 to SC 57) 13 0 11 10 2 5 0 41 pedestrian amenities with turning pockets at major intersections. Southern Evacuation Lifeline 69 Horry County Environmental Studies and Right of Way 28 0 8 0 5 0 0 41 (SELL) 16 City of Conway 4th and 3rd Avenues Intersection improvements at 4th Ave and 3rd Ave (Hwy 701) 18 0.6 7 10 2 3 0 40.6 East of Conway (New Bridge New Bridge over Waccamaw River, which would link US 501 and 22 City of Conway 38 0 0 0 1 1 0 40 over Waccamaw River) SC 90 with SC 905 east of Conway Underpass connecting 1st / 2nd Avenue to US 501 ramps for 17 City of Conway 1st / 2nd Avenue at US 501 22 0 6 6 1 5 0 40 access to downtown Conway Carolina Bays Parkway Extension of SC 31 (Carolina Bays Parkway) to US 17 in N. 70 Horry County 24 0 8 0 5 3 0 40 Extension Carolina (Hwy 57 / NC1303 improvements) Replace and widen HWY 501 Intracoastal Waterway bridge, 94 City of Myrtle Beach Hwy 501 Bridge 27 0 2 3 2 4 2 40 includes bicycle and pedestrian facilities Improve Surfside Industrial Drive to enhance Backside Access in 121 Town of Surfside Beach Surfside Industrial Drive 20 0 0 10 1 5 3 39 Surfside Beach Widen SC 90 from Robert Edge Parkway to SC 22, with bicycle 65 Horry County SC 90 18 6.9 7 1 1 3 2 38.9 and pedestrian facilities 27 City of Georgetown Anthuan Maybank Drive Widen and extend Anthuan Maybank Drive 12 0 11 10 1 3 0 37 Widen Kings River and Willbrook and complete multipurpose 24 Georgetown County Kings River and Willbrook 6 0 16 10 2 3 0 37 path Hwy 501 Widening and signalized intersection 67 Horry County Hwy 501 Widening improvements from SC 31 to SC 544, including bicycle and 11 0 11 7 1 5 2 37 pedestrian facilities Horry County/City of US 17 Bridges in North Myrtle Widen US 17 Bridges at SC 9, SC 90, and Sea Mountain Highway 77 13 0.5 5 7 2 3 5 35.5 North Myrtle Beach Beach with additional grade separation at SC 9
Widen Cultra Road from Church to Main St with center median 21 City of Conway Cultra Road 9 0.3 11 10 2 3 0 35.3 and multi-use path Widen Pennyroyal Rd from E of Montford Drive to US 17 in 34 Georgetown County Pennyroyal Road 10 0 7 10 1 3 0 31 Georgetown Widen Water Tower Road from SC 31 to SC 90 and widen Long 66 Horry County Water Tower Road 8 0.1 5 7 2 5 2 29.1 Bay Road, including bicycle and pedestrian facilities Georgetown Bypass from US 701 north of SC 51 to US 17 (north 36 Georgetown County Georgetown Bypass 13 0 11 0 2 3 0 29 of Sampit River) Widen Old Kings Hwy (from SC 707 to Turntable Road) & 28 Georgetown County Old Kings Hwy & Wesley Road 7 0.2 10 3 1 3 0 24.2 Wesley Road in Murrells Inlet and build new connection
39 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
5 ROADWAY MOBILITY
Table 5-15: North Carolina Roadway Projects Prioritization Financial Traffic Land Local Public Livability Viability and Functional Environmental Total Proj # Location Description Volume & Use Government Safety Total Maintenance Classification Impact Scores Congestion Total Costs Widen NC 130 to a multi-lane facility from McMilly Road (SR 1320) 108 Town of Shallotte Whiteville Rd 27 14.80 15 10 1 5 4 76.80 Village Road (NC 179) with sidewalks New Road (South Main to A new interconnection between South Main Street near Shallotte Park 111 Town of Shallotte 40 0.00 6 20 1 3 4 74.00 Village) to NC 179 and Village Point Road Widen NC 179 to a multi-lane facility from US 17 BUS to Hale Swamp 107 Town of Shallotte Village Rd 23 8.40 16 10 1 8 4 70.40 Road (future NC 179) with multipurpose path New Road (North Main to New interconnection between US17 Business/Main Street (SR 1434) to 115 Town of Shallotte 39 0.00 4 20 1 2 3 69.00 Smith) Smith Ave (SR 1357) 109 Town of Shallotte Ocean Hwy Upgrade roadway to superstreet from NC-211 to US-17 B (Main Street) 30 7.90 8 10 3 7 3 68.90 Town of Holden Widen NC 130 to a multi-lane facility from Sabbath Home Intersection 37 Holden Beach Rd 30 9.80 12 10 1 5 0 67.80 Beach to the end of state maintenance with sidewalks 3 Brunswick County Persimmon Rd SW / NC 179 Intersection improvements at Persimmon Rd and NC 179 18 19.60 6 10 2 6 4 65.60 Town of Sunset Widen NC 904 to a multi-lane facility from US 17 to NC 179 (Beach 117 Seaside Rd 29 7.80 10 9 1 5 3 64.80 Beach Drive) with sidewalks Widen NC 179 to a multi-lane facility from the South Carolina State 8 Town of Calabash Beach Dr 28 8.70 12 10 1 5 0 64.70 Line to Old Georgetown (SR 1163) with a multipurpose path Widen NC 130 to a multi-lane facility from Smith to Sabbath Home 4 Brunswick County Holden Beach Rd 30 10.10 12 0 1 5 5 63.10 Intersection with multipurpose path 112 Town of Shallotte Ocean Hwy Upgrade roadway to superstreet from US-17 B (Main Street) to NC-904 25 7.10 8 10 3 7 3 63.10 Upgrade roadway to superstreet from the US-17 B (Main Street) to US- 113 Town of Shallotte Ocean Hwy 23 7.60 9 10 3 7 3 62.60 17 B (Main Street) Widen NC 179 to a multi-lane facility from Hale Swamp Road (future 114 Town of Shallotte Brick Landing / Beach Dr 27 7.60 10 8 1 5 3 61.60 NC 179) to Ocean Isle Beach Road (SR 1184) with sidewalks Town of Ocean Widen NC 179 BUS to a multi-lane facility from Ocean Isle Beach Road 104 Beach Dr 26 7.60 10 9 1 5 3 61.60 Isle Beach SW (SR 1184) to the NC 904 (Seaside Road) with multipurpose path Town of Sunset Widen NC 179 to a multi-lane facility from NC 904 (Seaside Road) to 118 Old Georgetown Rd 26 8.20 11 7 1 5 3 61.20 Beach Beach Drive (179B) with sidewalks Town of Ocean Widen Ocean Isle Beach Road (SR 1184) to a multi-lane facility from US 105 Ocean Isle Beach Rd 27 10.70 6 8 1 5 3 60.70 Isle Beach 17 to NC 179 (Beach Drive) A new interconnection between Smith Ave (SR 1357) to Bridgers Road 110 Town of Shallotte New Road (Smith to Bridgers) 17 0.00 7 20 1 5 4 54.00 (SR 1349) Widen Hickman Road (SR 1303) to a multi-lane facility from US 17 to 5 Brunswick County Hickman Rd 27 6.60 5 7 1 5 2 53.60 State Line Widen White Street to a multi-lane facility from Smith Avenue (SR 116 Town of Shallotte White St 30 0.00 7 10 1 0 4 52.00 1357) to Mulberry Street (SR 1357) Town of Carolina Upgrade roadway to superstreet from the NC-904 to the South Carolina 9 Ocean Hwy 20 7.50 8 10 3 2 0 50.50 Shores State Line Widen NC 904 to a multi-lane facility from Etheridge Road (SR 1308) to 6 Brunswick County Longwood Rd 23 0.90 4 6 1 5 3 42.90 US 17 TIP Project R-3436: Proposed new freeway from US-17 (South of NC-904 7 Brunswick County Carolina Bays Parkway 16 0.00 8 0 5 3 2 34.00 / Seaside) to South Carolina State Line. Town of Sunset Widen NC 179 BUS to a multi-lane facility from NC 904 (Seaside Road) 119 Sunset Blvd 7 0.00 6 10 1 5 3 32.00 Beach to the Sunset Blvd Bridge Town of Ocean Brick Landing Rd to Shallotte New Bridge from Brick Landing Road (SR 1143) to Shallotte Blvd (SR 106 8 0.00 2 0 0 2 4 16.00 Isle Beach Blvd (New Bridge) 1202)
40 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
5 ROADWAY MOBILITY
Project Cost Estimation and Roadway Design Concepts A key part of the project identification task was identifying and estimating planning level project costs. of 3 percent was also applied to all projects to obtain the future year cost corresponding to future Many project costs were provided by the public agencies recommending or responsible for the roadways project year bands of 2020,2030, and 2040. Figure 5-1 provides an example of a typical cross section under consideration or identified in the previous plan. Other new projects necessitated developing representative of proposed projects. Additional typical cross sections of all proposed project types can planning level cost estimates. These costs were developed using data obtained from SCDOT on recently be found in the appendix. Typical cross-sections were also developed for roadway facilities constructed projects of similar roadway cross sections. This data allowed the development of per mile accommodating bicyclists and pedestrians and are included in Appendix G. costs that were applied to the proposed projects to obtain the estimated project cost. An inflation rate
Figure 5-1: Typical Cross-Sections
41 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
5 ROADWAY MOBILITY
STRATEGIC CORRIDORS NETWORK SC AND NC The Strategic Corridor Network is a critical component of the state’s highway system and provides represents the second most significant network of corridors that are critical to interregional mobility for regional mobility to residents and tourists, as well as both small and large companies that do business the state, after the interstate system. In North Carolina, the SSCN includes the interstates. The South and provide employment opportunities. The purpose of the Statewide Strategic Corridors Network (SSCN) Carolina and North Carolina designated SSCN within the GSATS study area are shown in Figure 5-2. is to develop a focused strategic system of roadways for each state. In South Carolina, the SSCN
Figure 5-2: Strategic Corridors within GSATS Study Area
42 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
6 ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION In recent years, communities throughout the United States and particularly in the Carolinas have experienced a growing interest in implementing transportation infrastructure improvements that enhance walking and biking. Towns, cities, counties, and metropolitan planning organizations understand the need to plan, design, and implement non-motorized transportation options as well as increase opportunities for recreation. Advancing bike and pedestrian networks is essential to meeting safety, mobility, livability, environmental, and economic goals. Additionally, active transportation options provide a host of benefits to individual communities and larger regions by connecting destinations and creating enjoyable transportation options that can improve the health of users.
