us 17 corridor study in georgetown county - gsats

US 17 Corridor Study in Georgetown County

Grand Strand Area Transportation Study

Project number: 60607299

December 2020

Mark Hoeweler, AICPAssistant Executive DirectorWaccamaw Regional Council ofGovernments1230 Highmarket StreetGeorgetown, SC 29440

US 17 Corridor Study in Georgetown County Project Number: 60607299

ii

Prepared for:Grand Strand Area Transportation StudyMark Hoeweler, AICPAssistant Executive DirectorWaccamaw Regional Council of Governments1230 Highmarket StreetGeorgetown, SC 29440

Prepared by:

AECOM101 Research DriveColumbia, SC 29203aecom.com

Copyright © 2020 by AECOM

All rights reserved. No part of this copyrighted work may be reproduced, distributed, ortransmitted in any form or by any means without the prior written permission of AECOM.


iii

Table of Contents1.0 Executive Summary ................................................................................ 12.0 Introduction .............................................................................................. 23.0 Steering Committee ................................................................................ 64.0 Previous Study Review ........................................................................... 75.0 Access Management Plan..................................................................... 116.0 Transportation and Land Use Planning Best Practices ........................ 137.0 Existing Conditions ................................................................................ 19

7.1 Corridor Characteristics ............................................................................................... 197.2 Traffic Count Data ........................................................................................................ 267.3 Transit .......................................................................................................................... 327.4 Pedestrian Walkways and Bikeways ............................................................................ 377.5 Crash Analysis ............................................................................................................. 40

8.0 Background Growth and Development ................................................. 429.0 Public Involvement ................................................................................ 4710.0 Capacity Analysis ................................................................................ 50

10.1 Existing 2019 Analysis ............................................................................................... 5210.2 No-Build 2040 Analysis .............................................................................................. 5510.3 Build 2040 Analysis .................................................................................................... 5910.4 Capacity Improvements ............................................................................................. 7010.5 Arterial Analysis.......................................................................................................... 78

11.0 Funding ................................................................................................ 7912.0 Conclusions and Recommendations .................................................. 81


iv

AppendixAppendix A – Steering Committee MinutesAppendix B – Raw Traffic CountsAppendix C – Wiki Map CommentsAppendix D – Public Meeting CommentsAppendix E – Signal PlansAppendix F – Existing 2019 Synchro and Sim Traffic ReportsAppendix G – No-Build 2040 Synchro and Sim Traffic ReportsAppendix H – Build 2040 Synchro and Sim Traffic ReportsAppendix I – Build 2040 Sidra ReportsAppendix J – Arterial AnalysisAppendix K – ConceptsAppendix L – Performance Measures

TablesTable 1: Project Steering Committee ............................................................ 6Table 2: 2003 US Highway 17 Corridor Study Status ................................... 8Table 4: US 17 Corridor Demographics ...................................................... 36Table 5: Intersection Crash Summary ......................................................... 41Table 6: Historic Traffic Growth ................................................................... 42Table 7: Wiki Map Response Summary ...................................................... 48Table 8: Level-of-Service Thresholds .......................................................... 51Table 9: Existing 2019 LOS and Delay ....................................................... 52Table 10: No-Build 2040 LOS and Delay .................................................... 55Table 11: Build 2040 LOS and Delay .......................................................... 60Table 12: Arterial Analysis Mid-day Peak Hour ........................................... 78Table 13: Arterial Analysis PM Peak Hour................................................... 78Table 14: Summary of Costs ....................................................................... 79Table 15: Failure Year Analysis Summary .................................................. 81Table 16: Near-term (2020-2025) Project Summary ................................... 82Table 17: Intermediate-term (2025-2035) Project Summary ...................... 82Table 18: Long-term (2035-2040) Project Summary................................... 84Table 19: Intersection LOS Summary by Scenario ..................................... 85


v

FiguresFigure 1: Study Area Limits ........................................................................... 4Figure 2: Intersection Study Area Map .......................................................... 5Figure 3: Existing Lane Configuration (1 of 4) ............................................ 22Figure 4: Existing Lane Configuration (2 of 4) ............................................ 23Figure 5: Existing Lane Configuration (3 of 4) ............................................ 24Figure 6: Existing Lane Configuration (4 of 4) ............................................ 25Figure 7: 2019 Average Daily Traffic Volumes ............................................ 26Figure 8: 2019 Existing Peak Hour Volumes (1of 4) ................................... 28Figure 9: 2019 Existing Peak Hour Volumes (2 of 4) .................................. 29Figure 10: 2019 Existing Peak Hour Volumes (3 of 4) ................................ 30Figure 11: 2019 Existing Peak Hour Volumes (4 of 4) ................................ 31Figure 12: Coast RTA Route 16 Bus Stops ................................................. 34Figure 13: US 17 Crashes south of N Causeway Rd / Waverly Rd............ 40Figure 14: 2040 No-Build Peak Hour Volumes (1 of 4) .............................. 43Figure 15: 2040 No-Build Peak Hour Volumes (2 of 4) .............................. 44Figure 16: 2040 No-Build Peak Hour Volumes (3 of 4) .............................. 45Figure 17: 2040 No-Build Peak Hour Volumes (4 of 4) .............................. 46Figure 18: US 17 Corridor Study Wiki Map ................................................. 48Figure 19: Roadway Level of Service ......................................................... 50Figure 20: 2040 Build Peak Hour Volumes (1 of 6) ................................... 64Figure 21: 2040 Build Peak Hour Volumes (2 of 6) .................................... 65Figure 22: 2040 Build Peak Hour Volumes (3 of 6) .................................... 66Figure 23: 2040 Build Peak Hour Volumes (4 of 6) .................................... 67Figure 24: 2040 Build Peak Hour Volumes (5 of 6) .................................... 68Figure 25: 2040 Build Peak Hour Volumes (6 of 6) .................................... 69Figure 26: Typical RCI Intersection ............................................................. 70Figure 27: FHWA Reduced Conflict Intersection Capacity Chart ............... 71Figure 28: 2040 Proposed Lane Configuration (1 of 6) .............................. 72Figure 29: 2040 Proposed Lane Configuration (2 of 6) .............................. 73Figure 30: 2040 Proposed Lane Configuration 3 of 6) ............................... 74Figure 31: 2040 Proposed Lane Configuration (4 of 6) .............................. 75Figure 32: 2040 Proposed Lane Configuration (5 of 6) .............................. 76Figure 33: 2040 Proposed Lane Configuration (6 of 6) .............................. 77


vi

Acronyms

ADA - Americans with Disability ActAADT - Annual Average Daily TrafficADT - Average Daily TrafficARMS - Access & Roadside Management StandardsCOG - Council of GovernmentsCTC - County Transportation CommitteeFAST - Fixing America's Surface TransportationFHWA - Federal Highway AdministrationFTA - Federal Transit AdministrationGSATS - Grand Strand Area Transportation StudyHEPOA - Hagley Estates Property Owners AssociationHCM - Highway Capacity ManualLOS - Level-of-ServiceMAP - Moving Ahead for ProgressMPH - Miles Per HourMTP - Metropolitan Transportation PlanMPO - Metropolitan Planning OrganizationNCDOT - North Carolina Department of TransportationRCI - Reduced Conflict IntersectionRTA - Regional Transportation AuthoritySCDOT - South Carolina Department of TransportationSCTIB - South Carolina State Infrastructure BankTAZ - Traffic Analysis ZoneTIFIA - Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation ActUSDOT - United States Department of TransportationVPD - Vehicles Per DayVPH - Vehicles Per HourVMT - Vehicle Miles TraveledWNCPOA - Waccamaw Neck Council Property Owners Association


Waccamaw Regional Council of Governments AECOM1

1.0 Executive SummaryThe Grand Strand Area Transportation Study (GSATS) has been improving capacity and safetyalong US 17 for the last several years by implementing recommendations from the 2003 US 17Highway Georgetown County study which addresses transportation deficiencies and providedimprovement strategies that are sensitive to the context of the community. The purpose of thisupdated US 17 Corridor Study is to build off the 2003 study as summarized in Section 4.0; however, recommendations using the Reduced Conflict Intersection (RCI) design at multiplelocations is the preferred alternative as opposed to traditional widening. With US 17 beingbordered by the Waccamaw River to the west and Atlantic Ocean to the east, the construction ofparallel roadway is cost prohibitive and has large environmental impacts.

Even widening the existing 4-lane highway to a 6-lane section of US 17 in the Pawleys Island andLitchfield areas is challenging with costly right-of-way impacts. Widening the roadway is alsolinked to higher speeds and longer pedestrian crossings which is counterproductive to safety andcapacity for all road users as expressed from the public information meeting held on September17, 2019.

The reduced conflict intersection design decreases the number of vehicular conflict points by 50%and pedestrian conflicts points by 67% when comparing it to a traditional intersection. In addition,the reduced conflict intersection provides opportunities for a signalized midblock crossing at theU-turns improving pedestrian safety across this primary arterial.

US 17 is a north / south primary arterial currently servicing 30,500 to 47,000 vehicles per day andis expected to serve 46,200 to 71,900 vehicles per day by 2040. There was a total of 1,133crashes over a three-year period (2016-2018) along the 19.0-mile section of US 17 betweenHobcaw Road and the Horry County line. Of these 1,133 crashes, approximately 50% of themwere rear-end collisions attributed to access management, congestion, and excessive speeding.Also, during this same period, seven (7) fatalities were reported.

There are several near-term recommendations along the entire corridor including closing medianopenings, new signals, lane restriping, vegetation maintenance, and adaptive signal timing thatcould have an immediate impact on safety and operation. The estimated cost of the near-termimprovements is approximately $2.5M with further details in Section 12.0.

Below is list of the top 10 projects totaling approximately $33M in order of priority based on thetraffic capacity analysis at 22 intersections and crash history along the entire study corridor. Allcost estimates are in the year 2020 dollars.

1. US 17 at Burgess Road Quadrant Intersection ($4.2M)2. US 17 Smalls Loop Road to Island Shops Access Management ($4.6M)3. US 17 at Litchfield Drive and Country Club Drive Safety Improvements ($2.4M)4. US 17 Willbrook Boulevard / Retreat Beach Cir Reduced Conflict Intersection ($1.8M)5. US 17 between Pendergrass Avenue to Wachesaw Road RCI ($2.7M)6. US 17 widening to six lanes from Bellamy Avenue to Burgess Road ($12.5M)7. Kings River Road at Waverly Road single lane roundabout ($2.0M)8. US 17 between Sandy Island Road and Wesley Road S. RCI ($1.4M)9. US 17 between of Prince George Road and The Colony U-turn lanes ($800K)10. US 17 at Kings River Road signalization and U-turn Lane ($730K)

Cost estimates for Near-term, Intermediate, and Long-term projects have been identified inSection 12.0 of this report and visually shown in the concept figures in Appendix K.



2.0 IntroductionThe US 17 Corridor in Georgetown County has experienced significant growth which has led totransportation challenges including increased congestion and safety concerns along the corridor.This continued growth is expected to impact existing traffic patterns in the area by furtherincreasing congestion and creating additional safety issues without improvements to the roadwayinfrastructure. This corridor study recognizes the regional and local importance of the corridor andseeks to address issues and concerns related to safety, connectivity and capacity; and formulate concepts, proposals and recommendations to address those issues. Key challenges along thecorridor include how to move traffic efficiently through coastal resort communities whilemaintaining access to businesses and providing bicycle and pedestrian accommodations.

The study area begins just north of Hobcaw Road and continues northward for approximately 19miles to US 17 and US 17 Bypass in Murrells Inlet (near Georgetown/Horry County Line) as shownFigure 1. The average daily traffic volumes during the peak summer season along the corridorvary from 30,500 vehicles per day (vpd) on the southern end to 47,400 vpd on the northern end.These existing traffic volumes are expected to grow to 46,200 vpd on the southern end to 71,900vpd on the northern end by 2040.

This Study is a culmination of involvement with the community, stakeholders, Georgetown County,GSATS Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), The South Carolina Department ofTransportation (SCDOT) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). It will seek to analyzetraffic operations, crash history, growth patterns, and access management strategies to improvesafety and traffic flow. These efforts will result in Near-term, Intermediate-term, and Long-termrecommendations that GSATS, Georgetown County, and the SCDOT could implement in thefuture to benefit the corridor.

In addition to the heavy traffic volumes, there is also a significant number of crashes totaling 1,133(7 fatalities) along the study area over 3.0-year time frame between 2016 to 2018. By establishingaccess management strategies, the corridor will be able to handle additional traffic volumes,provide safe access, limit signalization to key locations and provide opportunities for landscapingand multimodal uses.

The project study area includes a 19.0-mile span along US 17 from Hobcaw Road to US 17 atUS 17 Bypass. Between these termini points, twenty-two (22) intersections as shown in Figure2 have been identified on which to conduct a detailed analysis:

1. US 17 at Kings River Road (S-911) – Unsignalized

2. US 17 at S Causeway Road (S-266) - Signalized

3. US 17 at Petigru Drive (S-450) / Alston Road – Signalized

4. US 17 at Waverly Road (S-46) / N Causeway Road - Signalized

5. US 17 at MLK Road (S-449) / Brown Lane - Signalized

6. US 17 at Litchfield Drive (S-302) - Signalized

7. US 17 at Country Club Drive (S-535) – Unsignalized

8. US 17 at Willbrook Boulevard – Signalized

9. US 17 at N Boyle Drive (S-98) – Signalized



10. US 17 at Sandy Island Road / Trace Drive (S-362) – Unsignalized

11. US 17 at Wesley Road S (S-392) - Unsignalized

12. US 17 at US 17 Business - Unsignalized

13. US 17 at Pendergrass Avenue (S-752) - Unsignalized

14. US 17 at Wesley Road N (S-392) – Unsignalized

15. US 17 at Wachesaw Road (S-62) - Signalized

16. US 17 at Bellamy Avenue (S-391) – Signalized

17. US 17 at Riverwood Drive (S-1018) – Signalized

18. US 17 at Macklen Avenue (S-559) – Unsignalized

19. US 17 at Burgess Road / Sunnyside Avenue (SC 707) - Signalized

AECOM was also asked to perform a detailed analysis at the following three (3) intersections inGeorgetown County:

20. Kings River Road (S-911) at Tyson Drive (S-758) – Unsignalized

21. Kings River Road (S-911) at Waverly Road (S-46) – Unsignalized

22. Murrells Inlet Road (S-557) at Macklen Avenue (S-559) – Unsignalized

It should be noted that while these intersections were selected for a detailed analysis, accessmanagement considerations were recommended at other intersections along the corridor basedon the available crash information.

AECOM was tasked with studying traffic conditions during a typical summer seasonal weekdayduring the Mid-day and PM peak hours for three (3) scenarios:

1. Existing 2019: An analysis of existing conditions in the year 2019.2. No-Build 2040: An analysis of future conditions in the year 2040 using historic traffic

volume trends in the surrounding area.3. Build 2040: An analysis of the future 2040 conditions if a Build Alternative is constructed

for multiple scenarios.Interim year analysis was conducted in 2030 to help develop mid-term improvements for multiplescenarios.

The traffic analysis includes a review of the crash history, Level of Service (LOS), queuing, andvolume to capacity ratios for the Existing 2019, No Build 2040, and Build 2040 scenarios. Basedon these scenarios, the study will compare the No-Build 2040 scenario to the Build 2040 scenariosand provide roadway recommendations to improve operation, queuing, and volume to capacityratios.

This report also includes conceptual designs of the proposed improvements to accommodate the2040 projected traffic volumes. Finally, these improvements were separated into Near-term,Intermediate, and Long-term along with their associated cost estimates.

Pawleys Island

DeBordieu

Litchfield

Brookgreen Gardens

Murrells Inlet

Begin Project

End Project

Study Area

Georgetown

County


Study Area Limits

Figure 1

At lant ic Ocean

Sandy Island Rd

Pawleys Island

DeBordieu

Litchfield

Brookgreen Gardens

Murrells Inlet

Study Area

Georgetown

County Sandy Island Rd


Intersection Study Area Map

Figure 2

At lant ic Ocean

1

20 2

4 3

5 21

8

7 6

10

9

11 12

13

14 15

16 17

19 18 22



3.0 Steering CommitteeThroughout the duration of the GSATS US 17 Corridor Study, meetings were held with keystakeholders who served on the Steering Committee. These meetings provided a forum to provideupdates from their perspectives in regard to ongoing projects and / or developments. Thisinformation was critical in determining the 2040 future volume projections and shaped therecommendations on where to apply access management strategies. The access managementstrategies and improvements discussed in this report have been thoroughly discussed with thesteering committee.

Meetings were held on the following days with meeting minutes summarized in Appendix A.

§ June 18, 2019 – Kickoff Meeting§ September 17, 2019 – Public Information Meeting§ February 26, 2020 – Presentation of Recommendations

Stakeholders attending these meetings are shown in Table 1.

Table 1: Project Steering Committee

Name OrganizationMark Hoeweler Waccamaw COGDaniel Newquist Waccamaw COGTom Britton Waccamaw COGElizabeth Tucker Waccamaw COGHolly Richardson Georgetown County PlanningBoyd Johnson Georgetown County PlanningKevin Parks Coast RTAStacey Johnson SCDOT – Assistant Program ManagerJoey Skipper SCDOT District 5Crystal McCutcheon SCDOT PlanningPatrick Tyndall AECOMBill Jordan AECOMRyan Eckenrode AECOMErin Pate Coastal Conservation LeagueJohn Sands CitizenTom Stickler Citizen – President of HEPOA & WNCPOAGreg Farmer CitizenTom Leis CitizenDavid Gundling Citizen



4.0 Previous Study ReviewTo gain a thorough understanding of the myriad issues and constraints included along the USHighway 17 Georgetown County corridor, a thorough review of the 2003 corridor study wascompleted. This review was a first, but vital step in the project planning process to assist indetermining what can be removed from plan considerations based on previous projectimplementation or changed conditions that would result in a project no longer being feasible. Thisreview was also critical in helping to determine projects that potentially may now be needed basedupon changes in land use, policy, and regulation. The goals from the 2003 study reflect amultimodal approach for addressing transportation deficiencies and providing improvementstrategies that are sensitive to the context of the community.

