Appendix 6-H: Land Use & Economic Development Analysis. Draft Report February 2016

Transcription

1 Appendix 6-H: Land Use & Economic Development Analysis Draft Report February 2016

2 Page intentionally left blank

3 Table of Contents 1 Introduction Proposed Alignments Proposed Station Typology Land Use Measure Population and Employment Legally Binding Affordability Restricted Housing Park-and-Ride Demand Screen Two Land Use Summary Population, Housing, and Employment Affordable Housing Park-and-Ride Demand Estimates Alternative A: No-Build I-26 Commuter Bus Alternative B-1/B-2: US 78/ US 52/Meeting BRT/LRT Alternative B-3/B-4: US 78/US 52/ East Bay BRT/LRT Alternative C-1/C-2: US 176/US 52/ Meeting BRT/LRT Alternative C-3/C-4: US 176/US 52/ East Bay BRT/LRT Alternative D-1/D-2: Dorchester Rd/US 52/ Meeting BRT/LRT Alternative D-3/D-4: Dorchester/US 52/ East Bay BRT/LRT Economic Development Potential Summary Station Statistics: Household, Population and Employment Appendix 6-H: Land Use and Economic Development Analysis Page ii

4 1 Introduction Under the Federal Transit Administration s (FTA) Capital Investment Grant Program, project sponsors are required to submit to FTA documentation regarding existing land use and economic development effects for evaluation and rating of the project. The land use measure includes an examination of existing corridor and station area development; existing corridor and station are development character; existing station area pedestrian facilities; parking supply; and proportion of legally binding affordability restricted housing. The economic development measure is the extent to which a proposed project is likely to induce additional, transit-supportive development in the future based on a qualitative examination of the existing local plans and policies to support economic development proximate to the project. This Screen Two Land Use and Economic Development Analysis describes the methodology used to rate each Screen Two Alternative. Each alternative transit corridor alignment is analyzed according to specific qualitative and quantitative characteristics, and the FTA provided breakpoints are applied to rate the alignments from low to high. 2 Proposed Alignments Results of the Screen One Analysis, input from the I-26 Alternatives Analysis Steering and Technical Advisory Committees, and community feedback identified the following alternatives to move forward into the Screen Two Analysis: Screen Two - Alternative A: No Build I-26 Commuter Bus Screen Two - Alternative B-1: US 78/US 52/Meeting BRT Screen Two - Alternative B-2: US 78/US 52/Meeting LRT Screen Two - Alternative B-3: US 78/US 52/East Bay BRT Screen Two - Alternative B-4: US 78/US 52/East Bay LRT Screen Two - Alternative C-1: US 176/US 52/Meeting BRT Screen Two - Alternative C-2: US 176/US 52/Meeting LRT Screen Two - Alternative C-3: US 176/US 52/East Bay BRT Screen Two - Alternative C-4: US 176/US 52/East Bay LRT Screen Two - Alternative D-1: Dorchester Rd/US 52/Meeting BRT Screen Two - Alternative D-2: Dorchester Rd/US 52/Meeting LRT Screen Two - Alternative D-3: Dorchester Rd/US 52/East Bay BRT Screen Two - Alternative D-4: Dorchester Rd /US 52/East Bay LRT 2.1 Proposed Station Typology In the Screen One Land Use Analysis, station locations were identified and assigned distinct station typologies with general characteristics based partially on FTA guidelines and partially on comparable transit studies. Proposed typology designations and target employment and population densities establish the general development dynamics that would support the identified fixed guideway facility. Appendix 6-H: Land Use and Economic Development Analysis Page 1

5 Station Designation Urban Core (Core-Urban Center) Major Activity Center (Center-Regional employment or destination draw) Station Characteristics Primary and/or significant center of economic and cultural activities, regional-scaled destination. Housing Mix: High-rise and mid-rise apartments and condos. Retail Character: Regional-serving destination retail, need for localserving retail. Significant center of economic and cultural activities, regional-scaled destination. Housing Mix: Mid-rise, low-rise, some high-rise and townhomes. Retail Character: Regional-serving destination retail, need for localserving and community-serving retail. Mode Supported: All Peak Transit Frequency: < 5 minutes Station Area Total Units Target: 8,000-30,000 Station Area Unit Target Density (du/acre): Station Area Total Jobs Target: 40, ,000 Mode Supported: Commuter rail, local/regional bus hub, and LRT Peak Transit Frequency: 5-30 minutes Station Area Total Units Target: 1,500-7,500 Station Area Unit Target Density (du/acre): 3-20 Station Area Total Jobs Target: 7,500 50,000 Transit Node (Village-Small center within the urban area) Special Use District (Destination-Significant attraction with a large, singular base i.e. Airport, Coliseum, etc.) Local center of economic and community activity. Housing Mix: Mid-rise, low-rise, townhomes, and small-lot single family. Retail Character: Community-serving and destination retail opportunity; need for local-serving retail. Local focus of economic and community activity without distinct center. Housing Mix: Limited residential potential, mid-rise and high-rise appropriate. Retail Character: Potential for community-serving and regionalserving retail but need to balance demands for access. *Note Station Area is defined as the area within ½-mile walk radius of station location. Mode Supported: Commuter rail, local/regional bus hub, and LRT Peak Transit Frequency: 5-30 minutes Station Area Total Units Target: 1,500-7,500 Station Area Unit Target Density (du/acre): 3-20 Station Area Total Jobs Target: 0 7,500 Mode Supported: LRT/street car, BRT, potential heavy rail Peak Transit Frequency: minutes Station Area Total Units Target: 2,000-5,000 Station Area Unit Target Density (du/acre): 4-10 Station Area Total Jobs Target: 7,500 50,000 Appendix 6-H: Land Use and Economic Development Analysis Page 2