People throughout the GSATS area have embraced biking and walking as viable forms of transportation and recreation. As the communities within the GSATS region grow, extending a safe and comfortable network for biking and walking facilities should result in an increase in the number of people biking and walking within the region for shorter transportation trips. A detailed analysis of the active transportation system is found in Appendix G. OVERVIEW OF EXISTING FACILITIES The GSATS region currently has a number of bike and pedestrian facilities throughout the jurisdictions of its member governments. Predominantly, sidewalks exist within urban areas, but due to development regulation requirements, sidewalks are also located in a number of residential areas as well. The coastal nature of the GSATS area may encourage walking due to the number of visitors that travel to the area annually. While bike and pedestrian facilities exist in the GSATS study area, there are numerous opportunities to strengthen connectivity within individual communities and throughout the region. Planning and design of bike and pedestrian infrastructure should build upon the existing segments and networks within the GSATS area and strive to implement facilities that attract new users while linking destinations and providing more accessibility. The planned facilities for biking and walking highlight the current gaps in the bike and pedestrian network. In many cases, the planned facilities not only provide active transportation corridors within a single community but also connect to neighboring communities and illustrate how a regional network of bikeways and walkways could exist. Bike and pedestrian facilities, both existing and planned, are prevalent within the South Carolina portion of the GSATS region but the North Carolina area is lacking these facility types. Planning efforts and targeted strategies should be used to enhance the bike and pedestrian environments within the North Carolina portion of the GSATS region.
43 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
6 ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION
EAST COAST GREENWAY The East Coast Greenway is an urban trail system planned Figure 6-1: South Carolina East Coast Greenway System to link 25 major U.S. cities from Calais, Maine to Key West, Florida. The main spine of the trail will stretch 3,000 miles along the East Coast, with an additional 2,000 miles of alternate routes to provide connectivity to towns, cities, parks, and natural areas. The trail is designed to accommodate pedestrians, cyclists, and other non-motorized modes of transportation. According to the East Coast Greenway website, “Of the 270-mile route through South Carolina, 15% is complete on greenway trails, and another 20% is in development.”2 GSATS and its member governments support the implementation of the ECG; representatives from Myrtle Beach, North Myrtle Beach, Murrells Inlet, Horry County, and Waccamaw Regional Council of Governments (WRCOG) are active participants on the South Carolina ECG Steering Committee. In the GSATS region, approximately 50 percent of the 90-mile ECG alignment within Horry and Georgetown Counties is implemented. Key accomplishments include the first ECG trailhead in South Carolina at the Horry County Bike and Run Park, another trailhead being developed by the City of Myrtle Beach just south of Market Common, and the completion of the entire greenway route within the municipal limits of the City of Myrtle Beach. GSATS dedicates 80 percent of their Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP)3 funds to implement the ECG within the South Carolina and North Carolina portions of GSATS study area. Figure 6-1 illustrates the South Carolina East Coast Greenway System.
2 East Coast Greenway (2017), http://www.greenway.org/explore-by-state/sc 3 Under the FAST Act, adopted in 2016, TAP became a set-aside of the Surface Transportation Block Grant program; however, most MPOs continue to refer to it as TAP.
44 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
6 ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION
While a conceptual alignment has been created within Figure 6-2: North Carolina East Coast Greenway System the GSATS region in North Carolina, GSATS has not adopted a route for the North Carolina portion of its study area. A grant was recently awarded by the National Park Service, through the Rivers, Trails, and Conservation Assistance Program (RTCA), to assist with the development of a detailed study of a route for the ECG through Brunswick County, North Carolina. As part of this process, alternative alignments should be considered that keep the greenway closer to the Atlantic Ocean, as an alignment that is truly along the coast may benefit local economies and make the GSATS area more of a regional destination for long distance cycling. Figure 6-2 illustrates the North Carolina East Coast Greenway System.
45 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
6 ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION
SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL The Safe Routes to School (SRTS) program was developed to encourage school children to walk and bike safety and access to the school. Approximately one-tenth of a mile of multipurpose path was to school through a variety of strategies. SRTS assists community groups and schools with planning and implemented from Anthuan Maybank Drive to IP Canal Road. developing safe, dedicated bicycle and pedestrian facilities in the direct vicinity of schools. When originally established, SRTS had a dedicated federal funding source. Should additional or dedicated funding for SRTS projects be realized in the future, the Beginning in 2012, federal funding guidelines no longer dedicated funding to SRTS. Rather, GSATS region would benefit from pursuing more SRTS projects. Based on limited existing funding for SRTS now comes out of TAP and is discretionary. Because GSATS dedicates 80 resources, interest in pursuing SRTS projects should originate at the local level. Through percent of their TAP funding in South Carolina to the completion of the East Coast partnerships, TAP funds can be applied for and used on SRTS projects that may also Greenway, very little remains to fund initiatives like SRTS. However, GSATS has completed improve safety and connectivity for surrounding neighborhoods. two very successful SRTS projects in the past that can be held up as models to the rest of To generate more interest in SRTS projects, GSATS should consider advancing broader the region: Transportation Demand Management plans for schools. These would focus on all modes of • Waccamaw Elementary School – A multipurpose path along Waverly Road was school transportation (e.g., walking, biking, student drop-off/pickup by personal implemented to enhance access to the elementary school as part of this SRTS automobile, buses, etc.), and how best to coordinate those modes to allow for the most project. The multipurpose path is approximately a half-mile in length and is efficient internal and external transportation network surrounding one or more schools. parallel to Waverly Road from Shipmaster Avenue to Kings River Road. Other Additionally, local development regulations should be considered to support SRTS. For infrastructure improvements enhanced crossings for the path along the corridor. example, Horry County’s land development regulations require that new subdivisions built within 1.5 miles of a school or park include external sidewalks or the developer may pay a fee in lieu to fund future • Georgetown Middle School – The SRTS Committee recommended a multipurpose path along sidewalks. Church Street along with other infrastructure and non-infrastructure improvements to enhance
ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION RECOMMENDATIONS Having a broad vision for active transportation in the GSATS region is important; however, it is equally Develop Active Transportation Design Policies. GSATS should partner with member governments, important to understand that active transportation improvements need to be implemented in an SCDOT, and NCDOT to develop active transportation design policies. At a minimum, these four areas of efficient manner. To this end, the following recommendations lay the groundwork for realizing a more design should be considered: connected and comfortable active transportation network while increasing the number of users of the network. • Paved Shoulders – Roads having a more rural character (i.e., roads that do not have curb and gutter, lack shoulders, and/or have open ditches) within the GSATS area Benchmark. As the GSATS region moves toward a more integrated offer a unique opportunity for biking between coastal active transportation network, it will be important to be able to communities without traveling along corridors with higher measure the effectiveness of the efforts that are being vehicle volumes. Rural roadway designs should include 4- to 8- undertaken. Through partnerships with member governments, foot paved shoulders to provide bicyclists and walkers an area not-for-profits, and advocacy groups, benchmarking of refuge from automobile traffic. Paved shoulders also programs should be established. provide an area where motorists may make course corrections when lane departures occur. Incentivize Facilities in Areas of Higher Demand. GSATS’ existing Transportation Alternatives Ranking Criteria uses Successful active transportation networks address the needs of a wide spectrum of users • Rumble Strips – While popular on rural roads for seven criteria to score applications for TAP funding: 1) vehicular safety, rumble strips create hazards for people Funding Request Amount; 2) Funding Ratio (i.e., percentage of local match); 3) Environmental Benefit; riding bikes. When rumble strips are necessary, their design and placement are critical to safe 4) Level of Support; 5) Level of Benefit; 6) Local Commitment to Project; and 7) Connectivity. Consider bicycle travel. If rumble strips consume the entirety of the shoulder, or leave little to no awarding bonus points for projects that fall within the potential active transportation demand areas shoulder passable, bicyclists are forced to ride in the travel lane, increasing the potential for identified in Appendix G. automobile/bicycle conflicts. Additionally, periodic breaks or “skips” in the rumble strips allow bicyclists to enter and exit the shoulder area when needed.
