Georgia bicycle safety action plan 2018

GEORGIA
BICYCLE SAFETY ACTION PLAN 2018

Message from Georgia Bikes
On behalf of the Board of Directors and Staff of Georgia Bikes, we would like to thank you for taking an interest in bicycles as a safe, convenient way of transportation and recreation in Georgia. We are convinced that bicycles have a major role to play in the future of Georgia's transportation network, as well as for community wellness and statewide tourism. We hope this document can be used by policymakers, practitioners, advocates, and everyone in-between to help achieve the goals of decreasing crashes and fatalities while making bicycling in urban, suburban, and rural contexts more comfortable and enjoyable.
Through our efforts as an organization, along with partners like the Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) and the Georgia Governor's Office of Highway Safety (GOHS), we would like to make Georgia a better place for people of all ages and backgrounds to ride a bicycle, whether they live in or visit the mountains of the north, the busy Metropolitan Atlanta area, the flat fields of the south, or along the beautiful coast.
We would like to thank the many people and organizations who contributed to and supported the Bicycle Safety Action Plan, especially the Bicycle Safety Task Team (whose membership is full of very helpful people and institutions but is too long to list here), Dr. Dustin Tracy, the University of Georgia Traffic Safety Research Evaluation Group, the University of Georgia's Survey Research Center, Voices for Healthy Kids, Public Opinion Strategies, and the many bicycle enthusiasts and advocates who filled out surveys online and in person.
Specials thanks to the GDOT and GOHS staff who have been instrumental in this work over the years, especially Katelyn DiGioia and Jessica Driver.
And a tip of the cycling cap to former Georgia Bikes Executive Director Brent Buice, who did much of the heavy lifting for this plan and has remained a steadfast and dependable friend of anyone who rides a bicycle in Georgia.
Enjoy the ride,
Elliott Caldwell Executive Director Georgia Bikes
2

Table of Contents
Message from Georgia Bikes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Purpose of the Bicycle Safety Action Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Key Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Statewide Bicycle Safety Vision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Statewide Bicycle Safety Goal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Statewide Strategy Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Bikeability + Safety Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Statewide Data Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Moving Forward at the State Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Moving Forward at the Local Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Appendixes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Executive Summary
With bicycle ridership on the rise in Georgia and across the United States, bicycle safety should be of paramount concern to all road way users. People are using bicycles for transportation and recreation, reaching parts of the state, urban to rural, that had previously seen much less bicycle traffic. The Bicycle Safety Action Plan that follows seeks to assess the current state of bicycle safety in the state of Georgia with a goal of improving the crash injury and fatality rate while simultaneously making Georgia a safer and better place to ride a bicycle.
Purpose of the Bicycle Safety Action Plan (BSAP)
The BSAP provides guidance to the Georgia Department of Transportation, Georgia Governor's Office of Highway Safety and to law enforcement agencies, bicycle safety advocates, local and regional agencies, and others.
Key purposes of the plan include:
Identifying the current state of bicycle safety in Georgia. Increasing statewide understanding of bicycle crashes. Promoting objective, data-driven decision making. Promoting appropriate levels of investment and funding towards bicycle safety solutions. Aligning bicycle safety funding and resources with proven safety countermeasures and targeting locations with high needs and opportunities for success. Identifying priority counties, cities, and corridors to focus resources for bicycle safety.
Key Findings
Bicycle crash data provides valuable information that can inform safety objectives and actions taken as a part of a statewide plan. When and where casualties and fatalities are occurring, who is being hit, and other pieces of crucial information can help the BSAP make important determinations concerning appropriate counter-measures and solutions. From 20052015, 5834 vehicle-bicycle crashes occurred in Georgia. The crashes resulted in 4482 injuries, of which were 63 fatal.
4

