Georgia bicycle and pedestrian safety action plan

Georgia Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

Table of Contents
I. INTRODUCTION & PLANNING PROCESS ...................................................................... 3 II. GOALS & OBJECTIVES....................................................................................................... 5 III. EXISTING CONDITIONS REPORT ................................................................................. 6
1. Bicycle and Pedestrian Laws ............................................................................................... 6 2. Bicycle and Pedestrian Funding Sources ............................................................................ 8 3. Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities ....................................................................................... 13 4. Engineering, Planning and Design Policies ....................................................................... 15 5. Georgia Bicycle and Pedestrian Crash Analysis Report.................................................... 19 IV. POLICY & NON-ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS............................................ 31 V. SYSTEMWIDE ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONSError! Bookmark not defined. VI. SITE-SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS FOR HIGH CRASH AREASError! Bookmark not defined.
Page 2 of 40

I. INTRODUCTION & PLANNING PROCESS

Purpose

Passed in 2005, the federal transportation act, SAFETEA-LU, requires every state to develop Strategic Highway Safety Plans (SHSP) in order to continue to receive certain federal transportation funds. Georgia's SHSP was completed and adopted by Governor Perdue in October 2006, and updated again in October 2007. The plan identifies ten "key emphasis areas" and calls for the development of individual Safety Action Plans for each key emphasis area. Non-motorized transportation or bicyclists and pedestrians was one of these areas. A bicycle and pedestrian task team was convened, headed by Georgia Department of Transportation's State Bicycle and Pedestrian Coordinator, to develop the Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Action Plan.

The purpose of the Safety Action Plans is to identify current conditions, safety problems and needs, and to determine future funding and programs. The Safety Action Plans must be comprehensive in scope and should address education, enforcement, engineering, emergency response, and evaluation. The bicycle and pedestrian plan will also address encouragement (i.e. programs that encourage more biking and walking). A multi-disciplinary team is working together to develop each of the plans. Once completed, the plans will be adopted by the SHSP Leadership Committee, comprised of high level management and leadership of various state agencies, who will use the plans to prioritize funding and programs.

In addition to this process, in 2005, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) identified Georgia as one of ten pedestrian "focus states". All states with more than 150 annual pedestrian fatalities were included in the multi-year focus state initiative which provides technical assistance to state DOTs to develop Pedestrian Safety Action Plans. Through this effort, FHWA has provided GDOT with four training workshops, monthly conference calls, a "How To" guide on developing Safety Action Plans, and technical reviews of crash data and draft planning documents.

Planning Process
The Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) formed a Bicycle and Pedestrian Task Team in December 2006 and began the development of the Georgia Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Action Plan (GBPSAP).

The task team consists of members from 25 agencies and organizations involved in safety, transportation, public health, and biking and walking. The member organizations are listed below. The task team developed the vision, goals, objectives, recommendations and countermeasures, and will play in integral role in implementing the plan.

Georgia Bicycle and Pedestrian Task Team member organizations:

Agency/Organization
1 Association County Commissioners of Georgia
2 Atlanta Bicycle Campaign
3 Atlanta Regional Commission 4 Center for Quality Growth & Reg'l
Development (GA Tech) 5 Chatham Co-Savannah Metro Planning
Commission 6 City of Atlanta, Bureau of Planning

Agency/Organization 18 GDOT, Office of Consultant Design 19 GDOT, Office of Maintenance 20 GDOT, Office of Road Design 21 GDOT, Office of Traffic Safety & Design
22 GDOT, Office of Urban Design
23 Georgia Bikes

Page 3 of 40

7 City of Decatur

24

8 Clean Air Campaign

25

9 Dept. of Community Affairs, Office of Planning 26

& Quality Growth

10 Department of Education, Office of Pupil

27

Transportation

11 Dept. of Human Resources (DHR), Div. of

28

Public Health (DPH), Office of EMS/Trauma

12 DHR, DHR, Office of Injury Prevention

29

13 DHR, DPH, Office of Chronic Disease

30

(Physical Activity/Obesity initiative)

14 FHWA - GA Division

31

15 GA Tech - School of Civil & Environmental

32

Engineering

16 GDOT (Dept. of Transportation), Office of

33

Planning (Bike/Ped/SRTS Programs)

17 GDOT, District 7, Traffic Operations

34

Georgia Department of Driver Services, Cust. Srvc, Licensing & Records Division Georgia Environmental Protection Division Georgia Municipal Association
Georgia Regional Transportation Authority
Governor's Office of Highway Safety (Law Enforcement & Planning Offices) Institute of Transportation Engineers/GA Section MARTA
North Georgia Regional Development Center PATH foundation
PEDS
Perimeter Transportation Coalition

Next Steps:
Once completed, the plan will be adopted by the Strategic Highway Safety Plan Leadership Committee and the Governor. The Leadership Committee will use this plan to prioritize the expenditure of federal safety funds. The Task Team will also seek to have the plan adopted by the State Transportation Board and thereby guiding future GDOT transportation decisions.
Following the completion of the plan, the Task Team will continue to meet to advise on plan implementation, and to advise the Department of Transporation on other bicycle and pedestrian related matters (policies, plans, accessibility or maintenance issues, maps and publications, etc).

Page 4 of 40

II. GOALS & OBJECTIVES
The goal of the Georgia Strategic Highway Safety Plan is to "Strive for Zero Deaths". All of the goals and objectives below reflect this overarching goal.
Vision
A safe and accessible environment that supports and encourages increased levels of bicycling and walking. All state, local, and regional transportation agencies provide a transportation system where walking and bicycling are viable transportation choices, and residents and visitors are able to walk and bike safely and conveniently to accomplish their daily activities while maintaining active and healthy lifestyles.
Goal 1: Improve Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety:
Objectives: Reduce pedestrian fatalities by 33% by 2013. Statewide, the average number of annual pedestrian fatalities is 164 (2004 2006); a 33% reduction would result in about 110 fatalities per year by 2012. Reduce all pedestrian crashes and injuries by 20% by end of calendar year 2013. Statewide, the average number of annual pedestrian crashes (2004-2006) was 2,582; a 20% reduction would result in 2,066 pedestrian crashes per year by 2012. Overall 20% reduction in bicycle crashes and injuries by the end of calendar year 2013. Statewide, the average number of annual bicycle crashes (2004-2006) was 939; a 20% reduction would result in approximately 750 annual crashes.
Goal 2: Increase Trips Made by Bicycle and On Foot (including those using wheelchairs or other mobility assistance device):
Objectives: Increase bicycle and walking trips to school statewide by 20% by 2013. (Measured through the Georgia Safe Routes to School Program "before and after" parent surveys). Develop educational and promotional programs to encourage biking and walking.
Goal 3: Increase Funding for Bicycle and Pedestrian Programs and Infrastructure Improvements:
Objective: Base the percentage of total safety funds spent on bicycle/pedestrian safety projects on the percentage of bicycle/pedestrian fatalities statewide. Include bicycle and pedestrian facilities in all GDOT projects and all road projects with federal participation.
Goal 4: Improve Bicycle and Pedestrian Related Data Collection:
Objectives: Conduct inventory of sidewalk, bike lane, trail and shoulder mileage.
Develop a data collection method for bicycle and pedestrian traffic counts, so that biking/walking
rates can be measured.
Page 5 of 40

III. EXISTING CONDITIONS REPORT
1. Bicycle and Pedestrian Laws
Georgia's bicycle and pedestrian laws are found in the Georgia State Code. Below is a summary of key laws related to bicycles, pedestrians, and traffic safety, and a brief discussion of some emerging issues related to these laws. All traffic laws that impact bicycles and pedestrians can be found in the Appendix.
Figure 1: A cyclist riding legally in Athens, Georgia
Bicycle Laws: Bicyclists are considered vehicles under Georgia Code, and therefore have the same rights and responsibilities as motor vehicles. Bicyclists can ride in the middle or left part of a lane if the lane is too narrow to share with a motor vehicle. Georgia Code does not include a specific provision prohibiting bicycles from operating on the sidewalk, however based on the definition of "vehicle," it is illegal to operate a bicycle on the sidewalk regardless of the location or age of the bicyclist. All bikes operating at nighttime must use a front light and a rear red reflector. Any bicyclist under the age of 16 must wear a bicycle helmet. The Georgia Code does not address operation or right-of-way assignment for bicycle lanes or multi-use paths. However it does allow for a local governing authority to require bicycles to use a path if it is adjacent to the roadway, regulated for the exclusive use of bicycles and designed according to American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials (AASHTO). Currently there are no paths in Georgia that meet all three of these requirements, therefore, bicyclists cannot be required to use a multiuse path adjacent to the roadway unless such paths are restricted for bicycle traffic only (i.e. no pedestrians, dog-walkers, joggers, etc) and upgraded to meet AASHTO standards. Pedestrian Laws: A crosswalk is legally defined as the part of an intersection that connects the sidewalks on either side of the street whether marked with painted white stripes or not. Therefore, all laws that require drivers to stop for pedestrians in crosswalks apply to both those crosswalks marked with painted lines as well as to
Page 6 of 40