46 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
6 ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION
• Bridges – Bridges are classic choke points for pedestrians and bicyclists. When bridges only Continue to Connect the Network. GSATS understands the importance of connecting the network, as provide the necessary width for vehicular travel lanes, walkers and bicyclists have no safe travel shown by its focus on connecting the East Coast Greenway. Rather than having a myriad of facilities zone. Whenever possible, bridge replacement projects should include the continuation of splashed here and there across the region, GSATS should continue to direct its attention on connecting shoulder facilities (at a minimum) across their entire length. Even when these shoulders do not the bicycle and pedestrian network as funding allows, including the East Coast Greenway and beyond. By presently exist on the approaches, providing them on the bridge is good practice, as many years providing a better-connected network, facilities will be more useful for transportation trips as more will pass before the bridge is replaced again. destinations are reachable via active transportation. This in turn will make it more plausible to expand beyond TAP funding and advocate for the use of Surface Transportation Block Grant Program4 funding for • Signage – Basic signage is a very low-cost infrastructure improvement that provides increased bicycle and pedestrian projects, as they will have a legitimate transportation nexus. safety and comfort to walkers and bikers. By including “Bikes May Use Full Lane” signs in general roadway improvement designs, motorists become more aware of bicyclists even when bikes are not physically present. Improvements that are more directly targeted at bicyclists and pedestrians (i.e., TAP projects) should include more extensive signage appropriate for the context of the project. Make Active Transportation Part of Every Project. Historically, bicycle and pedestrian projects have been considered “alternative transportation” or amenities and viewed as projects that must be tackled independently and as desired. The reality is that active transportation should be an integrated part of the overall transportation network, and it is much more efficient and cost effective to incorporate active transportation facilities into larger roadway and bridge projects. The GSATS region has seen this approach work very successfully with projects like the Robert Grissom Parkway. When pursuing all roadway, intersection, and bridge projects, GSATS will consider how bicyclists and pedestrians will be accommodated in a safe, convenient, and comfortable manner. All new projects must make accommodations for non-motorized modes of transportation throughout the GSATS study area.
Continue to Prioritize Separated Facilities. Through the dedication of 80 percent of its South Carolina TAP funding to the East Coast Greenway, GSATS has made a bold statement about the importance of separated facilities. To meet the needs of all GSATS area residents and visitors, GSATS should continue to prioritize bicycle and pedestrian facilities that are physically separated from motorized traffic. While on-road facilities such as bike lanes are certainly valid in certain situations, separated bicycle facilities provide lower stress environments that 60 percent of the public desire. These facilities also provide greater separation for pedestrians, making the walking environment more comfortable as well. Such would include separated bike lanes, shared-use paths, sidepaths, trails, and greenways. Moving beyond just the East Coast Greenway, when new location and widening projects are considered, GSATS should advocate for separated facilities over SCDOT and NCDOT’s standard cross sections; in many cases, separated facilities require less right-of-way than on-road bike lanes. By providing facilities that everyone can use, especially the most vulnerable users like children and the elderly, GSATS will elevate the perception of active transportation, encourage more people to use the provided facilities, and meet the needs of a greater number of its constituents.
4 Per FHWA’s website, “The FAST Act converts the long-standing Surface Transportation Program into the Surface Transportation Block Grant Program acknowledging that this program has the most flexible eligibilities among all Federal-aid highway programs and aligning the program’s name with how FHWA has historically administered it. The STBG promotes flexibility in State and local transportation decisions and provides flexible funding to best address State and local transportation needs.” For more information visit: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/fastact/factsheets/stbgfs.cfm.
47 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
6 ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION
This page is intentionally blank.
48 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
7 TRANSIT Transit is reliant upon a complete transportation network to response times and enhance traffic safety. Signal operate efficiently. Appropriate roads must be suitable for bus MOBILITY NEEDS preemption can also be used by bus transit systems to allow service, and sidewalks and other pedestrian features must provide public transportation priority access through intersections, Historical trends in employment, as well as the commuting adequate access to transit stops. Thus, transit cannot be or by railroad systems at crossings to prevent collisions. patterns that connect outlying community residents to jobs, will considered in isolation to the overall transportation network. The play a key role in this future plan. There is an increasing need for strategies developed as part of this long-range plan will be • Park-and-Ride: Another transportation alternative would be employment-related transit services in Myrtle Beach and other high supportive of improvements to the total transportation system. The to build and operate several park-and-ride sites throughout employment areas that provide residents of the Grand Stand area success of transit in the GSATS region depends upon the the Grand Strand area, which could allow for commuters to transportation choices and increased access to employment beyond coordinated efforts of the many government entities, public transit park and then ride the bus to their respective destinations. traditional transit service areas. These trends include: agencies, and private businesses. These alternatives have been proven successful for other transit agencies, especially for areas where the employment • Long-term growth in employment The existing transit providers in the GSATS region and their opportunities are in the same general area. available services are summarized in the following sections. The • More residents live and work in different counties GSATS MPO anticipates the automobile to continue to be the • Increased commuting into urban areas • Volunteer Driver program: Supplemental service for dominant mode of transportation in the foreseeable future for the outlying destinations beyond the typical transit service In an ever-increasingly multimodal society, it is important to area, both in number of trips and the distance traveled. However, area. This is a viable low cost alternative for flexible identify various transit options and alternatives that should be transit and other modes will continue to play an increasingly service; however, policies must be in place regarding considered during future transportation related projects and important and beneficial role in the overall transportation insurance coverage and program administration. planning studies within the Grand Strand area. Viable alternatives network. Appendix H provides additional information on transit in that were identified include: the GSATS region. • Rideshare Program: Ridesharing currently exists in the Grand Strand area today; however increased marketing and • Inter-county bus service: This type of service is provided incentives will be needed in the future to meet future currently by several providers in the area. Enhanced service travel needs. This will likely include vanpool, carpool, options are likely an alternative to meet future demand. school-pool, and bike pool programs. • College/University Coordination: The Coast RTA currently • Private Ridesharing: In recent years, additional mobility coordinates with Coastal Carolina University for student options have emerged as potential services for individuals, passes and assisting students with their transportation such as Uber and Lyft. These private ridesharing companies needs. This coordination is necessary for the future with allow individuals who possess a smartphone to hail a person expanded services for students and staff. to pick them up and take them to their destination. While this service is similar to taxis, they have grown in recent • Traffic Signal Preemption: Traffic signal preemption is a type of system that allows the normal operation of traffic years for a multitude of reasons and are a viable option for lights to be preempted. The most common use of these many individuals. systems is to manipulate traffic signals in the path of an emergency vehicle, halting conflicting traffic and allowing
the emergency vehicle right-of-way, to help reduce
49 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
7 TRANSIT
EXISTING PROVIDERS Table 7-1: Coast RTA Annual Ridership (2014 – 2016) Demand Year Fixed-Route System Total A majority of the transit service in the Grand Strand area is offered by the Waccamaw Regional Response Transportation Authority also known as the Coast RTA. Coast RTA is based out of Conway, South Carolina 2014 414,361 3,942 418,303 and offers a variety of service options for residents traveling around the Grand Strand area, including: 2015 438,193 6,118 444,311 2016 527,008 11,329 548,337 • Fixed-route service • Curb-to-curb paratransit service • Citizens Accessible Transit Service (CATS) ADA service Brunswick Transit System • Coastal Carolina University Shuttles Brunswick Transit System, Inc. (BTS) is a non-profit community transportation system that coordinates The Coast RTA operates fixed-route regularly scheduled bus service daily, general public and human service transportation services for the residents of Brunswick County, North from approximately 4:00 a.m. to approximately 9:00 p.m. depending on the Carolina. BTS provides non-emergency transportation services to the general public through a Dial-a-Ride specific route. There are nine routes that provide service within the City of program and to human service agency clients through contract services. Dial-a-ride is a fare assistance Andrews, Conway, Georgetown, and Myrtle Beach. The current fleet transportation program sponsored by the North Carolina Department of Transportation open to the consists of 21 vehicles for fixed-route service. During peak hours, Coast RTA general public of Brunswick County. Service hours are Monday-Friday 7:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m. and require operates 34 vehicles. reservations with a forty-eight (48) hour notice. BTS is allocated Section 5307 federal transit funds through the MPO. Coast RTA Ridership Service Providers Outside GSATS Region Systemwide ridership for the Coast RTA has increased in the most recent years, as illustrated in Figure 7-1 and listed in Table 7-1. The Coast RTA staff indicated approximately 1,451 average weekday A few transit service providers located outside the GSATS region provide demand response service to boardings, 1,351 average Saturday boardings and 1,081 average Sunday boardings throughout the system. some locations with the GSATS region: Overall annual ridership from 2016 was 527,008 one-way trips for their fixed-route service and 11,329 • Williamsburg County Transit Authority one-way trips for their demand response service. • Pee Dee Regional Transportation Authority Figure 7-1: Coast RTA Fixed Route Annual Ridership • Santee Wateree Regional Transportation Authority • Intercity bus service: Greyhound, Carolina Trailways, and Southeastern Stages 600,000