Transportation issues identified in this prior study include:

§ Provide roadway capacity to meet future growth

§ Provide a balance of through capacity and local access based on corridor subarea needs

§ Reduce conflict points

§ Provide safe pedestrian and bike crossings

§ Develop pedestrian activity areas

§ Provide intersection geometry and to maximize efficiency

§ Provide pedestrian and bicycle facilities to enhance travel and complement local multi-usepath implementations

§ Increase alternative travel modes including pedestrian, bicycle, and transit

§ Provide aesthetic enhancement to activity areas and along the corridor

§ Provide additional roadway connections within the geographic constraints of water,wetlands and environmental concerns

The 2003 study used very conservative annual growth rates with 2025 projections ranging from59,000 vehicles per day (vpd) on the southern end during a typical weekday to 90,000 vpd on thenorthern end during peak season. Using these projections, the 2003 study developed thefollowing recommended strategies to address the issues:

Strategy 1: Reduce trip making through land use

Strategy 2: Optimize transportation system for maximum efficiency and safety

Strategy 3: Increase roadway capacity where feasible

Strategy 4: Expand transit opportunities

Strategy 5: Provide pedestrian and bicycle travel opportunities

Strategy 6: Improve transportation system aesthetics

AECOM reviewed each project associated with the above strategies in the 2003 Study in an effortto better understand what has been implemented. The results of this review are depicted in Table2 in the section below:



Table 2: 2003 US Highway 17 Corridor Study Status

Strategy Project Description Implementation Status

1 – ReduceTrip Makingthrough LandUse

Establish mixed use requirements for Planned UnitDevelopments (transit and pedestrian network) Not Implemented Keep

Provide incentives for pedestrian & Transit OrientedDevelopment in activity centers Not Implemented Keep

Highlight mixed use development strategies in PilotProject and work with landowners for implementation Not Implemented Keep

2 – OptimizeTransportationSystem forMaximumEfficiency andSafety

Realign S. Causeway Rd to intersect US 17 at rightangle Not Implemented Keep

Realign Windover Dr to intersect US 17 acrossfrom Sandy Island Rd Completed Remove

Realign Litchfield Dr to intersect US 17 across fromCounty Club Dr Not Implemented Remove

Extend Left Turn Lanes on US 17 at Willbrook Dr toincrease storage Completed Remove

Improve US 17 & N Causeway (install turn lanes) Completed RemoveImprove US 17 and SC 707 (install turn lanesvarious approaches) Completed Remove

Realign US 17 Bus at US 17 to right angle Not Implemented KeepImprove US 17 & SC 707 (install dual lefts for SEapproach) Completed Remove

Improve US 17 & Willbrook Blvd (install dual leftsfor SE approach) Not Implemented Remove

Improve US 17 at Wachesaw Rd (Install separateleft turn, through, and right-turn on minorapproaches)

Not Implemented Keep

Improve US at MLK Jr. Rd (Lengthen SE left-turnlane and restripe to shared left/right turn) Not Implemented Remove

Install interconnect cable to coordinate trafficsignals and coordinate with SCDOT Implemented Keep

Set minimum US 17 green percentage by policy tofavor US 17 Partially Implemented Keep

Implement Access Management Standards Partially Implemented KeepInstall US 17 median from S Causeway to north ofMLK Jr. Rd Partially Implemented Keep

Coordinate with property owners to fosterinterparcel access and connection backsideroadway

Partially Implemented Keep

Encourage development of backside access roadsalong US 17 (east side from Pawleys to Litchfield,east and west side north of Brookgreen Gardens,and west side from Petigru Dr to Beaumont Dr)


Coordinate with landowners to enhance safety ofexisting and future driveway cuts to avoid backingout into travel lanes




Table 2 (Continued): 2003 US Highway 17 Corridor Study Georgetown County Status

Strategy Project Description Implementation Status

3 – IncreaseRoadwayCapacityWhereFeasible

Extend Library Ln north to the development alongLitchfield Dr Not Implemented Remove

Extend Library lane south to Waverly Rd Not Implemented RemoveExtend St. Paul Place north to Sandy Island Rd andconnect US 17 at Boyle Dr Not Implemented Keep

Extend Otis Dr north to Willbrook Blvd and south toPlantation Dr Not Implemented Keep

Widen roadway to add through capacity from northof Litchfield and provide for right-turns andacceleration / deceleration lanes between Pawleysand Litchfield

Not Implemented Remove

Include multi-use path separated from roadway by abuffer area on east side of US 17 Mostly Implemented Keep

Widen lane on Old Kings Hwy from SC 707 toTurntable Rd and add turn lanes Not Implemented Keep

Connect Old Kings Hwy to Wesley Rd north ofTurntable Rd Not Implemented Keep

Widen lanes on Wesley Rd from Old Kings Hwyconnection to US 17 and add turn lanes Not Implemented Keep

4 – ExpandTransitOpportunities

Implemented demand responsive transit service Implemented KeepCoordinate transit stop locations for travel to workservices provided by private carriers Not Implemented Keep

Examine demand for increased frequency of fixedroute services as activity centers develop Not Implemented Keep

5 – ProvidePedestrianand BicycleTravelOpportunities

Recognize existing pedestrian activity areas andinstall streetscape elements along US 17 at SC 707,Willbrook Blvd, Litchfield Dr, and N Causeway Rd


Monitor future pedestrian activity areas and installstreetscape elements at Wachesaw Rd, SandyIsland Rd, MLK Rd, and S Causeway Rd


Construct pedestrian refuge island with pedestriansignal heads with conjunction of 6-lane widening Not Implemented Keep

Coordinate with development of East CoastGreenway regional bike routes Partially Implemented Keep

Install multi-use path or bike lanes/sidewalk east ofUS 17 on N and S Causeway, Litchfield Rd, KingsRiver Rd from US 17 to Willbrook Blvd, Kings RiverRd extension from Willbrook Blvd to Sandy IslandRd, Waverly Rd from US 17 to Kings River Rd,Petigru Rd from MLK Jr. Rd to Waverly Rd, OldKings Hwy from SC 707 to new connection toWesley Rd near Turntable Rd, Wesley Rd from OldKings Hwy connection to US 17


Create signed bike routes with “share the road”signage such as Parkersville Rd, Library Rd, MyrtleAve, and Pendergrass Ave.




Table 2 (Continued): 2003 US Highway 17 Corridor Study Georgetown County Status

5 – Provide Pedestrian and Bicycle Travel Opportunities

Install multi-use path along SC 707 and Wachesaw Rd from Old Kings Hwy to US 17 Business


Extend Petigru Rd north from MLK Jr. Rd to Aspen Loop as a multi-use trail connection Implemented Remove

Install pedestrian crossing phases at all US 17 signalized intersections Partially Implemented Keep

Install textured pavement treatments and/or other high visibility cross markings and maintain Partially Implemented Keep

6 – Improve Transportation System Aesthetics

Enhance pedestrian scale elements in activity areas with wide sidewalks, lighting, benches, future bus stops, signage to local destinations and access to multi-use path network


Provide Improvements to enhance travel and wayfinding with street name signs, public beach access identification, gateway features to Pawleys Island and Litchfield area, and planting material unique to each pedestrian activity area.


A large number of transportation improvements were recommended as part of the 2003 study and to date a majority of them have yet to be implemented due to funding limitations.



5.0 Access Management PlanThe purpose of this access management plan is to maintain progression and capacity along US17 by applying access management standards encouraging connectivity between residential andcommercial properties for all modes of transportation. The following ten (10) accessmanagement fundamentals have been identified for this corridor:

1. Signal Spacing (Full signal = 2,640 feet)

2. Signal Operations (65% of signal cycle should dedicate to green on US 17)

3. Median Openings (All center turn lane medians removed and replaced with grass orraised concrete) with directional median break spacing with 1,320-foot minimum.

4. Number of Driveways (1 driveway per 325 foot minimum)

5. Driveway Design (turning radii shall conform to SCDOT Access and RoadsideManagement Standards)

6. Driveway Linkages (reduces conflict and better management enter and exit traffic)

7. Backside Access (removes turning traffic to and from US 17 and encourage inter-parcelaccess)

8. Acceleration / Auxiliary Lanes (remove them to decrease speeds and limit weavingmaneuvers between intersections)

9. Decelerations Lanes (install to reduce number of slowing or stopping traffic)

10. Retrofitting Existing Driveway (Relocate, consolidate, or eliminate)

The 2003 US 17 Georgetown County Corridor Study identified a few access management relatedprojects along US 17:

§ Install a median along US 17 from south of South Causeway Road to north of Martin LutherKing Jr. Road to provide a continuous median along entire corridor from Horry County tothe Waccamaw River.

§ Work with existing property owners to foster inter-parcel access and connection tobackside roadways. Allow setback variance if developer can demonstrate inter-parcelaccess will be maintained through agreement with adjacent property owners.

§ Encourage development of backside access road with future development along east ofUS 17 from Pawleys Island to Litchfield, east and west side of US 17 north of BrookgreenGardens, and west side of US 17 from Petigru Drive to Beaumont Drive.

AECOM will utilize these best practices of access management; however, SCDOT ARMS manualreleased in 2008 should be referenced. Congestion and the number of crashes at full movementsignals are an issue today and will likely worsen for the entire corridor. Innovative intersectiondesigns such as the Reduced Conflict Intersection, which consists of multiple directional signalsmay provide better progression along the primary arterial.



Opportunity exists along US 17 to provide inter-parcel connectivity for all modes. Where feasible, adjacent parcels and associated circulation and parking should be physically connected. Providing these connections will create opportunities for the consolidation of driveways. When several parcels in succession are connected, a pseudo frontage road begins to take shape, and allows the shorter vehicle trip to access properties without traveling along US 17.

Pawleys Island Plaza is an example of inter-parcel connectivity along US 17 as shown in the image below. The site includes a large grocery store, and several outparcels. Instead of having multiple access points to each outparcel and the main retailer, the site has consolidated access from US 17, which allows patrons to access the stores without trips along US 17. The internal street network is also set up in a way to allow for connectivity to adjacent properties that could redevelop in the future.

NORTH



6.0 Transportation and Land Use PlanningBest PracticesBy definition “Best Practices” is a method or technique that has been generally accepted assuperior to any other alternatives because it produces optimal results. It is important to have agood foundation of best practices from within the transportation industry as they can providestakeholders and decision makers valuable insight into what works or does not work whenplanning. In the case of the US 17 Corridor Study in Georgetown County, the relationship betweentransportation planning and land use should not occur in a vacuum. Therefore, before detailedplanning can occur identifying best practices is an important factor to be addressed as thisinformation helps set the stage for recommendations listed throughout this report.

To help identify the most relevant best practices the following areas of transportation and land useplanning were assessed for potential application to this study. These include:

§ Travel demand modeling.§ Land use modeling.§ Context-sensitive highway design, including Complete Streets principles.§ Transportation system management (including access management).§ Travel demand management (including land use planning for travel reduction)§ Pedestrian and transit planning.

Travel Demand Modeling

Travel demand models (also called traffic models) are designed to evaluate transportationnetwork demands and use this information to predict roadway traffic volumes and impacts suchas congestion, level–of- service, volume/capacity ratio, air quality and pollution emissions. Mostare four-step models, meaning that they follow these steps:

§ Trip generation. Predict total trips that start and end in a particular area (referred to asTraffic Analysis Zones or TAZs in travel demand modeling), based on factors such as eachzone’s land use patterns, number of residents and jobs, demographics, transportationsystem features (number of roads, etc.) and distance between two zones.

§ Trip distribution. Trips are distributed between pairs of zones, based on the distancebetween those zones.

§ Mode Choice. Trips are allocated among the available travel modes (usually auto andtransit).

§ Trip assignment. Trips are assigned to specific facilities included in the highway and transittransportation networks.

As late as the early 1990s there was little research and limited practical application of land usemodels and activity-based travel demand models and their integration with demographic,economic and network modes. Since then, there has been a literal revolution in travel demandforecasting. Significant advances have been realized in survey methods and analysis toolsavailable within the travel demand modeling profession.



Today, there are several useful sources of information on best current practices for transportation modeling and ways to improve the accuracy of travel demand models. The U.S. DOT’s Travel Model Improvement Program and the U.S. Federal Highway Administration’s Toolbox for Regional Policy Analysis Website provide current information on transportation modeling techniques.

Below are some general guidelines for transportation modeling best practices:

General Guidelines for Transportation Modeling Best Practices

§ Modelers should work to stay informed of current research and improvements.§ Use comprehensive travel surveys to track travel activity, including non-motorized travel,

short trips, intra-zonal, thru trips, VMT and peak hour travel.§ Improve modeling and evaluation of non-motorized and transit travel. § Develop Level-of-Service indicators to help evaluate conditions and potential corridors

requiring network or other improvements.§ Incorporate feedback into models in order to accurately predict future congestion problems

and the traffic generated by roadway capacity expansion.§ Develop integrated transportation and land use models that can predict the effects that

transportation decisions will have on land use development patterns and the effects that land use decisions will have on accessibility.

For the US 17 Georgetown County Corridor Study the travel demand model developed for the GSATS 2040 Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) was reviewed and traffic projections at pertinent locations were selected and analyzed to determine future growth rates of traffic along the corridor and the surrounding roadway network. This valuable tool was also essential in formulating the proposed recommendations.

Land Use Modeling

Land use modeling can be defined as a quantitative method to predict future changes in land use, socioeconomic and demographic data based on economic theories and social behaviors. As stated previously, as late as the 1990’s there was little research or practical application of a sharing of information between land use models and activity-based travel demand models. It is now however an accepted notion that a reciprocal relationship exists between transportation and land use. Land use models are often developed at the regional level in coordination with transportation models, based on underlying GIS information and data sets that may include economic and environmental information, population projections, existing development, land use and zoning data. By utilizing land use modeling, planners are able to more accurately assess the performance of a given community’s current land use configuration, and more effectively communicate what the potential impact of future variations will be to decision-makers and the public. Below are some general guidelines for land use modeling best practices:

https://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm129.htm



General Guidelines for Land Use Modeling Best Practices

§ Promote a mix of land uses in centers.§ Accommodate housing in existing urban areas.§ Innovative and flexible approaches to parking.§ Locate day-to-day facilities in local centers so they are accessible by bike and pedestrians.§ Focus major generators in urban cores, district centers and near major public

transportation stops.§ Use best current practices for land use models. Modelers should work to stay informed of

current research and improvements.§ Develop integrated land use and transportation models that can predict the effects that

land use decisions will have on transportation patterns.

For the US 17 Georgetown County Corridor Study the land use data developed for the GSATS 2040 Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) was utilized by assisting in the development of the traffic model and ultimately aided in the formulation of the recommendations. It is important that land use policies should encourage development that supports a range of transportation options, including transit, bicycling, and walking. This can not only reduce traffic congestion, but also increase access for citizens without access to private automobiles as well as adding to the overall health and recreational options of the public.

Context Sensitive Highway Design

Context Sensitive Highway Design are streets designed and operated to enable safe use and support mobility for all users. Those include people of all ages and abilities, regardless of whether they are travelling as drivers, pedestrians, bicyclists, or public transportation riders. “Complete streets” is a term used to describe the transformation of vehicle-dominated thoroughfares in urban and suburban areas into community-oriented streets that safely and conveniently accommodate all modes of travel. The concept of Complete Streets encompasses many approaches to planning, designing, and operating roadways and rights of way with all users in mind to make the transportation network safer and more efficient. Below are some general guidelines for context sensitive highway design best practices:

General Guidelines for Context Sensitive Highway Design Best Practices

§ Achieve community goals and objectives.§ Blend street design with the character of the area creating a balance when designing so

that traffic demands do not outweigh other components of the complete street concept.§ Utilize public investment to the greatest extent possible by working with property owners,

developers and others to promote private investment in the area.



Transportation System Management

According to the FHWA access management can be described as “the process that provides access to land development while simultaneously preserving the flow of traffic on the surrounding system in terms of safety, capacity, and speed.” In many ways access management balances the needs of motorists using a roadway with the needs of adjacent property owners dependent upon access to the roadway. Successful strategies can reduce or manage traffic congestion while serving all users. As the US 17 corridor in Georgetown County continues to attract commercial development, protecting the capacity becomes essential for the efficiency of the transportation system and continued economic growth. In an environment with limited funds for competing transportation projects, access management is not just good policy but necessary to the well-being of the entire transportation network. In simple terms, poor access management negatively affects the livability and economic vitality of commercial corridors, ultimately discouraging potential customers from entering the area by creating unsafe congested conditions and lengthening commute times.

Obviously, there is no universal “one size fits all” solution to corridor congestion to include access management. There are, however, several successful best practice strategies listed below worth noting.

General Guidelines for Transportation System Management Best Practices

§ Driveway Placement - Typically, no driveway should be allowed within 100 feet of the nearest intersection.

§ Number of Driveways - Reducing the number of access points decreases the number of conflict points. Therefore, only the minimum number of connections necessary to provide reasonable access should be permitted.

§ On-Site Traffic Circulation - Pushing back the throat of an entrance helps to avoid spillback onto the arterial. A minimum separation of 100 feet should be provided to prevent internal site operations from affecting the main line.

§ Cross Access - Cross access is a service drive or secondary roadway that provides vehicular access between two or more continuous properties. This access prevents drivers from having to enter the highway network to travel between adjacent uses.

Travel Demand Management

Travel Demand Management can be defined as a set of strategies that increase overall transportation network efficiency, most often by encouraging a shift from single-occupant vehicle (SOV) trips to non-SOV modes or shifting trips out of peak periods. Travel Demand Management seeks to reduce auto trips by increasing travel options, providing incentives and information to

Poor access management leads to unsafe conditions



encourage and help individuals modify their travel behavior through various measures such astransit benefits, carpool matching and telecommuting. The cumulative effect of a set of TravelDemand Management strategies can have a significant impact on system efficiency,accommodation of new growth, and success of an urban area. Travel Demand Managementprograms are usually implemented by public agencies, employers, or via public privatepartnership. Several leading Travel Demand Management best practices are listed below:

General Guidelines for Travel Demand Management Best Practices

§ Broad and effective public outreach and promotion programs that not only improve thepublic’s awareness of alternative modes, but actively assist them in their day to day travelplanning and choices.

§ Adoption of public policies that encourage transportation demand management into theland development process.

§ Integrate Travel Demand Management programs that enlist multiple employers andinstitutions and are closely coordinated with the municipality and transit authorities.

§ Pricing and other incentives to influence mode choice and travel demand.§ Strong regional coordination of transportation demand management strategies to include

routine measuring and reporting of performance and progress.