"unmarked" crosswalks. Crosswalks must be marked at 3-way "T-intersections" and at mid-block locations in order for them to be considered "crosswalks" (the interpretation on T-intersections was established in Griffin v. Odum, Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1963). The term "jay-walking" is misleading. Pedestrians can legally cross a road between intersections unless both adjacent intersections are signalized (generally only found in downtown areas). Pedestrians have the right of way when crossing unsignalized intersections even if the crosswalk is unmarked (except at Tintersections). Pedestrians can legally cross the street at a signalized T-intersection when the signal facing the pedestrian is green. However, pedestrians must yield to motor vehicles when crossing at an unmarked crosswalk at an unsignalized T-intersection, and when crossing between intersections at a noncrosswalk location. (See Figure 2). Vehicles must stop and stay stopped for pedestrians in crosswalks. Georgia law requires turning cars to stop for pedestrians, even on green lights, if the pedestrian is approaching or within one lane of the half of the road onto which the driver will be turning. Drivers are allowed to turn right on red at most intersections, but pedestrians in crosswalks (marked or unmarked) still have right of way. Pedestrians can cross with the green light, except if there's a walk/don't walk symbol; then they can only start crossing during the walk phase, or finish walking during the flashing don't walk phase.
(INSERT FIGURE21 Diagram of legal pedestrian crossings)
Traffic Code Enforcement and Safety Laws: Speeding is a major factor in pedestrian fatalities. The difference of 10 mph in vehicle speed is significant in increasing or decreasing the chances of the pedestrian's survival in a pedestrian-vehicle crash. Currently police officers can only ticket drivers who exceed the speed limit by more than 10 mph (except in school zones one hour before, during, and after school hours, in marked historic districts, and in marked residential zones. Roads with speed limits of 35 mph + are not considered residential). However, urban districts cannot have a speed limit posted higher than 30mph which few local governments seem to be aware of. Reducing the posted speed limit in these areas would remove some barriers to law enforcement, as well as open up additional areas to certain engineering treatments that are typically reserved for roads with a speed limit of 30mph or less (such as in-street crosswalk signs or speed humps). There is a need to define "urban district" and "marked residential zone" in the Georgia Code in order to help communities set proper speed limit and allow traffic enforcement.
Page 7 of 40

2. Bicycle and Pedestrian Funding Sources
A. Transportation Enhancement:
The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) established the Transportation Enhancement (TE) program, which was further refined under the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) in 1998 and reauthorized under the Safe, Equitable, Transportation Efficiency Act A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) in 2005. The TE program provides funds for non-traditional transportation projects such as sidewalks, multi-use trails, bicycle facilities, railroad depot and lighthouse renovations, and streetscape improvements. http://www.dot.ga.gov/localgovernment/FundingPrograms/TransportationEnhancement/
B. Congressional Earmarks: Congressional earmarks are funds inserted into legislation for specific projects, locations, or institutions that do not go through the normal budgetary review process. Access to these funds is generally obtained through lobbying a Congressperson. There are 89 bicycle and pedestrian projects in the SAFETEA-LU authorization for Georgia. www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/m012606.pdf
C. CMAQ:
The Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) program was created as part of ISTEA to support local efforts to meet the new federal guidelines set by the Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) of 1990 and provides funding assistance to regions designated as non-attainment areas by the EPA (i.e. areas in non-attainment of air quality standards established by the Clean Air Act). Areas failing to meet the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) receive funds to invest in projects that decrease transportation related air pollutants by reducing highway travel, encouraging more efficient use of existing facilities, and reducing vehicle emissions at the source. Eligible projects include ridesharing programs, intelligent transportation systems, and bicycle/pedestrian facilities.
In Georgia, projects are selected by the State Air Quality Partners: Georgia Department of Transportation, Georgia Division of Environmental Protection and the Georgia Regional Transportation Authority. The Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC) participates in project selection in the metropolitan Atlanta region. SAFTEA-LU appropriated $50,115,972 to Georgia for FY05-FY09. http://www.dot.ga.gov/DOT/planprog/planning/aq/CMAQ/index.shtml. Historically, many of these funds were used for bicycle/pedestrian projects, however, since 2007, Georgia has focused these funds on projects that reduce Particulate Matter 2 primarily diesel retrofits of bus and vehicle fleets.
D. Recreational Trails Program:
The Recreational Trails Program (RTP) was established under ISTEA. The RTP funds come from the Federal Highway Trust Fund, and represent a portion of the motor fuel excise tax collected from nonhighway recreational fuel (i.e. tax on all-terrain vehicle fuel). Eligible projects include developing and maintaining recreational trails and trail-related facilities for both non-motorized and motorized recreational trail uses.
RTP funds are distributed to the States by legislative formula: half of the funds are distributed equally among all States, and half are distributed in proportion to the estimated amount of non-highway recreational fuel use in each State and a portion of these funds must be dedicated to motorized ATV trails projects. Georgia receives approximately $2 Million annually and the funds are administered by the
Page 8 of 40

Department of Natural Resources, Division of Parks, Recreation and Historic Sites. www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/rectrails/index.htm
E. Safe Routes to School:
Safe Routes to School (SRTS) is a new program created by SAFETEA-LU which provides Georgia with approximately $16 Million for fiscal years 2005-2009. The Program's goal is to increase the number of children in grades K-8 bicycling and walking to school. The Program makes funding available for a wide variety of programs and projects, from building safer street crossings to establishing programs that encourage children and their parents to walk and bicycle to school. Benefits of the Program include: reduced congestion and increased safety near participating schools; reduced air pollution in route to and near participating schools; and increased physical activity of children. In Georgia, the program is administered by the Georgia Department of Transportation and the first round of funding is expected in 2009. http://www.dot.ga.gov/srts/
F. Safety Education (Sections 402 & 157):
The Governor's Office of Highway Safety administers funding for safety-related educational programs. Funding comes from the State and Community Highway Safety Grant Program (Section 402 of SAFETEA-LU) and some funding from the Safety Incentive Program (Section 157). Project selection is directed towards "National Priority Program areas" (i.e. program areas most effective in reducing crashes, injuries and fatalities) which include the Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Program and the Community Traffic Safety Program (CTSP). Agencies at the state, county, city and private/non-profit levels are eligible to apply. State grants are available for up to three years with the first year of funding at 100% (no local match), the second year requiring a 20% local match, and the third year requiring a 40% local match. Funds are generally prioritized by crash frequency from the previous year's crash data. Examples of funded bicycle and pedestrian projects include a "Share the Road" awareness campaign and a bilingual pedestrian safety education initiative. (http://www.gohs.state.ga.us/).
G. Surface Transportation Program:
The Surface Transportation Program (STP) is funded by the Federal Highway Trust Fund, which is funded through gas taxes. The STP is the largest "pot" of money available for non-interstate highway construction, including bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Much of the bicycle and pedestrian facility network is constructed through this program as part of road widening and construction projects. In some instances, the Georgia DOT has used these general surface transportation funds to pay for pedestrian facilities as "stand alone" projects. Also, the larger MPOs with a population over 200,000 receive "attributable" funds which are a portion of STP that the MPO may program themselves, without the approval of GDOT. The Atlanta Regional Commission chooses to spend much of these "attributable" funds on bicycle and pedestrian projects (see Table 1). However, even MPOs which do not receive "attributable" funds can choose to fund bicycle and pedestrian projects through the STP they just require GDOT approval. The Athens MPO (MACORTS) has funded a couple of bike lane projects, with the approval of GDOT, in this way. (www.fhwa.dot.gov/safetealu/factsheets/stp.htm).
Page 9 of 40

H. Funding Amounts:

The following tables indicate the average amount of funding dedicated to bicycle and pedestrian programs and construction projects throughout the state. This tally does not include those facilities constructed as part of a road widening or new construction project, as those costs are not broken out separately in the project budget.

Table 1. Historic Bike/Ped Program Funding for Georgia

Program/Fund

Data Source

Years

Transportation Enhancement (TE) Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ)
Safe Routes to School
High Priority Projects ARC Programmed Projects (Q23) Other Federal Funds (Q20, Q24, Fed'l Safety, bond) DNR - Recreational Trails Program DNR - Land & Water Conservation Program Governor's Office of Highway Safety Safety/Education

Projects awarded for FY04-FY 07 (GDOT) Projects approved FY05-FY10 (GDOT) GDOT SAFETEA-LU Projects listed in SAFETEA-LU ARC Transp. Improv. Program FY03-FY05 GDOT - Transportation Explorer Database
Awarded project FY04 (DNR)
Awarded project FY03-05 (DNR) Provided by GOHS (Section 402 & 157 funds)

2004-2007 2005-2010 2005 - 2009 2005-2009 2003-2005
2003-2006 2004
2003-2005
2004-2006

Total amount
$ 107,864,836 $ 32,051,460 $ 16,000,000 $ 70,054,000 $ 48,823,200
$ 9,431,105 $ 1,441,722 $ 3,305,487
$ 498,704 TOTAL

Per Year Average
$ 26,966,209
$ 5,341,910 $ 3, 200,000 $ 14,010,800
$ 16,274,400

$ 2,357,776 $ 1,441,722 $ 1,101,829

$

166,235

$ 67,660,881

Table 2. Projected Bike/Ped Funding*

Program/Fund

Data Source

Years Total amount

Per Year Average

Transportation

Projects awarded for FY04-FY

Enhancement (TE)

07 (GDOT)

2004-2007 $ 107,864,836 $ 26,966,209

ARC Programmed

Projects (L230)

ARC 2008 2013 TIP

2008 - 2013 $ 103,170,517 $ 17,195,086

Other Federal Funds (L200, L240, Fed'l Safety)

ARC 2008 2013 TIP

2008 - 2013 $ 18,656,400 $ 3,109,400

State Bonds (GRTA) ARC 2008 2013 TIP

2008 - 2013 $ 7,715,053 $ 1,285,842

DNR - Recreational

Awarded project FY04 (DNR)

Trails Program

2004 $ 1,441,722 $ 1,441,722

DNR - Land & Water Awarded project FY03-05

Conservation Program (DNR)

2003-2005 $ 3,305,487 $ 1,101,829

Governor's Office of

Provided by GOHS (Section 402

Highway Safety -

& 157 funds)

Safety/Education

2004-2006 $ 498,704 $

166,235

TOTAL

$ 51,266,323

*Projections for SRTS and HPP to be determined. No CMAQ funds are expected in the next funding cycle.