500,000 Other Transportation Providers Several private service operators, such as shuttle, limousine, and taxi services transport residents 400,000 throughout eastern South Carolina and southeastern North Carolina to job sites along the Grand Strand area. There are also private ridesharing services, such as Uber and Lyft, which provide additional 300,000 mobility options to those with a smartphone by allowing them to request a ride through an application. 200,000 These private services have the potential to allow for individuals to move throughout the area and not rely on public transportation services such as buses or demand response options. 100,000
0 2014 2015 2016
2014 2015 2016
50 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
7 TRANSIT
FUTURE TRANSIT OUTLOOK The GSATS MPO recognizes that public transportation empowers individuals to be independent, seek and Table 7-2: Future Transit Projects and Needs retain employment, access medical care, and reach new opportunities including education, commercial, Project Name Type Timeframe Capital Annual O/M and recreational activities. Nationally, the role of public transportation is evolving from the perspective SHORT RANGE NEEDS of a standalone transit agency to the consideration of how mobility can enhance economic development 1 Multimodal Study Planning Study Short $250,000 $- and improve quality of life in communities. Thus, in many areas, transit is developing new partnerships 2 Vanpool Service New Service Short $400,000 $44,000 that are leading to improved mobility choices for customers for all services. This evolutionary process 3 Myrtle Beach Transit Hub Multimodal Hub Short $8,000,000 $80,000 has resulted in the recognition that “community transportation networks" add value to many facets of Total Short $8,650,000 $124,000 life for residents, tourists and workers. MID-RANGE NEEDS US 501 Service Conway to 4 New Service Mid $13,000,000 $1,000,000 Myrtle Beach Transit Needs 5 Aynor Park and Ride Lot Park and Ride Lot Mid $350,000 $3,500 6 Loris Park and Ride Lot Park and Ride Lot Mid $350,000 $3,500 Public transportation plays a key part in defining the transportation system in the Grand Strand area. Georgetown 7 Park and Ride Lot Mid $350,000 $3,500 The proposed transit needs discussed below provide a vision for public transportation in the future. The Park and Ride Lot proposed needs include travel mode choices to residents in the community, including regional and local Myrtle Beach 8 Operations Facility Mid $10,000,000 $100,000 services, a future streetcar network, water taxi service, park and ride services, and other transit Operations Facility circulators. These transit needs in coordination with roadway, pedestrian, and bikeway improvements Total Mid $24,050,000 $1,110,500 will build an overall cohesive future transportation network. LONG RANGE NEEDS New Service & 9 9th Avenue North Streetcar Long $9,500,000 $95,000 The following trends affect transportation patterns and provide an opportunity for public transit to meet Maintenance Facility these needs: 10 Georgetown Co Transit Hub Multimodal Hub Long $4,000,000 $40,000 Total Long $13,500,000 $135,000 • Anticipated growth in aging population. Expand transit services to include non-traditional services TOTAL NEEDS such as flex services, Call-A-Ride services, and rideshare services. Grand Total $46,200,000 $1,369,500
• Increasing density should be supported with enhanced transit services. Initial planning for higher density areas should include facilities and amenities for transit services. This may include bus Transit Policy Recommendations pullouts, shelters, queue jump lanes, transit signal priority, etc., which are a precursor for future The 2014 Waccamaw Regional Transit & Coordination Plan, an appendix of the South Carolina rapid transit services. Multimodal Transportation Plan, identified regional transit planning efforts, transportation gaps, and strategies for the future within the Waccamaw Council of Government (WRCOG) region. The South • Transit facilities and amenities. Future planning and coordination of transfer stations or multimodal facilities should involve all jurisdictions to identify modal needs and access to sites. Carolina portion of the GSATS region is located within the WRCOG region. The transit recommendations Incorporating private development within the planning process provides an opportunity for identified in that plan are relevant to the GSATS transit needs and are summarized below: additional revenue sources. All new development and infill development should follow transit • Implement a mobility manager and central location for directing and assigning trips supportive design guidelines. • Use technology to enhance transit efficiencies • Maximize agency-to-agency communication • Coordinate funding options to maximize utility of available funding options Table 7-2 summarizes the various public transportation improvements that were identified as needed • Adjust local policies and regulations if needed throughout the GSATS area. The projects are categorized by the various timeframes that the projects were identified; short, mid and long term. Short-term projects were identified as being targeted to start • Ensure appropriate vehicle types for specific needs of riders by 2020, mid-term projects by 2030, and long-term projects by 2040. • Formalize agreements between various agencies and mobility manager • Ensure proper documentation of all processes • Acquire marketing plan and logo development • Verify that local policies and regulations pacify any related changes
51 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
7 TRANSIT
This page is intentionally blank.
52 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
8 GOODS MOVEMENT Transportation is a vital engine that drives every Figure 8-1: GSATS Region Freight Transportation System economy. Transportation systems link key regional economic centers with national and international markets which, in turn, improves regional economic competitiveness, especially as transportation system efficiencies improve. Improvements in the system can lower the costs of transportation by decreasing the amount of time required for the movement of goods. Lower transportation costs can be passed on to consumers in the form of lower prices, to workers as higher wages, and to business owners in the form of increased profits. Additionally, convenient commutes for workers can lead to increased labor productivity in the workplace. The GSATS region’s freight transportation system includes several highways, one port, one Class I railroad, and five airports. While all modes play a role in moving freight to, from, and through the region, the local flow of goods and services is dominated by the trucking sector. Figure 8-1 illustrates the freight transportation system in the GSATS region.
53 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
8 GOODS MOVEMENT
HIGHWAY FREIGHT The regional truck network is comprised of five U.S. Routes and Figure 8-2: National Highway System in GSATS Region several state highways, a number of arterials and collectors, and local roads that provide the last mile access to major freight generators. The National Highway System (NHS) includes the Interstate Highway System as well as other roads important to the nation's economy, defense, and mobility. The NHS was developed by the Department of Transportation (DOT) in cooperation with the states, local officials, and metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs). As shown on Figure 8-2, US 501, SR 22, and SR 9 are on the “Other National Highway System”. US 17 is listed on the Strategic Highway Network (STRAHNET), a designation given to roads that provide “defense access, continuity, and emergency capabilities for movements of personnel and equipment in both peace and war.” STRAHNET includes Routes (for long-distance travel) and Connectors (to connect individual installations to the Routes).
Source: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/national_highway_system/nhs_maps/south_carolina/myrtlebeach_sc.pdf
54 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
8 GOODS MOVEMENT
Figure 8-3 illustrates the Strategic Freight Roadway Network (SFRN) for South Carolina. The SFRN According to a freight flow analysis for the North Carolina Freight Plan, about 3,885,000 tons of freight includes road segments with high volumes of daily truck traffic or are important to movement of goods originated in or destined for Brunswick County, North Carolina in 2012. Over 75 percent of this freight via truck according to the South Carolina Statewide Freight Plan adopted in 2014. US 17 throughout the was moved by truck with about 22 percent moved by rail car.5 Figure 8-4 illustrates the North Carolina GSATS region is identified on the SFRN. Truck Network in Brunswick County.
Figure 8-3: South Carolina Strategic Freight Roadway Network Figure 8-4: NCDOT - North Carolina Truck Network (NCTN) in Brunswick County
Source: NCDOT, accessed online https://ncdot.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html?webmap=a8f091b8fadc4c5d8bb905bf44556a5d
Source: South Carolina Statewide Freight Plan, 2014
5 http://scotttboone.github.io/NC_Freight
55 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
8 GOODS MOVEMENT
RAIL FREIGHT PORT OF GEORGETOWN AIR CARGO CSX Transportation (CSXT) is the The Port of Georgetown is located in There are five airports located within the only Class I railroad operator within Georgetown, SC and is South Carolina’s GSATS region; however only one handles the GSATS region. CSXT is the South dedicated breakbulk and bulk cargo port. air cargo. The Myrtle Beach International Carolina’s largest railroad with 1,269 The port has direct access onto US Hwy. 17 Airport has a dedicated air cargo building route miles and covers virtually and on-terminal rail service from CSX at the entrance of the airport. every area of the state. In the GSATS including covered access. Top commodities region the CSXT line serves the Port for the Port of Georgetown are steel, of Georgetown. Major commodities moved by rail in South Carolina cement, aggregates, and forest products. are petroleum and coal products, lumber and wood products, chemicals and allied products, coal, and miscellaneous mixed shipments (intermodal). In 2016, Horry County received an USDOT Transportation Infrastructure Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) Grant for the restoration of the Class III or short line carrier rail line that runs from Mullins, SC to Whiteville, NC and from Chadbourn, NC to Conway, SC, where it connects to a line owned by Horry County, SC that reaches Myrtle Beach, SC. The grant is for the rehabilitation of the track to increase speeds from 10 miles per hour to up to 25 miles per hour and will increase the class of track to Class I, and in some areas, to Class II.
56 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
9 FINANCING AND IMPLEMENTATION Federal planning regulations require that the financial plan presented in the MTP be financially constrained, which means that the estimated cost for all transportation improvements presented in the plan cannot exceed the amount of reasonably expected revenues projected from identified funding sources. This section focuses on the long-range financial constraints and opportunities in the GSATS region over the 24 fiscal years of this MTP. The MPO, in cooperation with Steering Committee members, SCDOT staff, and NCDOT staff, have conducted a careful analysis of what funds are to be reasonably expected, how those funds may be allocated, and how and when projects will be financed. The projects that have been included within the GSATS 2040 MTP Update have been carefully selected and prioritized. These projects represent the current priorities based upon anticipated needs over the coming years. However, planning for the future always includes revisiting priorities, evaluating new trends, and considering a wide variety of other factors. Therefore, this plan is to be considered a living document and will be revised as events warrant. During the course of the development of this MTP, a wide variety of worthwhile and needed projects were identified. However, due to financial constraints, there is not enough funding to support all proposed recommendations. These projects are considered as illustrative and are outside the financial constraint of this plan. Appendix I further details the project financing methodology.