6 2.2 Land Use Measure Population and Employment Using TAZ data from the Charleston Area Transportation Study (CHATS) Regional Transportation Model, corridor level population, population densities, households, and total employment were estimated for a half-mile radius around proposed stations based on FTA applied methodology to obtain current year (2010) and future year (2040) demographic data. FTA breakpoints for station area population densities, total employment served and Central Business District (CBD) parking supply are as follows: Table 3-1: FTA Station Area Development Breakpoints Station Area Development Parking Supply Rating Employment served by system 1 Avg. Population density (persons/square mile) 2 CBD typical cost per day 3 CBD spaces per employee 4 High > 220,000 > 15,000 > $16 < 0.2 Medium-High 140, ,999 9,600-15,000 $12 - $ Medium 70, ,999 5,760 9,599 $8 - $ Medium-Low 40,000-69,999 2,561 5,759 $4 - $ Low <40,000 < 2,560 < $4 > 0.5 Source: Final Interim Policy Guidance FTA Capital Investment Grant Program (2015) Legally Binding Affordability Restricted Housing FTA policy guidance defines a legally binding affordability restriction as a lien, deed of trust or other legal instrument attached to a property and/or housing structure that restricts the cost of housing units to be affordable to households at specified income levels for a defined period of time and requires that households at these income levels occupy these units. This definition, includes, but is not limited to, state or federally supported public housing, and housing owned by organizations dedicated to providing affordable housing. For the land use measure looking at existing affordable housing, FTA is seeking legally binding affordability restricted units to renters with incomes below 60 percent of the area median income and/or owners with incomes below the area median that are within ½ mile of station areas and in the counties through which the project travels. The FTA assigns a value to this measure by comparing (a) the percent of total units in the transit corridor (defined as 1/2 mile around each proposed station) that are legally binding affordability restricted housing to (b) the percent of total units in the counties in which the stations are located that are legally binding affordability restricted housing. 1 The employment breakpoints are based on the Institute for Transportation Engineer s document entitled A Toolbox for Alleviating Traffic Congestion, which suggests minimum non-residential development concentrations of 20 million square feet for frequent local bus service and 35 million square feet for light rail service. At 500 square feet per employee, these figures are equivalent to 40,000 and 70,000 employees, respectively. The total employment served includes employment along the entire line on which a no-transfer ride from the proposed project s stations can be reached. 2 The average population density breakpoints are based on the Institute for Transportation Engineer s document entitled A Toolbox for Alleviating Traffic Congestion, which suggests light rail and frequent bus service requires a minimum of 9 to 15 dwelling units per acre. This data has been used to inform the medium breakpoint shown. 3 CBD core (not fringe parking) 4 Average across CBD Appendix 6-H: Land Use and Economic Development Analysis Page 3

7 Table 3-2: FTA Affordable Housing Breakpoints Rating Proportion of legally binding affordability restricted housing in the project corridor compared to the proportion in the counties through which the project travels High > 2.50 Medium-High Medium Medium-Low Low < 1.10 Source: Final Interim Policy Guidance FTA Capital Investment Grant Program (2015) Data obtained from the National Housing Preservation Database (NHPD) as well as public housing inventory for the City of Charleston served as the prime sources for this analysis. Analysis was done for all affordable housing options available to moderate and low income individuals within the region and project corridor, as well as a more conservative measure for options that are available to individuals making at most 60 percent of the average median income (AMI) as identified by the NHPD program description Park-and-Ride Demand Park-and-ride facilities provide an opportunity for travelers to transfer between private automobiles and transit or between the single occupant vehicle (SOV) and other higher occupancy vehicle (HOV) modes such as carpool and vanpool. However, the facility can also support intermodal transfers between less typical modes including pedestrian, bicycle, paratransit, intercity bus transit, airport service, and other modes, depending on the facility s location, and system needs and opportunities available. 5 The current CARTA system serves six park-and-ride facilities (Table 3-3). Two of these facilities, Super K-Mart (North Charleston) and the Dorchester Village Shopping Center park-and-ride (Summerville) are located within the I-26 Study Area. In general, these lots are formal joint-use facilities used to accommodate commuter vehicles during the day. The system s park-and-ride lots are privately owned; however, there is an agreement between the owner of the lot and the transit agency for commuter parking use. While the joint-use lot model can be quickly implemented at minimal cost, the lot s sponsor (transit agency) has limited control of the lot. If conflict arises between the parking demand of transit users and that of customers and employees of the primary use, lot owners may choose to reduce the spaces available to commuters or prohibit commuter use of the lot entirely. Similarly, in the event that the demand for commuter parking is greater than the spaces available or in instances where demand for commuter parking might increase more than anticipated, it might be difficult for the transit agency to secure additional parking spaces. Another practical problem that joint-use parking lot operations may face is that of integrating transit vehicle access and circulation patterns into lot layout and design. Table 3-3: CARTA Park-and-Ride Facilities Park-and-Ride Location Facility Type Super K-Mart North Charleston Joint Use Facility Dorchester Village Shopping Center Summerville Joint Use Facility Citadel Mall West Ashley Joint Use Facility Wal-Mart (Folly Road) James Island Joint Use Facility Wal-Mart (Wando Crossing) Mount Pleasant Joint Use Facility Wal-Mart (Oakland Plantation) Mount Pleasant Joint Use Facility 5 Spillar, Robert J. (1997). Park-and-Ride Planning and Design Guidelines. Appendix 6-H: Land Use and Economic Development Analysis Page 4

8 In an effort to estimate the demand that might be generated for a new park-and-ride facility, baseline demand estimates were established for the two existing park-and-ride facilities located in the I-26 Study Area. The baseline demand established for the North Charleston park-and-ride is applied to the park-and-ride stations located along the US 78/52 and US 176/52 alternative alignments as well as the No Build alternative. The demand established for the Dorchester Village Shopping Center park-and-ride is applied to the park-and-ride facilities located along the proposed Dorchester Road alignment. Baseline demand factors were calculated using the modal split procedure which determines the market area population working in a defined activity center served by the park-and-ride 6. The general methodology utilized to obtain park-and-ride estimates is as follows: 1. Establish market population coverage area for existing park-and-ride facilities. The North Charleston Super K-Mart park-and-ride coverage area utilized a 5-mile buffer around the facility based on the average distance travelled by existing users obtained from collected origin-and-destination survey data and general observations of land use and roadway access to the facility. The Dorchester Village Shopping Center facility coverage area utilized a 2.5-mile buffer based on the average distance travelled by existing users obtained from collected origin-and-destination survey data and general observations of land use and roadway access to the facility. 2. Determine CBD workers originating from established coverage area using Longitudinal Employer- Household Dynamics (LEHD) analysis. 3. Obtain market area population using existing park-and-ride facilities (estimated from ridership data obtained from boarding and alighting count collection done for existing CARTA express bus service from each park-and-ride facility). The baseline estimates calculated for the North Charleston and Dorchester Road park-and-ride facilities are as follows: Existing PNR CBD Workers Ridership Demand Factor Super K-Mart PNR Dorchester Village PNR Applying the calculated demand factors to the working population accessing the CBD originating from within the market/coverage areas of each alignment s proposed park-and-ride facilities, the following estimated park-and-ride demand was generated*: CBD Workers Demand Estimate Alignment Factor No-Build I-26 Commuter Bus US 78/ US 176/ Dorchester Road/US *Note Demand estimates are calculated for the composite market area for all park-and-ride facilities identified in each alignment (aggregate demand) to avoid double counting. Estimated park-and-ride demand is distributed to individual station locations based on land use, roadway access to facility, station type, and general observation. 6 Nungesser, Lisa G. and Ledbetter, Nancy P. (1987). Procedures for Estimating Park-and-Ride Demand in Large Texas Cities. Appendix 6-H: Land Use and Economic Development Analysis Page 5