Pedestrian and Transit Planning

Pedestrian and Transit Planning is an essential component of building communities that ensureall citizens have alternatives as part of an integrated transportation system. People areincreasingly searching for solutions to tight family budgets and time wasted in traffic. Astransportation costs and congestion increase, walking, bicycling and transit will continue to growin importance. These are all viable and vital forms of transportation and are especially importantfor people who lack access to automobiles. A well thought out and executed Bicycle/PedestrianPlan and efficient Transit System is essential to optimize performance within a transportationsystem. Below are several general guidelines for Pedestrian and Transit Planning best practices:

General Guidelines for Pedestrian and Transit Planning Best Practices

§ Form a Pedestrian and Transit Steering Committee to help develop and guide the plan.The Steering Committee members should include citizens, elected officials, businesscommunity representatives, civic organizations, police department and educationrepresentatives.

§ Determine community goals, vision and objectives. These could include: Implementing asidewalk network that makes walking a viable alternative to driving, improving bike andpedestrian safety, especially at street crossings, improving pedestrian safety aroundschools, development of additional comfortable and safe places to wait for buses, etc.

§ Analyze existing conditions to include reviewing opportunities and constraints to helpinform recommendations.

§ Develop recommendations based on public input, performance criteria and compatibilitywith existing infrastructure.



Best Practices Project OptionsThere is not a single set of best practices that can be followed by all MPOs in the metropolitantransportation planning process as most MPOs are unique to some degree in character,environment and conditions. Simply stated, each MPO differs in terms of geographic size,population size, political environment and of course land use and transportation issues it mustcontend with. The best practices presented throughout chapter five are intended to identify thosepractices that are potentially appropriate for consideration and implementation in the US 17Georgetown County area. Just as each MPO is continually evolving and developing so too mustthe recommendations presented in this chapter.

Additional Best Practice Project Options

§ Scenario planning and visioning efforts§ Transportation and land use integration§ Consistent and unbiased project selection and prioritization methods§ Innovative public engagement methods and results§ Planning and environmental linkages efforts§ Use of state-of-the-art technical methodologies§ Practical performance measure goals§ Goals and objectives connected to selected strategies



7.0 Existing ConditionsThe US 17 study corridor runs north / south spanning approximately 19 miles starting from theHobcaw Road to the Horry County line. Throughout this 19-mile span on the Waccamaw Neck,the 4-lane divided principal arterial roadway characteristics widely differ and can be divided intofive (5) area types.

§ DeBordieu: Hobcaw Road to Kings River Road (5.6 miles)

§ Pawleys Island: Kings River Road to Duncan Avenue (3.6 miles)

§ Litchfield: Duncan Avenue to Sandy Island Drive / Trace Drive (3.7 miles)

§ Brookgreen Gardens: Sandy Island Drive to US 17 Business (2.7 miles)

§ Murrells Inlet: US 17 / US 17 Business to Horry County Line (3.4 miles)

Within these five areas mentioned above, the average daily traffic, transit usage, and pedestrian/ bike facilities vary.

7.1 Corridor CharacteristicsThe DeBordieu area typical cross section along US 17 from the Waccamaw River Bridge to KingsRiver Road is a rural parkway bordered with woods and resort like communities. This 5.6-milecross section consists of 4-lanes divided with a grass median and a speed limit of vary between45 and 60 miles per hour. There are no traffic signals along this section.

DeBordieu Area Typical Cross Section

The Pawleys area typical cross section along US 17 from Kings River Road to Duncan Avenue iscomprised of planned developments with varying building setbacks ranging between 50 and 90feet. This 3.6-mile cross section consists of 4-lanes divided with a combination of a two-way left-turn lane and concrete median. Between Waverly Road / North Causeway Road and DuncanAvenue, access management with reduced conflict intersection have been implemented. Thereare six (6) signals along this section of US 17 and the Waccamaw Neck Bikeway spans fromPawleys Crossing to North Causeway Road. This section has a speed limit of 45 miles per hour.



Pawleys Area Typical Cross Section

The Litchfield area typical cross section along US 17 from Duncan Avenue to Sandy Island Drive / Trace Drive is comprised of planned developments with varying building setbacks ranging between 50 and 90 feet. This 3.7-mile cross section consists of 4-lanes divided with a combination of concrete and grass median. Between Duncan Avenue and Baskerville Drive, access management with reduced conflict intersections have been implemented. There are four (4) signals along this section of US 17 and the Waccamaw Neck Bikeway spans from Retreat Beach Circle to North Boyle Drive. This section has a speed limit of 45 miles per hour.

Litchfield Area Typical Cross Section

The Brookgreen Gardens area typical cross section along US 17 from the Sandy Island Drive /Trace Drive is a rural parkway bordered with woods and provides access to Huntington BeachState Park. This 2.7-mile cross section consists of 4-lanes divided with a grass median and aspeed limit of 55 miles per hour. There are no traffic signals along this section. The WaccamawNeck Bikeway spans from Trace Drive to US 17 Business.

Brookgreen Gardens Area Typical Cross Section



The Murrells Inlet area typical cross section along US 17 from US 17 Business to Horry Countyline is lined with dense commercial and residential development. This 3.4-mile cross sectionconsists of 4-lanes divided with a grass median along with several auxiliary lanes connectingmajor driveways. There are four (4) signals along this section of US 17 with a speed limit of 45miles per hour.

Murrells Inlet Area Typical Cross Section

US 17 is the most direct highway between Georgetown and Myrtle Beach. The principal arterial has an annual average daily traffic volume between of 27,000 to 39,100 vehicles per day according to the SCDOT 2019 Traffic Count location map (Georgetown County Stations 113 and 121).

AECOM also conducted another 24-hour traffic count during peak summer season on Tuesday June 25th, 2019 that indicated significantly higher traffic volumes ranging between 30,500 to 47,400 vehicles per day with a 2 to 4 percent heavy truck traffic (Class 5 or higher which includes 2 axle, 6-Tire Single Units as the smallest type of truck).

US 17 is also a designated evacuation route. It should be noted that the 14 full movement traffic signals along the corridor are mostly spaced greater than 2,640 feet which is the minimum distance for a primary arterial according to the SCDOT Access and Roadside Management Standards (ARMS) manual. There are a few sections in Pawleys Island and Murrells Inlet areas that violate this spacing.

A field review was performed on May 21-22, 2019 to record existing laneage, signage, speed limits, signal phasing, and pedestrian accommodations. Any deficiencies in the system were also noted:

§ Median breaks in the grass medians without turn lanes in the DeBordieu, Litchfield, and Brookgreen Gardens areas

§ Auxiliary lanes and acceleration lanes associated with channelized right-turns in Pawleys Island and Murrells Inlet areas

§ US 17 at Wachesaw Road and Bellamy Road intersections had pedestrian push buttons but no crosswalk or pedestrian signal heads

§ Limited access management between South Causeway Road and North Causeway Road

§ Limited access management and congestion between Litchfield Drive and Country Club Road intersections.

The existing lane configuration and traffic control is shown on Figure 3 to Figure 6.

Figure 3

Existing Lane Configuration (1 of 4)## ####

<####>

STOP

Distance Between Intersections (feet)

Storage (feet)

Existing Laneage

Intersection Number

Stop Control

Signal Control

LEGEND

1

Kings River Rd

200'

100'

Tyso

n Dr

S. C

auseway

Alsto

n R

d

75'

250'

STOP

TWLTL

200'

300'

200'

200'

STOP

<7200'>

<1800'>

<7800'>

125'

225'

Petig

ru Dr

150'

150'

STOP

ST

OP

Kings Ri

ver R

d

Kings Ri

ver Rd

Waverly Rd

ST

OP

STOP

ST

OP

STOP

Waverly R

d

Waverly R

d

2

20

21

3

4125'

375'

175'

100'

<4900'>

Hagley Dr

Hagle

y Dr

TWLTL YIELD

dR

ya

we

su

aC

N

US 17

<3500'>


900'

500'

YIE

LD

YIE

LD

Existing Lane Configuration (2 of 4)

dvl

B k

oor

blliW

dvl

B k

oor

blliW

rD dnal

sI yd

naS

175'

200'

150'

150'

YIE

LD

200'

75'

175'

175'

STOP

50'

100'

325'

300'

225'

325'

100'

300'

200'

75'

250'

250'

200'

300'

STOP

STOP

<6100'>

<400'> <4700'> <3150'><2360'>

<11590'>

5

67

8

9

10

evi

rD

ec

arT

ywa

ive

Dr

Countr

y Clu

b Dr

Bro

wn L

n

Litchfield Dr

N B

oyle R

d

DLEI

Y DLEI

Y

Kin

g R

d

Martin L

uth

er

25'

200'

## ####

<####>

STOP


Storage (feet)

Existing Laneage

Intersection Number

Stop Control

Signal Control

LEGEND

Figure 4


<7800'>

400'

FREE


500'

STOP

325'

200'

250'

275'

250'

STOP

ev

A s

sar

gr

ed

ne

P

STOP

STOP

<5110'>

11

71 SU

ST

OP

SUB 71 SU

12

13 14

US 17

ev

A s

sar

gr

ed

ne

P

## ####

<####>

STOP


Storage (feet)

Existing Laneage

Intersection Number

Stop Control

Signal Control

LEGEND

Figure 5


<11590'>

<1070'>

300'

FREE' <3100'>

71 SU

<600'>Wesle

y R

d S

Wesley Rd N


16

17

18

19

ev

A e

dis

yn

nu

S

500'

150'

225'

250'

dR

wa

se

hc

aW

150'

200'

300'

250'

250'

300'

200'

400'

200'

300'

250'

350'

350'

250'

75'

225'

150'

350'

DL

EIY

200'STOP

STOPevA

ymall

eB

<600'>

<2570'>

<1320'>

<2650'>

200'

150'

200'

100'

rD

do

owr

evi

R

ya

we

vir

D

dR

ss

egr

uB

15

ST

OP

STOP

ST

OP

STOP

dR

wa

se

hc

aW

evA

ymall

eB

DL

EIY

DLEI

Y

rD

do

owr

evi

R

Murrells Inlet R

d

Mackle

n A

ve

22

## ####

<####>

STOP


Storage (feet)

Existing Laneage

Intersection Number

Stop Control

Signal Control

LEGEND

<1200'>

Figure 6


FREE

<1100'>

600'



7.2 Traffic Count DataAverage Daily Traffic (ADT) was collected on Tuesday June 25, 2019 along US 17 at five (5) locations:

§ US 17 south of Kings River Road

§ US 17 south of Martin Luther King Jr Road

§ US 17 north of Sandy Island Drive / Trace Drive

§ US 17 north of Pendergrass Avenue

§ US 17 north of Burgess Avenue / Sunnyside Avenue

Results from these traffic counts indicate that peak season daily traffic volumes range from approximately 30,500 to 47,500 vehicles per day with a 2-4 percent heavy truck traffic as shown in Figure 7. Based on the results of the daily counts, turning movement counts were obtained for the Mid-day and PM peak hours.

Turning movement counts were collected by National Data & Surveying Services, Inc. on Tuesday, June 25, 2019 for all intersections along US 17 and the intersection of Kings River Road at Tyson Drive. GSATS provided counts at Murrells Inlet Road at Macklen Avenue (June 26, 2019) and Kings River Road at Waverly Road (July 16, 2019). These counts were analyzed to determine the peak hour of traffic in the Mid-day (11:00 to 1:00) and PM (4:00 to 6:00) peak periods. The individual peak hours of each intersection varied and were utilized for the analysis. The majority of the study intersections had peak hours of 11:30 AM to 12:30 PM and 4:00 PM to 5:00 PM.

Figure 7: 2019 Average Daily Traffic Volumes



Turning movement counts were performed at each intersection listed below and peak hour trafficvolumes are summarized in Figure 8 to Figure 11.

1. US 17 at Kings River Road (S-911) – Unsignalized

2. US 17 at S Causeway Road (S-266) - Signalized

3. US 17 at Petigru Drive (S-450) / Alston Road – Signalized

4. US 17 at Waverly Road (S-46) / N Causeway Road - Signalized

5. US 17 at MLK Road (S-449) / Brown Lane - Signalized

6. US 17 at Litchfield Drive (S-302) - Signalized

7. US 17 at Country Club Drive (S-535) – Unsignalized

8. US 17 at Willbrook Boulevard – Signalized

9. US 17 at N Boyle Drive (S-98) – Signalized

10. US 17 at Sandy Island Road / Trace Drive (S-362) – Unsignalized

11. US 17 at Wesley Road S (S-392) - Unsignalized

12. US 17 at US 17 Business - Unsignalized

13. US 17 at Pendergrass Avenue (S-752) - Unsignalized

14. US 17 at Wesley Road N (S-392) – Unsignalized

15. US 17 at Wachesaw Road (S-62) - Signalized

16. US 17 at Bellamy Avenue (S-391) – Signalized

17. US 17 at Riverwood Drive (S-1018) – Signalized

18. US 17 at Macklen Avenue (S-559) – Unsignalized

19. US 17 at Burgess Road / Sunnyside Avenue (SC 707) - Signalized

20. Kings River Road (S-911) at Tyson Drive (S-758) – Unsignalized

21. Kings River Road (S-911) at Waverly Road (S-46) – Unsignalized

22. Murrells Inlet Road (S-557) at Macklen Avenue (S-559) – Unsignalized

Raw count data sheets are included in Appendix B.

Figure 8

1

Kings River Rd

Tyso

n Dr

Alsto

n R

d

Petig

ru Dr

Kings Ri

ver R

d

Waverly Rd

Waverly R

d

2

20

21

3

4

Hagley Dr

dR

ya

we

su

aC

N

US 17

(1174) 969

953 (1228)

82 (89)

14 (16)

(1261) 1045

1078 (1295)

121 (142)

S Causew

ay Rd

(1322) 1215

10 (3

1)

23 (3

3)

1228 (1370

)

(138) 1

61

(164) 94

(25) 30(51) 56

25 (21)

74 (95)

31 (43)

58 (58)

(94) 1

41

(36) 5

4

(93) 1

25

(1339) 11

92

1268 (1390)

(144) 1

33

(127) 1

63

(24) 32

(10) 11

141 (12

6)

107 (1

02)

122 (1

10)

25 (1

2)

122 (8

0)

LEGEND

## Intersection Number

Volume Movement

PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume

##

(##)

Mid-Day Peak Hour Traffic Volume

(6) 7

(11) 11

(14) 14

28 (32)

(159) 80

(0) 1

(109) 93

92 (74)

(0) 2

(104) 105

(23) 17

51 (37

)

30 (41

)

1 (1

)

80 (67)

0 (2)

(16) 1

3 (9

2) 1

04

86 (69)

0 (7)

52 (4

2)

79 (8

2)

(1) 0

(83)

88

(52)

81

116 (99)

11 (1

1)

107 (7

5)

24 (3

7)

(16) 10

(9) 12

2019 Existing Peak Hour Volumes (1 of 4)


6 (56)

33 (15)

dvl

B k

oor

blliW

dvl

B k

oor

blliW

rD

dn

alsI

yd

na

S

5 67

8

9

10

evi

rD

ec

arT

ywa

ive

Dr

Countr

y Clu

b Dr

Bro

wn L

n

Litchfield Dr

N B

oyle R

d

Kin

g R

d

Martin L

uth

er

(1527) 1382

(5) 2

(0) 0

(1) 2

1491 (1479)142 (144)

(1510) 1401

1470 (1523)

14 (13)

(1597) 1475

1524 (1559)41 (33)

54 (32)

(1388) 1199

(78) 66

(54) 52

(55) 25

1236 (1312)253 (219)

181 (145)

(1625) 1436

(86) 108

1333 (1439)

(1668) 1396

29 (3

0)

1359 (1438)

(33) 2

9

LEGEND


Volume Movement


##

(##)


Figure 9

36 (31)

1 (1)

(2) 2

(26) 13

(1) 1

(0) 0

114 (126)

0 (3)

3 (5)

5 (2)

8 (10)

17 (9)

93 (59)

3 (1)

(12) 7

(82) 103

(105) 90

(9

7) 116

(0) 4

56 (49)

0 (1)

(1) 2

(31) 33

72 (53)

(0) 2

(166) 212

(36) 34

1 (1) 32 (31)

189 (201)

(4) 0

(82) 122

22 (23)

10 (7)

(35) 34

(0) 3

(4) 2

(10) 15

8 (5

) 3 (1

)

(1) 3

(4) 8

54 (70)

32 (27)

2 (3)



ev

A s

sar

gr

ed

ne

P

11

71 SU

SUB 71 SU

12

13

14

ev

A s

sar

gr

ed

ne

P

(1875) 1621

19 (16)

24 (21)

1389 (1483)

US 17 NB(1654) 1443

98 (107)

(1652) 1477

1356 (1385)

20 (24)

31 (25)

(20) 21

(1792) 1576

(35) 4

3

1460 (1473)

LEGEND


Volume Movement


##

(##)


(31) 22 (3) 3

26 (20)

21 (9)

(2) 2

(27) 20

(19) 18

(11) 9

(12) 5

16 (13) 43 (30)

18 (15) 0 (7)

(8) 13

0 (1)

42 (48)

(8) 1

2


Figure 10


98 (107)

(1654) 1443

BS 71 SU

(254) 181

Wesle

y R

d S

Wesle

y R

d N

16

17

18

19

dR

wa

se

hc

aW

evA

ymall

eB

rD

do

owr

evi

R

ya

we

vir

D

dR

ss

egr

uB

15

dR

wa

se

hc

aW

evA

ymall

eB

rD

do

owr

evi

R

Murrells Inlet R

d

Mackle

n A

ve

22

ev

A e

dis

yn

nu

S

(1578) 14

30

52 (4

6)

56 (5

4)

54 (6

0)

(96) 1

21

(120) 1

28

1321 (

1372)

(1626) 1

426

34 (21)

51 (50)

60 (43)

1417 (1

411)

(108) 169

(1793) 167

7

(144) 1

60

23 (1

9)

19 (1

5)

1550 (1528

)

(24) 1

2

(13) 2

4

(1923) 1864

67 (7

0)

1647 (1602)

(130) 91

(60) 4

4

(72) 5

7

(40) 2

5

17 (1

7)

29 (2

9)

51 (81)

(1564) 1525

1398 (1367)224 (202)

112 (151)

325 (253)

122 (1

71)

LEGEND


Volume Movement


##

(##)


(80) 5

3

36 (

32)61 (

69)

5 (

3)

(80) 43

(137) 15

2(1) 1

(3) 2

(39) 41

(41) 63

1 (3

) 90 (57

) 10

5 (56

)

(45) 65

(48) 58 (48) 5

8 (7)

6

(5) 1

8

(9) 1

0

(49) 6

2

76 (60

)

16 (8

)

5 (2

)

18 (8

)

(2) 2

(1) 9

(40) 36

0 (0

)

12 (6

)

10 (9)

56 (70)

24 (2)

(0) 0

2 (6)

15 (7)

(12) 18

(20) 15

9 (1

7)

314 (314)

19 (3) 90 (148)

(7) 4

(17) 49

(447) 354 2

8 (3

3)

75 (1

39)

Figure 11





7.3 TransitUS 17 is a critical transit corridor for transit between Georgetown, Pawleys Island, Murrells Inlet,and Myrtle Beach. Coast RTA, the regional public transit provider, has regularly scheduled, fixed-route bus service along this corridor. Additionally, multiple agencies including the GeorgetownBureau of Aging Services, Georgetown County Board of Disabilities and Special Needs,Waccamaw Regional Council of Governments, and Neighbor 2 Neighbor provide demandresponse transit services in the corridor. This chapter summarizes current transit services,identifying existing issues in the corridor, reviews local demographics and recommends corridorimprovements to better support transit in the future.