57 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
9 FINANCING AND IMPLEMENTATION
ROADWAY FUNDING SOURCES AND REVENUE FORECASTS The GSATS region relies on state and federal funding to implement regional transportation improvements. Considerable statewide needs, coupled with rising fuel efficiency and an unstable Local Funding Source – RIDE III transportation funding trend, leave many future transportation funding questions unanswered. The Road Improvement and Development Effort (RIDE) program was initiated in Horry County in 1996 to determine the short and long-term transportation infrastructure needs for the County, along with various Actual funding availability during the period to 2040 will depend largely upon future actions and public funding options. Funding for the first phase, totaling $1.1 billion, was provided through applications to policy directives initiated at the federal and state levels. Roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian projects are the State Infrastructure Bank together with matching funds from a 1.5 percent hospitality fee. The traditionally financed through federal, state, and local funds, which are primarily derived from taxes on second phase, called RIDE II, was paid for through a one-cent Capital Projects Sales Tax approved by fuel, fees from vehicle registrations, and local option sales taxes, such as the Horry County Ride Horry County voters on November 7, 2006. RIDE II went into effect on May 1, 2007 and expired April 30, programs. Transit projects are also funded through federal, state, and local sources, as well as revenue 2014. Funding totaled about $425,307,500. received through fares. The Financial Plan provides an analysis of anticipated federal, state, and local revenues, cost inflation factors, year-of-expenditure dollars, and planning level cost estimates. On November 8, 2016, Horry County voters supported a One-Cent Capital Projects Sales Tax for roads, also known as the RIDE III. This tax went into effect on May 1, 2017, and will expire on April 30, 2025. It Federal and State Funding Sources will increase the level of sales tax in Horry County an additional penny on all retail sales, accommodations and prepared food/beverage. Groceries (unprepared food) will be exempt from the One of the primary sources of funding comes from a mixture of state and federal transportation dollars. sales tax. Again, Horry County is slated to receive $592 million over the eight-year life of the one-cent State departments of transportation are required to sub-allocate federal highway funds by formula to Capital Projects Sales Tax. About $408 million is funding projects within the GSATS portion of Horry designated Transportation Management Areas (TMAs). County. South Carolina Due to the success of the first three rounds of the RIDE program, it is anticipated that the RIDE program In South Carolina, the SCDOT Commission determines the funding level allocation to MPOs for the will continue during the life of the 2040 MTP. Therefore, an additional $795 million ($53 million per year federal-aid program following each new federal highway bill and annual appropriations act. Since the from 2026 to 2040) is forecast for the GSATS portion of Horry County to fund transportation projects. mid-1990s, the allocation between urban and rural federal-aid funds for MPOs, called Guideshare, has been based on study area population. In 2016, GSATS received $7.6 million for the GSATS Study Area Additional Funding Sources within South Carolina. The State portion of these monies serves as the local match to the federal dollars, so local governments do not have to identify monies to encumber these funds. Between 2017 and 2040, • Other Publicly Funded Improvements – Federal Highway High Priority Projects, South Carolina’s there will be at least $182.4 million of Guideshare revenue available for roadway projects (24 years at State Infrastructure Bank, Local Option Sales Taxes, and the County Transportation Committees $7.6 million per year). often provide funding for transportation improvements in the GSATS region. • Privately Funded Improvements – Impact Fees, Tax Increment Financing, Municipal North Carolina Improvement Districts, or other private investment also provide funding for transportation Based on the current 5-year NCDOT STIP apportionment and historic funding levels, approximately $8 improvements in the region. million of federal funds and local match can be reasonably anticipated to be available every 5 years for roadway projects in the North Carolina portion of the GSATS region. In general, local governments will be required to identify non-federal funds to serve as the twenty percent match to the federal dollars. ROADWAY REVENUE FORECAST Between 2017 and 2040, there will be approximately $38.4 million of revenue available for roadway Using historic data and projected allocations from SCDOT and NCDOT, future roadway funding was projects (24 years at $1.6 million per year). forecast to the year 2040. The projected revenue for SC and NC revenue are listed in Table 9-1.
Table 9-1: South Carolina and North Carolina Roadway Revenue Forecast through 2040 South Carolina North Carolina Projected Allocation $182,400,000 $38,400,000 RIDE Program 2026-2040 (Horry -- $795,000,000 County) Total $977,400,000 $38,400,000
58 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
9 FINANCING AND IMPLEMENTATION
RECOMMENDED PROJECTS This fiscally constrained plan identifies the project recommendations to be funded using the projected funding available as indicated in Table 9-1. The requested South Carolina projects for funding totaled over $1.2 billion not including the RIDE III projects. However, the available projected funding is $977.4 million. The requested North Carolina projects totaled almost $520 million and $38.4 million is projected to be available. Those projects which fall outside of the available funding limits will be placed on the regionally significant-unfunded list. The projects and their associated costs are listed by state and project improvement type in the following tables. South Carolina projects are listed by type in Table 9-2 through Table 9-5. Projects funded by RIDE III are listed separately in Table 9-2. North Carolina projects are listed in Table 9-5. The projects are also illustrated by County in Figures 9-1, 9-2, and 9-3. The Tier column shown in the tables represent the available sources of funding:
• Tier 1 – Projects likely to be funded entirely from GSATS resources • Tier 2 – Projects eligible for GSATS funding as well as other public sources available such as RIDE III, SCDOT, NCDOT, or cities and counties • Tier 3 – Projects eligible for GSATS funding with the potential for other private sources such as impact fees, transportation increment financing, or private developer contributions Table 9-2: Horry County, South Carolina RIDE III Projects
Local Cost Estimate Total Proj # Location Description Funding Source(s) TIER Government ($millions, 2017) Score Palmetto Point Boulevard 39 Horry County Palmetto Pointe Boulevard extension to SC 544 RIDE III 2 7.5 75.00 Extension Fred Nash Boulevard 122 Horry County New connection to extend Fred Nash Boulevard to Harrelson Boulevard, includes bicycle facilities RIDE III 2 19.3 67.00 Extension US 17 Business in Garden Safety and capacity improvements at three intersections in Garden City (US 17 @ Mt. Gilead Rd., US17 38 Horry County RIDE III 2 19.8 52.60 City @ Atlantic Ave., US17 @ Garden City Connector) Widen Carolina Forest Boulevard including turn lanes at major intersections and construct multi- 44 Horry County Carolina Forest Boulevard RIDE III 2 54.7 52.40 purpose path 1. Extend Postal Way to Waccamaw Pines to the south, including bicycle and pedestrian facilities and Hwy 501 Corridor transit potential. 2. Extend Middle Ridge Avenue east from Myrtle Ridge Drive to West Perry Road and Non-Traditional, RIDE III 41 Horry County 2 9 46.00 Improvements west from Walmart to Singleton Ridge Road, including bicycle and pedestrian facilities with transit partial potential 53 Horry County Forestbrook Road Widen Forestbrook Road including turn lanes at major intersections and construct multi-purpose path RIDE III 2 89.1 45.00 Conway Perimeter Rd Phase 20 City of Conway El Bethel Road Extension from US 378 to US 701 South to provide north-south capacity in Conway RIDE III 2 18.4 44.00 II City of Myrtle Roadway and intersection improvements associated with realignment of Hwy 501 at Broadway St 93 Hwy 501 Realignment RIDE III 2 13.9 44.00 Beach intersection to connect 7th Ave North at Oak St. Southern Evacuation 69 Horry County Environmental Studies and Right of Way RIDE III 2 25 41.00 Lifeline (SELL) Carolina Bays Parkway Non-Traditional, RIDE III 70 Horry County Extension of SC 31 (Carolina Bays Parkway) to US 17 in N. Carolina (Hwy 57 / NC1303 improvements) 2 125 40.00 Extension partial Hwy 501 Widening and signalized intersection improvements from SC 31 to SC 544, including bicycle 67 Horry County Hwy 501 Widening Non-Traditional, RIDE III 2 41 37.00 and pedestrian facilities
59 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
9 FINANCING AND IMPLEMENTATION
Table 9-3: South Carolina – New Construction Project Recommendations Cost Estimate Total Proj # Local Government Location Description Funding Source(s) TIER ($millions, Score 2017) 55 Horry County Scipio Lane Scipio Lane Extension from Holmestown Road to Big Block Road with multipurpose path Non-Traditional 3 6.9 68 Postal Way extension to Extend Postal Way to the north to Atlantic Center, including bicycle and pedestrian facilities with 60 Horry County 3.8 65 Atlantic Center transit potential Interchange and Intersection Improvements at Hwy 17 Bypass & Hwy 544 interchange from Beaver Run 40 Horry County Hwy 17 Bypass & Hwy 544 10 64.1 Blvd to South Strand Commons including bicycle and pedestrian facilities Town of Atlantic Beach/ City 1 Wiley Connector Extend 30th GSATS 1 1 62 of North Myrtle Beach South to Wiley Drive in North Myrtle Beach 18 City of Conway SC 90 Extension Extend SC 90 from US 501 Bus to intersect US 501 east of Conway FHWA, SCDOT 2 6 60 Horry County/City of North Extend Sandridge Rd/Old Sanders Dr to Bourne Trail all the way to Long Bay Rd, with dedicated GSATS with Developer 76 Sandridge Road Extension 3 13 60 Myrtle Beach bicycle lanes Participation 35 Georgetown County Beaumont Drive Connect Beaumont Dr with Petigru Dr W of US 17 in Pawleys Island Impact Fee eligible 3 2.2 59 29 Georgetown County Parkersville Road Extension of Parkersville Road from Baskerville Road north to Gilman Road in Litchfield Impact Fee eligible 3 2.5 56 31 Georgetown County Arcadia /Debordieu Arcadia East Connector east of US 17 in Georgetown County 4.6 56 12 City of Conway Medlen Parkway Extension Medlen Parkway Extension: Realign western terminus at US 501 to continue straight to US 378 FHWA, SCDOT, GSATS 2 5.2 56 Augusta Plantation 68 Horry County Extend Augusta Plantation to Carolina Forest Blvd with an interchange at SC 31 67 53 Extension Horry County/City of North Connector from US 17 and Construct connector between US 17 and Champions Blvd in North Myrtle Beach, between 17th & 21st 78 Non-Traditional 3 31.1 52 Myrtle Beach Champions Blvd Ave Edge Parkway to Sand GSATS with Developer 101 City of North Myrtle Beach Connect Sandridge Rd to Edge Parkway signal 3 7 52 Ridge Rd connector Participation St Paul / Sandy Island 25 Georgetown County Extend St Paul Place to Sandy Island Road with connection to Boyle Drive in Georgetown County 2.5 50 Road Connector New parkway between Long Bay Road and Champions Boulevard as 2 lanes divided with multipurpose GSATS with Developer 99 City of North Myrtle Beach Champions Blvd 3 7.5 49 path on 5 lane ROW Participation Horry County/City of North New road connecting Water Tower Road and Long Bay Rd, with multipurpose path connecting to GSATS with Developer 75 Champions Blvd Connector 3 8 48 Myrtle Beach Water Lilly and Water Tower Road Participation