9 3 Screen Two Land Use Summary 3.1 Population, Housing, and Employment Alternative Land Area (sq. miles) Households Population 2010 (TAZ) 2040 (TAZ) (persons/sq. mile) Rating Employment Rating Households Population (persons/sq. mile) Rating Employment Rating A: No Build I-26 Commuter Bus ,317 15,357 3,999 Medium-Low 35,729 Low 8,635 17,374 4,524 Medium-Low 46,504 Medium-Low B-1/B-2: US 78/US 52/Meeting BRT/LRT ,126 28,861 2,257 Low 28,058 Low 16,995 37,511 2,933 Medium-Low 36,017 Low B-3/B-4: US 78/US 52/East Bay BRT/LRT ,317 26,857 1,986 Low 33,336 Low 16,365 36,019 2,664 Medium-Low 42,018 Medium-Low C-1/C-2: US 176/US 52/Meeting BRT/LRT ,652 27,989 2,462 Low 23,521 Low 15,786 35,046 3,082 Medium-Low 29,368 Low C-3/C-4: US 176/US 52/East Bay BRT/LRT ,843 25,985 2,146 Low 28,799 Low 15,156 33,554 2,771 Medium-Low 35,369 Low D-1/D-2: Dorchester Rd/US 52/Meeting BRT/LRT ,933 28,697 2,515 Low 18,730 Low 16,048 36,108 3,165 Medium-Low 23,189 Low D-3/D-4: Dorchester Rd/US 52/East Bay BRT/LRT ,124 26,693 2,199 Low 24,008 Low 15,418 34,616 2,851 Medium-Low 29,190 Low FTA Station Area Breakpoints Alternative Land Area (sq. miles) Population 2013 (Census) (persons/sq. mile) Rating A: No Build I-26 Commuter Bus ,452 4,284 Medium-Low Rating Station Area Development Employment served by system 1 Avg. Population density (persons/square mile) 1 B-1/B-2: US 78/US 52/Meeting BRT/LRT ,216 2,519 Low B-3/B-4: US 78/US 52/East Bay BRT/LRT ,205 2,308 Low C-1/C-2: US 176/US 52/Meeting BRT/LRT ,824 2,623 Medium-Low C-3/C-4: US 176/US 52/East Bay BRT/LRT ,835 2,546 Low D-1/D-2: Dorchester Rd/US 52/Meeting BRT/LRT ,283 2,654 Medium-Low D-3/D-4: Dorchester Rd/US 52/East Bay BRT/LRT ,272 2,411 Low High > 220,000 > 15,000 Medium- High 140, ,999 9,600-15,000 Medium 70, ,999 5,760 9,599 Medium-Low 40,000-69,999 2,561 5,759 Low <40,000 < 2,560 Appendix 6-H: Land Use and Economic Development Analysis Page 6

10 3.2 Affordable Housing Alternative Transit Corridor County Total Housing Units LBAH* Percent [A] Housing Units LBAH* Percent [B] Ratio [A]/[B] A: No Build I-26 Commuter Bus 7, % 245,906 4, % 3.15 High B-1/B-2: US 78/US 52/Meeting BRT/LRT 14, % 301,477 5, % 4.61 High B-3/B-4: US 78/US 52/East Bay BRT/LRT 13, % 301,477 5, % 4.42 High C-1/C-2: US 176/US 52/Meeting BRT/LRT 13, % 245,906 4, % 5.64 High C-3/C-4: US 176/US 52/East Bay BRT/LRT 13, % 245,906 4, % 5.45 High D-1/D-2: Dorchester Rd/US 52/Meeting BRT/LRT 13, % 227,196 4, % 3.60 High D-3/D-4: Dorchester Rd/US 52/East Bay BRT/LRT 12, % 227,196 4, % 3.35 High *Note - LBAH (Legally Binding Affordable Housing) includes afforable housing units generated from National Housing Preservation Database available to individuals making at or below 60% AMI. Rating Rating FTA Affordable Housing Breakpoints Proportion of legally binding affordability restricted housing in the project corridor compared to the proportion in the counties through which the project travels High > 2.50 Medium-High Medium Medium-Low Low < Park-and-Ride Demand Estimates PNR Demand US 78/52 Estimate 5th & Berlin G. Myers 342 US 78 & Royle 147 US 78 & College Park 147 Rivers & Otranto 342 Total Estimated Demand 977 PNR Demand US 176/52 Estimate 5th & Berlin G. Myers 258 US 78 & Royle 111 US 78 & College Park 111 Rivers & Otranto 258 Total Estimated Demand 738 PNR Demand Dorchester Rd/US 52 Estimate Old Trolley & Miles Jamison 65 Old Trolley & Dorchester 65 Dorchester & Ash. Phosphate 65 Total Estimated Demand 196 Park-and-ride demand estimates were distributed between station locations based on land use, roadway access, proposed station types, and general observation. Appendix 6-H: Land Use and Economic Development Analysis Page 7

11 3.4 Alternative A: No-Build I-26 Commuter Bus Appendix 6-H: Land Use and Economic Development Analysis Page 8

12 Land Use: Station Area Development 2010 Land Area (sq. miles) Households Population (persons/sq. mile) Employment Households Population Stop A Azalea Square P&R ,474 1,878 1, ,730 Stop B Boeing , Stop C - G A: No Build I-26 Commuter Bus Meeting & Spring Meeting & John Calhoun & St. Philip Calhoun & Jonathan Lucas Courtenay & Bee ,731 13,869 6,110 32,447 7,920 15,631 Total Station Area ,317 15,357 3,999 Medium-Low 35,729 Low 8,635 17,374 4,524 Medium-Low 46,504 Medium-Low 2040 (persons/sq. mile) Employment 2,204 2, ,528 6,886 41,669 Development Potential A: No Build I-26 Commuter Bus % Pop. Change % Emp. Change Planning studies or developments that may impact station location Stop A Azalea Square P&R 17.37% 44.73% Summerville Vision Plan: Identified as Reinvest & Infill District. Increased access from proposed Bear Island Road extension. Adjacent to Nexton development: 4,500 acres; 13,000 housing units; 6 million sq. ft. commercial use. Stop B Boeing -7.14% 49.76% Boeing campus expansion. Stop C - G Meeting & Spring Meeting & John Calhoun & St. Philip 12.70% 28.42% Calhoun & Jonathan Lucas Courtenay & Bee Courier Square Mixed-Use development: ~12 acres; Phase 1 (Meeting St. & Columbus St.). Horizon District Redevelopment Master Plan: 22 acre development. Appendix 6-H: Land Use and Economic Development Analysis Page 9