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
From 20052015: Nearly 77% of crashes resulted in injuries, 1.4% of crashes resulted in fatalities Of all bicycle casualties (including injuries and fatalities) 72% were male Mean age was 31 years old 51% of the time, the person riding the bicycle was assigned fault Nearly half of all crashes, 48%, occurred in the 5 biggest cities in Georgia
Statewide Bicycle Safety Vision A safe and accessible environment that supports and encourages increased levels of bicycling. All state, local, and regional transportation agencies provide a transportation system where bicycling is a viable transportation choice, and residents and visitors are able to bike safely and conveniently to accomplish their daily activities while maintaining active and healthy lifestyles.
Statewide Bicycle Safety Goals A statewide bicycle safety goal to reduce bicyclist crashes, injuries and fatalities, with a vision of moving towards zero deaths. By 2025, under 15 fatalities and 32 major injuries a year.
In addition, a broad goal of increasing bicycle mode share in urban areas and promoting bicycle tourism on safe, inviting, and well-marked routes.
Statewide Strategy Summary The Georgia Bicycle Safety Action Plan prioritizes strategies organized under 4 topic areas. Each is supported by individual actions that are detailed later in the plan.
Objective 1 Gather data that helps optimize selection of bicycle safety improvements
Strategy 1.1: Continue to map collision data, update annually and use it to target key corridors and hot spots for road safety audits and improvements.
Strategy 1.2: Develop a strategic bicycle count program in targeted urban areas with regional partners in order to develop rates of collisions and fatalities.
Strategy 1.3: Develop method and track the annual miles built of bikeable shoulders, bike lanes, and protected bike lanes.
5

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Strategy 1.4: Implement at least two road safety audits per year in each of the GDOT districts that consider bicycle safety when appropriate.
Strategy 1.5: Use data on the injury outcomes of bicyclists involved in collisions who are taken to hospitals and trauma centers to guide safety improvements.
Objective 2 - Systematically & reliably incorporate proven bicyclist safety countermeasures during the design process
Strategy 2.1: Develop and implement procedures for incorporating bicycle safety improvements into maintenance projects on corridors identified by crash data as highrisk for bicyclists ("twinning").
Strategy 2.2: Assess state and federally-funded projects for bicycle improvements early in the planning stage.
Strategy 2.3: Incorporate bicycle safety strategies and performance measures into state transportation plans; incorporate bicyclist safety treatments into Complete Streets Guidelines, Georgia Streetscapes and Pedestrian Design Guide, and the Driveway Manual.
Strategy 2.4: Incorporate bicycle safety strategies and performance measures into regional transportation plans, MPO TIP's, and LRTP's.
Strategy 2.5: Develop case for funding full time Complete Streets engineer within the Georgia DOT.
Objective 3 - Train and engage partners on strategies that will increase bicyclist safety
Strategy 3.1: Develop and implement a targeted "Three Foot Passing Law" campaign using advertising outlets such as billboards, gas pump toppers, bus wraps, and signs on police cars.
Strategy 3.2: Document the enforcement of the 3 foot law
Strategy 3.3: Provide training workshops on designing streets for bicycle safety to transportation professionals, including for-profit and non-profit, government officials and others.
Strategy 3.4: Improve the capacity of school-based and for-profit driver's education programs by assessing current programs, developing and distributing new materials and providing training.
6

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Strategy 3.5: Expand the driver's permit test question bank to include questions about the three foot passing law. Strategy 3.6: Engage a law enforcement officer with the Bicycle Safety Task Team to assist with a broader enforcement campaign. Offer a small number of competitive grants to police agencies to implement a pilot targeted 3 foot passing law program. Strategy 3.7: Provide annual bicyclist summits or trainings targeting transportation and public health professionals, elected officials, advocates and others. Strategy 3.8: Develop short videos (in the style of public service announcements) explaining bicycle related laws for law enforcement offices to be shown in between officer shifts. Objective 4 - Establish and allocate funding streams needed to achieve all strategies Strategy 4.1: Document current allocation of HSIP, STP Urban, and 402 funds that are going to bicycle safety education and infrastructure improvements. Strategy 4.2: Use `Share the Road' tag revenues and funding from other state sources to annually fund bicycle safety outreach and education provided by nonprofit organizations such as Georgia Bikes, BikeAthens, Savannah Bicycle Campaign, the Atlanta Bicycle Coalition, and others.
7