Page 10 of 40

Transportation Enhancement Program:

The largest proportion of bicycle and pedestrian projects are funded through the TE program (See Figure 3). Of these projects, less than one-percent were spent on on-street bicycle facilities, and approximately 10% were spent on new sidewalks (where none had previously existed) and on pedestrian safety improvements (such as pedestrian overpasses or refuge islands). The majority of the funds went to multiuse trail facilities, and streetscape projects which generally include sidewalk upgrades, street furniture, new lighting, and landscaping (See Figure 4).

Figure 3.

Bicycle and Pedestrian Projects Average Annual Federal Funds

40%

8% 21%

0.25%
2% 2% 3%

24%

Transportation Enhancement Congestion Mitigation Air Quality High Priority Projects Atlanta Regional Commission Other Federal Funds (STP, Safety, etc) Recreational Trails Program Land & Water Conservation Program Governor's Office of Highway Safety

Figure 4.
43%

TE Funds by Project Type (FY04 - FY07) Total funds: $107,864,836
1% 10%

7%

3% 2%

Bicycle lanes/shoulders
Historic Preservation
Multi-use trail
Other - non-bike/ped 34%
Pedestrian Safety Improvements New Sidewalks
Streetscape (incl. sidewalk replacements)

Page 11 of 40

Congressional Earmarks:

In addition to Transportation Enhancements, a large percentage of bicycle and pedestrian funding (21%) came from Congressional earmarks in the SAFETEA-LU legislation. Congressional earmarks, also referred to as "high priority projects", are projects inserted into authorization bills by U.S. Senators and House Representatives for a particular project in their state. SAFETEA-LU dedicates over $70 Million to bicycle and pedestrian projects in Georgia for the period of the authorization FY2005-FY2009. Of these projects, like the Transportation Enhancement (TE) Program, most are streetscape and trail projects. However, a higher proportion of these funds are dedicated to pedestrian safety projects (such as median refuge islands), sidewalk construction, and bike lanes. (See Figure 5).

Figure 5.

SAFETEA-LU Congressional Earmark Bike/Ped Funding by Project Type

3%

29% 4%

18%

Bike Lanes Bike/Ped Facility Multi-Use Trail Pedestrian Safety Sidewalks Streetscape

32% 14%

Metropolitan Planning Organizations:
The Atlanta Regional Commission is the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) that serves the Atlanta Region. There are 15 MPOs in Georgia which are charged with programming the federal transportation funds for their respective metropolitan regions. MPOs receive funds based on their population, and the larger MPOs with populations over 200,000 receive additional funding which can be spent at the discretion of the MPO (known as Q23 or LU230 or "attributable" funds). Most MPOs spend these funds on road projects, but the ARC spends much of its money on bicycle and pedestrian projects. Much of the ARC bike/ped projects are part of the Livable Centers Initiative which is a program aimed at coordinating land use and transporation, and developing compact, mixed-use developments that promote transit, bicycle and pedestrian access. The LCI Program funds both plans and construction projects. Most of the remaining ARC bike/ped projects are transportation or safety oriented, with fewer streetscape projects than TE or Congressional Earmarks.

Page 12 of 40

3. Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities

Sidewalks:

According to the Georgia Department of Transportation's Road Characteristics (RC) database, there are a total of 7,754.44 miles of public roads that have sidewalks on one or both sides of the road. Of the 7,754.44 miles, 3,880.48 miles have sidewalks on both sides of the road. There are approximately 1,485.31 miles of state highway with sidewalks on at least one side of the road, of which, 944.66 miles have sidewalk on both sides and 550.65 miles have sidewalk on just one side.

Paved shoulders:

The RC database indicates that there are approximately 2,382 miles of public roads that have at the least one paved shoulder with a width greater than, or equal to 4 feet. Of these, 2141 miles are state highways.

All Public Roads
All Public Roads (excluding interstates) Sidewalks (on at least one side of the road) Paved Shoulder > 4' (on at least one side of the road)

Miles 114,758 7,754 2,382

Percentage
7% 2%

State Highways
State Highways (excluding interstates) Sidewalks (on at least one side of the road) Paved Shoulder > 4' (on at least one side of the road) Source: GDOT, Office of Transportation Data 2008

Miles 15,702 1,495 2,141

Percentage
10% 14%

Figure 6: A Cyclist Riding on the Shoulder in Chamblee.
Page 13 of 40

Georgia State Bicycle Route Signage:

In 1997, the Georgia Department of Transportation designated 14 state bicycle routes, and to date, has installed signage on four of these designated routes. Information on the four signed routes can be found in Table 3 below. In addition to the four state bicycle routes that are signed, there are many other local roads and some state highways that have bicycle signage, but there is no current inventory of these signed routes at this time.

Table 3. Signed State Bicycle Routes State Bicycle Route (SBR) Name Southern Crossing (SBR 10) Coastal Route (SBR 95)
Savannah River Run (SBR 85) Augusta Link (SBR 50)

Counties Seminole, Decatur, Grady, Thomas, Brooks, Lowndes, Lanier, Clinch, Ware, Brantely, Glynn Rabun, Habersham, Stephens, Franklin, Hart, Elbert, Wilkes, McDuffie, Warren, Jefferson, Burke, Jenkins, Screven, Effingham, Chatham Effingham, Chatham, Bryan, Liberty, McIntosh, Clynn, Camden McDuffie, Columbia, Richmond
Total

Mileage 246.3 168.6
314.3 38.5 767.7

The signs along the state bicycle routes include various signs from the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). They are: the bicycle warning sign with the "Share the Road" placard (W11-1, W16-1), bicycle route markers (D11-1, M1-8), "right turn yield to bikes" regulartory sign (R4-4) and a variation of a warning sign which reads "watch for bicyclists on bridge". The signs are installed in 5 mile intervals and at every intersection where the bike route makes a turn.

Figure 7: Bicycle Signage

Page 14 of 40

4. Engineering, Planning and Design Policies
Design and Accommodation Policies Georgia Department of Transportation Policies:
Pedestrian Signals: Pedestrian countdown heads are being used on new traffic signal permits for new signals and signal upgrades.
Sidewalks: From the GDOT Design Policy Manual: Sidewalks will be provided wherever curb and gutter is utilized along the outside edges of pavement of the mainline roadway, i.e., urban sections. Sidewalk may be omitted on side road tie-ins where there is no existing sidewalk and the additional widening of shoulders for sidewalk would result in excessive impacts as determined by the design team on a case by case basis. Sidewalk will not be required in rural areas where curb and gutter is placed at the back of the useable shoulder for the purpose of reducing construction limits. Refer to GDOT Construction Standards and Details and GDOT Pedestrian and Streetscape Guide. Sidewalks are to be placed 2' behind the curb (Typical), 6' behind the curb (Desirable). A 16' shoulder is recommended when there is sufficient space for the use of a 6' grass strip. (GDOT Design Policy Manual, Chapter 6.6).
Figure 8: Typical Sidewalk Placement Behind Curb
Crosswalks: Pedestrian signals, crosswalks, landings, and curb ramps must be provided on all approaches to a signalized intersection except those exempted by the Office of Traffic Safety and Design (usually for safety reasons). (Traffic Signal and Design Guidelines)
Islands:
Page 15 of 40