13 3.5 Alternative B-1/B-2: US 78/ US 52/Meeting BRT/LRT Appendix 6-H: Land Use and Economic Development Analysis Page 10

14 Land Use: Station Area Development B-1/B-2: US 78/US 52/Meeting - BRT/LRT Station A - B Development Potential B-1/B-2: US 78/US 52/Meeting - BRT/LRT % Pop. Change % Emp. Change Planning studies or developments that may impact station location Summerville Vision Plan: Downtown District Plan including The Dorchester Main & Richardson Mixed-Use Project and Hutchinson Square Revitalization Project % 30.66% Station A - B Adjacent to Nexton development: 4,500 acres; 13,000 housing units; 6 million 5th & Berlin G. Myers sq. ft. commercial use. Station C US 78 & Royle 7.76% 38.71% Summerville Vision Plan: Included in parks and trails network - US 78 upgrade. Station D US 78 & College Park 63.70% 63.48% Ingleside Mixed-Use development. Station E Trident Health/CSU 77.39% 85.29% Ingleside Mixed-Use development. Station F Rivers & Otranto 15.41% 36.56% Station G Rivers & Ashley Phosphate 11.39% 32.68% Station H Rivers & Stokes 6.09% 26.86% Station I Rivers & Remount 12.85% 28.88% Station J - K Station L Station M Station N Station O - R Main & Richardson Rivers & Mall Rivers & Durant 45.12% 11.80% Rivers & McMillan 34.15% 12.92% US 52 & Stromboli 44.95% 14.83% Meeting & Milford % 62.78% Meeting & Mt. Pleasant Meeting & Romney Meeting & Huger Meeting & Line 2010 Land Area (sq. miles) Households Population (persons/sq. mile) Employment Households Population 5th & Berlin G. Myers ,001 2,448 1,733 3,601 1,489 3,444 Station C US 78 & Royle , ,000 Station D US 78 & College Park ,249 Station E Trident Health/CSU , ,389 Station F Rivers & Otranto ,278 2,902 1,001 1,147 2,629 Station G Rivers & Ashley Phosphate , Station H Rivers & Stokes ,511 1,925 1, ,603 Station I Rivers & Remount ,393 1,775 2, ,572 Station J - K Rivers & Mall Rivers & Durant ,208 3,002 1,952 4,389 1,937 4,356 Station L Rivers & McMillan ,115 2,820 3,592 1,857 1,675 3,783 Station M US 52 & Stromboli ,455 1, ,109 Station N Meeting & Milford ,483 Station O - R Meeting & Mt. Pleasant Meeting & Romney Meeting & Huger Meeting & Line ,724 10,461 5,257 5,662 5,940 12,103 Total Station Area ,126 28,861 2,257 Low 28,058 Low 16,995 37,511 2,933 Medium-Low 36,017 Low 15.70% 20.51% 2040 (persons/sq. mile) Employment 2,437 4,706 1, , ,769 2,557 3,349 1,367 1,009 4,133 2,042 2,385 2,003 3,097 2,832 4,907 4,819 2,097 2,687 1,123 1,889 1,579 6,082 6,823 Adjacent to Mixson Mixed-Use development: 43 acres; 650 dwelling units. North Charleston Regional Intermodal Facility. Neck Area Plan: Redevelopment area; increased access and transit node development. Neck Area Plan & Lowcountry Alliance for Model Communities Revitalization Plan: Redevelopment area; increased access and transit node development. Neck Area Plan & Lowcountry Alliance for Model Communities Revitalization Plan: Redevelopment area; increased access and transit node development. Magnolia development: 182 acres; 3,500 housing units; 1.3 million sq. ft. commercial. Upper Peninsula Initiative: Mixed-use development, increased pedestrian access and connectivity. Upper : increased densities, mixed-use development. Peninsula Mobility Report: parking consolidation, pedestrian access and connectivity. Courier Square Mixed-Use development: ~12 acres; Phase 1 (Meeting St. & Columbus St.). Horizon District Redevelopment Master Plan: 22 acre development. Appendix 6-H: Land Use and Economic Development Analysis Page 11

15 3.6 Alternative B-3/B-4: US 78/US 52/ East Bay BRT/LRT Appendix 6-H: Land Use and Economic Development Analysis Page 12