Population ServedSeveral agencies currently provide transit service in the US 17 Corridor as summarized below inthis section. All providers expect ridership to incrementally increase in the future.

Coast RTAAs the regional public transportation provider, the Coast RTA connects residents and visitors toemployment, education, and services within Horry and Georgetown counties. The agencycurrently operates 10 fixed-routes and complementary paratransit services. In addition, CoastRTA operates the fare-free Entertainment Shuttle, a loop service to connect tourist destinationlocations during the summer months in Myrtle Beach.

Georgetown Bureau of Aging ServicesThe Georgetown Bureau of Aging Services strives to enable senior residents of GeorgetownCounty to continue being an integral part of the community. To that end, the Bureau offers severalprograms: home delivered meals, group dining, homecare service, health promotion activities andtransportation for medical and recreational purposes. The Bureau operates six senior centers,one of which is located in the US 17 Corridor: the Waccamaw Senior Center.

Georgetown County Board of Disabilities and Special NeedsThe Georgetown County Board of Disabilities and Special Needs (GCBDSN) serves persons withintellectual disabilities in Georgetown County, and to a limited extent, individuals residing inCharleston, Williamsburg, and Horry Counties. GCBDSN operates community-based dayprograms at the GCBDSN center off Highway 701 north of the Georgetown municipal limits aswell as complete care services at eight homes in the region.

Assisted RidesIn the past, the Waccamaw Regional Council of Governments has offered the Assisted RidesProgram, which addresses mobility needs of individuals 60 years and older. The program isunfunded at this time. When funding is available, Assisted Rides’ volunteer drivers provide non-emergency transportation to doctor’s offices, grocery stores, pharmacies, human serviceagencies, and social activities among other locations. The Assisted Rides program provided over500 one-way trips per month, 48 of which were in the US 17 study Corridor. Ridership would beexpected to increase if funding were available.

Neighbor 2 NeighborNeighbor 2 Neighbor (N2N) is a nonprofit organization incorporated in 2006 to supportindependent living through volunteer transportation to medical appointments, grocery shopping,and other critical services. N2N matches volunteer drivers with eligible clients who are either over60 years old and unable to drive or over 21 and have a chronic illness or disability that preventsthem from driving. In 2015, N2N provided over 6,000 trips and received the “Transit Provider of



the Year in Human Services” award from the South Carolina Department of Transportation.Currently, N2N provides approximately 15 to 20 daily trips in the US 17 Corridor. Demand for N2Nservices is anticipated to increase in the future as the over 65 population continues to grow. N2Nemphasized that the Grand Strand is the fastest growing area for the over 65 demographic in thecountry. N2N identified several safety concerns and future needs for the US 17 Corridor.

Existing and Future RoutesCoast RTA Current Transit Services

Coast RTA currently operates two routes in the US 17 Corridor: Route 16 and Route 16 Express.Each route provides approximately 50,000 annual trips. Route 16 begins at the Conway Terminal,stops at the Georgetown Transfer Center at the midpoint, and terminates at the Ivory WilsonTransfer Center in Myrtle Beach. The route resembles a horseshoe, with the southern part of thehorseshoe operating in the US 17 Corridor. Route 16 operates daily between Georgetown andMyrtle Beach from 6:00 AM and 8:00 PM. During this service window, four outbound trips and fourinbound trips are provided along the US 17 Corridor, approximately every 3 hours and 30 minutes.The travel time between Georgetown and Myrtle Beach is approximately 90 minutes. The routefollows US 17 between the two cities with a deviation onto Willbrook Boulevard to serve theWaccamaw Public Library and Sandy Island Landing. There are 40 “Route 16” bus stops in thecorridor, which are currently curb stops. The spacing between them ranges from approximately1,000 to 8,000 feet. Stops are spaced closest together on Willbrook Boulevard and Murrells Inletwhere the concentration of trip generators is greatest as shown in Figure 12. The stops are placedat nearside (before the intersection), midblock (middle of the intersection) and farside (after theintersection) locations. According to a recent stop inventory, only five out of the 40 bus stops areserved by sidewalks. Boardings and alightings within the corridor are well dispersed.

Route 16 Express operates in a similar pattern to Route 16 but without stops in the US 17 Corridorbetween Georgetown and Myrtle Beach. There are two morning inbound trips from theGeorgetown Transfer Center to Myrtle Beach at 7:00 AM and 7:30 AM. Similarly, there are twoafternoon outbound trips from the Ivory Wilson Transfer Center to Georgetown at 2:10 PM and3:10 PM. The travel time between Georgetown and Myrtle Beach is approximately 85 minutes inthe inbound direction and 110 minutes in the outbound direction. Although this route is express,the travel times are not shorter than those of Route 16 because Route 16 Express serves the 79th

Avenue North stop on all trips between the two cities - whereas Route 16 only serves 79th AvenueNorth on the first morning inbound trip.



Figure 12: Coast RTA Route 16 Bus Stops



Coast RTA Future Transit Services

Coast RTA intends to continue operating Routes 16 and 16 Express in the future. Frequency onRoute 16 may be increased, subject to funding through the state’s intercity bus program. Althoughspecific bus stop ridership numbers are not available for the corridor, ridership is expected toincrease in response to the growing population and additional frequency on Route 16.

Georgetown Bureau of Aging Services Current Transit Services

Currently, the Bureau of Aging Services provides approximately six daily trips between PawleysIsland and Murrells Inlet, three weekly trips to Pawleys Island and Murrells Inlet from Georgetown,and six weekly trips to Georgetown from Pawleys Island and Murrells Inlet. The Bureau of AgingServices uses 15 passenger vans and smaller minivans. The segment of US 17 between SouthCauseway Road and Tidelands Waccamaw Community Hospital in Murrells Inlet was identifiedto be particularly challenging due to vehicle congestion.

Georgetown Bureau of Aging Services Future Transit Services

In Georgetown County, the over age 60 demographic is growing and is expected to continue, dueto an aging population and migration from other parts of the country. As this demographic grows,the Bureau of Aging Services anticipates an increased demand for their transportation services.Transit trips related to the home delivered meals program, group dining, medical transportation,and shopping are all anticipated to increase.

Georgetown County Board of Disabilities and Special Needs Current Transit Services

GCBDSN provides several transportation services in the US 17 Corridor on a daily basis.Approximately six trips are provided each weekday between clients’ homes and the GCBDSNcenter in Georgetown. Three vehicles are used to provide this door-to-door service. GCBDSNalso provides individual transportation to medical appointments. Corridor medical trips serveclients going to and from Tidelands Waccamaw Community Hospital in Murrells Inlet and theGrand Strand Medical Center in Myrtle Beach. There are two complete care homes in the corridorfor which GCBDSN also provides transportation.

Georgetown County Board of Disabilities and Special Needs Future Transit Services

Ridership is anticipated to grow modestly in the future; however, additional transportation serviceswill be directly dependent on the availability of state supported funding levels.

Stop Location and SpacingThe existing bus stops in the corridor are curb stops, which can pose safety concerns due to theinteraction between high vehicular speeds, high traffic volumes, and stopped buses. There maybe opportunities to construct bus pullouts in the future, which would allow the bus to exit the travellanes on US 17 to pick up and drop off passengers. However, bus pullouts can make it challengingfor buses to reenter the travel lane and merge with traffic. The lack of shelters and benchesdiscourage potential transit riders. A bus stop placement study was recently conducted for theCoast RTA and noted that there is potential to re-route buses to service roads along the corridor,to better accommodate boarding and alighting passengers. GCBDSN directly cited the lack ofbus stop amenities as an impediment to employment for its clients. GCBDSN’s clients would rely



on Coast RTA services to reach jobs in Myrtle Beach, but without bus stop signage (which is beingaddressed) and bus shelters, waiting for the bus is not often a safe option.

Frequency of ServiceA demographic profile was prepared in order to gain a better understanding of the residents andtransportation needs within the US 17 Corridor. This demographic profile was prepared usingAmerican Community Survey (ACS) 2013-2017 five-year estimates from the US Census Bureauat the block group level. The demographics within a half mile of the US 17 Corridor wereapproximated by multiplying the percentage of the block group contained within the corridor bythe demographic. As shown in Table 3, the population density of the corridor is 442 people persquare mile, ten percent of corridor residents live below the poverty level, 15 percent areminorities, and three percent of corridor households do not have access to cars.

Population densities are greatest by Murrells Inlet and Pawleys Island. Low-income populationsare most concentrated in Pawleys Island and north to the county line. Minority populations areevenly distributed throughout the corridor. The greatest concentration of households withoutaccess to vehicles is on the east side of US 17 between Murrells Inlet and the county line.

Table 3: US 17 Corridor Demographics

Demographic US 17 CorridorPopulation Density (people per square mile): 442Persons below poverty level: 10%Minority Population: 15%Zero Vehicle Households: 3%

Source: American Community Survey 2013-2017 five-year estimates

Existing and Future RidershipBased on interviews with the current transit providers, the following future needs were identifiedthat would improve the US 17 Corridor for transit in the future.

Increase Capacity

Vehicle congestion is currently a primary concern in the US 17 Corridor. Whereas congestion inthe past was typically limited to tourism during summertime months, it has now become more ofthe norm. Congestion in the afternoon is particularly challenging and delays transportationservices on a routine basis. This has a direct impact on travel times, as trip times can double inlength of time due to congestion. In addition to inconveniencing clients and families, congestionalso discourages specialized job placements for persons with disabilities in Myrtle Beach.GCBDSN is interested in securing job placements for its clients but the longer trip times combinedwith the limited intercity bus frequency and lack of bus stop amenities impose obstacles toimplementing an efficient employment program. N2N volunteers and staff specifically noted thelack of left turn lanes and absence of coordinated traffic signals.



Pedestrian Infrastructure

The lack of pedestrian infrastructure in the corridor is another issue for transit. Sidewalks are ofparamount importance for providing safe access to and from bus stops. Without them residentsare discouraged from taking transit or to confront unsafe conditions as they walk on roadwayshoulders and cross intersections without crosswalks or pedestrian signals. Providing sidewalksand pedestrian accommodations at intersections would improve safety and encourage multimodaltransportation in the corridor. Pedestrian improvements may be prioritized at bus stops withgreater boardings and in proximity to the specific trip generators within the corridor.

Address Safety Concerns

The lack of turn lanes at intersections presents safety concerns when transit vehicles, followedby fast moving traffic, slow down in the travel lanes to negotiate turns. This safety concern issimilar to buses stopping in travel lanes to serve bus stops. Open ditches, particularly on thesouthbound side of US 17, and the lack of shoulders and lighting are also of concern. In the future,addressing these safety concerns and addressing vehicular capacity issues and frequency ofservices would improve transit as a viable option.

7.4 Pedestrian Walkways and BikewaysUS 17 plays a significant role in the mobility, health, and economy of Georgetown County. It is theonly continuous north-south route linking Georgetown to the area’s beach communities andprovides a critical link to support residents, businesses, and tourists. The Grand Strand AreaTransportation Study (GSATS) 2040 Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) 2017 Updateoutlined a vision for the region’s transportation system including four main focus areas:

§ Roadway Improvements§ Biking and Walking§ Public Transportation§ Regional Mobility

It is under the umbrella of these focus areas and goals outlined in the above study, that providesa deeper-dive into the active transportation facilities along US 17. Specific to active transportation,the 2040 MTP Update provides recommendations that form a strong policy position for theimplementation of bicycle and pedestrian facilities throughout the region; this evaluation considers and incorporates those recommendations where appropriate.

Existing Pedestrian and Bicycle EnvironmentThe study area boundary extends from the Horry County/Georgetown County line, near MurrellsInlet, south to Arcadia Plantation Drive. The approximately 19-mile long corridor engages twogeneral land use typologies: undeveloped areas or areas of preservation/conservation and stripcommercial/big-box retail. Residential communities are generally not found along the corridor.Most of the corridor is a four-lane (i.e., two travel lanes in each direction) divided highway, withdesignated left-turn lanes at most intersections and dedicated right-turn lanes where warranted.The corridor provides mobility for both the short, local trip and the longer, regional trip. Access toproperties along the corridor generally have multiple curb cuts and lack connectivity betweenparcels. Signalized intersections are spaced at between one-half-mile and one-mile along thecorridor, limiting the locations for safe pedestrian and bicycle crossings.



Planned Pedestrian and Bicycle ImprovementsThe US 17 corridor has numerous destinations, including: Inlet Square Mall, TidelandsWaccamaw Community Hospital, Huntington Beach State Park, Brookgreen Gardens, andseveral hotels. A number of these destinations are connected by Waccamaw RegionalTransportation Authority’s (The Coast RTA) Route 16. It is important to note, that access to thebeach communities is generally between one to three miles from the US 17 corridor. Given theflat topography of the area, access to many of these destinations and the beach are readilybikeable.

Active Transportation FacilitiesActive transportation is non-motorized mobility (i.e., walking and biking). Providing appropriatefacilities for active transportation is extremely important, particularly in the more suburban nodesand primary intersections along the corridor. This includes sidewalks, crosswalks, pedestriansignals, and pedestrian-scaled lighting. The East Coast Greenway does the heavy lift of providingthe only active transportation facility along the corridor.

The East Coast Greenway connects 15 states and 450 cities and towns from Maine to Florida. InGeorgetown County, a major segment of the greenway is the Waccamaw Neck Bikeway spanning15.0 miles from S. Causeway Road to the Horry County Line. It should be noted that this multi-purpose path trail extends an additional 3.6 miles into Horry County (outside of study corridorlimits). The Waccamaw Neck Bikeway parallels US 17 for the most part except for deviations atWaverly Road and Willbrook Boulevard connected by Kings River Road. Other segments of thetrail include portions that run along US 17 through Huntington Beach State Park. The greenwayalso includes several on-street facilities that are adjacent to US 17. Intersections where the facilitycrosses, such as Willbrook Boulevard and US 17, include pedestrian signals and crosswalks.

Understanding UsersBicycle and pedestrian facilities have evolved from serving as “alternative transportation” facilitiesto filling a critical gap in communities’ transportation networks. For years, bicycle facilities placedpeople riding bikes in or directly adjacent to vehicle travel lanes. While this approach meets theneeds of the confident cyclist, it does not attract new users or encourage a broader bike culture,which is a key quality of life indicator. Research illustrates that a variety of bicyclists exists, eachwith different needs and street tolerances.



Pedestrian AccessPedestrian and bicycle access and circulation is as equally important as vehicular access andcirculation. At the most basic level, a pedestrian network should include a connected sidewalksystem. This is particularly important within parking areas to provide safe access to buildings. Ata minimum:

§ Sidewalks should be five feet wide and connected between building entrances tosurrounding streets, transit stops, parking lots, and adjacent development;

§ Sidewalks should be landscaped with shade trees at an average of one tree every 50feet; and

§ Crosswalks should be designated and coordinated to move people safely to and frombuildings and through parking areas.

Given the lack of pedestrian facilities along the corridor, it will be critical to provide internalpedestrian facilities and pedestrian crosswalks and signals across US 17, and to transit stops.

Shared-Use Paths/Greenway StandardsGSATS has been developing a robust network bike / ped accommodations over the past 25 years.With incremental successes, GSATS is getting closer to piecing together the “spine” of the EastCoast Greenway. Greenway systems are generally less developed than shared-use paths andare usually associated with natural resource areas such as parks or conservation areas. Agreenway system through the Huntington Beach State Park and south of Kings River Road isappropriate, but in more developed areas along US 17 corridor, a shared-use path is the mostappropriate facility, given the current pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure.

The East Coast Greenway, in conjunction with the Waccamaw Neck Bikeway, provide a vitalactive transportation connection along the US 17 corridor. However, these connections don’textend along the entire corridor and infrastructure improvements may be needed. South of SCauseway Road, the greenway is an on-road facility all the way to Georgetown. In Murrells Inlet,the greenway system diverges from US 17 and follows US 17 Business, where a five-foot widebike lane is provided. Given the high-speed nature of the US 17 corridor, coupled with multiplecurb cuts, only the most experienced cyclist would venture on the greenway south of Kings RiverRoad. The road conditions along US 17 Business are more favorable due to a dedicated facility,supportive land uses, and a slower posted speed (35 mph). In general, the existing dedicatedgreenway systems are between six feet and 8 feet in width. A dedicated, protected shared-usepath facility along US 17 and within the right-of-way, is recommended. To expand the reach of thefacility, on-street or off-street facilities should be explored along key corridors that intersect theexisting greenways. To ensure continuity and cohesion of the shared-use path/greenway network,standards to consider include:

§ Shared-use paths and greenways should have a minimum of 10-feet of paved surface,such as asphalt or concrete;

§ All paths should be Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant;§ Any site furnishing should be located along the same side of the path and three feet from

the back of the facility’s edge;§ Vehicular warning signs should be posted at all travel routes;§ A more robust wayfinding system could include mile markers, directional signs to local

destinations, and path regulations; and§ Each major access point or trailhead should contain a sign that directs users.



