Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation Master Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City unveils Phase 2 of Downtown Transportation Master Plan with SPUI, lane-reconfig and signal options
Summary
City and consultants presented Phase 2 of the Downtown Transportation Master Plan, reporting that 28 Phase 1 projects are complete or underway and proposing longer-term alternatives for key corridors including I-385/Lawrence interchange (SPUI or flyover options), Church Street corridor redesign, and Main Street left-turn restrictions.
City staff and consultants briefed council on the Department of Transportation's Downtown Transportation Master Plan Phase 2, describing technical analyses, public outreach and proposed short- and long-term projects.
Clint and David Harding opened the presentation by reiterating the plan's purpose: evaluate Phase 1 recommendations, analyze future traffic under an updated travel demand model, and recommend multimodal projects for a 20-year horizon. Consultants said they updated crash and traffic data, validated the Greenville-Pickens Area Transportation Study (GPATS) travel demand model, and gathered public input through a May survey and public meeting.
Consultants reported that 28 Phase 1 projects have been completed or are underway and that Phase 2 focuses on corridors expected to face congestion and safety pressures as the city grows. The study identified recurring public concerns at several locations including the I-385/Stone Avenue interchange, Church Street, Academy Street, Washington Street and River Street. Proposed long-term alternatives examined by the consultants include an interchange reconfiguration at I-385 (single-point urban interchange, additional turn lanes, and a potential flyover for the heavy left movement); signal-phase reductions and quadrant-intersection treatments on constrained downtown intersections; and lane reconfiguration on Pettigrew/Keyhole-style corridors to add space for transit, bike facilities or widened sidewalks.
The project team ran the shortlisted projects through GPATS-aligned prioritization criteria plus locally weighted measures such as multimodal accessibility and flood impacts. Model runs incorporating the proposed projects showed corridor-level improvements, including lower delays on some downtown streets when left-turn movements are restricted and signal phasing is adjusted.
Council members asked technical and jurisdictional questions about project limits, funding and coordination with GPATS and SCDOT, ownership of specific roadway segments and whether certain items were inside the downtown study boundary. Staff emphasized these are planning-level recommendations requiring additional feasibility and engineering study as well as funding commitments before construction.
Consultants recommended pursuing feasibility studies, continued coordination with GPATS and SCDOT, and exploring federal, state and local discretionary funding to advance selected projects. No formal council action was taken at the briefing; council members asked staff to continue coordination and follow up on high-priority corridors.
