Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation Needs Assessment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Regional planners tell council congestion will worsen without new county investment
Summary
BCDCOG staff presented long‑range transportation modeling showing severe congestion by 2045 on many Charleston County corridors if the county does not add funding beyond traditional state and federal sources; planners urged council to set priorities for corridors, safety, transit and technology investments ahead of a possible referendum.
A representative from the Berkeley‑Charleston‑Dorchester Council of Governments briefed County Council June 24 on a transportation needs assessment that projects sharply increased congestion through 2045 if Charleston County provides no additional local investment beyond traditional state and federal sources.
The COG presentation included projections for population and employment growth, and staff said almost 136,000 people commute into Charleston County each day. The model compares a 2019 baseline to forecasted 2045 conditions assuming only existing and committed projects; many corridors are projected to fall into poor level‑of‑service categories (E–F) without new investments.
COG staff said the modeling incorporates land‑use assumptions, cell‑phone mobility data, planning time index and safety crash data. The agency recommended council consider a range of interventions: corridor and intersection capacity projects, targeted safety and non‑motorized improvements, operational and technology investments such as adaptive signal systems, and expanded transit service. The presenter noted that county criteria for prioritizing projects could differ from state criteria (Act 114) that govern state and federal funding prioritization.
Several council members asked about public transit and alternatives to widening. Councilmember Wierman asked the COG to include stronger transit strategies in the county’s decision framework; the presenter said COG can model investment packages that include transit and technology to maximize system capacity. Councilmember Boykin asked whether congestion and safety should be the county’s top priorities; the COG presenter said public input typically ranks safety and congestion highest and said the county’s role includes deciding which project categories to target in any future funding measure.
Councilmembers also discussed land‑use coordination with municipalities to avoid moving traffic problems from one corridor to another, and the need for explicit criteria to guide a future referendum or prioritization process. The presenter offered to support council and county staff with public engagement materials and modeling options ahead of an upcoming retreat and recommended that the county identify desired outcomes and criteria so COG can produce a prioritized list tailored to county policy goals.
No formal council action was recorded; councilmembers directed staff to include this topic on the retreat agenda and to invite COG to assist with public engagement and scenario modeling.