Islands should be considered for roads too wide for pedestrians to cross all at once. They must be large enough for drivers to see, cannot get in the way of turns, and should not make the intersection larger. (GDOT Design Policy Manual, Chapter 7)
Bicycle Facilities: Bicycle lanes and related improvements shall be incorporated into all widening and reconstruction projects when there is an existing bikeway or if the project is on an approved Bicycle Route. The term "Bicycle Route" is defined as "any roadway where there is an existing bikeway or any location where a bicycle facility is identified for such roadway in a state, regional or local transportation plan" (GDOT Design Policy Manual, Chapter 6.12 and Glossary).
Medians at Pedestrian Crossings: Locations where a significant number of pedestrians are likely to be crossing the roadway at mid-block, may warrant positive separation of opposing traffic using a median for pedestrian refuge. Signals are not typically warranted at these locations. Two phase pedestrian crossings may be required when the roadway width requires excessive pedestrian crossing time (i.e. 6-lane section with dual lefts and a right turn lane, etc). In the case of a two phase pedestrian crossing, the median must be wide enough to provide an ADA compliant pedestrian refuge area. (GDOT Design Policy Manual, Chapter 6.9.4)
Lane Widths: The standard lane width is 12 feet. In Type A urban areas (characterized by speed limits of 35 or less, curbs and sidewalks, CBDs or historic districts, building face to curb generally 10 feet or less, low truck volumes) lane widths can be reduced to 11 feet. (GDOT Design Policy Manual, Chapter 6.2.1)
Bike Lane signs: GDOT follows the FHWA Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD: mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/pdfs/2003/Ch9.pdf). The "bike lane" sign must be used together with marked bicycle lanes. Sign spacing should be determined by engineering judgment based on prevailing speed of bicycle and other traffic, block length, distances from adjacent intersections, and other considerations. The "ahead" sign should be mounted directly below a bike lane sign in advance of the beginning of a marked bicycle lane. The "ends" sign should be mounted directly below a bike lane sign at the end of a marked bicycle lane. Where motor vehicles entering an exclusive right-turn lane must weave across bicycle traffic in bicycle lanes, the "begin right turn lane yield to bikes" sign may be used to inform both the motorist and the bicyclist of this weaving maneuver.
Figure 9: Marked bicycle lane near Georgia Tech in Atlanta
Share the Road signs:
Page 16 of 40

GDOT's guidelines state they should be placed on roads without bike lanes; within 500 feet of transitions between bike lanes or paved shoulders to shared roadways; in areas where the road curves continuously (at intervals of 5 miles in rural areas and 2 miles in urban areas or as needed); and along two-lane roads with paved shoulders less than 2 feet wide (same intervals as above). In practice, signs are typically installed at the request of a local government or concerned citizens. Often installation is done by the local government, even on state facilities. (GDOT Signing and Marking Guidelines)

Speed limits: Georgia Code Article 9, beginning with Section 40-6-180 sets the basic standard of a "reasonable" speed limit. Transportation Online Policy & Procedure System (TOPPS) 6780-4 (www.dot.ga.gov/topps/op/tsd/6780-4.htm) states that "the speed limit will be set as a maximum speed limit under the best conditions...".

Roundabouts: GDOT requires approval by the Division Director of Preconstruction, the Division Director of Operations, and the Chief Engineer. To be eligible for roundabouts, roads must have single-lane approaches with ADT counts not to exceed 16,000.

Accel /Deceleration lanes: Acceleration lanes are usually not built on low speed roads. They are required by GDOT as needed based on grade, sight distance and traffic. According to the Driveway Manual, at speeds over 55 mph, fullwidth acceleration lanes should be considered, and on driveways that include a deceleration lane, a tapered acceleration lane should be considered. Deceleration Lanes are considered to always be helpful and are required when projected traffic exceeds certain minimum standards.

From the Regulations for Driveway & Encroachment Control Driveway Manual used by site developers:

"4I-1 When Deceleration Lanes Are Required: The provisions of this section shall generally apply to auxiliary lanes installed on the approach to an intersection that provide for deceleration and storage of vehicles waiting to turn right or left. Such lanes are always beneficial and will be required in conjunction with commercial driveway permits when projected traffic volumes exceed minimum levels as provided in the sections below.

4I-1-1 Minimum Requirements for Right Turn Deceleration Lanes: Right turn deceleration lanes must be constructed at no coset to the Department (Georgia Department of Transportation) if the daily site generated Right Turn Volumes (RTV) based on ITE Trip Generation (assuming a reasonable distribution of entry volumes) meet or exceed the values shown in <table below>. Passing lane sections fall under the criteria for two or more lanes."

Table 4. GDOT Minimum Requirements for Deceleration Lanes

Posted Speed

2 Lane Routes

More than 2 Lanes on Main Road

AADT

AADT

AADT

AADT

<6000

>6000

<10,000

>10,000

35mph or less 40 to 50 mph 55 to 60 mph > 65 mph

200 RTV/day 150 RTV/day 100 RTV/day Always

100 RTV/day 75 RTV/day 50RTV/day Always

200 RTV/day 150 RTV/day 100 RTV/day Always

100 RTV/day 75 RTV/day 50 RTV/day Always

Multiple left turn lanes:

Page 17 of 40

Dual left turn lanes are used on high traffic volume roads based on a capacity analysis (300 vehicles or more turning left per hour). Off-peak periods should be considered as dual left turn lanes usually do not allow turning at will. (Regulations for Driveway and Encroachment Control)
Design Speed: AASHTO defines the design speed as "...the maximum safe speed that can be maintained over a specified section of highway when conditions are so favorable that the design features of the highway govern."
GDOT policy, according to GDOT Design Policy Manual, is to set design speeds such that they are consistent with the speed drivers are traveling. The manual further notes that on country roads or city streets, engineers should work with local jurisdictions to set speed limits and design speeds in order to encourage the local jurisdiction to post a speed less than or equal to the design speed. "It is desirable to select a design speed as high as practical to attain a desired degree of safety, mobility, and efficiency within the constraints of environmental quality, economics, aesthetics, and other social or political effects." (GDOT Design Policy Manual, Chapter 3).
Design vehicles are selected types of vehicles, with representative weight, dimensions, and operating characteristics used to set highway design controls (passenger cars, buses, trucks, and recreational vehicles). The Design Manual notes that the bicycle should be considered a design vehicle where it may be used on a road.
Sources: GDOT Design Guidance Policy Memo, January 7, 2003 from Frank Danchetz, Chief Engineer Repository for Online Access to Documentation and Standards (ROADS):
www.dot.ga.gov/dot/preconstruction/R-O-A-D-S/index.shtml GDOT Design Policy Manual: www.dot.ga.gov/dot/preconstruction/R-O-A-D-
S/DesignPolicies/index.shtml GDOT Transportation Online Policies and Procedures System (TOPPS): www.dot.ga.gov/topps Regulations for Driveway & Encroachment Control Driveway Manual:
www.dot.ga.gov/dot/preconstruction/r-o-a-d-s/DesignPolicies/documents/pdf/DrivewayFull.pdf Office of Traffic Safety and Design: www.dot.ga.gov/dot/operations/traffic-safety-design/index.shtml Office of Road Design: www.dot.ga.gov/dot/preconstruction/roaddesign Traffic Signal and Design Guidelines: www.dot.ga.gov/dot/operations/traffic-safety-
design/Documents/PDF/Traffic%20Signal%20Design%20Guidelines.pdf
Page 18 of 40

5. Georgia Bicycle and Pedestrian Crash Analysis Report

The data used in this crash report is from the Georgia Department of Transportation crash database which is compiled from police crash reports. The Crash Analysis Reporting Environment (CARE) tool was also used.

Introduction

Bicycles and pedestrians comprise 10.5% of all fatalities in Georgia more than other crash types and users (e.g. heavy trucks, motorcycles, train/car, work zone and run-off-the-road crashes).

Table 5: Percentage of Fatalities by User and Crash Type* Alcohol related Bicycles Fatigue/Inattentive Head-on Heavy Trucks Intersections Motorcycles Not using seatbelt (passenger vehicles) Older drivers (over 64) Pedestrians Run-off the road Speeding & tailgating Vehicle/train Work zones Young drivers (under 21)

31.5% 1.5%
3% 15%
9% 46% 7% 73% 16% 9% 9% 21% <1% 1% 19%

*Based on 1,023,293 crashes, and 4995 traffic fatalities between 2003-2005

Bicycle Crashes

Bicycle crashes in Georgia comprise less than a quarter of 1% of the overall traffic related crashes, yet represent more than 5 times that percentage of the overall traffic fatalities. This points to the vulnerability of a bicyclist in a crash compared with motor vehicle drivers/passengers. Nationally, Georgia ranks 8th among the states with the most bicycle fatalities. This is somewhat alarming considering that, based on the 2000 Census journey to work data (the only exposure data available on bicycling), the Atlanta Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) has among the lowest rates of bicycling in the country.