7.5 Crash AnalysisCrash data was provided by the South Carolina Department of Transportation along US 17 from Hobcaw Road to Horry County Line. A total of 1,133 crashes were reported for the 19.0-mile section of US 17 between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2018. Seven (7) fatal crashes were reported during that time located at or near:

§ Just south of S Causeway Road – Pedestrian§ Petigru Drive – Vehicular (angle)§ Just south of N Causeway Road – Pedestrian§ Professional Lane – Vehicular (angle)§ Gilman Road – Vehicular (overturn)§ Pendergrass Avenue – Vehicular (angle)§ Bellamy Avenue – Bicycle

Based on this data, the predominant type of crash was rear end comprising 50% (568 crashes) of all crashes followed by angle crashes at 28% (320 crashes). There were 11 non motor vehicle crashes that included nine pedestrians and two bicyclists along the corridor during the study period.

Most crashes occurred during the daylight totaling 937 crashes; however, there were also crashes occurring at night or dusk totaling 196 crashes or 17 percent. The most prevalent crash type is non-injury or property damage only (PDO) at 73 percent of crashes. This is followed by non-incapacitating injuries at 19 percent of crashes. The remaining crashes fall into the injury categories of possible injury at three percent, incapacitating injury at five percent, and fatality at less than one percent.

Friday accounts for the highest number of crashes at 213 crashes, respectively. Months May through August had the highest number of crashes with July having 123. The increased number of visitors and volumes on US 17 during the summer season have a direct correlation to the higher than typical number of crashes. One area of concern along US 17 shown in Figure 13 is just south of the North Causeway Road / Waverly Road intersection where access management has not been implemented.

Figure 13: US 17 Crashes south of N Causeway Rd / Waverly Rd

NORTH



AECOM also performed a detailed crash review at the 22 study intersections with crash types and number summarized in Table 4.

Table 4: Intersection Crash Summary

Int# Location Angle Head On Other Rear End

Side Swipe

Total

1 US 17 at Kings River Rd 4 0 0 2 0 6

2 US 17 at S Causeway Rd 8 0 0 8 2 18

3 US 17 at Petigru Dr 13 0 1 22 1 37

4 US 17 at N Causeway 23 1 3 17 3 47

5 US 17 at MLK Rd 0 0 1 15 2 18

6 US 17 at Litchfield Dr 6 0 2 17 2 27

7 US 17 at Country Club Dr 10 0 1 8 2 21

8 US 17 at Willbrook Blvd 8 0 2 30 1 41

9 US 17 at N Boyle Dr 1 0 2 16 0 19

10 US 17 at Sandy Island Dr 4 0 2 4 1 11

11 US 17 at Wesley Rd S 6 1 3 8 1 19

12 US 17 at US 17 Bus 4 0 1 2 2 9

13 US 17 at Pendergrass Ave 10 0 2 0 0 12

14 US 17 at Wesley Rd N 3 0 0 8 0 11

15 US 17 at Wachesaw Rd 12 0 0 23 1 36

16 US 17 at Bellamy Ave 5 0 2 21 1 29

17 US 17 at Riverwood Dr 19 0 1 19 2 41

18 US 17 at Macklen Ave 9 0 3 10 1 23

19 US 17 at Burgess Rd 10 0 0 32 9 51

20 Kings River Rd at Tyson Dr 4 0 0 0 0 4

21 Kings River Rd at Waverly Rd 2 0 0 3 0 5

22 Murrells Inlet Rd at Macklen Ave 1 0 2 1 0 4

It should be noted that Petigru Drive, S Causeway Road, Wachesaw Road, and Riverwood Drive signalized intersections all had greater than 10 angle collisions which may require further analysis. A collision diagram was not included as part of this study but these diagrams may help better identify if signal phasing or sight distance needs improvement.

Rear-end collisions are half of the total crashes along the entire corridor associated with speeding, lack of turn lanes, congestion, and limited access management. As shown in the table above, most of them occur at signalized intersections.



8.0 Background Growth and DevelopmentAECOM reviewed and utilized multiple sources to determine an acceptable annual growth ratefor the 2040 traffic projections. These sources include:

§ Source 1: Historic SCDOT Traffic Count locations between 2010 and 2018

§ Source 2: 2003 US 17 Corridor Study

§ Source 3: GSATS 2040 Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) Update

§ Source 4: 2019 AECOM Daily (24 hour) Counts

Historic volumes were reviewed to determine a background growth rate on US 17 within the studyarea limits. Traffic count data was obtained from SCDOT at Stations 113,115, 117, 119, and 121in Georgetown County. By comparing the annual average daily traffic (AADT) from 2010 and2018, the yearly percent growth was determined using an exponential growth formula. A summaryof the historic data and growth is shown in Table 5.

Table 5: Historic Traffic Growth

Station Location2010VolumeAADT

2018VolumeAADT

Growth

113 Waterford Rd to S Causeway Rd 22,400 26,500 +2.1%115 S Causeway Rd to MLK Rd 28,800 34,800 +2.4%117 MLK Rd to Sandy Island Rd 32,700 37,300 +1.7%119 Sandy Island Rd to Wesley Rd 30,400 32.200 +0.7%121 Wesley Rd and Horry County Line 32,400 38,400 +2.1%

Using the 2018 volumes with the respective growth rate per station, a weighted average of 1.8%was obtained for the entire corridor. In addition, the GSATS MTP Update was referenced whichindicated 2.47% growth rate on southern end and 2.66% growth on the northern end of corridor.AECOM also reviewed the 2003 US 17 Corridor Study where a much higher growth rate wasprojected.

In summary, the annual growth rate along the US 17 corridor ranges from 1.8% to 4.5% dependingon reference used. It should be noted the 2003 study projections were too high based on existing2019 AADTs. The GSATS 2040 MTP Update was complete in October 2017 which had lowergrowth rates in Georgetown County ranging between 2.47% to 2.66% within the study area limits.

Using the daily (24 hour) counts on US 17 at 5 locations during June 2019 (peak season), it wasconcluded the peak summer season ADT is approximately 10% higher than the volumes reportedat the SCDOT Traffic locations.

The planned traffic analysis conducted at the 22 study intersections use turning movementscounts during the peak summer season; therefore, the most congested period of the year ismodeled. Based on this information along with the growth rates from SCDOT count stations andthe recent GSATS 2040 MPT Update, AECOM is planning on using a 2.0% annual growth rate toobtain 2040 traffic projections. 2040 traffic projections at each study intersection during the peakhours are summarized in Figure 14 to Figure 17.

(2029) 18

07

1922 (2107)

(218) 2

02

(192) 2

47

(36) 49

(15) 17

214 (19

1)

162 (1

55)

185 (1

67)

1

Kings River Rd

Tyso

n Dr

Alsto

n R

d

Petig

ru Dr

Kings Ri

ver R

d

Waverly Rd

Waverly R

d

2

20

21

3

4

Hagley Dr

dR

ya

we

su

aC

N

US 17

(1911) 1584

1634 (1963)

183 (215)

S Causew

ay Rd

(2004) 1842 1

5 (4

7)

35 (5

0)

1861 (2076

)

(209) 2

44

(1779) 1469

1444 (1861)

124 (135)

(249) 14

2

(38) 45(77) 85

112 (144)

88 (88)

50 (85)

139 (112)

(139) 1

58

38 (1

8)

120 (1

24)

185 (1

21)

(142) 2

14

(141) 1

89

162 (11

4)

(14) 18

LEGEND


Volume Movement


##

(##)


(9) 11

(17) 1

7 (21) 2

1 9 (23)

47 (65)

38 (32)

21 (24)

(241) 121

42 (49)

(0) 2

(165) 141

0 (3)

121 (102)

(0) 3

(158) 159

(35) 26

(24) 2

0

77 (56

)

45 (62

)

2 (2

)

(2) 0

(126) 1

33

(79) 1

23

79 (6

4)

(55) 8

2

130 (105)

176 (150)

0 (11)

(24) 15

36 (5

6)

17 (1

7)


Figure 14

No-Build 2040 Peak Hour Volumes (1 of 4)

dvl

B k

oor

blliW

dvl

B k

oor

blliW

rD

dn

alsI

yd

na

S

5 67

8

9

10

evi

rD

ec

arT

ywa

ive

Dr

Countr

y Clu

b Dr

Bro

wn L

n

Litchfield Dr

N B

oyle R

d

Kin

g R

d

Martin L

uth

er

(2314) 2095

(8) 3

(0) 0

(2) 3

2260 (2242)215 (218)

(2289) 2123

2228 (2308)

21 (20)

(2421) 2236

2310 (2363)62 (50)

82 (49)

(2104) 1817

1873 (1989)383 (332)

274 (220)

(2463) 2176

2020 (2181)

(2528) 2116

44 (4

5)

2060 (2180)

(50) 4

4

(147) 176

(159) 136

12 (15)

(118) 100

(130) 164

LEGEND


Volume Movement


##

(##)


(39) 20

(2) 2

(3) 3

(0) 0

(18) 11

(124) 156

5 (8) 0 (5)

173 (191)

2 (2)

55 (47)

8 (3)

26 (14)

141 (89)

5 (2) (0) 6

(2) 3

(47) 50

85 (74)

0 (2)

109 (80)

286 (305)

49 (47)

2 (2)

(252) 321 (0) 3

(55) 52

(8

2) 79

(220) 38

(6) 0

(124) 185

(5

3) 52

15 (11) 33 (35)

(0) 5

(6) 3

(15) 23

5 (2

)

12 (8

)

3 (5) 49 (41)

(2) 5

(6) 2

82 (106)

Figure 15



ev

A s

sar

gr

ed

ne

P

11

71 SU

SUB 71 SU

12

13

14

ev

A s

sar

gr

ed

ne

P

(2842) 2457

29 (24)

36 (32)

2105 (2248)

US 17 NB

BS 71 SU

(2507) 2187

(2504) 2239

2055 (2099)

30 (36)

47 (38)

(30) 32

(2716) 2389

(53) 6

5

2213 (2233)

149 (162)

32 (14)

(17) 14

(12) 1

8

LEGEND


Volume Movement


##

(##)


(5) 5

(47) 33

39 (30)

0 (11)

(29) 27

(41) 30 (3) 3

(18) 8

27 (23)

65 (45)

24 (20)

(12) 20

64 (73)

0 (2)

Figure 16



(385) 181(2507) 2187 149 (162)

Wesle

y R

d S

Wesle

y R

d N

16

17

18

19

dR

wa

se

hc

aW

evA

ymall

eB

rD

do

owr

evi

R

ya

we

vir

D

dR

ss

egr

uB

15

dR

wa

se

hc

aW

evA

ymall

eB

rD

do

owr

evi

R

Murrells Inlet R

d

Mackle

n A

ve

22

ev

A e

dis

yn

nu

S

(2392) 21

67

79 (7

0)

85 (8

2)

82 (9

1)

(182) 1

94

2002 (

2079)

(2464) 2

161

52 (32)

77 (76)

91 (65)

2148 (2

139)

(164) 256

(2718) 254

2

(218) 2

43

35 (2

9)

29 (2

3)

2349 (2316

)

(36) 1

8

(20) 3

6

(2915) 2825

2496 (2428)

(109) 8

6

26 (2

6)

44 (4

4)

77 (123)

(2371) 2311

2119 (2072)340 (306)

170 (229)

493 (383)

185 (2

59)

(146) 1

83

27 (1

2)

102 (1

06)

114 (2

11)

(197) 138 1

4 (2

6)

LEGEND


Volume Movement


##

(##)


(2) 2

(208) 2

30

(121)

65

(121) 8

0 55 (4

9)

8 (5)

92 (10

5)

(5) 3

(59) 62

(62) 95

(68) 99

(73) 88

2 (5

) 136 (86

) 15

9 (85

)

(14) 1

5

(74) 9

4

(73) 8

8 (11)

9

(8) 2

7

8 (3

) 24 (12

)

115 (91

)

(0) 0

36 (3)

85 (106)

15 (14)

0 (0

)

18 (9

)

(11) 6

(678) 537

(26) 74

42 (5

0)

29 (5) 136 (224)

476 (476)

(61) 3

8

(91) 6

7

(18) 27

(30) 23

23 (11)

3 (9)

Figure 17



(2) 14

(3) 3

(61) 55



9.0 Public InvolvementPublic Involvement is paramount in identifying the needs, goals and priorities of transportation projects. Conducting a substantive and well-planned public outreach effort is essential in determining those priorities. A successful public involvement process increases community support for and ownership of projects and leads to increased trust in local government. Conversely, poor public outreach efforts can cause stakeholders to view the process as merely “checking the box” leading to limited participation as well as community adversity to potential projects.

As the US 17 Corridor Study in Georgetown County was initiated a Public Involvement Plan was developed and several goals for the public involvement plan were detailed. These included:

§ To engage the public and stakeholders along the US 17 corridor for input that guides the project.

§ To manage expectations of a diverse group of citizens.§ To provide information to the public on the project.§ To engage the public in a meaningful way through digital media without holding costly face

to face meetings, which potentially may only gain limited input.

AECOM worked with GSATS and Georgetown County as well as in coordination with Stantec, who was working simultaneously on a Land Use Study in the corridor, to define the core attributes to be achieved and formulate the basis of the brand elements for the US 17 Corridor Study. These efforts included engaging the public in traditional and interactive ways; staging public information meetings; compiling stakeholder contacts, and providing news releases of the project.

Keeping the goals listed above in mind, the US 17 Corridor Study sought to reflect those priorities through use of a US 17 Corridor Study Wiki Map website. Wiki Map is an internet-based mapping platform that allows participants to comment on suggested routes and notate their own specific recommendations on a shared interactive map. A press release was also created announcing the project and the location of the wiki map. This press release was shared with local communities within the region for inclusion on their websites and social media outlets as well as HOA’s, churches, schools and other civic organizations. For this study the Wiki Map was specifically tailored to the US 17 Corridor and was available for comments from June 13, 2019 thru January 17, 2020. A screenshot of the US 17 Corridor Study Wiki Map website is below in Figure 18.

The use of the US 17 Corridor Access Management Wiki Map website garnered a large response with a total of approximately 400 visitors to the site including 235 leaving comments. Those comments are provided in Appendix C.

Common Themes We Heard§ Excessive speeding and more police enforcement needed to reduce speeding§ Numerous dangerous intersections§ More sidewalks/crosswalks/bike paths (several indicating the Marshwalk area)§ Dangerous median crossings with no acceleration/deceleration lanes§ Extend Bypass SC 31/ US 701 around study area§ Traffic signal issues



Figure 18: US 17 Corridor Study Wiki Map

Wiki Map Summary

Visitors to Site: 414Comments Received: 249Site Live Dates: June 13, 2019 to January 17, 2020

Comments and response numbers obtained from the Wiki Map Site are shown in Table 6.

Table 6: Wiki Map Response Summary

Improvement Number of ResponsesTraffic Signal Issues 47

Intersection Issues 34

Bicycle/ Pedestrian Issues 28

Excessive Speeding 21

Extend Bypass SC 31/ US 701 around study area 18

Disapprove of Current Medians 17

Stop additional development 14

Median foliage needs cutting/ pruning 8

Congestion 7

Various other concerns and comments 55



The project team held a kick-off meeting with technical staff and stakeholders from the Georgetown County region on June 18, 2019 at the Waccamaw Regional Councils of Government office in Georgetown. The purpose of this meeting was to provide an overview of the project team’s path forward and seek feedback from the group in the initial stages of the study.

On September 17, 2019 the project team participated in another Stakeholder and Meeting at Howard Gym and Auditorium in Georgetown. Eleven Stakeholder Group members attended the meeting. The purpose of this meeting was to give an overview of the US 17 Corridor Study and promote the relationship between this transportation study and the land use study being conducted simultaneously by Stantec. This also gave an opportunity for both consultant teams to seek feedback from the group members. From 5:00 to 7:00 that evening, a public information meeting was also conducted at the Murrells Inlet Community Center. In all, approximately 108 citizens and members of the community attended the public information meeting and learned more about the traffic improvement study including an overview with Study Area Boundary, Average Annual Daily Traffic Count and Accident Data maps being presented. During this meeting members of the project team were stationed at boards around the room and had one on one conversations with property owners, residents, and business owners. This allowed the project team to hear comments and recommendations from those residents who drive the corridor on a daily basis.

During this Public Information Meeting, attendees were given the opportunity to provide written comments. These comments were then used in the development of the proposed recommendations. The September 17, 2019 Public Information attendance list along with all comments received during the public involvement process can be found in Appendix D.

Once draft recommendations were developed the project team provided a presentation to the Stakeholder Group on February 26, 2020.



10.0 Capacity AnalysisThe traffic carrying ability of an uninterrupted flow roadway is described by levels-of-service (LOS) that range from LOS A to LOS F. LOS A represents unrestricted maneuverability and operating speeds. LOS B represents reduced maneuverability and operating speeds. LOS C represents restricted maneuverability and operating speeds closer to the speed limit. LOS D represents severely restricted maneuverability and unstable, low operating speeds. LOS E represents operating conditions at or near the capacity level. LOS F represents breakdown conditions characterized by stop and go travel. A visual representation of each LOS is shown is shown in Figure 19 below.

Figure 19: Roadway Level of Service

The Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 6 also defines LOS at an unsignalized intersection by average control delay per vehicle, which includes initial deceleration delay, queue move-up time, stopped delay, and final acceleration delay. Several factors affect the controlled delay for unsignalized intersections, such as availability and distribution of gaps in the conflicting traffic stream, critical gaps, and follow-up time for a vehicle in the queue. The Highway Capacity Manual explains that drivers perceive that a signalized intersection is designed to carry higher traffic volumes and therefore expect to experience greater delays at signalized intersections. Unsignalized intersections are assigned a LOS for each minor movement. Typically, LOS D is considered the minimum acceptable level of service at an intersection. Table 7 presents LOS thresholds for unsignalized and signalized intersections.



Table 7: Level-of-Service Thresholds

LOSUnsignalized

Average ControlDelay (sec/veh)

SignalizedAverage ControlDelay (sec/veh)

A ≤ 10.0 ≤ 10.0

B > 10.0 and ≤ 15.0 > 10.0 and ≤ 20.0

C > 15.0 and ≤ 25.0 > 20.0 and ≤ 35.0

D > 25.0 and ≤ 35.0 > 35.0 and ≤ 55.0

E > 35.0 and ≤ 50.0 > 55.0 and ≤ 80.0

F > 50.0 > 80.0

AECOM calculated the intersection LOS for each of the 22 project study intersections for existingand future conditions. The intersections were analyzed using Highway Capacity 2010 softwareand Synchro 10.3 (build 122, Rev 0) software. SIDRA 8.0 was used for any roundabout relatedanalysis. AECOM obtained signal design plans from SCDOT as shown in Appendix E. AECOManalyzed Existing 2019, No-Build 2040, and Build 2040 traffic projections for the Mid-day and PMpeak hours.