INTRODUCTION
Background
On December 4, 2015, President Obama signed the Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act (Pub. L. No. 114-94) into law--the first federal law in over a decade to provide long-term funding certainty for surface transportation infrastructure planning and investment. The FAST Act authorizes $305 billion over fiscal years 2016 through 2020 for highway, highway and motor vehicle safety, public transportation, motor carrier safety, hazardous materials safety, rail, and research, technology, and statistics programs. The FAST Act maintains our focus on safety, keeps intact the established structure of the various highway-related programs we manage, continues efforts to streamline project delivery and, for the first time, provides a dedicated source of federal dollars for freight projects.
With the enactment of the FAST Act, states and local governments are now moving forward with critical transportation projects with the confidence that they will have a federal partner over the long term. A Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) is a major component and requirement of the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) (23 U.S.C. 148). It is a statewide-coordinated safety plan that provides a comprehensive framework for reducing highway fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads. An SHSP identifies a State's key safety needs and guides investment decisions towards strategies and countermeasure with the most potential to save lives and prevent injuries. SHSPs were first required under SAFETEA-LU, which established the HSIP as a core federal program. The Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act continues the HSIP as a core Federal-aid program and the requirement for States to develop, implement, evaluate and update an SHSP that identifies and analyzes highway safety problems and opportunities on all public roads.
An SHSP is developed by the State Department of Transportation in a cooperative process with Local, State, Federal, Tribal and other public and private sector safety stakeholders. It is a data-driven, multi-year comprehensive plan that establishes statewide goals, objectives, and key emphasis areas and integrates the four E's of highway safety engineering, education, enforcement and emergency medical services (EMS). The SHSP allows highway safety programs and partners in the State to work together in an effort to align goals, leverage resources and collectively address the State's safety challenges.
Georgia's first SHSP was completed and adopted by Governor Sonny Perdue in October 2006, and updated again in October 2007 and 2010. 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 task team was convened, headed by Georgia Department of Transportation's State Bicycle and Pedestrian Coordinator, to develop the Bicycle Safety Action Plan.
8

INTRODUCTION
Since 2004, FHWA's Safety Office has been working to aggressively reduce pedestrian deaths by focusing extra resources on the cities and states with the highest pedestrian fatalities and/ or fatality rates. The states and cities were revised in 2015 to include bikes and to what you currently see in this map. For more information on how the states and cities were selected visit the Office of Safety's Focused Approach Website. In 2005, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) identified Georgia as one of these "focus states".
Purpose The purpose of the Bicycle Safety Action Plan is to identify current conditions, safety problems and needs, and to determine future funding and programs. The Safety Action Plan must be comprehensive in scope and should address education, enforcement, engineering, emergency response, and evaluation. The bicycle 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.
9

INTRODUCTION

Coalition
The task team consists of members from over 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 it will play in integral role in implementing the plan.

Georgia Bicycle Task Team member organizations:

Georgia Bikes

Georgia Environmental Protection Division

Association of County Commissioners of Georgia

Dept. of Community Affairs, Office of Planning & Quality Growth

GDOT, Office of Consultant Design

Georgia Municipal Association

Atlanta Bicycle Coalition BikeAthens Savannah Bicycle Campaign Bike Alpharetta Georgia Trails Alliance Bike Walk Macon River Valley Regional Commission GDOT, Office of Maintenance Atlanta Regional Commission GDOT, Office of Road Design Center for Quality Growth & Regional Development at Georgia Tech GDOT, Office of Traffic Safety & Design Chatham Co-Savannah Metro Planning Commission GDOT, Office of Urban Design City of Atlanta, Bureau of Planning City of Decatur Georgia Department of Driver Services, Customer Service, Licensing & Records Division Clean Air Campaign

Department of Education, Office of Pupil Transportation Georgia Regional Transportation Authority Dept. of Human Resources (DHR), Div. of Public Health (DPH), Office of EMS/Trauma Governor's Office of Highway Safety (Law Enforcement & Planning Offices) DHR, DHR, Office of Injury Prevention Institute of Transportation Engineers/GA Section DHR, DPH, Office of Chronic Disease (Physical Activity/Obesity initiative) MARTA FHWA - GA Division North Georgia Regional Development Center
School of Civil & Environmental Engineering, Georgia Tech PATH Foundation PEDS GDOT, District 7, Traffic Operations Perimeter Transportation Coalition Valdosta-Lowndes Metropolitan Planning Organization

10

INTRODUCTION
Stakeholders Agencies whose missions, goals, and/or programs have a stake in the BSAP include: GDOT, state and local biking and walking advocacy organizations, MPOs, regional commissions, Safe Routes to School Resource Center, public and private sector traffic engineers and transportation planners, traffic enforcement officers, Governor's Office of Highway Safety, and the Georgia Municipal Association.
11