Table 6: Bicycle and Traffic Crashes in Georgia, 2000 - 2006

Year All

All Bicycle % of All

All Traffic

Traffic Crashes Traffic Crashes Fatalities

Crashes

that are Bicycles

2000

310,122

803

0.26%

1,404

2001

317,851

711

0.22%

1,475

2002

327,710

788

0.24%

1,367

2003

332,321

723

0.22%

1,469

2004

342,307

718

0.21%

1,466

2005

348,041

755

0.22%

1,595

2006

342,158

932

0.27%

1,703

All Bicycle Fatalities
12 21 11 15 16 20 16

% of all Traffic Fatalities that are Bicycles
0.85% 1.42% 0.80% 1.02% 1.09% 1.25% 0.94%

Page 19 of 40

Of all reported bicycle crashes from 2000 2005, 2.1% were fatalities, 76.5% were injury crashes, and 21.3% were non-injury or property damage only (PDO) crashes. While the number of bicycle fatalities seems relatively low per year (generally under 20), they are on the rise in Georgia. The year 2001 stands out as a bit of an anomaly with highest number of fatalities in the 7 year period, while at the same time having the lowest number of crashes and injuries for the same period. The general trend line however shows a steady increase of fatalities since 2002. Figure 10.
Shortfalls of Data The biggest obstacle to analyzing bicycle crash data is the lack of "exposure" data. Unlike with motorvehicles, we do not have traffic counts or bicycle-miles-traveled data. Therefore, while we know there is a moderate increase in bicycle fatalities, we do not know if the fatality rate for bicyclists is going up, down, or staying flat. The crash database also does not include some critical information, such as the bicycle's direction of travel (riding with or against traffic), the bicycle maneuver (was the bicyclist traveling straight or turning left or right?), the presence of a bike facility, and helmet use data is incomplete. In addition to analyzing the crash database, 198 police crash report forms where a bicyclist was injured or killed were reviewed. None of these reports indicated whether the bicyclist was using headlights or rear reflectors/lights, the helmet data was spotty, and nearly half of the reports did not indicate where the bicyclist was riding (i.e. with traffic, against the flow of traffic, in a bike lane, on a sidewalk, etc). This lack of data makes it difficult to understand the root causes of certain crashes. Geographic Distribution of Crashes The majority of bicycle crashes occur in a relatively small geographic area. There were 2,819 bicycle crashes from 2004 2006. Of these, 1,806 crashes (64% of the state's total) occurred in just 13 counties. The remaining 1,013 crashes were spread among the remaining 146 counties, averaging about 7 crashes per county over the 3 year period.
Page 20 of 40

Figure 11.

Characteristics of Bicycle Crashes

Beyond this clustering of crashes in metropolitan areas, there is no statistically significant pattern of bicycle crashes occurring along the same roadway or intersection. Therefore, it will be more fruitful to look at roadway type and crash characteristics to find trends or commonalities among the crashes. Countermeasures will be generally applicable to similar types of roadways or crashes across the state.

Bicycle Crashes by Speed Limit:

Nearly twice as many bicycle crashes occur on local streets with a posted speed limit of 35mph or less than on higher speed roads. However, the opposite is true for fatalities: from 2004 through 2006, 17 fatalities occurred on roads with a speed limit of 35mph or less, and 40 fatalities on roads with a 40mph speed limit or greater. This is not surprising the roads with higher speed limits tend to be rural state highways or multi-lane suburban arterials which attract fewer bicyclists than lower speed streets in urban areas. However, when crashes do occur at these higher speeds, they are more likely to be fatalities.

Table 7: Bicycle Crashes and Fatalities by Speed Limit, 2004-2006

% of Crashes

Speed Limit Crashes Fatalities

that are

fatalities

Null

199

0

0.00%

15

6

0

0.00%

20

9

0

0.00%

25

415

2

0.48%

30

587

5

0.85%

35

690

10

1.45%

40

194

3

1.55%

45

477

19

3.98%

50

30

1

3.33%

55

192

16

8.33%

60

2

0

0.00%

65

15

1

6.67%

70

3

0

0.00%

Total

2819

57

2.02%

Page 21 of 40

The following pie chart reiterates this pattern that most bicycle crashes occur in urban areas on urban roadway types. These are generally roadways with a speed limit of 35mph or less (sometimes up to 45mph), have curb and gutter and usually sidewalks. There are generally more driveways and intersections on urban roadways than on rural typical sections. Figure 12.
Manner of Collision: As shown in the chart below, approximately half of all bicycle crashes are at an angle, which indicates turning movements (possibly motor vehicles turning right or left in front of the bicyclist). Figure 13.
Page 22 of 40

Use of Bicycle Helmets: Georgia's bicycle crash statistics from 2000 to 2006 (taken from GDOT's crash database) reveal that only 12 percent of bicyclists involved in crashes wore helmets. National statistics from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety show that just 8.5 percent of bicyclists killed in crashes from 2000 to 2006 wore helmets. This may reflect the low usage of helmets, or may portray the effectiveness of helmet usage in preventing death. Age is a significant factor affecting helmet use. Of the bicycle crash victims in Georgia, those aged 30 and older had a helmet use rate of 22 percent. This is more than three times greater than the helmet use rate among bicycle crash victims under 30 years old. This may explain why bicyclists under 18 years old comprise 30% of Georgia's bicycle fatalities (of these fatalities, only 11 percent wore helmets). Figure 14.
Figure 15.
Page 23 of 40

High Bicycle Crash Locations:

While the majority of bicycle crashes are spread out randomly among a dozen counties, there are some corridors where crashes tend to cluster, and further evaluation of the crash reports for these areas may be warranted. The high crash corridors were determined by all 2 mile roadway segments with at least 4 crashes from 2004 2006.

Intersections were also analyzed, and no pattern was discovered in these crash locations. Over the 3-year period, no intersection in the entire state had more than 3 bicycle crashes recorded. During this same time period. Only 25 intersections in the state had 2 bicycle crashes occur at them, and only 4 intersections experienced 3 bicycle crashes (none of which were fatalities). Therefore, the intersection data will not be used in project prioritization, but the corridors will be (which are inclusive of intersection crashes as well).

Table 8: High Bicycle Crash Corridors, 2004 - 2006

County
Fulton Fulton Clarke Chatham Clarke Fulton Richmond
Chatham Richmond Richmond Chatham

Name
PONCE DE LEON AVE HIGHLAND AVE PRINCE AVE MONTGOMERY CROSS RD BAXTER ST NORTH AVE WALTON WAY
DERENNE AVE GREENE ST LANEY WALKER BLVD 40TH ST

Start Point
8.41 1.59 3.09
0.3 0.17 7.49 0.27
0.16 3.91 0.23 0.14

Liberty Lowndes Clarke Chatham Clarke Bulloch Clarke Chatham Cobb Fulton Clayton Dougherty Glynn Lowndes Houston Richmond Douglas

ELMAG MILES PKWY PATTERSON ST W BROAD ST HENRY ST OCONEE ST FAIR RD BROAD ST LINCOLN ST S COBB DR MEMORIAL DR UPPER RIVERDALE RD SLAPPEY BLVD GLYNN AVE N PATTERSON ST GREEN ST FAIRINGTON DR FAIRBURN RD

17.92 15.24
7.57 0.9
8.79 18.49
6.3 1.08 4.87 31.8 0.49 1.65 13.53 0.08 0.89 0.01 8.32

End Point
9.9 3.51 4.25 1.22 1.81 8.04 1.27
0.43 4.63 1.04 1.16
18.97 16.49
8.09 1.79 8.96 18.91 6.76 1.57 5.56 32.56 1.49 2.68 14.59 1.24 2.51 1.75 10.23

Total Crashes
11 11
9 8 8 7 7
6 6 6 6
6 6 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

Fatal Crashes
1
1
1 1

Page 24 of 40

Pedestrian Crashes

Introduction As shown in the table below, pedestrians are over-represented in traffic fatality data, comprising of over 10% of all motor-vehicle related fatalities yet making up less than 1% of all crashes.

Table 9: Pedestrian and Traffic Crashes in Georgia, 2000 - 2006

% of All

All

Traffic Crashes

All Traffic Pedestrian

that are

All Traffic

Year

Crashes

Crashes

Pedestrians Fatalities

2000

310,122

2490

0.80%

1,404

2001

317,851

2552

0.80%

1,475

2002

327,710

2561

0.78%

1,367

2003 332,321

2530

0.76%

1,469

2004 342,307

2435

0.71%

1,466

2005 348,041

2574

0.74%

1,595

2006 342,158

2738

0.80%

1,703

All Pedestrian Fatalities
141
158
166
161
156 151
185

% of all Traffic Fatalities that are Pedestrians
10.04%
10.71%
12.14%
10.96%
10.64% 9.47%
10.86%

Summary of Injuries and Fatalities Pedestrian crashes, injuries and fatalities have generally remained level for the six year time period, however crashes are decreasing or leveling off in the City of Atlanta (down 3% from 2003 to 2006), but increasing in the suburban Atlanta up over 30% in Gwinnett and Clayton Counties, and up 10% in Dekalb County over the same time period. This may indicate that as Atlanta is becoming more walkable and densely developed, crashes are going down, while suburban Atlanta has seen increased traffic and an influx in transit-dependent residents in recent years. The 10 counties below comprise almost 70% of all pedestrian crashes in the state.

Table 10: Counties with a Minimum 50 Annual Pedestrian Crashes, 2003 - 2006

County

2003

2004

2005

2006 Total

Fulton

587

555

551

569 2262

Dekalb

306

329

342

337 1314

Cobb

144

120

163

152 579

Chatham

138

146

142

160 586

Gwinnett

121

133

148

160 562

Clayton

102

107

113

139 461

Richmond

86

80

76

84 326

Bibb

94

76

67

104 341

Muscogee

72

73

87

78 310

Clarke

74

50

64

56 244

Pedestrian Crashes by Speed Limit
As with bicycle crashes, most pedestrian crashes occur on lower speed roads (25mph 35mph), while most fatalities occur on roads with a 45mph speed limit. Fatalities are more likely to occur on higher speed roadways because reaction time and stopping distances are decreased. However, there are fewer

Page 25 of 40

pedestrians on these high speed roadways (generally principal arterials and multi-lane suburban corridors), which would explain why fewer overall crashes occur on these roads than on local roads. Figure 16.
Figure 17.