To determine the necessary roadway improvements required for future development, a LOS “D”or better was the target value. According to Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 6, an acceptableLevel-of-Service (LOS) is “D” or better with “A” having the shortest delays and “F” having thelongest delays. Turn lane storage recommendations will accommodate the needs of 95thpercentile queuing. Sim Traffic was used to estimate storage requirements by using the higherof the maximum or 95th percentile queuing.



10.1 Existing 2019 AnalysisAECOM analyzed the Existing 2019 traffic conditions during the AM and PM peak hours at each study intersection. The following intersections / approaches operated at LOS E or worse.

§ US 17 at Kings River Rd eastbound left-turn§ US 17 at Country Club Dr eastbound left-turn§ US 17 at Sandy Island Rd / Trace Dr eastbound and westbound left-turns§ US 17 at Wesley Rd S eastbound left-turn§ US 17 at US 17 Bus westbound approach§ US 17 at Pendergrass Ave eastbound and westbound approaches§ US 17 at Wesley Rd N eastbound approach§ US 17 at Macklen Ave eastbound and westbound left-turns

The results are summarized in Table 8 with detailed Synchro / Sim Traffic reports located in Appendix F.

Table 8: Existing 2019 LOS and Delay

ID# Intersection ApproachLevel of Service

(LOS)Control Delay

(sec/veh)MD PM MD PM

1 US 17 at Kings River Rd

EB Left D F 26.4 202.5NB Left B C 11.5 16.0

2

US 17 at S Causeway Rd

Overall A B 10.0 13.9WB D D 35.8 41.3NB A B 9.3 12.5SB A B 5.7 10.9

3

US 17 at Petigru Dr / Alston Rd

Overall A B 8.0 10.3EB C D 34.2 36.3WB C D 31.6 37.6NB A A 2.5 2.9SB A B 6.0 11.2

4

US 17 at Waverly Rd /

N Causeway Rd

Overall B B 19.5 12.1EB D D 49.5 42.3WB D D 40.7 49.0NB B A 16.5 9.3SB B A 10.2 4.7

5

US 17 at Martin Luther King Jr / Brown Ln

Overall B B 13.4 15.4EB D D 52.2 53.1WB A A 0.3 0.2NB A A 3.9 5.8SB B B 16.8 19.5



Table 9: (Continued): Existing 2019 LOS and Delay


(LOS)Control Delay


6

US 17 at Litchfield Dr / Driveway

Overall B B 15.7 14.5EB C C 20.3 25.4WB C C 27.3 24.8NB B B 19.7 19.2SB B A 10.4 7.9

7 US 17 at Country Club Dr

EB Left F F 300+ 300+NB Left C C 18.1 16.6

8

US 17 at Willbrook Blvd / Retreat Beach Cir

Overall D C 36.0 29.6EB D D 45.9 39.1WB D C 35.9 25.8NB D C 35.6 30.1SB C C 33.0 26.9

9

US 17 at N Boyle Rd

Overall B A 10.3 9.6WB C C 33.0 33.4NB B B 11.9 12.0SB A A 5.9 4.9

10 US 17 at Sandy Island Rd / Trace Dr

EB Left F F 300+ 300+WB F F 300+ 192.2

NB Left C B 24.0 13.4SB Left C C 15.2 19.0

11 US 17 at Wesley Rd SEB Left F F 243.5 300+NB Left C C 16.4 17.6

12 US 17 at US 17 Bus WB Left F F 300+ 300+

13 US 17 at Pendergrass Ave

EB F F 300+ 300+WB F F 300+ 300+

NB Left B C 14.1 16.1SB Left C D 22.6 29.7

14 US 17 at Wesley Rd N

EB F F 300+ 300+NB Left B B 13.8 13.7

15US 17 at Wachesaw Rd

Overall C C 21.6 20.4EB C D 26.7 45.6WB C C 26.6 34.8NB B B 18.6 16.8SB C B 23.1 17.4



Table 9: (Continued): Existing 2019 LOS and Delay


(LOS)Control Delay


16

US 17 at Bellamy AveOverall C B 23.5 16.7

EB F E 80.9 66.8WB E E 67.8 68.0NB C B 21.5 18.5SB A A 8.9 3.7

17

US 17 at Riverwood DrOverall B B 14.6 14.7

EB E E 65.9 68.1WB D D 39.8 45.7NB A A 5.2 5.7SB B B 15.9 16.4

18 US 17 at Macklen Ave

EB Left F F 300+ 300+WB Left F F 300+ 300+NB Left C D 19.6 29.2SB Left D F 34.1 55.6

19

US 17 at Burgess Rd / Sunnyside Ave

Overall D D 43.1 43.6EB E D 56.8 53.3WB D D 40.3 46.4NB D D 43.6 44.5SB D D 37.3 38.7

20 Kings River Rd at Hagley Dr / Tyson Rd

EB B B 12.6 14.0WB B B 11.5 12.9

NB Left A A 7.6 7.5SB Left A A 7.5 7.7

21 Kings River Rd at Waverly Rd

EB B A 10.7 10.0WB B B 11.9 11.1NB B B 13.7 12.3SB B B 14.6 12.5

22 Murrells Inlet Rd at Macklen Ave

EB A A 8.4 9.4WB A A 7.9 8.4NB A A 8.3 9.3SB A A 7.9 8.7

SimTraffic results indicated significant queuing at the following locations:

§ Eastbound Kings River Rd at US 17§ Eastbound and westbound Pendergrass Ave at US 17§ Southbound US 17 at Riverwood Dr§ Westbound Macklen Ave at US 17§ Northbound US 17 at Burgess Rd / Sunnyside Ave



10.2 No-Build 2040 AnalysisAECOM analyzed the No-Build 2040 traffic conditions during the AM and PM peak hours at each study intersection. The following intersections / approaches operated at LOS E or worse.

§ US 17 at Kings River Rd eastbound left-turn§ US 17 at Waverly Rd / N Causeway Rd overall signal§ US 17 at Litchfield Dr overall signal§ US 17 at Country Club Dr eastbound left-turn and northbound left-turn§ US 17 at Willbrook Blvd / Retreat Beach Cir overall signal§ US 17 at Sandy Island Rd / Trace Dr eastbound / westbound left-turns and southbound

and northbound left-turns§ US 17 at Wesley Rd S eastbound left-turn and southbound left-turns§ US 17 at US 17 Bus westbound approach§ US 17 at Pendergrass Ave eastbound and westbound approaches as well as northbound

and southbound left-turns§ US 17 at Wesley Rd N eastbound approach§ US 17 at Wachesaw Rd overall signal§ US 17 at Bellamy Ave overall signal§ US 17 at Riverwood Dr overall signal§ US 17 at Macklen Ave eastbound, westbound, southbound, and northbound left-turns§ US 17 at Burgess Rd / Sunnyside Ave overall signal§ Kings River Rd and Waverly Rd northbound and southbound approaches

The results are summarized in Table 9 with detailed Synchro / SimTraffic reports located in Appendix G.

Table 9: No-Build 2040 LOS and Delay


(LOS)Control Delay


1 US 17 at Kings River Rd

EB Left F F 300+ 54.6NB Left C F 18.5 95.4

2


Overall B C 16.4 24.7WB E F 73.2 85.4NB B C 16.9 29.9SB A B 5.0 10.1

3


Overall C D 33.2 37.6EB F F 88.5 101.5WB E F 77.0 147.5NB D D 37.4 45.7SB B B 13.3 11.7

4


N Causeway Rd

Overall F D 81.6 53.4EB F F 99.5 90.4WB F F 98.8 107.1NB E D 79.0 44.1SB E D 75.9 48.6



Table 10: (Continued): No-Build 2040 LOS and Delay


(LOS)Control Delay


5


Overall C D 34.3 39.7EB F F 129.1 133.8WB A A 0.3 0.3NB A B 9.6 17.2SB D D 43.9 48.6

6


Overall F F 98.3 131.9EB D D 42.3 47.3WB D D 48.1 36.8NB F F 173.1 253.1SB D C 41.0 24.9

7 US 17 at Country Club Dr

EB Left F F 300+ 300+NB Left F E 71.0 48.6

8

US 17 at Willbrook Blvd / Retreat Beach Cir

Overall F F 127.9 106.5EB F E 100.1 66.3WB E C 66.5 34.3NB F F 109.7 124.3SB F F 161.7 112.9

9

US 17 at N Boyle Rd

Overall C C 22.7 23.9WB F F 84.3 129.3NB C C 28.1 31.5SB A A 9.4 6.7

10 US 17 at Sandy Island Rd / Trace Dr

EB Left D F 28.0 300+WB Left F F 300+ 300+NB Left F C 70.2 22.6SB Left E F 35.8 88.2

11 US 17 at Wesley Rd SEB Left F F 300+ 300+NB Left E F 42.6 58.1

12 US 17 at US 17 Bus WB Left F F 300+ 300+

13 US 17 at Pendergrass Ave

EB F F 300+ 300+WB F F 300+ 300+

NB Left D E 28.6 37.5SB Left F F 193.3 300+

14 US 17 at Wesley Rd N

EB F F 300+ 300+NB Left C C 24.7 24.0



Table 10: (Continued): No-Build 2040 LOS and Delay


(LOS)Control Delay


15US 17 at Wachesaw Rd

Overall E F 80.0 85.4EB E E 64.3 66.9WB D E 52.8 66.2NB F F 85.0 113.9SB F E 81.6 56.5

16

US 17 at Bellamy AveOverall F E 84.6 64.1

EB F F 214.5 191.7WB F F 90.3 114.1NB F F 87.3 83.7SB E B 55.4 19.2

17

US 17 at Riverwood DrOverall E D 67.9 52.7

EB F F 134.9 153.0WB E E 61.3 79.3NB D E 48.5 55.4SB E C 79.4 33.6


EB Left E D 37.4 34.7WB Left F F 300+ 300+NB Left F F 59.5 99.5SB Left F F 300+ 300+

19


Overall F F 233.9 196.4EB F F 131.0 102.2WB D D 40.0 52.5NB F F 289.0 239.8SB F F 245.2 211.6


EB C C 18.1 23.6WB B C 14.7 20.8


21 Kings River Rd at Waverly Rd

EB B B 15.0 12.8WB C C 18.7 15.4NB F D 51.5 29.7SB E C 46.6 23.8


EB A B 9.7 12.9WB A A 8.7 9.9NB A B 9.6 12.4SB A B 8.7 10.6



SimTraffic results indicated significant queuing at the following locations:

§ Eastbound Kings River Rd at US 17§ Northbound left-turn US 17 at Kings River Rd§ Northbound and southbound US 17 at Waverly Rd / N Causeway Rd§ Northbound US 17 at Litchfield Dr§ Eastbound Country Club Dr at US 17§ Northbound US 17 at Willbrook Blvd / Retreat Beach Cir§ Eastbound Willbrook Blvd at US 17§ Eastbound / westbound Sandy Island Rd / Trace Dr at US 17§ Westbound US 17 Bus at US 17§ Eastbound and westbound Pendergrass Ave at US 17§ Eastbound Wesley Rd S at US 17§ Northbound US 17 at Wachesaw Rd§ Eastbound Bellamy Ave at US 17§ Southbound US 17 at Riverwood Dr§ Westbound Macklen Ave at US 17§ Northbound / southbound US 17 at Burgess Rd / Sunnyside Ave§ Eastbound Burgess Road at US 17



10.3 Build 2040 AnalysisAECOM analyzed the 2040 traffic conditions with improvements during the Mid-day and PM peakhours at each study intersection. All outputs in the tables below for the signalized intersectionsare using Synchro LOS rather than HCM 6 LOS as it is assumed a Synchro Green adaptivesystem would be in place for the entire corridor. The 2040 rerouted traffic volumes with proposedlaneage configuration is shown in Figure 20 to Figure 25. The LOS and Delay results aresummarized in Table 10 with detailed Synchro / SimTraffic reports located in Appendix H. Sidrareports for the roundabout analysis are located in Appendix I.

It should be noted that all signalized intersections are expected to operate at an overall LOS D orbetter with the proposed improvements; however, some minor street approaches may fall belowthis threshold. While some of the minor street approaches may operate at a LOS D or worse, allUS 17 approaches at each intersection are expected to operate at LOS D providing efficientoperation along the entire corridor between Georgetown and Murrells Inlet.

The following five (5) unsignalized intersections are expected to operate at LOS E or worse evenwith the reduced conflict intersection design:

§ US 17 at Sandy Island Road / Trace Drive

§ US 17 at Wesley Road S

§ US 17 at Pendergrass Avenue

§ US 17 at Wesley Road N

§ US 17 at Macklen Avenue

While the above unsignalized intersections report a LOS E or worse, the 95th percentile queuesand volume to ratios were also analyzed and indicate signalization is likely not warranted and canbe reevaluated closer to the time of implementation.

The intersection of US 17 at Wesley Road N connects with US 17 right in between the WachesawRoad planned signalized U-turn. There should be some consideration to realign Wesley Road Nwith US 17 at a ninety degree to the south.

SimTraffic results indicated insignificant queuing at all intersections with the proposedrecommendations. The minimum required turn lane storage lengths at each intersection wasused in the analysis but should be analyzed in further detail closer to implementation.



Table 10: Build 2040 LOS and Delay


(LOS)Control Delay


1

US 17 at Kings River Rd

Overall B C 17.3 25.4EB B C 19.5 22.7NB B B 14.1 19.9SB C C 20.3 31.4

2


Overall B C 14.8 25.0WB E E 61.7 73.7NB B C 17.1 27.7SB A B 3.7 14.6

3


Overall C C 33.2 28.9EB E E 79.6 76.2WB E F 69.9 108.2NB C B 29.1 17.2SB C C 24.2 27.0

41


Overall C B 27.5 19.5EB F F 93.9 98.5WB E F 75.4 80.7SB B A 10.3 5.1

42US 17 at Waverly Rd U-turn Overall C B 22.1 11.4

EB F F 97.0 97.8WB B A 11.3 3.8

43

US 17 at N Causeway Rd

Overall C B 23.2 19.8EB F F 98.2 103.4WB F F 93.1 95.6NB A A 5.2 3.8

44

US 17 at N Causeway U-turn

Overall B B 14.6 14.9WB F F 99.6 94.8

SB A A 7.5 8.5



Table 11: (Continued): Build 2040 LOS and Delay


(LOS)Control Delay


5


Overall D D 37.8 41.6EB F F 122.1 137.5WB A A 0.3 0.3NB B C 17.3 32.9SB D D 45.1 37.0

6


Overall B B 16.5 18.7WB F F 96.3 103.9

NB A A 6.4 8.7

61

US 17 at Litchfield Dr U-turn

Overall C C 27.7 30.8WB F F 110.5 106.9

SB B C 19.2 24.1

7

US 17 at Country Club Dr

Overall B A 12.4 8.0EB F F 122.6 113.5

SB A A 6.3 4.1

71

US 17 at Country Club Dr U-turn

Overall B B 16.2 12.7EB F F 88.3 90.9

NB A A 9.0 7.5

81

US 17 at Willbrook Blvd

Overall D C 35.1 29.8EB E E 71.7 77.5WB D D 39.1 42.0SB C B 22.6 16.5

82

US 17 at Willbrook Blvd SB U-turn

Overall C D 25.6 39.6EB D E 36.6 63.0

NB C D 23.1 35.6

83

US 17 at Retreat Beach Cir

Overall B D 11.6 44.8EB D E 38.1 58.6WB D F 42.4 98.0NB A D 8.3 35.9

84

US 17 at Retreat Beach Cir U-turn

Overall B B 17.7 19.9WB D D 42.9 54.0

SB B B 15.6 17.0

9

US 17 N Boyle Rd

Overall C C 21.4 22.1WB F F 87.0 94.0NB C C 25.3 27.6SB A A 9.4 10.0





(LOS)Control Delay


101 US 17 at Sandy Island Rd EB Right D E 32.3 35.4

102 US 17 at Sandy Island Rd U-turn EB U-turn D F 32.4 53.1

103 US 17 at Trace Dr WB Right E F 35.4 55.0

104 US at Trace Dr U-turn WB U-turn D D 28.0 29.1

11 US 17 at Wesley Rd S WB Right E E 35.6 38.8

110 US at Wesley Rd S U-turn WB U-turn E F 38.0 52.6

12

US 17 at US 17 Bus

Overall B D 19.1 38.6WB E F 65.6 146.5

NB B C 15.0 29.6

131 US 17 at Pendergrass Ave EB Right E E 36.7 41.4

132 US 17 at Pendergrass Ave SB U-turn EB U-turn E F 38.4 62.4

133 US at Pendergrass Ave WB Right E F 38.4 60.8

134 US 17 at Pendergrass Ave NB U-turn WB U-turn D D 28.1 30.7

14 US 17 at Wesley Rd N WB Right F F 68.4 55.7

151

US 17 at Wachesaw Rd

Overall C C 24.5 25.1EB E F 79.1 88.6WB E E 70.1 68.8SB A A 9.0 9.2

152

US 17 at Willbrook Rd SB U-turn

Overall C D 24.1 45.2EB E F 73.3 144.2

NB B C 17.3 33.4

153

US 17 at Wachesaw Rd

Overall B C 17.4 31.6EB E E 59.1 70.8WB A F 85.4 106.0NB A C 9.9 24.5

154

S 17 atWachesaw Rd NB U-turn

Overall B B 16.1 19.5WB E F 77.0 81.8

SB B B 10.8 14.9





(LOS)Control Delay


16

US 17 at Bellamy AveOverall C C 34.4 24.9

EB F F 106.6 81.3WB E F 69.7 83.1NB C C 29.3 25.4SB C B 21.0 11.8

17

US 17 at Riverwood DrOverall C C 24.4 22.2

EB E E 68.3 79.6WB D D 41.3 51.0NB B B 16.1 13.3SB C C 26.0 23.5


EB Right E F 45.6 66.1WB Right F F 300+ 300+NB Left F F 67.2 138.0SB Left F F 300+ 300+