BIKEABILITY + SAFETY OVERVIEW
Bikeability/Safety Overview
Key Issues Accessibility and Equity Our public system of streets, roads, and bridges are a resource available to all for the purpose of mobility. Whether we ride a bicycle, walk, drive a motor vehicle, or use a wheelchair, we all should have equitable access to the transportation commons represented by our roadway network. For decades, transportation planners and traffic engineers have focused solely on the rapid, efficient movement of motor vehicles, to the detriment of other modes, including bicycling. Multi-lane configurations and roadway geometries that promote high speeds, coupled with an absence of safe facilities for non-motorized road users, has led to lower rates of bicycling, increased casualty rates for people bicycling, and a wide range of equity, quality of life and public health issues that arise from engineered motor vehicle dependence. A key goal of this plan is to reverse this trend by fostering programming and investments that will make bicycling safe, viable, and welcoming transportation options for residents and visitors.
Economic Communities that rank higher in bikeability are thriving, desirable places to live and do business. Businesses that exist along bicycle corridors see increased sales over comparable businesses on motor vehicle only routes. Bicycle Friendly Communities enjoy higher property values, more tourism revenue, and improved public health. Cities that proactively encourage bicycling for transportation see lower roadway maintenance costs. Businesses benefit from higher productivity and lower absenteeism when their workforce engages in daily routine exercise like bicycling and walking. Streets and roads that allow all residents to access jobs, no matter how they travel, fosters economically stable families and local economies. Investments in bicycle infrastructure are dramatically cheaper than most transportation projects and the ROI on multi-modal projects is highly favorable and well documented. By creating and improving conditions for safe bicycling, Georgia's communities will reap significant economic benefits.
Health, Quality of life, and the Environment Routine, daily exercise like bicycling is a proven strategy to decrease a community's rates of chronic diseases like heart disease and diabetes. Polling data, both from Georgia and nationally reflects a strong desire for bikeable, walkable neighborhoods, waterfronts, and downtown business districts. People enjoy proximity to multi-use paths and want their children to be able to walk or bicycle to school. Obviously, increased rates of bicycling will lead to lower levels of carbon emissions, which will improve air quality and contribute to a more stable environment.
12

BIKEABILITY + SAFETY OVERVIEW
Safety, Polling and Data The most urgent issue related to bicycling in Georgia is safety. Bicyclist and pedestrian fatalities have been on the rise for several years running. 2016 saw a 9% increase in non-motorized roadway user fatalities over 2015. In total, people walking and bicycling represented more than 15% of total roadway fatalities in the state, a distinction that made Georgia eligible for newly authorized section 405(h) federal funding to educate the public and law enforcement on this important safety trend.
For qualitative data, Georgia Bikes has conducted statewide polling on public perceptions of bicycle safety. In collaboration with the Governor's Office of Highway Safety and the University of Georgia's Survey Research Center, Georgia Bikes completed the first ever statewide survey of Georgians' attitudes toward and awareness of bicycling issues in 2011.
Key findings from the survey regarding safety:
13% of adult Georgians ride a bicycle at least once per month 81% of respondents either strongly agreed (37.0%) or agreed (43.9%) that they would
ride a bicycle more frequently if their community had better bicycle facilities such as bike lanes or multi-use paths. 66% of respondents report that more driver education about the rights of bicyclists is either extremely important (21.1%) or very important (43.5%). 92% of respondents either strongly agreed (39.5%) or agreed (52.9%) that they would feel safer knowing that the law required a 3-foot safe passing distance for cars passing bicycles. The full survey report is available here.
In 2016, thanks to generous support from Voices for Healthy Kids (project of the American Heart Association and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation), Georgia Bikes conducted the state's first ever multi-city public opinion poll on people>s attitudes toward Complete Streets policies and creating safer streets and neighborhoods for walking and biking.
The polling focused on likely voters in five Georgia cities: Athens, Augusta, Columbus, Macon, and Savannah. Telephone interviews and data analysis were managed by Public Opinion Strategies, one of the nation's leading public opinion research firms specializing in political, public affairs, public policy, and corporate positioning research.
13