Characteristics of the Pedestrian

There is a common misconception that the majority of pedestrian crashes are caused by a drunk or impaired pedestrian. The data indicates otherwise: only 3.4% of pedestrians involved in crashes in Georgia from 2004 2006 were listed as having been under the influence of drugs or alcohol.

Table 11: Condition of Pedestrians Involved in Crashes, 2004 - 2006

Pedestrian Condition

Not Injured

Injured

Fatal

Not Drinking

855

5363

398

Not Known if U.I.

167

934

123

Drinking, not Impaired

7

45

1

U.I. Alcohol and/or Drugs

33

218

29

Total 6616 1224 53 280

Page 26 of 40

Physical Impairment

3

Apparently Fell Asleep

1

Source: 2004 2006 CARE database

Pedestrian Crashes by Light Condition

12

1

16

0

0

1

The vast majority of crashes occur during daylight hours; however three times as many fatalities occur at night (dark conditions) than during the day. This could indicate the need for better lighting; it also may suggest that motorists are travelling at greater speeds at night when there is less traffic (resulting in decreased reaction time and stopping distance).

Figure 18.

Pedestrian Crash Location
There is a fairly even split between pedestrian crashes occurring at intersections and "mid-block". However, more than twice as many fatalities happen at mid-block locations than at intersections. This is likely due to the higher speeds at mid-block where motorists are not slowing down to make a turn, and also because drivers are less likely to expect pedestrians at non-intersection locations.
Figure 19.

Pedestrian Crashes by Maneuver
Page 27 of 40

Almost half of all pedestrian crashes and fatalities occur while crossing the roadway. Only about 12% occur while walking along the roadway. For these types of crashes, twice as many crashes occur when walking on the right side of the road (i.e. with your back to traffic) rather than on the left side of the road facing oncoming traffic. These statistics reinforce the state law requiring pedestrians to walk on the left side of the road when walking in the street (when no sidewalk or shoulder is present). It is safer to walk facing traffic because the pedestrian can see a car coming and can get out of the way if necessary. Interestingly, it is the opposite for bicycles. Due to speed differentials and driver expectation, bicycles are safest riding with traffic on the right side of the road (which is also required by law). Figure 20.
High Crash Locations Most pedestrian crashes (83% in Georgia) occur in areas defined as urban and suburban rather than rural. This is also reflected in the distribution of pedestrian crashes by county (see pie chart below). Nearly 65% of all pedestrian crashes happened in just 9 counties. All of these counties are predominantly urban or suburban and include the five core metro-Atlanta counties and the next five largest metropolitan areas in the state (Savannah, Augusta, Macon, Columbus and Athens). These same counties are also the only counties in the state that had at least 50 pedestrian crashes annually from 2004 to 2006.
Page 28 of 40

Figure 21.

Corridors with the Highest Pedestrian Crashes:

The high crash corridors were determined by all 1 mile roadway segments with at least 5 crashes. This resulted in 199 segments. Where these 1 mile segments were contiguous on the same roadway, they were aggregated into one corridor. For example, there were three 1-mile contiguous segments on Ponce de Leon with approximately 20 crashes each. These were combined to create a three-mile corridor with 58 crashes). This process yielded 141 corridors which were further filtered by selecting only those with 15 or more crashes. This resulted in 28 "high pedestrian crash corridors".

Table 12: High Pedestrian Crash Corridors, 2004-2006

County

Name

Fulton ROSWELL RD

Dekalb Fulton Fulton Fulton Dekalb

BUFORD HWY PONCE DE LEON AVE PEACHTREE ST BANKHEAD HWY GLENWOOD AVE

Dekalb Dekalb Fulton Clayton Dekalb Fulton Fulton Fulton

COVINGTON HWY CANDLER RD PEACHTREE RD RIVERDALE RD MORELAND AVE STEWART AVE BOULEVARD NORTH AVE

From LAKELAND DR
DURANT PL
MAYNARD CT BROWNWOOD AVE MOUNTAIN DR FLAT SHOALS RD 28TH ST WALKER RD GRACEWOOD AVE MORELAND WAY
FOWLER ST

To DALRYMPLE RD SHALLOWFORD RD
PIERCE AVE CLARKE LN GREENBRIAR WAY GLENWOOD RD E ANDREWS DR ON TO I-285 S ST LOUIS PL CHRISTMAN ST
DURANT PL

Total Crashes
55
42 41 39 38 37
34 33 33 29 29 27 27 24

Fatal Crashes
1
2 2 1 0 3
3 0 0 3 0 2 0 0

Page 29 of 40

Chatham VICTORY DR

HOPKINS ST

SHUPTRINE AVE

23

1

Clayton Fulton

TARA BLVD MARTIN LUTHER KING JR DR

SOUTH AVE BARFIELD AVE

MT. ZION RD OLD GORDON RD

20

4

20

1

Fulton Fulton

Fulton SR 883 NORTHSIDE DR

20

0

RALPH D ABERNATHY

BLVD

NORTHSIDE CIR

19

1

Fulton SIMPSON RD

19

0

Fulton OLD NATIONAL HWY

FLAT SHOALS RD

GODBY RD

18

2

Clarke BROAD ST Chatham ABERCORN ST

SYCAMORE DR

JACKSON ST

18

0

MONTGOMERY

MIDDLEGROUND RD

CROSS RD

17

2

Dekalb MEMORIAL DR

WYMAN ST

16

2

Fulton CASCADE AVE

16

0

Gwinnett BUFORD HWY

HILSIDE DR

CAMBRIDGE ST

15

2

Muscogee VETERANS PKWY

14TH ST

35TH ST

15

2

Dekalb CLAIRMONT RD

CLAIRMONT RUN

CENTURY PL

15

1

High Pedestrian Crash Intersections: The following intersections were selected based on having at least 5 pedestrian crashes from 2004-2006. They are ranked according to the crash severity index which assigns weighted scores to crashes for fatalities, serious injuries, etc.

Table 13: High Pedestrian Crash Intersections, 2004- 2006

County Route

Description

Fulton Fulton SR 3

Stewart Ave @ Cleveland Ave

Clayton Clayton SR 139 Riverdale Rd at Garden Walk Blvd

Dekalb Dekalb SR 260

Glenwood Rd at Columbia Drive

Fulton Fulton CS 904-03 Martin Luther King Dr at Fulton CS 2003-03

Fulton Fulton CS 661-03 Peachtree St at Fulton CS 1828-03

Fulton Fulton CS 2001-03 International Blvd at Fulton CS 3695-03

Fulton Fulton SR 8

North Ave at W. Peachtree St

Dekalb Dekalb CS 693-05 Chamblee Dunwoody Rd at Cumberland Dr

Dekalb Dekalb SR 260

Glenwood Rd at E. Lake Blvd

Fulton Fulton SR 42-SP McDonough Blvd at Henry Thomas Dr

Fulton Fulton CS 904-03 Martin Luther King Dr at Fulton CS 1868-03

Dekalb Dekalb SR 13

Buford Hwy at N. Cliff Valley Way

Fulton Fulton SR 883

Fulton SR 883 at Fulton CS 2051-03

Fulton Fulton SR 8

Ponce de Leon Ave at Kennesaw Ave

Fulton Fulton SR 8

Ponce de Leon Ave at Seminole Ave

Fulton Fulton SR 8

North Ave at Peachtree St

Clarke Clarke SR 10

Broad St at College Ave

Total
10 7 6 6 6 6 6 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5

Fatal
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Injury
9 5 6 6 6 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 4

Severity
30 37.14 33.33 26.67 23.33
20 16.67
60 36 36 28 28 32 28 28 24 24

AADT
15628 35680 22210 21846 18156 10398 29345 11728 18442 13236 21616 25234 11600 33390 36180 30590 30224

Page 30 of 40

Figure 22: Woman and child attempting to cross Buford Highway

IV. POLICY & NON-ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS

Acronym Directory:

GDOT

Georgia Department of Transportation

GOHS

Governor's Office of Highway Safety

DDS

(Georgia) Department of Driver Services

GDEC

Georgia Department of Economic Development

DCA

(Georgia) Department of Community Affairs

GDPH

Georgia Division of Public Health

DOE

(Georgia) Department of Education

MPOs

Metropolitan Planning Organizations

RDCs

Regional Development Centers

TMAs

Transportation Management Associations

MARTA

Metropolitan Atlanta Regional Transit Authority

GRTA

Georgia Regional Transportation Authority

ARC

Atlanta Regional Commission

GMA

Georgia Municipal Association

ACCG

Association County Commissioners of Georgia

ABC

Atlanta Bicycle Campaign (non-profit/advocacy org.)