16 Station Area Development Statistics B-3/B-4: US 78/US 52/East Bay - BRT/LRT Station A - B Development Potential B-3/B-4: US 78/US 52/East Bay - BRT/LRT Station A - B Main & Richardson 5th & Berlin G. Myers % Pop. Change % Emp. Change 40.66% 30.66% Planning studies or developments that may impact station location Summerville Vision Plan: Downtown District Plan including The Dorchester Mixed-Use Project and Hutchinson Square Revitalization Project. Adjacent to Nexton development: 4,500 acres; 13,000 housing units; 6 million sq. ft. commercial use. Summerville Vision Plan: Included in parks and trails network - US 78 US 78 & Royle 7.76% 38.71% Station C upgrade. Station D US 78 & College Park 63.70% 63.48% Ingleside Mixed-Use development. Station E Trident Health/CSU 77.39% 85.29% Ingleside Mixed-Use development. Station F Rivers & Otranto 15.41% 36.56% Station G Rivers & Ashley Ph % 32.68% Station H Rivers & Stokes 6.09% 26.86% Station I Rivers & Remount 12.85% 28.88% Station J - K Station L Station M Station N Station O - R Main & Richardson Rivers & Mall Rivers & Durant 45.12% 11.80% Rivers & McMillan 34.15% 12.92% US 52 & Stromboli 44.95% 14.83% Meeting & Milford % 62.78% Meeting & Mt. Pleasant East Bay & Romney East Bay & Huger East Bay & Columbus East Bay & Calhoun 2010 Land Area (sq. miles) Households Population (persons/sq. mile) Employment Households Population 5th & Berlin G. Myers ,001 2,448 1,733 3,601 1,489 3,444 Station C US 78 & Royle , ,000 Station D US 78 & College Park ,249 Station E Trident Health/CSU , ,389 Station F Rivers & Otranto ,278 2,902 1,001 1,147 2,629 Station G Rivers & Ashley Phosphate , Station H Rivers & Stokes ,511 1,925 1, ,603 Station I Rivers & Remount ,393 1,775 2, ,572 Station J - K Rivers & Mall Rivers & Durant ,208 3,002 1,952 4,389 1,937 4,356 Station L Rivers & McMillan ,115 2,820 3,592 1,857 1,675 3,783 Station M US 52 & Stromboli ,455 1, ,109 Station N Meeting & Milford ,483 Station O - R Meeting & Mt. Pleasant East Bay & Romney East Bay & Huger East Bay & Columbus East Bay & Calhoun ,915 8,457 3,109 10,940 5,310 10,611 Total Station Area ,317 26,857 1,986 Low 33,336 Low 16,365 36,019 2,664 Medium-Low 42,018 Medium-Low 25.46% 17.22% 2040 (persons/sq. mile) Employment 2,437 4,706 1, , ,769 2,557 3,349 1,367 1,009 4,133 2,042 2,385 2,003 3,097 2,832 4,907 4,819 2,097 2,687 1,123 1,889 1,579 3,901 12,824 Adjacent to Mixson Mixed-Use development: 43 acres; 650 dwelling units. North Charleston Regional Intermodal Facility. Neck Area Plan: Redevelopment area; increased access and transit node development. Neck Area Plan & Lowcountry Alliance for Model Communities Revitalization Plan: Redevelopment area; increased access and transit node development. Neck Area Plan & Lowcountry Alliance for Model Communities Revitalization Plan: Redevelopment area; increased access and transit node development. Magnolia development: 182 acres; 3,500 housing units; 1.3 million sq. ft. commercial. Upper Peninsula Initiative: Mixed-use development, increased pedestrian access and connectivity. Upper : increased densities, mixed-use development. Peninsula Mobility Report: parking consolidation, pedestrian access and connectivity. Courier Square Mixed-Use development: ~12 acres; Phase 1 (Meeting St. & Columbus St.). Horizon District Redevelopment Master Plan: 22 acre development. Appendix 6-H: Land Use and Economic Development Analysis Page 13

17 3.7 Alternative C-1/C-2: US 176/US 52/ Meeting BRT/LRT Appendix 6-H: Land Use and Economic Development Analysis Page 14

18 Station Area Development Statistics C-1/C-2: US 176/US 52/Meeting - BRT/LRT Development Potential C-1/C-2: US 176/US 52/Meeting - BRT/LRT % Pop. Change % Emp. Change Planning studies or developments that may impact station location Station A US 176 & US 17A 53.65% % Cane Bay development: 4,500 acres; 10,000 housing units. Station B Station C US 176 & Old Mt. Holly Rd. 5.80% 59.01% US 176 & Central Ave. 9.26% 17.05% Station D Rivers & Otranto 15.41% 36.56% Station E Rivers & Ashley Phosphate 11.39% 32.68% Station F Rivers & Stokes 6.09% 26.86% Station G Rivers & Remount 12.85% 28.88% Station H - I Station J Station K Station L Station M - P Rivers & Mall Rivers & Durant 45.12% 11.80% Rivers & McMillan 34.15% 12.92% US 52 & Stromboli 44.95% 14.83% Meeting & Milford % 62.78% Meeting & Mt. Pleasant Meeting & Romney Meeting & Huger Meeting & Line 2010 Land Area (sq. miles) Households Population (persons/sq. mile) Employment Households Population Station A US 176 & US 17A Station B US 176 & Old Mt. Holly Rd ,516 1, ,604 Station C US 176 & Central Ave ,986 2, ,170 Station D Rivers & Otranto ,278 2,902 1,001 1,147 2,629 Station E Rivers & Ashley Phosphate , Station F Rivers & Stokes ,511 1,925 1, ,603 Station G Rivers & Remount ,393 1,775 2, ,572 Station H - I Rivers & Mall Rivers & Durant ,208 3,002 1,949 4,389 1,937 4,356 Station J Rivers & McMillan ,115 2,820 3,592 1,857 1,675 3,783 Station K US 52 & Stromboli ,455 1, ,109 Station L Meeting & Milford ,483 Station M - P Meeting & Mt. Pleasant Meeting & Romney Meeting & Huger Meeting & Line ,724 10,461 5,257 5,662 5,940 12,103 Total Station Area ,652 27,989 2,462 Low 23,521 Low 15,786 35,046 3,082 Medium-Low 29,368 Low 15.70% 20.51% 2040 (persons/sq. mile) Employment 1, , , ,349 1,367 1,009 4,133 2,042 2,385 2,003 3,097 2,828 4,907 4,819 2,097 2,687 1,123 1,889 1,579 6,082 6,823 Carnes Crossroads development: 2,300 acres; 4,300 5,300 housing units. Carnes Crossroads development: 2,300 acres; 4,300 5,300 housing units. Adjacent to Mixson Mixed-Use development: 43 acres; 650 dwelling units. North Charleston Regional Intermodal Facility. Neck Area Plan: Redevelopment area; increased access and transit node development. Neck Area Plan & Lowcountry Alliance for Model Communities Revitalization Plan: Redevelopment area; increased access and transit node development. Neck Area Plan & Lowcountry Alliance for Model Communities Revitalization Plan: Redevelopment area; increased access and transit node development. Magnolia development: 182 acres; 3,500 housing units; 1.3 million sq. ft. commercial. Upper Peninsula Initiative: Mixed-use development, increased pedestrian access and connectivity. Upper : increased densities, mixed-use development. Peninsula Mobility Report: parking consolidation, pedestrian access and connectivity. Courier Square Mixed-Use development: ~12 acres; Phase 1 (Meeting St. & Columbus St.). Horizon District Redevelopment Master Plan: 22 acre development. Appendix 6-H: Land Use and Economic Development Analysis Page 15

19 3.8 Alternative C-3/C-4: US 176/US 52/ East Bay BRT/LRT Appendix 6-H: Land Use and Economic Development Analysis Page 16