INTRODUCTION
Executive Summary of results:
1. Voters in these five Georgia cities overwhelmingly support (84%+) Complete Streets policies that encourage cities to create safe crosswalks, sidewalks, and protected bike lanes. The support crosses partisan, racial, and gender lines.
2. There is also strong support (86%) for investing transportation dollars in street safety improvements like sidewalks and protected bike lanes.
3. Georgians support slower motor vehicle speeds in cities to foster safer streets for people who walk and ride bicycles.
The full survey report is available here.
Bicycle Safety Action Plan Surveys For the BSAP, specifically, two major public feedback efforts solicited input on Georgians' perceptions of bicycling safety, their priorities and goals for improving bicycling safety, and their hopes and expectations for this document.
The first effort consisted of an online survey, created in Google Forms, which was emailed to local bicycle safety advocacy organizations as well as recreational riding clubs and bicycle retailers throughout the state. Georgia Bikes promoted the poll on social media outlets and its website as well. 811 responses were received.
As complementary public engagement, we also surveyed attendees of the 2016 Georgia Bike Summit at the Westin Jekyll Island. Georgia Bikes collected 83 survey responses to four questions. Summary of response text analysis for the nearly 900 respondents is below:
Q1. How respondents will be a "champion" for bike safety Top responses: Providing bicyclist education, e.g. Smart Cycling classes Educating drivers about bicyclist rights and safe driving practices Advocating locally for improved infrastructure
Q2. What are key barriers to bike safety Top responses: Lack of infrastructure Lack of funding Lack of political will to improve bicycling
14

Q3. Best strategies for improving bike safety Top responses: Providing driver education on bicyclist rights and safe driving practices Improving infrastructure to create safe places to ride
Q4. How to make BSAP more useful and practical Top responses: Contains clear, accurate data on crashes Provides design guidance Offers implementation guidance, case studies

STATEWIDE DATA FINDINGS
Statewide Data, Findings
Bicyclist Fatalities, 20052015 In 2016, Georgia Bikes contracted with a Georgia State University Andrew Young School of Public Policy PhD in Economics candidate, Dustin Tracy, to analyze crash and fatality data for the period from 2005 to 2015 quantitatively. Mr. Tracy obtained raw crash data from the University of Georgia's Traffic Safety Research Evaluation Group, who in turn obtained raw data from the Georgia Department of Transportation. In collaboration with UGA researchers, Mr. Tracy conducted deep analysis on the data, updating aberrant records, confirming data accuracy, and analyzing the confirmed data for trends and salient issues. Below are charts and graphs summarizing his work.

Overall Bicycle Crash Data (20052015)

Total # of Collisions

5,834

Total # of Bicyclist Injuries (including Fatalities)

4,482

% of Injuries by Type No Injuries Complaint of Injury Visible Injury Serious Injury Fatality

21.9% 28.3% 42.5% 5.9% 1.4%

Gender of Cyclist Male Female

84.8% 15.2%

Age of Cyclist Mean Median Mode(s)

Age range: 286 years 31 years 27 years 21 years

16

STATEWIDE DATA FINDINGS

Cyclist Motorist Both Neither/NA Pedestrian

Assigned Fault

Overall

When there are Injuries

51.2%

49.9%

30.0%

31.5%

5.0%

5.2%

13.7% 0.1%

13.3% 0.1%

When there are Fatalities
56.0% 22.7% 2.6% 18.7%
--

GA Cities + Jurisdictions w/ Most Bicycle Collisions (20052015)

City
1. Savannah 2. Atlanta 3. Augusta 4. Athens 5. Columbus 6. DeKalb County 7. Cobb County 8. Valdosta 9. Albany 10. Clayton County

# of Collisions
889 810 426 412 312 220 219 219 185 129

# of Fatalities
10 8 9 5 1 2 1 2 3 0

17

Casuality Rate per 100,000 Persons

STATEWIDE DATA FINDINGS

Bicyclist Casualities

80

30

27.442

24.005

25

60

20

40

15.68

14.056

14.47 15

20
7.774

7.975

10.308
10

6.05

4.984

0

5

Chatham Clarke Clayton Cobb
DouDgehkearltby RMiLcuoshFcwmuonlotgdnoeesnde

Bicyclist Fatalities Fatality Rate per 100,000 Persons

County Bicyclist Casualities Casuality Rate per 100,000 Persons
Bicycle crash injury rate compared to broader injury rate by county