PEDS

Pedestrians Educating Drivers on Safety (non-profit/advocacy org.)

GA Bikes Georgia Bikes! (non-profit/advocacy org.)

Page 31 of 40

Education Priority Task

Description

Responsible Agencies

1

State-wide public Modeled after GOHS's successful "Click it or GOHS, MARTA, GRTA,

education campaign Ticket" and "Zero Tolerance" programs.

PEDS, GA Bikes, ABC,

Messages should be tailored for each target

Community Improvement

audience (motorists, pedestrians & cyclists).

Districts, TMAs

Campaign to include the following:

Drive-time radio PSAs, including some

Spanish language messages

Messages placed inside transit vehicles,

stations and stops, to reach cyclists and

pedestrians; and on bus-backs and bus

"wraps" to reach motorists.

Use new communication tools such as

Facebook, Podcasts, etc

Below are some general concepts for

safety messages:

o Motorist oriented: Cyclists

belong on road, pass with care,

look for bike/peds at

intersections, peds have right of

way in crosswalk, don't speed,

etc.

o Cyclist oriented: wear helmet,

use lights, ride with traffic, make

eye contact/watch for cars at

intersections, obey traffic rules

o Pedestrian: Cross with signal not

against it, look for turning cars

even when you have the right-of-

way, etc.

2

Educate drivers on Develop curriculum to be included in driver's Department of Driver

how to share the road education trainings, conduct bus driver's

Services, GOHS, PEDS,

with bikes/peds education trainings for transit agencies, and

ABC, GA Bikes, MARTA,

produce materials for schools, transit agencies, GRTA, ARC's Transit

and Department of Driver Services.

Operators Subcommittee, and

other transit agencies

3

Educate

Partner with professional organizations to GDOT, Planning and

transportation

develop and host trainings (such as ITE, Engineering Professional

professionals and

GPA, ASCE, WTS, MPOs, TMAs, etc). Organizations, ARC, PEDS,

civil engineering students on bike/pedestrian design and safety

Educate GDOT staff through GDOT Universities Trainee program, incorporate this into Plan Development Process (possibly part of ADA Compliance Officers duties...).

throughout the state. Incorporate bike/ped design into curricula

of State engineering and planning schools

(GA Tech, GA Southern, Southern

Polytech , Savannah State, etc)

Page 32 of 40

4

Develop and

Expand GOHS Bike Helmet Giveaway GDOT, GOHS, DDS, RDCs,

Distribute Bicycle

Program, distribute bicycle lights, and Georgia Bikes, Atlanta

Safety Materials

reflective gear.

Bicycle Campaign

Update, print and distribute Georgia Bike

Sense Guide, and develop additional

educational materials as needed. Work

with GOHS, Regional Development

Centers (RDCs) and DDS to distribute.

Translate Bike Sense into Spanish and

distribute with assistance from the RDCs,

Latin American Association, churches,

etc.

Continue to distribute Bike Sense guides

and other educational materials to all bike

shops, driver license and tag registration

centers, state parks, visitor centers.

Translate into Spanish.

5

Conduct Bicycle Work with colleges and universities, get bicycle ABC, GA Bikes, GOHS,

Safety Training

police officers to assist with trainings, make

TMAs, Universities, law

trainings more accessible, mainstream to reach enforcement

more riders, or potential riders.

6

Continue "share the Use this bike/ped task team to develop plan and GOHS

road" license plate identify educational programs to be funded with

program

license plate revenue.

7

Update the Driver's Include more information about the rules of the DDS, GDOT, PEDS

Manual

road related to bicyclists. Provide materials for

new drivers.

8

Educate elected and Conduct regular trainings for elected officials in GDOT, GOHS, ARC, GMA,

appointed officials Atlanta and other parts of state. Present to State ACCG, Universities

on laws, innovative Transportation Board to encourage the allocation

techniques and the of more resources to bicycle and pedestrian

needs of bicycles and facilities and safety programs. Incorporate into

pedestrians

Georgia Municipal Association and Association

County Commissioners training and the

University of Georgia's training for officials and

judges.

9

Research

Conduct longitudinal studies on the effectiveness GDPH, Universities, GDOT

effectiveness on bike of Safe Routes to School (SRTS) program on

& ped educational driving habits, commute habits, etc.

programs

10

Put bike/ped safety Messages could be posted on non-interstate signs, GDOT, GOHS

messages on Georgia and interstate signs if permissible. This could be

Navigator signs done for a targeted awareness campaign, for bike

month (May), or walk to school day/week

(October), etc.

11

Create PowerPoint Put presentation on GDOT website, and distribute GDOT

presentation on

to neighborhood associations, professional

bike/safety issues. associations (e.g. ITE, GPA, ASE, WTS, etc).

Page 33 of 40

Encouragement Priority Task

Description

Responsible Agencies

1

Encourage Georgia's Agency leadership and advocacy organizations GDOT, DDS, GOHS, ABC,

congressional

work with state legislators and Georgia's U.S. PEDS, GA Bikes

members to support Congressional delegations to join bike/ped

bike/ped

caucus and support bike/ped funding.

2

Encourage bicycle & Develop handbook of bicycle and pedestrian GDOT, DCA, local city planning

pedestrian friendly friendly land use regulations for use by local offices and planning boards, GA

development.

government planning offices and neighborhood Tech (planning school and/or

groups. Work with cities and counties to enact Center for Quality Growth)

land use regulations that: require showers and

secure bike parking for employees or create

incentives for businesses that provide them;

require bike and ped facilities as part of new

developments and subdivisions; require

pedestrian-oriented urban design (ped scale,

parking in rear, etc); and driveway

consolidation and access management.

3

Install secure, covered Also, evaluate possibility for a "bike station" MARTA, GRTA, CCT, C-trans,

bicycle parking at pilot project (similar to Chicago's Millennium other transit agencies, ABC, GA

MARTA and park & Park bike station).

Bikes

ride lots.

4

Create statewide

Model after Clean Air Campaign's Commuter GDOT, GOHS, MPOs, RDCs,

Transportation

Awards program to expand statewide. Host an TMAs

Alternatives

annual event and conduct year-round activities

Campaign

to encourage people to bike and walk to

work/school, etc.

5

Expand Safe Routes Partner with other organizations or agencies to GDOT, RDCs, MPOs, DOE,

to School

expand SRTS to more schools. Continue GDOT GOHS, bike/ped organizations,

contracts with RDCs to develop SRTS plans.

6

Sunday/Holiday road Fully or partially close roads to motor vehicle GDOT, Local City jurisdiction,

closings

traffic on a Sunday and/or Holiday to encourage GDED, GDPH, TMAs

biking and walking and other activities, such as

skating or jogging.

Enforcement
Priority Task

Description

Responsible Agencies

1

Conduct Speed and

Provide funding for sting operations and

Georgia State Patrol, University

crosswalk enforcement at enforcement efforts

police, GOHS

pedestrian safety hot

spots

2

Train law enforcement Work through law enforcement training

GOHS, State Law Enforcement

officers in pedestrian and center and GOHS' monthly law enforcement Training Center in Forsyth, GA,

bicycle laws, crash

meetings. Trainings will help improve crash PEDS

reporting, and safety reporting, driver/rider/walker behavior and

Page 34 of 40

issues

help prevent injuries.

3

Improve the reporting of Revise state police crash reports form to

GDOT, GOHS, law

bicycle and pedestrian include more information on bike/ped

enforcement agencies.

crashes

crashes.

Legislation/Laws

Task

Description

Responsible Agencies

Priority (not assigned yet)

Pass new law to allow use Pass new legislation to allow speed camera

GDOT, GOHS,

of speed cameras in school enforcement in school zones and construction zones. DOE Agency

zones

Revenue from fines, after operating costs, go to leadership

GDOT Georgia Safe Routes to School program and

GOHS traffic/pedestrian/bicycle safety programs

Pass "Stop for Bus" law and post signs on backs of buses

Pass new law requiring that motorists stop for buses MARTA,

that are loading/unloading passengers (like the stop GRTA, GOHS

for school buses law).

Agency

leadership

Change law (40-14-8) to permit law enforcement to ticket motorists speeding within 10 mph over the speed limit.

This would allow for more enforcement in neighborhoods and on non-interstate locations. The difference of 5 or 10 mph in a bike or ped crash can mean the difference between surviving the crash or not.

GOHS and law enforcement Agency Leadership

Change Super Speeder Law Change law to include anyone driving more than 20 GOHS and law

to include lower speed mph over speed limit on roads with 45mph speed enforcement

roads where bikes/peds are limit or less.

Agency

more prevalent.

Leadership

Define or refine definitions Change "bicycle" to be a "vehicle", not a "device", DDS, GOHS

in the Georgia Code

including multi-wheeled bicycles, and bicycles with Agency

a wheel <13" in diameter.

Leadership

Include definitions for skaters, skateboards, etc.

Change law to make it legal to ride a bicycle on the sidewalk under certain conditions, such as bicyclists under the age of 16.

Change definition of Bicycle Path to "Shared use Path" (since paths are never exclusive to bicycle use)

Delete sidepath law (40-6- Delete law replace with a law that prohibits

294 c and d)

jurisdictions from requiring bicyclists to use

sidepaths. This law conflicts with other laws giving

bicycles the same rights and responsibilities as

motor vehicles.