13 City of Conway Powell St Extension Extend Powell Street from 1st Avenue to Marina Drive and install sidewalks in Conway 1 48 Town of Atlantic Beach/City 2 Madison Connector Connect Madison Drive to Poinsetta Street in North Myrtle Beach GSATS 1 2 47 of North Myrtle Beach New US 17 and US 17 A new connector between US 17 Bypass and US 17 Business in Garden City north of the Garden City 63 Horry County Developer Participation 3 10 47 Business connector Connector and South of Glenns Bay Road, including bicycle and pedestrian facilities 14 City of Conway 2nd Avenue Extension 2nd Avenue Extension to S-723 (US 501 exit ramp to 3rd Avenue) 0.3 46 Widen B&C Blvd from R Grissom Parkway to Oak Street with pedestrian, bicycle, and transit 84 City of Myrtle Beach B&C Blvd Developer Participation 3 5 45.3 improvements 33 Georgetown County Murrells Inlet Road Connect South 1st St with Murrells Inlet Road (County Road-S22-188) E of US 17 in Murrells Inlet Impact Fee eligible 3 3 44 32 Georgetown County Petigru Drive Extension of Petigru Drive from north of MLK Rd north to Aspen Loop in Litchfield Impact Fee eligible 3 1.2 43
19 City of Conway US 501 / SC 544 US 501 / SC 544 Interchange improvements Non-Traditional 2 42 42.6 Outrigger Rd / Hilton 102 City of North Myrtle Beach Connect Outrigger Road with Hilton Drive near 27th South. GSATS 1 1.7 42 Drive Connector East of Conway (New 22 City of Conway Bridge over Waccamaw New Bridge over Waccamaw River, which would link US 501 and SC 90 with SC 905 east of Conway 188.86 40 River)
60 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
9 FINANCING AND IMPLEMENTATION
Cost Estimate Total Proj # Local Government Location Description Funding Source(s) TIER ($millions, Score 2017) 1st / 2nd Avenue at US 17 City of Conway Underpass connecting 1st / 2nd Avenue to US 501 ramps for access to downtown Conway FHWA, SCDOT, GSATS 2 30 40 501 Carolina Bays Parkway Non-Traditional, RIDE III 70 Horry County Extension of SC 31 (Carolina Bays Parkway) to US 17 in N. Carolina (Hwy 57 / NC1303 improvements) 2 125 40 Extension partial
Table 9-4: South Carolina – Widening Project Recommendations
Cost Estimate Total Proj # Local Government Location Description Funding Source(s) TIER ($millions, Score 2017) 49 Horry County Myrtle Ridge Drive Widen Myrtle Ridge Drive from US 501 to SC 544 6 66 Widen Garden City Connector to include turn lanes at major intersections and construct multi- 45 Horry County Garden City Connector 5 63.5 purpose path to improve capacity and safety Horry County/City of North Widen Little River Neck Road with multipurpose path in North Myrtle Beach and construct roundabout 74 Little River Neck Road GSATS 1 12 57.5 Myrtle Beach north of Hill St 46 Horry County Big Block Rd. Widen and Realign Big Block Rd and Include bicycle and pedestrian facilities Developer Participation 3 5.8 56 Widen 29th Ave North from Robert Grissom Parkway to North Kings Highway with sidewalk (Limit 92 City of Myrtle Beach 29th Avenue North 3.63 55.9 project to the Oak Street intersection) 98 City of North Myrtle Beach 2nd Avenue N Widen 2nd Avenue North in North Myrtle Beach with bike lane, and multipurpose path GSATS 1 3 55.2 Install Additional Lanes on Bus 17/Eliminate Frontage Roads Between Myrtle Beach and Surfside, 54 Horry County US 17 Business 12 53.8 match existing section in MB and extend East Coast Greenway 56 Horry County SC 179 Improve and widen 179 from US 17 to NC 179 to multilane facility with multipurpose path GSATS 3 3.7 53 97 City of North Myrtle Beach Hwy 17 - Windy Hill Widen for dual left at intersections GSATS 1 9 53 Widen Seaboard St between US 501 and Mr. Joe White Ave in Myrtle Beach including bicycle and 90 City of Myrtle Beach Seaboard St GSATS 3 8 52 pedestrian improvements. 47 Horry County SC 90 Widen SC 90 from 17 to Robert Edge Parkway Intersection with bicycle and pedestrian facilities 15.6 51.8 Widen 38th Ave North from Robert Grissom Parkway to North Kings Highway with bike lane, and 91 City of Myrtle Beach 38th Avenue North 3.24 51 sidewalk US 17 Bypass - Back Gate 52A Horry County Widen US 17 Bypass from Back Gate to Hwy 544 13.75 49.4 to Hwy 544 US 17 Bypass - Hwy 544 to 52B Horry County Widen US 17 Bypass from Hwy 544 to Horry County line 13.75 49.4 Horry County Line 87 City of Myrtle Beach US 17 Bypass Widen US 17 Bypass from Back Gate Bridge to Harrelson Blvd with sidewalk 13.2 49.4 61 Horry County SC 90 Widen SC 90 from SC 22 to International Drive, including bicycle and pedestrian facilities Non-Traditional 3 29.3 49.2 88 City of Myrtle Beach US 17 Bypass Widen US 17 Bypass from 29th Avenue N northwards to Grissom with interchange improvements Non-Traditional 3 23 47.4 Widen River Oaks Drive including turn lanes at major intersections to improve capacity and safety 51 Horry County River Oaks Drive Non-Traditional 3 21.4 45.6 and construct multi-purpose path
50 Horry County SC 57 Widen SC 57 from SC 90 to SC 9 with bicycle and pedestrian amenities 13.5 44.1
62 Horry County SC 90 Widen SC 90 from International Drive to US 501, including bicycle and pedestrian facilities Non-Traditional 3 34.8 43.8 30 Georgetown County US 17 Widen US 17 from the Horry County Line to the BUS split Non-Traditional 3 27.5 42.5 58 Horry County Singleton Ridge Road Widen Singleton Ridge Road from US 501 to SC 544 with multipurpose path in Conway FHWA, SCDOT 2 10 42.5
61 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
9 FINANCING AND IMPLEMENTATION
Cost Estimate Total Proj # Local Government Location Description Funding Source(s) TIER ($millions, Score 2017) Edge Parkway / SC 31 100 City of North Myrtle Beach Edge Parkway / SC 31 interchange ramp improvements GSATS 1 6 42 interchange Horry County/Georgetown 73 US 701 Widen US 701 from Georgetown to Conway Non-Traditional 3 170 41.5 County
Table 9-5: South Carolina – Access Management/Streetscape/Complete Streets Project Recommendations
Cost Estimate Total Proj # Local Government Location Description Funding Source(s) TIER ($millions, Score 2017) Improve alignment of 8th Avenue N from N Kings Hwy to Broadway including bicycle and pedestrian 82 City of Myrtle Beach 8th Avenue North GSATS 3 1.1 69 facilities and turning pockets 80 City of Myrtle Beach Kings Highway Improve Kings Highway from 31st N to 67th Ave. N with Bike/Ped/Transit improvements GSATS/Non-Traditional 2 10.4 64.1 City of Myrtle Beach/ Horry Improve Kings Highway from 67th Ave. N (MB) to 48th Ave S (NMB) with Bike/Ped/Transit 79 County/City of North Myrtle Kings Highway GSATS/Non-Traditional 1 10.4 64.1
Beach improvements 81 City of Myrtle Beach Kings Highway Improve Kings Highway from Farrow Parkway to 31st N with Bike/Ped/Transit improvements GSATS/Non-Traditional 2 10.4 64.1 Improve Tournament Blvd between McDowell Shortcut and Hwy 17 Bypass, including bike and 43 Horry County Tournament Blvd 11.3 63 pedestrian facilities and intersection improvements at McDowell Shortcut 9th Avenue North and North 89 City of Myrtle Beach Intersection improvement in coordination with roadway realignment improvement GSATS/Non-Traditional 2 2 59.6 Kings Hwy Improve alignment of North Kings Hwy from 6th Ave North to 10th Ave North in coordination with 85 City of Myrtle Beach North Kings Hwy GSATS/Non-Traditional 2 2.1 59.2 realignment of Hwy 501, 8th Ave N, and 9th Ave N 4th Avenue to 16th Avenue-Coordinate Access Management, Aesthetic Improvements w/ Underground 10 City of Conway Hwy 501 Bypass 5.5 58.5 Wiring Project Access management improvements from SC 57 to US 17 Interchange including plantable median 42 Horry County SC 9 2 58 between intersections and bicycle and pedestrian facilities Improve alignment of Broadway from HWY 501 to 9th Ave N including bicycle and pedestrian facilities 86 City of Myrtle Beach Broadway Street 3 1.1 56 and turning pockets 11 City of Conway Church Street Safety/Access Management improvements from 16th to Mill Pond 2 54.9 59 Horry County US 17 Business / SC 544 Intersection improvements for right turn congestion and queuing onto SC 544 10 54.6 Georgetown County/Horry 23 US 17 Bus Access management improvements from Belin Rd to Tadlock Rd 3.7 52.6 County 57 Horry County 707 Connector Proposed Left turn lanes on 707 Connector for traffic queuing onto SC 544 ramps Developer Participation 3 1.2 52 Sea Mountain Highway (SC 9 Improve alignment of Sea Mountain Highway (SC 9 to Intracoastal Waterway Bridge) in Horry County 48 Horry County to Intracoastal Waterway to two-lane undivided minor arterial standards, including bicycle and pedestrian amenities with 3.1 51.7 Bridge) turning pockets at major intersections 120 Town of Surfside Beach Sandy Lane Improve Azalea Drive and Sandy Lane to Improve Backside Access in Surfside Beach 1 3 48 New cross section for the portion of US 521 (Highmarket and St. James Streets) from N. Fraser Street 26 City of Georgetown US 521 2.6 45.4 to Church Street in the City of Georgetown
62 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
9 FINANCING AND IMPLEMENTATION
Cost Estimate Total Proj # Local Government Location Description Funding Source(s) TIER ($millions, Score 2017) 9th Avenue North and 95 City of Myrtle Beach Intersection improvement in coordination with realignment roadway improvement. GSATS/Non-Traditional 2 2 43.7 Broadway St Improve alignment of 9th Avenue North from North Kings Hwy to Broadway include bicycle and 96 City of Myrtle Beach 9th Avenue North GSATS/Non-Traditional 2 2 42.4 pedestrian facilities with turn lanes at major intersections 15 City of Conway 2nd/3rd/4th/Powell/Wright Realign road segments to allow for better capacity, function, flow and safety 10 41.4 Mt. Zion Road (SC 90 to SC Improve alignment of Mt Zion Road (SC 90 to SC 57) to two-lane undivided minor arterial standards, 64 Horry County 3.5 41 57) including bicycle and pedestrian amenities with turning pockets at major intersections. 16 City of Conway 4th and 3rd Avenues Intersection improvements at 4th Ave and 3rd Ave (Hwy 701) Developer Participation 3 2 40.6
