A total of eight (8) alternatives were identified as reasonable intersection improvements. Each alternative was studied and ranked based on specific screening factors such as right-of-way impacts; motorist, pedestrian, and school safety; impact to grand trees; Level of Service for design year 2040; and vehicle queue.
Of the eight (8) identified, the following three (3) alternatives ranked highest and moved forward for further analysis.
| Right of Way Impacts | .77 Acres | ||
| *Grand Tree Impacts (Oaks) | 10 (10) | ||
| 2040 Peak Hours | AM | School | PM |
| Level of Service | B | B | B |
| Riverland Drive Northbound queue in feet | 261 | 247 | 273 |
| Riverland Drive Southbound queue in feet | 165 | 153 | 166 |
| Central Park Road Westbound queue in feet | 81 | 118 | 169 |
| Right of Way Impacts | 1.23 Acres | ||
| *Grand Tree Impacts (Oaks) | 6 (5) | ||
| 2040 Peak Hours | AM | School | PM |
| Level of Service | B | B | B |
| Riverland Drive Northbound queue in feet | 387 | 316 | 241 |
| Riverland Drive Southbound queue in feet | 220 | 132 | 91 |
| Central Park Road Westbound queue in feet | 112 | 167 | 163 |
| Right of Way Impacts | 2.16 Acres | ||
| *Grand Tree Impacts (Oaks) | 7 (3) | ||
| 2040 Peak Hours | AM | School | PM |
| Level of Service | C | B | B |
| Riverland Drive Northbound queue in feet | 681 | 563 | 299 |
| Riverland Drive Southbound queue in feet | 458 | 130 | 840 |
| Central Park Road Westbound queue in feet | 70 | 198 | 291 |
| Alternative Preferences | ||
| Alternative | Number in Favor | Percentage in Favor |
| Alternative 1 | 44 | 14.33% |
| Alternative 2 | 10 | 3.26% |
| Alternative 3 | 231 | 75.24% |
| Combination of Alternatives | 2 | 0.65% |
| No Options or Other | 20 | 6.51% |
| Important Factors | Number in Support | Percentage in Support |
| Improved Safety | 211 | 68.73% |
| Improved Traffic Flow | 195 | 63.52% |
| Minimized Tree Impacts | 160 | 52.12% |
| Bike/Pedestrian Options | 149 | 48.53% |
| Anti-traffic Light | 44 | 19.30% |
| Minimized Property Impacts | 32 | 10.43% |
Why did you not consider a more traditional traffic signal design?
The South Carolina Department of Transportation initiated this project in 2012 with the intention of implementing a traffic signal. The original plan required the removal of twelve (12) grand trees, which put the project on hold in 2015.
When the project re-entered into the design process in early 2018, the intersection improvements needed to meet newly instated design criteria and accommodate updated traffic data. The alternative including a traditional traffic signal and meeting today's standards required the removal of nineteen (19) grand trees, seven (7) more than the 2012 design. Due to the traffic signal's impact to grand trees, the project team eliminated this alternative.
Which is the least expensive alternative?
| Alternative 1 | Alternative 2 | Alternative 3 |
| $4,105,000 | $4,278,000 | $4,630,000 |
Alternative 1 should be the least expensive to construct
Can the Project include bike/pedestrian improvements along Riverland Drive to the James Island County Park?
Charleston County, the City of Charleston, the Town of James Island and the South Carolina Department of Transportation met in 2017 to prioritize the distribution of the $15 Million designated for the James Island Intersection and Bike/Pedestrian Improvements. The improvements to James Island became prioritized as:
Bike/pedestrian improvements along Riverland Drive to the James Island County Park would require additional funding, and significantly prolong the necessary safety improvements needed at this intersection. Charleston County Parks and Recreation Commission (CCPRC) did request this project through the Transportation Sales Tax Annual Allocation Program. Click here to learn more about the Annual Allocation Program. Transportation Development staff evaluates project requests through the County Council approved Objective Evaluation and Prioritization Process. Click here to review the objective criteria. Unfortunately, this bike/pedestrian project did not score well enough to receive staff's recommendation for funding. If you would like to express your support for this project, contact the CCPR Planning Division, 843-762-2172. They can continue to request this project, and public support does factor into scoring.
Will anything be done about the speeding on Riverland Drive?
While the design team believes that all 3 Alternatives will provide traffic calming at this intersection, the Transportation Development Department does not have the ability to enforce speed limits within the project area. Staff informed the City of Charleston’s Police Department and Charleston County’s Sheriff’s Office about the concern of speeding. The Traffic Divisions from the City of Charleston Police Department and the Charleston County Sheriff’s Office will increase their presence within their jurisdiction at this intersection and along Riverland Drive.