DDS, GOHS Agency Leadership

Page 35 of 40

Change 40-6-21 meaning Change meaning of the flashing don't walk signal DDS, GOHS

of the flashing don't walk when displayed with a countdown timer to mean that Agency

signal

pedestrians can start walking across the crosswalk at Leadership

anytime during the countdown phase, as long as they

are out of the crosswalk by the time the countdown

gets to zero.

Increase fines and penalties Change 40-6-270(b) to read "If such accident is the DDS, GOHS

for injuring a person in hit proximate cause of death or a injury, any person Agency

and run crashes

knowingly failing to stop and comply with the

Leadership

requirements of subsection (a) of this Code section

shall be guilty of a felony and, upon conviction

thereof, shall be punished by imprisonment for not

less than one nor more than five years."

Change 40-6-270(c)(1) to read "If such accident resulted in damage to vehicle which is driven or attended by any person, any person knowingly failing to stop or comply with the requirements of this Code section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor..."

Change law regarding requirement to use overcrossing or undercrossing (40-692(b))

Include exceptions to law for ADA accessibility, DDS, GOHS

personal security, or excessive walking distance to Agency

reach the over/underpass

Leadership

Develop new standard for Change law from current obsolete and confusing law DDS, GOHS

bicycle brakes

(40-6-296(b)) which measures brakes on skidding Agency

distance. Develop new standard for bicycle brakes. Leadership

Remove 40-6-92(c)

This law is very confusing and difficult to enforce, DDS, GOHS

(pedestrian crossing

and does not necessarily improve safety or access. Agency

between adjacent signalized Eliminate this provision and replace it with one that Leadership

intersections can only cross prohibits crossing within 150 feet of a traffic signal

at crosswalks)

unless using a marked crosswalk.

Broaden definition of crosswalk to include unmarked crosswalks at T intersections

Currently pedestrians do not have the right-of-way or legal protection at unmarked crosswalks at Tintersections.

DDS, GOHS Agency Leadership

Change law requiring that Provision should be included to require that light bikes be equipped with rear functions as a reflector when the battery is dead. red reflectors (40-6296(a)) to allowing red lights instead of red reflector

DDS, GOHS Agency Leadership

Remove or create exception Many bicycles are designed with "clipless pedals" DDS, GOHS

to law requiring that all which requires that the cyclist clips his/her shoe into Agency

bikes sold be equipped with the clip. There are no pedals on these bicycles the Leadership

reflectors on pedals. (40- reflectors are on the shoes and other parts of the

6-297)

bicycle.

Remove or make exception Changing this law would make recumbent bicycles DDS, GOHS

to law requiring that pedals street legal.

Agency

Page 36 of 40

to be no more than 12" off the ground (40-6-296(d)).
Increase fines for excessive Change 40-6-1 to increase fines for driving >5 to speeding in <35mph areas 10mph above the speed limit on streets with limits
<35mph. The current fine of $35 is not sufficient penalty to discourage the action.

Leadership
DDS, GOHS Agency Leadership

I. SYSTEMWIDE ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS
Engineering Countermeasures
Integrate bicycle and pedestrian facility needs into all planning, design, construction and maintenance activities of the Department of Transportation, local governments and other transportation providers (such as sidewalks, shoulders, crossing enhancements, pedestrian signals, etc.).
Create policy to fund crosswalk and curb ramp improvements as part of GDOT resurfacing projects.
On federally-funded and state-funded projects, require counties and cities to meet or exceed GDOT standards for medians, channelization islands, crosswalks, pedestrian signals, etc.
Expand the staff of state pedestrian and bicycle program to include a planner or engineer whose primary role is to conduct project reviews of GDOT and state/federally funded projects for inclusion of bicycle and pedestrian safety and accessibility features.
Develop policy and criteria for using Leading Pedestrian Intervals. Possible locations include T-intersections and intersections with significant right turn movements and pedestrians.
GDOT adopt policy to consider narrowing travel lanes as part of resurfacing projects to accommodate a bikeable shoulder. Develop guidelines for travel lane widths according to speed, truck percentages, etc...
Develop a "safety audit" process for all road improvement projects in the State Transportation Improvement Program and prioritize projects based on outcomes.
Identify high bicycle and pedestrian crash locations and develop countermeasures to improve safety. Construct projects with federal Safety funds as well as opportunities to piggyback these projects with other road improvement projects. Countermeasures that might be built through this program include but are not limited to: Raised medians and crossing islands Countdown pedestrian signals at intersections Pedestrian signals at pedestrian crossings Pedestrian beacon (HAWK) at pedestrian crossings Protected only left turns Flashing yellow arrow for protected-permissive phasing (GDOT needs to accept this first). Leading Pedestrian Intervals Changes to signal timing (cycle lengths, phasing)
Require access management plans as part of GDOT and local projects.
Page 37 of 40

Encourage land use policies that promote bikeable/walkable streets, community design that promotes walking, biking and transit use, driveway consolidation/access management, and lower speeds.
Develop a program to review urban streets for opportunities for road diets. Evaluate GDOT driveway policy for possible improvements to pedestrian safety:
Evaluate the possibility of increasing the warrants (i.e. minimum number of turning vehicles per hour) for a driveway deceleration/acceleration lane in urban areas, residential areas, school zones, and roads with speeds of 35 mph or less.
Develop new design standards for driveways and sidewalks through driveways to encourage slow speed turns and yielding to pedestrians.
Develop criteria for use of the Florida right turn slip lane design standard under certain conditions and include in GDOT design policy manual.
Develop a policy to set pedestrian signals to automatically display the WALK signal whenever the concurrent traffic signal is circular green.
GDOT adopt policy that when bridges are closed due to structural deficiency, they remain open for bicycle and pedestrian traffic if bridge conditions safely allow. This could encourage bicycle and pedestrian traffic and allow a transportation facility to remain partially useful to the public.
II. SITE-SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS FOR HIGH CRASH AREAS
Bicycle Safety Projects:
1. Priority Area One: Midtown/Poncey-Highland Area of Atlanta (North Ave., Ponce de Leon, N. Highland, and vicinity)
a. Mark bike lanes on Virginia Ave as possible alternate route to Ponce b. Add "sharrows" (shared lane markings) to N. Highland due to not enough space for bike
lanes and to encourage bicycles to stay out of the door zone c. Add bicycle signage to North Ave., Ponce de Leon, N. Highland, Virginia Avenues d. Do a road diet on North Ave west of Freedom Parkway and add bike lanes. This portion
of North has excess capacity, and the bike lanes would also help to improve sight distance for vehicles entering from side streets, shorten the crossing distance and reduce speeds. e. Work with Ponce de Leon Pedestrian Safety Project to incorporate bicycle safety elements where possible
2. Priority Area Two: Athens/UGA area (Prince St., Baxter St., Broad St., Oconee St.):
a. Evaluate the possibility of marking bike lanes or shoulders on Prince, Baxter, Broad, and Oconee Streets.
b. Identify and mark alternative routes where necessary c. Use sharrows and signage where roads are too narrow for bike lanes
Page 38 of 40

3. Priority Area Three: Savannah (Montgomery Cross Rd, Derenne Ave., 40th St., Henry St., Lincoln St., )
a. Evaluate the possibility of marking bike lanes or shoulders on Montgomery Cross Rd., Derenne Ave., 40th Street, Henry St., Lincoln Street and surrounding principal streets.
b. Identify and mark alternative routes where necessary c. Use sharrows and signage where roads are too narrow for bike lanes
4. Continue to review crash data and analysis crash reports to identify bicycle crash "hot spots" and develop safety projects.
Pedestrian Safety Projects:
1. Priority Area One: Metropolitan Ave @ Cleveland Ave (intersection project) b. Restripe crosswalks and add accessible curb ramps and signals
2. Study turning movements and add protected left turn or eliminate right turns on red if needed
3. Evaluate signal timing and make adjustments as needed is wait time for the walk light too long? Is walk phase too short? Does this intersection have many red light runners (can we add a camera here?)?
4. Evaluate need for a Leading Pedestrian Interval 5. Evaluate need for medians 6. Tighten curb radii and create concrete raised crossing islands if warranted
Evaluate crash reports for the following to determine countermeasures (may include median refuge islands, signal improvements, signing and marking, etc):
1. Priority Area Two: Roswell Rd, Fulton County
2. Priority Area Three: Peachtree Street & Peachtree Rd, Fulton County
3. Priority Area Four: Bankhead Hwy, Fulton County
4. Priority Area Five: Glenwood Ave, Dekalb County
5. Priority Area Six: Covington Hwy, Dekalb County
6. Priority Area Seven: Candler Rd. Dekalb County
7. Priority Area Eight: Riverdale Rd., Clayton County
8. Priority Area Nine: Moreland Ave., Dekalb County
9. Priority Area Ten: Boulevard Dr., Fulton
Page 39 of 40

10. Continue to review crash data and analysis crash reports to identify pedestrian crash "hot spots" and develop safety projects
Page 40 of 40