20 Station Area Development Statistics C-3/C-4: US 176/US 52/East Bay - BRT/LRT Development Potential C-3/C-4: US 176/US 52/East Bay - BRT/LRT 2010 Land Area (sq. miles) Households Population (persons/sq. mile) Employment Households Population Station A US 176 & US 17A Station B US 176 & Old Mt. Holly Rd ,516 1, ,604 Station C US 176 & Central Ave ,986 2, ,170 Station D Rivers & Otranto ,278 2,902 1,001 1,147 2,629 Station E Rivers & Ashley Phosphate , Station F Rivers & Stokes ,511 1,925 1, ,603 Station G Rivers & Remount ,393 1,775 2, ,572 Station H - I Rivers & Mall Rivers & Durant ,208 3,002 1,952 4,389 1,937 4,356 Station J Rivers & McMillan ,115 2,820 3,592 1,857 1,675 3,783 Station K US 52 & Stromboli ,455 1, ,109 Station L Meeting & Milford ,483 Station M - Q Meeting & Mt. Pleasant East Bay & Romney East Bay & Huger East Bay & Columbus East Bay & Calhoun ,915 8,457 3,109 10,940 5,310 10,611 Total Station Area ,843 25,985 2,146 Low 28,799 Low 15,156 33,554 2,771 Medium-Low 35,369 Low % Pop. Change % Emp. Change Planning studies or developments that may impact station location Station A US 176 & US 17A 53.65% % Cane Bay development: 4,500 acres; 10,000 housing units. Station B US 176 & Old Mt. Holly Rd. 5.80% 59.01% Station C US 176 & Central Ave. 9.26% 17.05% Station D Rivers & Otranto 15.41% 36.56% Station E Rivers & Ashley Phosphate 11.39% 32.68% Station F Rivers & Stokes 6.09% 26.86% 2040 (persons/sq. mile) Employment 1, , , ,349 1,367 1,009 4,133 2,042 2,385 2,003 3,097 2,832 4,907 4,819 2,097 2,687 1,123 1,889 1,579 3,901 12,824 Carnes Crossroads development: 2,300 acres; 4,300 5,300 housing units. Carnes Crossroads development: 2,300 acres; 4,300 5,300 housing units. Station G Rivers & Remount 12.85% 28.88% Rivers & Mall 45.12% 11.80% Station H - I Rivers & Durant Station J Rivers & McMillan 34.15% 12.92% Station K US 52 & Stromboli 44.95% 14.83% Station L Meeting & Milford % 62.78% Meeting & Mt. Pleasant East Bay & Romney Station M - Q East Bay & Huger 25.46% 17.22% East Bay & Columbus East Bay & Calhoun Adjacent to Mixson Mixed-Use development: 43 acres; 650 dwelling units. North Charleston Regional Intermodal Facility. Neck Area Plan: Redevelopment area; increased access and transit node development. Neck Area Plan & Lowcountry Alliance for Model Communities Revitalization Plan: Redevelopment area; increased access and transit node development. Neck Area Plan & Lowcountry Alliance for Model Communities Revitalization Plan: Redevelopment area; increased access and transit node development. Magnolia development: 182 acres; 3,500 housing units; 1.3 million sq. ft. commercial. Upper Peninsula Initiative: Mixed-use development, increased pedestrian access and connectivity. Upper : increased densities, mixed-use development. Peninsula Mobility Report: parking consolidation, pedestrian access and connectivity. Courier Square Mixed-Use development: ~12 acres; Phase 1 (Meeting St. & Columbus St.). Horizon District Redevelopment Master Plan: 22 acre development. Appendix 6-H: Land Use and Economic Development Analysis Page 17

21 3.9 Alternative D-1/D-2: Dorchester Rd/US 52/ Meeting BRT/LRT Appendix 6-H: Land Use and Economic Development Analysis Page 18

22 Station Area Development Statistics 2010 Land Area D-1/D-2: Dorchester/US 52/Meeting - BRT/LRT (sq. miles) Households Population (persons/sq. mile) Employment Households Population Station A Main & Richardson ,369 1,744 2, ,714 Station B Old Trolley & Miles Jamison ,183 2, ,496 Station C Old Trolley & Dorchester ,894 2,413 1, ,320 Station D Dorchester & Wescott ,526 1, ,191 Station E Dorchester & Ash Phosphate ,478 1, ,872 Station F Dorchester & W. Hill Station G Dorchester & Michaux ,100 2, ,170 Station H Dorchester & Montague ,798 2, ,129 Station I Dorchester & Leeds , Station J Dorchester & Rivers ,075 2,657 3,385 1,951 1,774 3,933 Station K US 52 & Stromboli ,455 1, ,109 Station L Meeting & Milford ,483 Station M - P Development Potential D-1/D-2: Dorchester/US 52/Meeting - BRT/LRT % Pop. Change % Emp. Change Planning studies or developments that may impact station location Station A Main & Richardson 25.20% 23.31% Summerville Vision Plan: Hutchinson Square. Station B Old Trolley & Miles Jamison 14.34% 50.33% Station C Old Trolley & Dorchester 22.49% 33.21% Summerville Vision Plan: Oakbrook Mixed Use Development. Station D Dorchester & Wescott 43.58% 74.11% Station E Dorchester & Ash Phosphate 26.66% 21.85% Station F Dorchester & W. Hill 12.80% 13.50% Station G Dorchester & Michaux 3.33% 28.62% Station H Dorchester & Montague 18.41% 12.27% Station I Dorchester & Leeds 2.91% 24.36% Station J Station K Station L Station M - P Meeting & Mt. Pleasant Meeting & Romney Meeting & Huger Meeting & Line ,724 10,461 5,257 5,662 5,940 12,103 Total Station Area ,933 28,697 2,515 Low 18,730 Low 16,048 36,108 3,165 Medium-Low 23,189 Low Dorchester & Rivers 48.02% 13.22% US 52 & Stromboli 44.95% 14.83% Meeting & Milford % 62.78% Meeting & Mt. Pleasant Meeting & Romney Meeting & Huger Meeting & Line 15.70% 20.51% 2040 (persons/sq. mile) Employment 2,183 3,259 3, ,955 1,388 2, , , , , ,854 5,010 2,209 2,687 1,123 1,889 1,579 6,082 6,823 Neck Area Plan & Lowcountry Alliance for Model Communities Revitalization Plan: Redevelopment area; increased access and transit node development. Neck Area Plan & Lowcountry Alliance for Model Communities Revitalization Plan: Redevelopment area; increased access and transit node development. Magnolia development: 182 acres; 3,500 housing units; 1.3 million sq. ft. commercial. Upper Peninsula Initiative: Mixed-use development, increased pedestrian access and connectivity. Upper : increased densities, mixed-use development. Peninsula Mobility Report: parking consolidation, pedestrian access and connectivity. Courier Square Mixed-Use development: ~12 acres; Phase 1 (Meeting St. & Columbus St.). Horizon District Redevelopment Master Plan: 22 acre development. Appendix 6-H: Land Use and Economic Development Analysis Page 19