Table 9-6: North Carolina – Project Recommendations
Cost Estimate Total Proj # Local Government Location Description Project Type Funding Source(s) TIER ($millions, Score 2017) Widen NC 130 to a multi-lane facility from Sabbath Home Intersection to the 37 Town of Holden Beach Holden Beach Rd Widening NCDOT SPOT 2 6.58 67.80 end of state maintenance with sidewalks 3 Brunswick County Persimmon Rd SW / NC 179 Intersection improvements at Persimmon Rd and NC 179 New Construction NCDOT SPOT 2 1.3 65.60 Widen NC 179 to a multi-lane facility from the South Carolina State Line to Old 8 Town of Calabash Beach Dr Widening NCDOT SPOT 2 13.08 64.70 Georgetown (SR 1163) with a multipurpose path Upgrade roadway to superstreet from the NC-904 to the South Carolina State 9 Town of Carolina Shores Ocean Hwy Widening NCDOT SPOT 2 11 50.50 Line
63 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
9 FINANCING AND IMPLEMENTATION
Figure 9-1: Project Recommendations by Horizon Year in Georgetown County, SC Figure 9-2: Project Recommendations by Horizon Year in Horry County, SC
64 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
9 FINANCING AND IMPLEMENTATION
Figure 9-3: Project Recommendations by Horizon Year in Brunswick County, NC
SOUTH CAROLINA ACT 114 In 2007, the South Carolina General Assembly enacted Act 114, which requires MPOs to follow legislative guidance on prioritizing transportation projects. Act 114 provides a statewide framework for evaluating road widening, intersection improvements, and new facilities, based on legislative guidance. SCDOT maintains a statewide list of ranked widening and new-location roadway projects using criteria consistent with Act 114. The statewide list provides a uniform process for evaluating project priorities and is for informational purposes only; projects compete only with others within each respective urban or rural region. MPOs have the discretion of using the statewide list to establish local priorities or they may use commission-approved criteria consistent with Act 114, in addition to other criteria that address local desires and concerns related to transportation improvements. The project scoring criteria described above were developed during the 2035 LRTP process in compliance with Act 114.
65 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
9 FINANCING AND IMPLEMENTATION
– Congestion 20% NORTH CAROLINA DOT SPOT 4.0 – Multi-modal 10% – Local Input 50% NCDOT uses a transparent, systematic, and data-driven process called Strategic Transportation Investments (STI) to prioritize its transportation investment decision-making. STI is a process to The percentages and weights adopted by Region B and Division 3 are used for the roadway mode only determine how the NCDOT, in partnership with local governments, will fund and prioritize transportation and all non-roadway projects will use the same criteria statewide. projects in the state of North Carolina. Under the STI, all modes will compete for the same funding. This means that roadway projects will compete with ferry projects which will compete with public transportation projects, etcetera. GSATS’ Local Input Point Assignment The following process, along with the prioritization criteria outlined earlier in this report and local The STI places projects into three categories: Statewide, Regional, and Division levels. Metropolitan input, are used by GSATS to allocate local input points in NCDOT’s prioritization process. It has been Planning Organizations (MPOs), Rural Planning Organizations (RPOs), and division engineers assign local developed by the GSATS MPO for the purposes of participating in determining transportation funding input points to projects in the Regional and Division levels. MPOs and RPOs are required to develop a priorities in the regional and division funding level in Prioritization 4.0. This process will be used to rank methodology for the assignment of local input points. Funding levels are designated according to the all projects within the GSATS boundary in Brunswick County and is designed to be both data-driven and 2013 Strategic Transportation Investments law. Each of the three categories identified under the new responsive to local needs. Local input can come in the form of surveys; comment periods; historical Strategic Transportation Investments have their own criteria: documentation that supports a priority project important to the community; nearby RPO, MPO, or • Statewide Level Division priorities; or other evidence made available to the TAC. – Projects of statewide significance will receive 40% of the available revenue; and The methodology has been developed to meet the requirements of North Carolina Session Law 2012-84 – The project selection process will be 100% data-driven/quantitative scoring. (NC Senate Bill 890), which requires that MPOs and RPOs have a process including both quantitative and • Regional Level qualitative elements for determining project prioritization. The MPO’s participation in the Strategic – Projects of regional significance will receive 30% of the available revenue based on regional Transportation Investments consists of the following steps: (1) select projects for consideration in the population. Projects on this level compete within specific regions made up of two NCDOT Statewide, Regional, and Division levels; (2) develop draft qualitative scoring of projects and ranking; (3) Divisions. GSATS is located in Region B; and seek public involvement; and (4) finalize project scoring and ranking. – Data / quantitative scoring will comprise 70% of the decision-making process and local rankings will comprise of the remaining 30%. Schedule • Division Level As part of the STI process, GSATS requests projects from the local member governments (counties, – Projects that address local concerns such as safety, congestion and connectivity will receive towns, transit departments, airports, etc.). The GSATS-North Carolina Technical Coordinating Committee 30% of the available revenue shared equally over NCDOT’s 14 Transportation Divisions. GSATS (NCTCC) then evaluates the candidate projects. The GSATS-North Carolina Transportation Advisory is located in NCDOT Division 3; and the department will choose projects based 50% on data Committee (NCTAC) and Policy Committee then approve the draft prioritized project list and point and 50% on local rankings. allocation pending public comment. New projects are submitted to the NCDOT’s SPOT. GSATS next advertises the projects for a 30-day public comment period, as prescribed in the GSATS Public The Strategic Prioritization Office of Transportation (SPOT) develops quantitative scores for all projects Participation Process, followed by NCTCC, NCTAC, and Policy Committee meetings to consider the public based on the adopted methodology. Default criteria were recommended by the Prioritization 4.0 work comments and any suggested modifications to the point allocation. group and agreed to by NCDOT to quantitatively score projects across all modes. MPOs, RPOs and the NCDOT’s division engineers were given flexibility to develop their own highway criteria and formulas for the quantitative evaluation and project scoring in the Regional Projects and Division Projects. SPOT Local Point Methodology Points are allocated to projects in order of their MTP quantitative ranking. Projects partially located required that any deviation from the adopted criteria had to be approved by MPOs and RPOs in the within the study area can be given up to 100 points and the balance of points necessary to provide 100 region and/or division by July 1, 2013. A revised set of criteria was approved by the members of Region points can be shared with the neighboring MPO/RPO. If a points-sharing arrangement is approved, both B and Division 3. These revised criteria include: parties must agree to the amount of points donated and provide this agreement in writing to the SPOT • Regional Projects Evaluation Criteria: Office. High priority projects that are expected to cascade to the Regional or Division funding levels can – Multi-modal 25% be awarded GSATS’ local input points at the discretion of the NCTAC. Safety 25% – Non-highway projects will be evaluated when received. Point allocation for non-motorized projects will – Benefit-Cost 20% only be made when local matching funds can be reasonably expected. The P3.0 non-motorized project – Local Input 30% score provided by NCDOT will be used, along with local input, to evaluate non-motorized projects. • Division Projects Evaluation Criteria: – Safety 20%
66 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
9 FINANCING AND IMPLEMENTATION
Final Ranking and Local Points Assignment demand, and promoting the use of alternative modes of transportation are all strategies that will need to be employed in order to relieve the pressure on the regional roadway system and advance the goals of Points are assigned to each project based on project MTP score and local input. GSATS has 1100 points to this plan. assign toward Regional Projects and another 1100 points to assign toward Division Projects. Each project can receive a maximum of 100 points. Consultation with the RPO, Division Engineer, Division Planning Engineer, and District Engineer for each project to gauge Division priority will occur prior to final point System Preservation allocation. Any justification/rationale for point assignments made by the TAC which deviate from this Preserving the existing system and maintaining it in good condition will continue to be a high priority for local methodology will be placed on the GSATS website. the MPO. Adequate resources must be directed toward system preservation to keep the transportation network in good condition. These resources will be used to maintain high quality, smooth roadway ALTERNATIVE FUNDING STRATEGIES surfaces, to quickly repair unexpected damages, and to reduce the number of structurally deficient bridges. Federal and state transportation revenue streams are rapidly losing pace with needed investments. State and federal gas taxes have not changed since the early 1990s. Increases in oil prices in the mid-2000s caused people to adjust their driving habits and buy more fuel-efficient cars. Over the last few years, System Efficiency prices in oil are now limiting the amount of funds generated from gas taxes. Federal programs have Transportation System Management (TSM) strategies help to improve the safe and efficient movement