19


Overall B C 19.2 28.7EB B B 18.6 19.7WB C D 26.9 46.0NB B C 15.8 28.5SB C C 21.0 24.7

191

US 17 at Sunnyside Ave U-turn

Overall B B 13.8 19.1EB D E 53.3 57.7

NB B B 11.6 16.3

192

US 17 at Sunnyside Ave Quadrant Rd

Overall B B 11.3 13.6EB A A 3.4 4.1WB C C 29.5 27.3SB B B 10.3 14.2


EB C C 18.1 23.6WB B C 14.7 20.8


21Kings River Rd at

Waverly Rd(Roundabout)

Overall A A 8.1 7.3EB A A 5.8 5.0WB A A 7.7 7.8NB A A 8.9 7.6SB A A 7.9 7.0


EB A B 9.7 12.9WB A A 8.7 9.9NB A B 9.6 12.4SB A B 8.7 10.6

1

Kin

gs River

Rd

Tyson Dr

Alsto

n R

d

Petig

ru Dr

Kings Ri

ver R

d

Kings Ri

ver Rd

Waverly Rd

Waverly R

d

2

20

21

3

Hagley Dr

US 17

42

43

44

41

S Causew

ay Rd

(1779) 1469

124 (135)

1442 (1861)

(249) 142

88 (88)

50 (85)

112 (144)

(38) 45(77) 85

(1911) 1584

183 (215)

139 (112)

1634 (1963)

(2004) 1842

15 (4

7)

38 (1

8)

35 (5

0)

1861 (2076

)

(139) 1

58

(209) 2

44

(2236) 2063

2231 (2372)

(2171) 2021

(309) 384 (2292) 2206

2373 (2373)

2042 (2231)

485 (338)

LEGEND


Volume Movement


##

(##)


(241) 121

21 (24)

42 (49)

4 (4)

(0) 2

(165) 141

0 (3)

121 (102)

(0) 3

(158) 159

(35) 26

2 (2

) 45 (62

)

77 (56

)

(24) 2

0

296 (197)

(128) 133

(134) 205

209 (169)

176 (161)

(188) 199

(9) 11 (1

7) 17

(2

1) 21

9 (23)

38 (32)

47 (65)

(218) 2

02

(192) 2

47

(36) 49

(15) 17

214 (19

1)

162 (1

55)

185 (1

67)

162 (11

4)

(14) 18

17 (1

7)

36 (5

6)

(24) 15

Waverly R

d

N C

ause

way R

d

Figure 20


2040 Build Peak Hour Volumes (1 of 6)

5

Bro

wn L

nKin

g R

d

Martin L

uth

er

71

7

61

6

(2314) 2095

(8) 3

(0) 0

(2) 3

2260 (2242)215 (218)

(2431) 2290

2425 (2475)

(2376) 2213

(306) 318

144 (99)

2506 (2532)

(2473) 2298

2395 (2439)

LEGEND


Volume Movement


##

(##)


(216) 305 (214) 246

135 (121) 228 (161) 173 (191)

0 (5)

5 (8)

(3) 3

(2) 2

(39) 20

55 (47)

2 (2) Countr

y Clu

b Dr

Litchfield Dr

US 17

Figure 21



9

N B

oyle R

d

82

83

84

81

rD

dn

alsI

yd

na

Se

vir

D e

car

T

104

102Willbrook Blv

d

Retreat

Beach Cir

101

103

(2411) 2193

(2438) 2205(4

20) 217 (2658) 2240

2250 (2327)

766 (632)

1978 (2109)

2210 (2343)

(2463) 2176

(130) 164

2020 (2181)

(2549) 2147

2089 (2194)

(2578) 2168

(55) 61

61 (58)

2080 (2193)

(2628) 2207

2194 (2332)

LEGEND


Volume Movement


##

(##)


494 (414)

365 (387)

49 (47)

(200) 182 (252) 321

(135) 161

(6) 0

(124) 185

(5

3) 52

15 (11)

33 (35)

52 (57) 49 (41)

(10) 22 (6) 3

(17) 28

87 (108)

US 17

Figure 22



11

SUB 71 SU

12

ev

A s

sar

gr

ed

ne

P

131

133

134

132

(2894) 2495

2146 (2285)

71 (61)

(2866) 2486

2105 (2248)

(2507) 2187

149 (162)

(2577) 2299

(2563) 2296

(65) 54

77 (85)

2119 (2157) 2096 (2139)

(2590) 2325

2171 (2187)

LEGEND


Volume Movement


##

(##)


54 (67)

(41) 30

(40) 27

(38) 25

35 (41)

65 (45)

32 (14)

39 (30)

29 (24)

(53) 38

US 17 US 17

Figure 23

71 SU

110

Wesle

y R

d S

ev

A s

sar

gr

ed

ne

P



(385) 181 (2507) 2187 149 (162)

71 SU

152

151

153

15414

Wachesa

w R

d

Bella

my A

ve

16

83 (65)

(2728) 2409

2484 (2507)

2231 (2245)

457 (449)

(243) 246

(2557) 2380

2111 (2168)

(2634) 2440

2157 (2238) 256 (164)

(32) 52

(76) 77

(55) 91

2148 (2139)

(2464) 2161

LEGEND


Volume Movement


##

(##)


336 (327) 84 (85)

177 (187)

55 (49)

(208) 230

(242) 145

(166) 186

99 (68)

88 (73)

159 (85)

136 (86)

2 (5)

(59) 62

(62) 95

(5) 3

US 17 US 17

Figure 24

Wesle

y R

d N

Wachesa

w R

d



Murrells Inlet Rd

Mackle

n A

ve

17 18

22

191

19

192

193

Burgess R

d

Riv

erw

ood Dr

Medic

al Park

Wacca

ma

w

Courtfield Dr

Sunnysid

e A

ve

(2718) 2542

(29) 35

(23) 29

(12) 27

2349 (2316)243 (218)

54 (56)

(115) 120

(2915) 2825

2496 (2428)

(3086) 2928

2660 (2516)

(3065) 2883

(937) 722

2284 (2301) 2760 (2777)

(464) 426

(2429) 2368

510 (535)

493 (383)

(362) 255

543 (689)

340 (306)

380 (479)

86 (109)

(26) 26

(44) 44

77 (123)

(197) 138

(26) 14

LEGEND


Volume Movement


##

(##)


(158) 86

(689) 543

476 (476)

(6

1) 48

(5

3) 28

(250) 210

165 (229) 36 (3)

85 (106)

15 (14)

(61) 55

(2) 14

(3) 3

115 (91)

24 (12)

8 (3)

(8) 27

(73) 88

(11) 9

15 (14)

94 (74)

38 (61)

67 (91)

23 (11)

3 (9)

(18) 27

(30) 23

Quadrant

Rd

Sunnysid

e A

ve

US 17 US 17

Figure 25





10.4 Capacity ImprovementsIn 2040, US 17 within the study area limits is expected to carry between 46,200 and 72,000 vehicles per day which is more than the parallel SC 31 (Carolina Bays Parkway) which is grade separated at major cross streets instead of signals. To provide progression along US 17 and a LOS of D or better at the study intersections, a combination of access management strategies, intersection improvements and widenings were used.

Access Management strategies included the reduced conflict intersection (RCI) such that the side streets cannot make left or straight through movements. At these locations, side road traffic must make a right turn and continue in that direction or make a U-turn at a designated location. Medians are also recommended in areas to channelize turning movement traffic to signalized intersections to improve traffic flow.

Intersection Improvement Strategies include turn lanes and signals,

The US 17 corridor could benefit today (with the existing 30,500 to 47,500 vehicle per day) by retrofitting the 4-lane highway to the RCI design as the capacity is reached closer to 50,000 vehicles per day. Once the 50,000 vehicles per day threshold is reached, consideration to widen US 17 to 6 lanes is recommended which is likely needed in the northern sections of the corridor.

Throughout the corridor, the benefits of a RCI include the following:

§ High capacity as a four (4) lane signalized RCI can serve 40,000 to 50,000 vehicles per day and a six (6) lane signalized RCI can serve 60,000 to 80,000 vehicles per day

§ Improved coordination of signals with the simpler two-phase operation

§ Reduced delay along the main street with few signal phases, short cycle lengths, and coordinate operation resulting in reduced travel times along corridor

§ Reduced delay along the side street despite the indirect movement, lower number of signal phases, and shorter cycle lengths when compared to traditional intersections

§ Flexible operation as different cycle lengths and speeds are possible for both travel directions, and signal timing throughout the day

§ Safer for travelers as studies show a 60 percent reduction in fatal and injury crashes and a 42 percent reduction in all reported crashes

§ Safer for pedestrians as it is easier to cross the street

An example of a typical RCI design is shown in Figure 26 in Loris, SC along Highway 9.

Figure 26: Typical RCI Intersection



Figure 27: FHWA Reduced Conflict Intersection Capacity Chart

AECOM considered various options for improvements on US 17 keeping in mind that the goal of the project is to improve safety while maintaining the flow of vehicles and people along the corridor. Access management strategies were considered essential to manage traffic flow and minimize impacts to the right-of-way. One general access management improvement includes a raised concrete median along the two-way left-turn lane cross sections throughout the corridor. In addition, in the long term, AECOM recommends US 17 to be widened to a 6-lane divided section between south Bellamy Avenue to Burgess Road / Sunnyside Avenue. Recommendations for corridor strategies are described below from south to north and correspond to Figure 28 to Figure 33.

Proposed Lane Configuration (1 of 6)##

####

<####>

STOP


Storage (feet)

Existing Laneage

Intersection Number

Stop Control

LEGEND

1

Kin

gs River

Rd

200'

100'

Tyson Dr

Alsto

n R

d

75'

250'TWLTL

<7200'>

Petig

ru Dr

150'

ST

OP

ST

OP

Kings Ri

ver R

d

Kings Ri

ver Rd

Waverly Rd

Waverly R

d

2

20

21

3

375'

<4900'>

Hagley Dr

TWLTL YIELD

US 17

<3500'>

250'

125'

200'

125'

300'

200'

42

43

4441

200' 200'

300'

(Cul-d

e-S

ac)

Hagle

y Dr

TWLTL Two-Way Left-Turn Lane

S Causew

ay Rd

Waverly R

d

N C

ause

way R

d

300'

ROUNDABOUT

New Signal Control

Existing Signal Control

Proposed Laneage

Proposed Storage (feet)####

Figure 28

Lengthen

to 300'

Restrip

e to pro

vide 1

25'


<7100'>

<830'>

<700+'>

<700+'>

Restripe to pro

vide 350'

Proposed Lane Configuration (2 of 6)

175'

200'

150'

150'

175'

<5400'>

5

Bro

wn L

nKin

g R

d

Martin L

uth

er

300'

100'

71

7

61

6

200'

300'

200'

Litchfield Dr

Countr

y Clu

b Dr

US 17

##

####

<####>

STOP


Storage (feet)

Existing Laneage

Intersection Number

Stop Control

LEGEND


New Signal Control


Proposed Laneage


<7100'>

Figure 29


<700+'>

<700+'>

<3200'>


300'

200'

<2360'>

9

N B

oyle R

d

300'

300'

200'

82

83

8481

rD

dn

alsI

yd

na

S

300'

200'

STOP

STOP

evi

rD

ec

ar

T

104

102200'

Willbrook Blv

d

Retreat

Beach Cir

300'

300'

250'

200'

200'

101

103

300'

US 17

200'

Exte

nd to 1

50'

##

####

<####>

STOP


Storage (feet)

Existing Laneage

Intersection Number

Stop Control

LEGEND


New Signal Control


Proposed Laneage


<3200'> <2160'>

200'

Figure 30


<700+'>

<700+'>

<700+'>

<700+'>

<10150'>


500'

STOP

300'

11

SUB 71 SU

12

US 17

300'

250'

ev

A s

sar

gr

ed

ne

P

131

133

134

132

110

200'

250'

STOP

STOP

300'

250'

US 17US 17

71 SU

300'

##

####

<####>

STOP


Storage (feet)

Existing Laneage

Intersection Number

Stop Control

LEGEND


New Signal Control


Proposed Laneage


<2500'>

Wesle

y R

d S

ev

A s

sar

gr

ed

ne

P

Figure 31

250'

STOP


<10150'>

<700'+>

<1070'><2500'>

<3530'>

<700'+>

<700'+>


250'

150'

300'

500'

152

151

153

15414

Wachesa

w R

d

Bella

my A

ve

16

300'

DLEI

Y

200'250'

300'

250' 150'

250'

250'

300'

200'

150'

US 17 US 17

##

####

<####>

STOP


Storage (feet)

Existing Laneage

Intersection Number

Stop Control

LEGEND


New Signal Control


Proposed Laneage


<3530'>W

esle

y R

d N

Wachesa

w R

d

Figure 32

850'


<700'+>

<700'+>

<1830'>

ST

OP

STOP

ST

OP

STOP

Murrells Inlet Rd

Mackle

n A

ve

<1200'>


1718

22

191

19

192

193

200'

400'

200'

300'

200'

100'

FREE

300'

STOP

STOP

200'

STOP

400'

YIE

LD

YIE

LD

300'

FREE

150'

YIE

LD

Riv

erw

ood Dr

Park W

est

Wacca

ma

w M

edic

al

Courtfield Dr

Burgess R

dSunnysid

e A

ve

Quadrant

Rd

Sunnysid

e A

ve

Riv

erw

ood Dr

250'

300'

350'

##

####

<####>

STOP


Storage (feet)

Existing Laneage

Intersection Number

Stop Control

LEGEND


New Signal Control


Proposed Laneage


<1320'> <1100'> <1840'>

<460'>

<750'>

<600'>

US 17 US 17

300'

Figure 33

600'


YIE

LD

Restripe to provide 300'

<830'>YIE

LD



10.5 Arterial AnalysisAECOM conducted an arterial analysis using Sim Traffic software along US 17 between SCauseway Road to Burgess Road / Sunnyside Avenue which spans nearly 12 miles. The purposeof this analysis is to provide a measure of effectiveness for the entire corridor rather than focusingon an isolated intersection. The following measures of effectiveness are included in this analysis:

§ Delays (seconds/vehicle)

§ Travel time (seconds)

§ Arterial speed (miles per hour)

The Existing 2019, No-Build 2040, and Build 2040 conditions during the Mid-day and PM peakhours were analyzed and summarized in Table 11 and Table 12.

Table 11: Arterial Analysis Mid-day Peak Hour

ScenarioNorthbound Southbound Average

Delay(s)

TravelTime (s)

Speed(mph)

Delay(s)

TravelTime (s)

Speed(mph)

Delay(s)

TravelTime (s)

Speed(mph)

Existing 2020 266 1111 38 294 1166 35 280 1139 35No-Build 2040 779 1626 26 554 2535 29 667 2081 28

Build 2040 270 864 47 254 796 44 262 830 46

Table 12: Arterial Analysis PM Peak Hour

ScenarioNorthbound Southbound Average

Delay(s)

TravelTime (s)

Speed(mph)

Delay(s)

TravelTime (s)

Speed(mph)

Delay(s)

TravelTime (s)

Speed(mph)

Existing 2020 244 1060 38 275 1176 36 519 1118 37No-Build 2040 836 1656 24 509 2456 30 673 2056 27

Build 2040 313 909 45 224 772 45 269 841 45

Output in the tables show that the Mid-day and PM peak hours results were very similar. Onaverage, according to the traffic model it takes about 19 minutes to travel from S. Causeway Roadto Burgess Road / Sunnyside Avenue in 2019. In 2040, if no improvements are made, that timenearly doubles to 35 minutes to travel the same 12 mile distance. With AECOM’s proposedrecommendations combined with 2040 traffic volumes projections, the travel times over thesesame 12 miles is expected to be 14 minutes. In summary, in 2040 with AECOM’s proposedimprovements in place, safety, congestion, and air quality will be improved with less starting andstopping ultimately improving travel times along the corridor.

Sim Traffic arterial detailed outputs from this analysis can be bound in Appendix K.



11.0 FundingThe team developed a projects and associated costs for Near-term (2020-2025), Intermediate-term (2025-2035), and Long-term (2035-2040) projects. These costs were developed based onconceptual design quantities of the considered improvements as part of this US 17 Corridor studyand have been summarized below.

Table 13: Summary of Costs

Project Type Project Location Cost

Near-Term(2020-2025)

§ US 17 at DeBordieu Colony Neighborhood§ US 17 at Hog Heaven Driveway§ Kings River Rd at Tyson Rd / Hagley Dr§ US 17 at (Rodeway Inn and SGA Architecture Office)§ US 17 at Alston Rd / Petigru Dr§ US 17 at (Eagles, Channel Bluff Ave, Georgieville St, and Atalaya Rd)§ US 17 at US 17 Business§ US 17 at (Wesley Rd North, Nicoles, Nelson Dr, and Hammock Ave)§ US 17 at (MLK Rd, Litchfield Dr, Willbrook Blvd, N Boyle Rd,

Wachesaw Rd, Bellamy Rd, Riverwood Dr, and Burgess Rd)

$2,525,500

Intermediate-term (2025-

2035)

§ US 17 at Median opening between of Prince George Road and TheColony Communities

§ US 17 at Kings River Rd§ US 17 at Smalls Loop Rd to Island Shops§ US 17 Healthpoint Center for Health and Fitness to One Oak Place§ US 17 at Blackgum Rd / Retreat Beach Blvd to Seaside Inn§ US 17 at N Boyle Rd§ US 17 at Sandy Island Rd / Trace Rd to Wesley Rd (South)§ US 17 at Hughes Rd to Causey Rd§ US 17 at Pendergrass Ave to Wachesaw Rd§ US 17 at Burgess Rd§ Kings River Rd at Hagley Dr / Tyson Dr§ Kings River Rd at Waverly Rd§ Waverly Rd at Petigru Dr

$25,090,000

Long-term(2035-2040)

§ US 17 at Beaumont Dr§ US 17 at US 17 Business§ US 17 at Bellamy Ave to Burgess Rd

$25,700,000

Additional details on projects and recommendations can be found in the Conclusions andRecommendations section of this report. This information is provided for planning purposes. Inorder to fully implement the proposed improvements a combination of federal, state, local andprivate funding will be required. Although no one has a crystal ball for what funding levels maylook like in the future, the project team has identified various sources that could potentially beused to fund the proposed improvements.