23 3.10 Alternative D-3/D-4: Dorchester/US 52/ East Bay BRT/LRT Appendix 6-H: Land Use and Economic Development Analysis Page 20

24 Station Area Development Statistics 2010 Land Area D-3/D-4: Dorchester/US 52/East Bay - BRT/LRT (sq. miles) Households Population (persons/sq. mile) Employment Households Population Station A Main & Richardson ,369 1,744 2, ,714 Station B Old Trolley & Miles Jamison ,183 2, ,496 Station C Old Trolley & Dorchester ,894 2,413 1, ,320 Station D Dorchester & Wescott ,526 1, ,191 Station E Dorchester & Ash Phosphate ,478 1, ,872 Station F Dorchester & W. Hill Station G Dorchester & Michaux ,100 2, ,170 Station H Dorchester & Montague ,798 2, ,129 Station I Dorchester & Leeds , Station J Dorchester & Rivers ,075 2,657 3,385 1,951 1,774 3,933 Station K US 52 & Stromboli ,455 1, ,109 Station L Meeting & Milford ,483 Station M - Q Meeting & Mt. Pleasant East Bay & Romney East Bay & Huger East Bay & Columbus East Bay & Calhoun ,915 8,457 3,109 10,940 5,310 10,611 Total Station Area ,124 26,693 2,199 Low 24,008 Low 15,418 34,616 2,851 Medium-Low 29,190 Low Development Potential D-3/D-4: Dorchester/US 52/East Bay - BRT/LRT % Pop. Change % Emp. Change Planning studies or developments that may impact station location Station A Main & Richardson 25.20% 23.31% Summerville Vision Plan: Hutchinson Square. Station B Old Trolley & Miles Jamison 14.34% 50.33% Station C Old Trolley & Dorchester 22.49% 33.21% Summerville Vision Plan: Oakbrook Mixed Use Development. Station D Dorchester & Wescott 43.58% 74.11% Station E Dorchester & Ash Phosphate 26.66% 21.85% Station F Dorchester & W. Hill 12.80% 13.50% Station G Dorchester & Michaux 3.33% 28.62% Station H Dorchester & Montague 18.41% 12.27% 2040 (persons/sq. mile) Employment 2,183 3,259 3, ,955 1,388 2, , , , , ,854 5,010 2,209 2,687 1,123 1,889 1,579 3,901 12,824 Station I Dorchester & Leeds 2.91% 24.36% Station J Dorchester & Rivers 48.02% 13.22% Station K US 52 & Stromboli 44.95% 14.83% Station L Meeting & Milford % 62.78% Meeting & Mt. Pleasant East Bay & Romney Station M - Q East Bay & Huger 25.46% 17.22% East Bay & Columbus East Bay & Calhoun Neck Area Plan & Lowcountry Alliance for Model Communities Revitalization Plan: Redevelopment area; increased access and transit node development. Neck Area Plan & Lowcountry Alliance for Model Communities Revitalization Plan: Redevelopment area; increased access and transit node development. Magnolia development: 182 acres; 3,500 housing units; 1.3 million sq. ft. commercial. Upper Peninsula Initiative: Mixed-use development, increased pedestrian access and connectivity. Upper : increased densities, mixed-use development. Peninsula Mobility Report: parking consolidation, pedestrian access and connectivity. Courier Square Mixed-Use development: ~12 acres; Phase 1 (Meeting St. & Columbus St.). Horizon District Redevelopment Master Plan: 22 acre development. Appendix 6-H: Land Use and Economic Development Analysis Page 21

25 4 Economic Development Potential Summary Transit Supportive Plans and Policies Alt B-1: US 78/Mtg BRT Alt B-3: US 78/EB BRT Alt C-1: US 176/Mtg BRT Alt C-3: US 176/EB BRT Alt D-1: Dorch/Mtg BRT Alt D-3: Dorch/EB BRT Alt B-2: US 78/Mtg LRT Alt B-4: US 78/EB LRT Alt C-2: US 176/Mtg LRT Alt C-4: US 176/EB LRT Alt D-2: Dorch/Mtg LRT Alt D-4: Dorch/EB LRT Growth Management: Concentration of development around established activity centers and regional transit High High Medium-High Medium-High Medium-High Medium-High Land conservation and management Medium Medium Medium-Low Medium-Low High High Transit Supportive Corridor Policies Plans and policies to increase corridor and station area development Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Plans and policies to enhance transit-friendly character of corridor and station area development Nexton/Ingleside/Mixson/Ma gnolia/courier Square ; City of Charleston Peninsula Mobility Report; Neck Area Plan Nexton/Ingleside/Mixson/ Magnolia/Courier Square; City of Charleston Peninsula Mobility Report; Neck Area Plan Cane Bay/Carnes Crossing/Mixson/Magnolia/Co urier Square; City of Charleston Peninsula Mobility Report; Neck Area Plan Cane Bay/Carnes Crossing/Mixson/Magnolia/ Courier Square; City of Charleston Peninsula Mobility Report; Neck Area Plan Oakbrook/Courier Square/Wescott/Magnolia; City of Charleston Peninsula Mobility Report; Neck Area Plan Oakbrook/Courier Square/Wescott/Magnolia; City of Charleston Peninsula Mobility Report; Neck Area Plan Plans to improve pedestrian facilities including facilities for persons with disabilities Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Parking policies Supportive Zoning Regulations Near Transit Station Zoning ordinances that support increased development density in transit station areas Zoning ordinances that enhance transit-oriented character of station area development and pedestrian access Zoning allowances for reduced parking and traffic mitigation Tools to Implement Land Use Policies Outreach to government agencies and the community in support of transit supportive planning Regulatory and financial incentives to promote transit-supportive development Efforts to engage the development community in station area planning and transitsupportive development City of Charleston Peninsula Mobility Report Yes - PDD zoning (Mixson/Horizon Village/Ingleside) Upper Peninsula Initiative ( Upper Peninsula Initiative ( City of Charleston Peninsula Mobility Report Yes - PDD zoning (Mixson/Horizon Village/Ingleside) Upper Peninsula Initiative ( Upper Peninsula Initiative ( City of Charleston Peninsula Mobility Report Yes - PDD zoning (Mixson/Horizon Village) Upper Peninsula Initiative ( Upper Peninsula Initiative ( City of Charleston Peninsula Mobility Report Yes - PDD zoning (Mixson/Horizon Village) Upper Peninsula Initiative ( Upper Peninsula Initiative ( City of Charleston Peninsula Mobility Report No - Dorchester Rd. Overlay District (restrictive) Upper Peninsula Initiative ( Upper Peninsula Initiative ( City of Charleston Peninsula Mobility Report No - Dorchester Rd. Overlay District (restrictive) Upper Peninsula Initiative ( Upper Peninsula Initiative ( Appendix 6-H: Land Use and Economic Development Analysis Page 22