of made strides toward rejuvenating the automobile industry and decreasing emissions, but those advances people and vehicles within the existing transportation system. They typically involve roadway have come at the cost of decreasing federal and state transportation revenue. improvements that increase capacity, optimize traffic operation, or apply traffic calming in residential areas. Generally, implementation of these strategies can be completed at relatively low cost, requiring Various suggestions have been made to bolster federal and state transportation funding mechanisms, minimal right-of-way, and often can be accomplished quickly. including increasing the gasoline tax and/or indexing it to the consumer price index, increasing local vehicle registration fees, and imposing a local tax dedicated to transportation improvements. However, such tax increases are typically very politically unpopular. Other suggestions include transitioning to a Safety and Security tax based upon miles driven, rather than gasoline consumed. GPS and other technologies to implement Safety may be defined as the freedom from unintended harm. Transportation safety planning considers this type of solution have been around for years, but concerns over privacy may limit this type of ways that all elements of the system can operate efficiently while still being safe for users. This could solution from widespread adoption. include any number of projects or programs such as police surveillance, intelligent transportation systems (ITS), and improvements at high-crash locations. Security, on the other hand, may be defined as At the local level, Horry County residents recently voted to extend a local option sales tax dedicated to the freedom from intentional harm, including those inflicted by people and natural phenomena. In transportation capital projects. Local option taxes are increasingly becoming a solution for funding particular, security goes beyond safety and includes planning to prevent, manage, and respond to transportation projects across the country. threats to the regional transportation system. These threats could include a variety of events, such as Nevertheless, MPOs must make some prediction on future revenue funding streams in order to try and natural disasters, terrorist threats, or hazardous spills, all of which endanger the lives of people and keep up with the transportation infrastructure investments that are necessary to keep their regional important transportation infrastructure. In the GSATS region, safety and security of the transportation economies competitive in the global marketplace. system is coordinated within various agencies at the federal, state, and local levels. POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS Travel Demand Management Travel Demand Management (TDM) is the application of strategies and policies to reduce travel demand Population growth, high automobile availability and usage, and auto-oriented land use development (specifically that of single-occupancy private vehicles), to redistribute this demand in time or space, and indicate that the Grand Strand Area is heavily dependent upon the automobile as the primary mode of to offer a set of strategies aimed at maximizing traveler choices. Managing demand can be a cost- transportation. Based upon an evaluation of the regional roadway system over the next 23 years, it is effective alternative to increasing capacity and also has the potential to deliver better environmental evident that increasing demands will be placed on the existing roadway network. The regional roadway outcomes, improved public health, stronger communities, and more prosperous and livable cities. system cannot indefinitely sustain this growth in demand without substantial investment. Poor level of service and low travel speeds along major thoroughfares in the region indicate many roadways are TDM strategies are effective in influencing travel patterns and behavior, increasing vehicle occupancy, accommodating traffic volumes that exceed their designed operating capacity, and need major promoting and encouraging alternative transportation modes, and redistributing the timing of trips to improvements. reduce traveling peaks, thereby reducing the overall demand on the transportation system.
However, funding levels are not keeping pace with investment needs. Preserving the existing system in a Additional TDM recommendations that would benefit the GSATS region include: state of good repair, increasing its operational efficiency, enhancing its safety, managing future travel
67 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
9 FINANCING AND IMPLEMENTATION
• Telecommuting – It is quite feasible and practical to work closer to home with today’s communication technologies. This is an excellent tactic for reducing the number of vehicles on Technology the road. Additionally, other flexible work options which enable employees to shift their work In the last few years, the automobile and technology industry are undergoing dramatic innovations in schedules to earlier or later parts of the day spread out demand for travel, thereby reducing vehicle technology, smart infrastructure advancement, and shared mobility concepts. Several major congestion. automakers are working towards fully autonomous vehicles (AVs) available to the public within the next decade. While current opinion suggests the anticipated increase in autonomous and connected vehicles • Support for Transit – Providing necessary support for transit ridership can be instrumental in will enhance safety and efficiency; changes in mode, ridesharing, parking, and number of vehicle trips encouraging people to use alternative modes of transportation. People value their time and the are not fully understood. convenience of a vehicle; therefore, transit should provide frequent service and be accessible to multiple origins and destinations. Specific programs to encourage transit use include employer- GSATS should consider the following strategies to address the potential changes to the transportation provided, tax-free transit passes and guaranteed-ride-home programs. system:
• Support for Walking and Bicycling – Bicycle and pedestrian facilities that offer safe, accessible, • Leverage technology to enhance mobility. Partner with transit agencies and private companies contiguous, and direct pathways are most ideal and can take some of the burden off the roadway to adopt smartcards, open data, and universal apps to allow riders to compare, book and pay for network. trips that combine buses, trains, bikes and ridesharing vehicles. This will match customers with the most efficient travel choice. • School Considerations – Schools generate a substantial amount of vehicular traffic when parents drive their children to and from school. Even the children living within close proximity to schools • Prioritize and modernize public transit. The role of transit will evolve as AVs and shared may not walk or bike to school because parents do not feel that the environment is safe. mobility become widespread. Transit agencies should focus on high-frequency, high-capacity Programs such as Safe Routes to School and the Walking School Bus (which provides chaperoned services in dense urban corridors (such as rail or bus rapid transit), provide first and last-mile walks to schools) are effective in providing safe and accessible walking environments. Better connections through driverless shuttles, and expand kiss-and-rides/mobility hubs. coordination between local governments and school districts can also help with selecting sites for • new schools that are conducive to walking and bicycling. Implement dynamic pricing. To ensure that AV use supports public objectives and complements public transit, localities may consider a dynamic road pricing plan that varies by origin, destination, number of passengers, congestion, and household income. This can be done through Land Use and Urban Design a combination of proven policy tools such as congestion pricing, zone pricing, variable tolls and The types of land use and development in a region generally fall into the categories of where a person vehicle miles traveled fee. lives, works, or plays. These nodes of activity are oftentimes separated, but are becoming more integrated as people realize the benefits of mixed-use. The links connecting the nodes of activity are the • Plan for mixed-use, car-light neighborhoods. AVs can unlock demand for living and working in highways, roads, and other such pathways in a transportation system. Therefore, promoting smart and mixed-use neighborhoods – whether they are urban or suburban. To shape this demand, localities integrated land use and transportation development planning policies is vital for the overall health of a need to plan for and incentivize mixed-use development, overhaul parking requirements, and region. The MPO regularly works with stakeholders to promote the integration of transportation reevaluate new public transit projects. improvements and land use development, especially mixed-use development. • Encourage adaptable parking. Fewer cars means fewer parking spaces, especially in city centers. Parking garages need to be built with housing or office conversion in mind and include Environmental Mitigation level floors, higher ceiling heights and centralized ramps. GSATS and its members are committed to protecting and enhancing natural resources, improving quality of life, and promoting compatibility of transportation improvements with state and local planned • Promote equitable access to new jobs and services. To support disadvantaged populations, growth. Therefore, resource conservation and environmental and stormwater impact mitigation are key cities must encourage public and private operators to provide alternative payment methods, elements of the GSATS’ transportation planning process. GSATS recognizes that not every project will access via dial-a-ride and equitable service coverage. Cities and private partners must also create require the same type or level of mitigation. Some projects involve major construction with considerable new employment and training opportunities for drivers and others in legacy occupations. earth disturbance, while others, like intersection improvements, street lighting, and resurfacing projects, involve minor construction and minimal, if any, earth disturbance. The mitigation efforts used for a project should be dependent upon how severe the impact on environmentally sensitive areas is expected to be.
68 GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 2040 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
MARK HOEWELER, DIRECTOR GRAND STRAND AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY 1230 HIGHMARKET STREET GEORGETOWN, SC 29440 WWW.GSATS.ORG