Current FundingLocal Funding Options

Georgetown County voters in 2014 approved a one percent sales tax that expired in May 2019.The tax raised $41 million and was for a variety of projects including road paving. If this onepercent sales tax could be restored, it could potentially be a major contributor to aid with thetransportation infrastructure needs for the County. Impact fees, Tax Increment Financing andMunicipal Improvement Districts are all possible funding options at the local level.

State Funding Options

An obvious option would be the GSATS (Grand Strand Area Transportation Study) Guidesharesallocated by SCDOT to the GSATS region on an annual basis. Additionally, Georgetown CountyTransportation Committee (CTC) C-funds can be used at the discretion of the CTC. Othercounties have benefited by using C-Funds as matching funds to obtain various grants, such asthe SCDOT Transportation Alternatives Program and transit grants. These grants are availablefor multiple purposes, but mostly for pedestrian accommodations and beautification. In addition,the SCDOT has Safety Funds that can be used on qualifying intersections and corridors basedon ADT and collision history. There is also funding at SCDOT for upgrading traffic signals andinstalling new traffic signals where needed, as well as improving traffic signal timing oncoordinated traffic signal systems. Additionally, the SCDOT administers the Safe Routes toSchools program that allows for bicycle and pedestrian improvements in and around schools. Afinal funding option at the state level would be to apply for funding from the State InfrastructureBank (SIB). Recent lawsuits have been cleared and now the SIB has approximately$1,054,389,000 in available funding to loan to local partners (as of June 30, 2020).

Federal Funding Options

At the federal level, there are several funding options that could assist in the US 17 GeorgetownCounty Corridor. Most of these funding sources are also administered by the SCDOT. However,BUILD grants are part of President Trump’s Infrastructure plan and include annual discretionaryallocations for projects across the country. Transportation Infrastructure Finance and InnovationAct (TIFIA) loans are another funding source that was carried forward during the FAST Act. Themost recent project in South Carolina that utilized a TIFIA loan was the Cooper River Bridge inCharleston. Included in the federal category are also Federal Transit funds.

Innovative FundingPublic Private partnerships are increasing in popularity around the country and basically involvea private entity building a road or making improvements to a corridor in exchange for the rights tocollect tolls on that corridor for a specified period of time. While a public private partnership for aproject on the US17 Corridor may be a stretch, there’s tremendous innovation taking place acrossthe country and smaller projects are now being funded with public private partnerships.



12.0 Conclusions and RecommendationsThe primary goal of this study is to address issues and concerns related to safety, connectivityand capacity; and formulate concepts, proposals, and recommendations to address those issues.The proposed improvements along US 17 as described in this report provide a combination ofpolicies and strategies to create a roadway system to benefit all users. It should be noted thatthere are several recommendations yet to be implemented from the 2003 US 17 HighwayGeorgetown County study. A complete summary of the status of the recommendations arelocated in Section 4.0 of this report.

AECOM reviewed Crash Data for the corridor and found there were 1,133 crashes along US 17within the study limits over a three-year period with 7 of those crashes resulting in fatalities. Ofthese 1,133 crashes, approximately 50 percent of them were rear-end collisions and 28 percentangle collisions. Several Strategies for improving safety have been incorporated into the conceptdesigns and recommendations for the project, with one of the key strategies being reducedconflict intersection (RCI). A RCI provides for a two-phase signal operation as opposed to thetraditional eight-phase intersection. This improved signal coordination combined with accessmanagement should reduce the frequency of starting and stopping, equating to fewer crashes.

AECOM has reviewed in detail existing and future capacity of the corridor and found US 17, anorth / south primary arterial corridor currently services from 30,500 (south) – 47,000 (north)vehicles per day and is expected to serve 46,200 (south) – 71,900 (north) vehicles per day by2040. One of the major differences between the 2003 Study and this study are therecommendations to widen US 17. It is proving to be too costly and have significant Right of WayImpacts to widen the existing 4-lane highway to a 6-lane section in the more densely populatedareas such as Pawleys Island and Litchfield. Widening is also linked to longer pedestriancrossings and timing needed which is counterproductive to safety and capacity. Therefore,AECOM has provided alternatives to widening in these areas such as RCI’s, IntersectionImprovements and Signal Timing/Coordination, while incorporating widening where feasible orwhen other mitigation measures could not be implemented to meet desired Levels of Service.

AECOM has developed a prioritized list of projects that aim to improve safety and operation alongthe corridor. These projects have been grouped into Near-term (2020-2025), Intermediate-term(2025-2035), and Long-term (2035-2040), where Near-term projects will have an immediateimpact on capacity or to address safety concerns. It should be noted that some of theseimprovements may overlap with the Intermediate projects, making it more cost effective to movethe intermediate project forward. Additionally, AECOM used a combination of a failure yearanalysis at the major signalized intersections and crash data to help in prioritizing these projects.A summary of these prioritized recommendations can be found in the tables on the followingpages and Table 14 below summarizes the results of the failure year analysis.

Table 14: Failure Year Analysis SummaryID# Intersection Failure Year # of Crashes19 US 17 at Burgess Road (SC 707) 2022 518 US 17 at Willbrook Boulevard 2026 41

15 US 17 at Wachesaw Road 2032 366 US 17 at Litchfield Drive 2034 274 US 17 at Waverly Road / N Causeway Road 2038 47

16 US 17 at Bellamy Road 2038 2917 US 17 at Riverwood Drive 2039 41



Table 15: Near-term (2020-2025) Project Summary

All Near-term projects N-1 to N-9 are listed from south to north and are not listed based on priority

Table 16: Intermediate-term (2025-2035) Project Summary

Project # (Area) Location Consideration ProjectLength Cost

N-1 (DeBordieu) US 17 at DeBordieu Colony Neighborhood Traffic study to determine alternative form of traffic control - $30,000

N-2 (DeBordieu) US 17 at Hog Heaven Driveway Remove concrete median opening and replace with grass - $100,000

N-3 (Pawleys Island) Kings River Rd at Tyson Rd / Hagley Dr Cul-de-sac Hagley Dr - $95,000

N-4 (Pawleys Island) US 17 at (Rodeway Inn and SGA Architecture Office) Remove concrete median opening and replace with grass - $50,000

N-5 (Pawleys Island) US 17 at Alston Rd / Petigru Dr Restripe Petigru Dr approach with an exclusive left-turn lane and construct anexclusive left-turn lane on Alston Rd with 125 feet of storage - $250,000

N-6 (Litchfield) US 17 at (Eagles, Channel Bluff Ave, Georgieville St, and Atalaya Rd) Remove concrete median opening and replace with grass - $400,000

N-7 (Litchfield) US 17 at US 17 Business Signalize northbound US 17 when warranted - $100,000

N-8 (Murrells Inlet) US 17 at (Wesley Rd North, Nicoles, Nelson Dr, and Hammock Ave) Remove concrete median opening and replace with grass - $300,000

N-9 (Litchfield and MurrellsInlet)

US 17 at (Litchfield Dr, Willbrook Blvd, N Boyle Rd, Wachesaw Rd,Bellamy Rd, Riverwood Dr, and Burgess Rd) Adaptive Signal Timing - $1,200,000

Total $2,525,000

Project # ID#(Area) Location Consideration Project

Length Cost ConceptFigure

I-119

(Murrells Inlet)US 17 at Burgess Rd

US 17 at Burgess Road / Sunnyside Drive is the first major signalized intersection in the Murrells Inlet area just south of the US 17 / US 17 gradeseparated interchange. Horry County is currently working on a project on US 17 Bus. to improve the operation along the corridor. Thecombination of these two factors along with having the greatest number of crashes pushes this intersection to the top of the prioritization list.This intersection has recently been upgraded to provide additional capacity, but additional improvements are needed to maintain efficientprogression along US 17. AECOM recommends an at grade quadrant intersection design.

0.6 miles $4,210,000 Figure K-1

I-2 4

(PawleysIsland)

US 17 at Smalls LoopRd to Island Shops

Along the 19-mile study area, approximately 20% of the crashes occur on the 1.7-mile segment between Smalls Loop Road and Island Shops(just north of Waverly Road / N Causeway Road) in the Pawleys Island area, with an average of 1 fatality per year. There are numerousdriveways with a two-way left-turn lane in this section. AECOM recommends implementing a raised concrete median along with specificopenings (reduced conflict intersections) to improve vehicle progression and safety, and to remove any auxiliary lanes and replace withdedicated turn lanes. It should be noted this project was also identified in the 2003 study but has yet to implemented.

1.7 miles $4,620,000Figures

K-2 to K-5



All Intermediate-term projects I-1 to I-13 are listed in order of priority using engineering judgment from the on traffic capacity and safety analysis

I-36 & 7

(Litchfield)

US 17 HealthpointCenter for Health andFitness to One OakPlace

The major intersections of Litchfield Drive (signalized) and Country Club Drive (unsignalized) are separated by 300 feet with numerous crashesand excessive delays at Country Club Drive. Left-turn lane storage lengths are restricted due to the 300 feet spacing and signalizing CountryClub is not ideal on this primary arterial. In 2003, it was recommended to align Litchfield Drive with Country Club Drive; however, due to right-of-way constraints / funding, this was never implemented. AECOM has developed an alternative solution that restricts all left-turns to and fromLitchfield Drive and Country Club and uses a raised concrete median with signalized U-turn downstream of each intersection. It should be notedthat right-turns leaving Litchfield Drive and Country Club Drive will also be signalized.

0.4 miles $2,395,000 Figure K-6

I-48

(Litchfield)

US 17 at Blackgum Rd /Retreat Beach Blvd/Willbrook Blvd

The 0.6 mile section between Black Gum Road and the signalized Willbrook Blvd contain several median openings with no deceleration / left-turnlanes. Willbrook Blvd/ Retreat Beach Circle is a major signalized intersection serving densely populated resort communities on the west of US 17and the Litchfield Beach on the east. At Willbrook Blvd / Retreat Beach Circle intersection, there is a significant number of angle and rear-endcollisions. In addition to the safety issue, the intersection is expected to fail in the year 2026. AECOM recommends converting this signalizedintersection to a reduced conflict intersection to improve safety and to provide an acceptable LOS in the year 2040. Black Gum Road / RetreatBeach Circle would also benefit from an unsignalized reduced conflict intersection due the offset and current access.

0.6 miles $1,750,000 Figure K-7

I-513

(Murrells Inlet)US 17 at PendergrassAve and Wachesaw Rd

The 1.4 miles section between Pendergrass Avenue and the signalized Wachesaw Road contain several median openings with no decelerationlanes. The traffic control at the intersection of Pendergrass Avenue is an overhead flashing signal with excessive delays on the minor streetapproaches. Wachesaw Road is a major signalized intersection serving densely populated residential housing on the west of US 17 and theMurrells Inlet community on the east. Both Pendergrass Avenue and Wachesaw Road intersections have significant number of injury relatedangle collisions including one fatality. AECOM recommends converting both of these intersection to a RCI. Pendergrass Avenue will likely notrequire signalization; however, traffic volumes should be monitored closer to implementation. The intersection of Wesley Road N at US 17creates challenges with the proposed reduced conflict intersection design at Wachesaw Road and may need to be realigned with CoquinaAvenue.

1.4 miles $2,700,000 FiguresK-8 to K-10

I-6 21Kings River Rd at

Waverly Rd

The all-way stop control at Kings River Road at Waverly Road is a major intersection expecting to fail with 2040 traffic volumes. The issurrounded by residential communities and typically sees congestion associated with the Waccamaw Elementary School and Waccamaw HighSchool. All four legs to the intersection do not align at ninety degrees. AECOM recommends a single lane roundabout this intersection toprovide a continuous flow of a traffic and to improve 2040 LOS F to LOS A.

- $2,000,000 Figure K-11

I-710 & 11

(BrookgreenGardens)

US 17 at Sandy IslandRd / Trace Rd to WesleyRd (South)

The 2.5 mile section between Sandy Island Road / Trace Drive and Wesley Road S is a rural section along US 17 with a speed limit of 55 mph.The 4 lane roadway is separated by a grass median. The three major intersections along this segment is Sandy Island Road / Trace Drive,Brookgreen Gardens, and Wesley Road S. 2040 operation shows significant delays for the minor approaches along the corridor along with asignificant number of crashes. AECOM recommends installing unsignalized reduced conflict intersections at all three of these intersections. Thisdesign will decrease the number of conflict points within the intersection improving safety remove left-turns from the side streets decreasingdelays.

2.5 miles $1,385,000 -

I-8 (Debordieu)

US 17 at Medianopening between ofPrince George Road andThe ColonyCommunities

There are several crashes along US 17 near the Hog Heaven BBQ restaurant and The Colony residential development. Currently there is alsono southbound left-turn lane into The Colony forcing vehicles to go down to the next median break that does not have a deceleration lane.AECOM recommends closing the median break in front of Hog Haven restaurant (in the middle of horizonal curve) and installing a dedicated U-turn lane both northbound and southbound halfway between the Prince George Road and the Colony communities. US 17 has a speed limit of45 mph making these dedicated U-turn necessary to decrease the probability of rear end collision.

- $800,000 Figure K-12

I-91

(PawleysIsland)

US 17 at Kings River Rd

The intersection of US 17 at Kings River Road is expected to operate at a LOS F for the side street approach in 2040. Most of the vehiclesduring the peak hours make a right-turn from Kings River Road rather than a left-turn keeping the intersection from meeting signal warrants. Thenorthbound left-turn from US 17 onto Kings River Road is higher and signalization may be needed in the future due to this movement alone. Asvolumes increase on US 17 over the next 20 years and access management recommendations are in place, signalization of this intersection islikely including the potential for a southbound U-turn lane on US 17. AECOM recommends signalization is likely needed at this intersection overthe next 20 years as traffic volumes should be monitored every couple of years. The number of crashes at this intersection was minimal, sosignalization is not an immediate need.

- $730,000 -

I-11 9(Litchfield) US 17 at N Boyle Rd With access management measures being implemented along the corridor and the number of vehicles currently making U-turns, AECOM

recommends installing a Northbound U-turn lane along US 17. - $500,000 -

I-12 20 Kings River Rd atHagley Dr / Tyson Dr

A single lane roundabout is recommended as an intermediate solution if the short term improvement with the Cul-de-sac of Hagley Drive cannotbe implemented. This improvement is more geared towards safety rather than capacity. - $2,000,000 -

I-13 - Waverly Rd atPetigru Dr

A single lane roundabout is recommended as a safety countermeasure to realign the minor street approaches and to provide as a traffic calmingmeasure. - $2,000,000 -

Total $25,090,000



Table 17: Long-term (2035-2040) Project Summary

Project # ID# (Area) Location Consideration Project

Length Cost ConceptFigure

L-116, 17, 18

(MurrellsInlet)

US 17 at Bellamy Ave toBurgess Rd

The 1.0 mile section between Bellamy Avenue and Burgess Road is expected to carry the highest number of traffic volumes for the entire studyarea. This cross section along this one mile segment varies with median openings, acceleration lanes, deceleration lanes, and auxiliary lanescause in uncertainty to the road users. AECOM recommends widening this section to 6 lanes to accommodate the projected 71,900 vehicles perday in 2040 and to standardize the cross section to improve safety. Other improvements include a reduced conflict intersection at MacklenAvenue that may need signalized closer to implementation.

1.0 mile $12,500,000 Figures K-13 to K-14

L-212

(Litchfield)US 17 at US 17Business

This intersection is expected to be improved in the near term with a traffic signal. The traffic signal should help with capacity; however realigningUS 17 Business with US 17 at a right angle should help with overall safety in the long term. 0.1 miles $5,000,000 Figure K-15

L-3 (PawleysIsland)

US 17 at Beaumont Dr(Pawleys Island)

Signal spacing is not ideal between S Causeway Road and Tyson Drive so consideration to realign S Causeway Rd with Beaumont Dr isrecommended. This would improve the angle that S Causeway Road intersects with US 17 and provide a longer distance between signals on US17.

0.2 miles $8,200,000 Figure K-16

Total $25,700,000

All Long-term projects L-1 to L-3 are listed in order of priority using engineering judgment from the on traffic capacity and safety analysis

All recommendations in this report are supported by crash data along the 19 mile study area on US 17 or from the traffic capacity analysis at the 22 selected intersections. Each of these 22 intersections, Mid-day and PM peak hourturning movements counts were obtained. An intersection level-of-service summary for all 22 intersections studied for Existing 2019, No-Build 2040, and Build 2040 is shown Table 19. It should be noted that any intersectionshowing LOS F in the Build 2040 is an unsignalized Reduced Conflict Intersection. Signalizing the reduced conflict intersection is likely to provide an acceptable LOS; however, a signal warrant analysis should be conducted prior toimplementation. In addition, performance measures are located in Appendix L.



Table 18: Intersection LOS Summary by Scenario

ID# IntersectionMid-day Peak PM Peak

Existing 2019

No-Build 2040

Build 2040

Existing 2019

No-Build 2040

Build 2040

1 US 17 at Kings River Rd D F B F F C 2 US 17 at S Causeway Rd A B B B C C 3 US 17 at Petigru Dr / Alston Rd A C C B D C 4 US 17 at

Waverly Rd / N Causeway Rd B F C B D B

5 US 17 at Martin Luther King Jr / Brown Ln B C D B D D

6 US 17 at Litchfield Dr B F B B F C 7 US 17 at Country Club Dr F F B F F B 8 US 17 at Willbrook Blvd /

Retreat Beach Cir D F D C F D

9 US 17 at N Boyle Rd B C C A C C

10 US 17 at Sandy Island Rd / Trace Dr F F E* F F F*

11 US 17 at Wesley Rd S F F E* F F F*

12 US 17 at US 17 Bus F F B F F D 13 US 17 at Pendergrass Ave F F E* F F E*

14 US 17 at Wesley Rd N F F F* F F F*

15 US 17 at Wachesaw Rd C E C C F D 16 US 17 at Bellamy Ave C F C B E C 17 US 17 at Riverwood Dr B E C B D C 18 US 17 at Macklen Ave F E F* F F F*

19 US 17 at Burgess Rd / Sunnyside Ave D F B D F C

20 Kings River Rd at Hagley Dr / Tyson Rd B C C B C C

21 Kings River Rd at Waverly Rd B F A A D A

22 Murrells Inlet Rd at Macklen Ave A A A A B B

= Full Signal = Directional (Partial) Signal * = Unsignalized RCI

us 17 corridor study in georgetown county - gsats

Documents