26 Performance and Impacts of Land Use Policies Alt B-1: US 78/Mtg BRT Alt B-3: US 78/EB BRT Alt C-1: US 176/Mtg BRT Alt C-3: US 176/EB BRT Alt D-1: Dorch/Mtg BRT Alt D-3: Dorch/EB BRT Alt B-2: US 78/Mtg LRT Alt B-4: US 78/EB LRT Alt C-2: US 176/Mtg LRT Alt C-4: US 176/EB LRT Alt D-2: Dorch/Mtg LRT Alt D-4: Dorch/EB LRT Performance of Land Use Policies Demonstrated cases of developments affected by transit-supportive policies Yes - Mixson Yes - Mixson Yes - Mixson Yes - Mixson Station area development proposals and status Potential impact of Transit Project on Regional Land Use Adaptability of station area land for development Medium-High Medium-High High High Low Low Corridor economic environment High High Medium-High Medium-High Low Low Tools to Maintain or increase the Share of Affordable Housing Alt B-1: US 78/Mtg BRT Alt B-3: US 78/EB BRT Alt C-1: US 176/Mtg BRT Alt C-3: US 176/EB BRT Alt D-1: Dorch/Mtg BRT Alt D-3: Dorch/EB BRT Alt B-2: US 78/Mtg LRT Alt B-4: US 78/EB LRT Alt C-2: US 176/Mtg LRT Alt C-4: US 176/EB LRT Alt D-2: Dorch/Mtg LRT Alt D-4: Dorch/EB LRT Evaluation of corridor-specific affordable housing needs and supply Plans and polices to preserve and increase affordable housing in the region and/or corridor Medium-Low Medium-Low Medium-Low Medium-Low Medium-Low Medium-Low Adopted financing tools and strategies targeted to preserving and increasing affordable housing in the region and/or corridor Low Low Low Low Low Low Evidence of public sector and developer activity to preserve and increase affordable housing in the corridor Extent to which plans and policies account for long-term affordability and needs of the very-and extremely-low income households in the corridor Low Low Low Low Low Low Appendix 6-H: Land Use and Economic Development Analysis Page 23

27 5 Station Statistics: Household, Population and Employment (2010 & 2040 TAZ) Station Location Alternative Served Households (2010) Population (2010) Employment (2010) Households (2040) Population (2040) Employment (2040) Azalea Square A 582 1,474 1, ,730 2,307 Boeing & Aviation Ave A , ,528 Spring St & Meeting St A 2,768 6,065 4,531 3,362 6,841 5,187 John & Meeting St A 2,638 5,369 2,443 3,135 6,103 11,346 St Phillip & Calhoun A 3,242 6,406 13,002 3,406 6,526 13,658 Johnathan Lucas St & Calhoun A 2,054 4,106 17,726 2,182 4,346 25,559 Courtenay & Bee A 1,538 3,218 16,747 1,798 3,685 24,766 E. 5th N. St & Berlin G Myers B1-B ,405 1, ,134 2,477 US 78 & Royle Rd B1-B , US 78 & College Park Rd B1-B , Trident Health & CSU B1-B , ,389 2,557 US 176 & 17A C1-C US 176 & Old Mt Holly Rd C1-C , , US 176 & Central Ave C1-C , , Main St & Richardson Ave B1-B4, D1-D ,369 2, ,714 3,259 Old Trolley Rd & Miles Jamison Rd D1-D , , Old Trolley Rd & Dorchester Rd D1-D ,895 1, ,320 1,388 Dorchester Rd & Wescott Blvd D1-D , , Dorchester Rd & Ashley Phosphate D1-D , , Dorchester Rd & West Hill Blvd D1-D Dorchester Rd & Michaux Parkway D1-D , , Dorchester Rd & W. Montague Ave D1-D , , Dorchester Rd & Leeds Ave D1-D , ,854 Dorchester Rd & Rivers Ave D1-D4 1,075 2,657 1,951 1,774 3,933 2,209 Rivers Ave & Otranto Blvd B1-B4, C1-C ,278 1,001 1,147 2,629 1,367 Rivers Ave & Ashley Phosphate Rd B1-B4, C1-C , ,133 Rivers Ave & Stokes Ave B1-B4, C1-C ,511 1, ,603 2,385 Rivers Ave & Remount Rd B1-B4, C1-C ,393 2, ,572 3,097 Rivers Ave & Mall Dr B1-B4, C1-C ,795 2, ,798 3,287 Rivers Ave & Durant Ave B1-B4, C1-C ,260 1,521 1,175 2,614 1,722 Rivers Ave & McMillian Ave B1-B4, C1-C4 1,115 2,820 1,857 1,675 3,783 2,097 US 52 & Stromboli Ave B1-B4, C1-C4, D1-D , ,109 1,123 Meeting St & Milford St B1-B4, C1-C4, D1-D ,483 1,579 Meeting St & Mt Pleasant St B1-B4, C1-C4, D1-D4 1,078 2,411 1,550 1,324 2,744 2,068 Meeting St & Romney St B1-B2, C1-C2, D1-D2 1,411 3,200 2,047 1,937 4,029 2,533 Meeting St & Huger St B1-B2, C1-C2, D1-D2 1,834 4,153 1,727 2,652 5,395 2,160 Meeting St & Line St B1-B2, C1-C2, D1-D2 2,786 6,164 3,307 3,492 7,089 3,782 East Bay & Romney St B3-B4, C3-C4, D3-D ,063 1,658 1,298 2,781 2,134 East Bay & Huger St B3-B4, C3-C4, D3-D4 1,054 2,496 1,239 1,709 3,555 1,621 East Bay & Columbus B3-B4, C3-C4, D3-D4 1,373 3,160 2,229 1,773 3,617 2,634 East Bay & Calhoun B3-B4, C3-C4, D3-D4 1,270 2,394 6,938 1,645 3,056 7,771 Nexton , , Azalea & King St , ,099 1,135 Braswell & US ,736 1,505 Meeting & Brigade + 1,248 2,837 1,831 1,581 3,296 2,369 Source: CHATS Regional Transportation Model (2015) + Additional station locations identified for consideration (generated from stakeholder meetings). Appendix 6-H: Land Use and Economic Development Analysis Page 24