.423
1
.373

.401
.4

.8

.319

.3

.6

.183

.2

.4

.143

.1

.2

.086

.1

.052

.038

0

0

Chatham Clarke Clayton

Cobb DekalbDougherty Fulton LowndesMuscogeeRichmond

County

Bicyclist Fatalities Fatality Rate per 100,000 Persons

Bicycle crash fatality rate compared to broader fatality rate by county 18

STATEWIDE DATA FINDINGS

Casuality Rate per 100,000 Persons

Bicyclist Casualities

500

5.5

5.319

400 5

300

4.5

200

4.251

4.096 4.051

4.08

100

3.943

3.952 3.882

4

3.679

0 2006

2008

2010

2012

Year

2014

3.5 2016

Bicyclist Casualities Casuality Rate per 100,000 Persons

Bicycle crash injury rate compared to broader injury rate by year in Georgia

.126
15 .12

.098

.1
.1

10
.075

.08

.061
.06

5

.042 .041

.04

.04

.03

.02

0 2006

2008

2010

2012

Year

2014

0 2016

Bicyclist Fatalities Fatality Rate per 100,000 Persons

Bicycle crash fatality rate compared to broader fatality rate by year in Georgia 19

Fatality Rate per 100,000 Persons

Bicyclist Fatalities

STATEWIDE DATA FINDINGS
Map of Crashes with Injuries 20052015. 20

STATEWIDE DATA FINDINGS
Map of Fatal Crashes 2005-2015. 21

STATEWIDE DATA FINDINGS
As the charts and maps show, bicycle crash injuries and fatalities are highest in cities and metropolitan areas throughout the state. However, rural and less dense counties still account for bicycle crashes; two notable bicycle crash deaths in 2016 were in Toombs and Henry counties. Bicycle crashes that result in fatalities outrace the fatality rate most notably in Metropolitan Atlanta area counties. And while year-to-year statewide bicycle fatalities keep pace with the general fatality rate, non-fatal bicycle injury rates are much higher compared to the broader rate of injury.
Priority cities in Georgia for decreasing crashes include Savannah, Atlanta, Athens, Columbus, and Augusta. Per capita, Savannah outpaces all cities in Georgia in terms of crashes and fatalities and needs desperate attention; with such a high bicycle modeshare and tourist population, many Savannahians and visitors are risking their limb and life daily as they navigate the streets of the city by bicycle. While not having the amount of crashes and fatalities of Savannah or population of Atlanta, Augusta accounts for a significant percentage of bicycle fatalities and clearly needs to be a priority city. Atlanta needs to be a focus based on sheer numbers of crashes and fatalities, combined with the recent boom of bicycle ridership associated with multi-use trails like the Beltline and as well as Relay Bike Share.
These charts show a deep need for statewide attention to bicycle safety in all parts of Georgia. Even smaller cities and areas like Valdosta/Lowndes County and Albany/ Dougherty County experienced high rates of crash injuries and fatalities. And suburban Atlanta counties with high percentages of daily bicycle ridership, like DeKalb and Clayton, deserve particular attention as the demographics and transportation habits of closer-in suburbs changed.
In each of the cities and counties listed above there are a number of priority corridors that should be focused on for improvements to bicycle safety. According to data collected as part of the Atlanta Regional Commission's Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Action Plan, major and minor arterials that are greater than 4 lanes with speed limits over 35mph are most dangerous for bicyclists both in terms of frequency of crashes and severity of injuries associated with crashes.
The priority cities listed above contain a multitude of these roads. Corridors like Prince Avenue in Athens, Abercorn Street in Savannah, Memorial Drive in Atlanta, Gray Highway in Macon, and Washington Road in Augusta are emblematic of this type of road; these corridors connect local residents to businesses, workplaces, schools, and community institutions. To decrease crash rates and increase bicycle safety across the state, these types of roads need immediate attention and improvement.
22

STATEWIDE DATA FINDINGS
Effective education and enforcement as well as creation of best practice bicycle infrastructure are two of the many ways that crashes can be decreased. See Appendix B for images of existing bicycle facilities in the state of Georgia. Some are unique and rare, like bike boxes and contra- flow/buffered lanes while others are more standard and can be found in many communities across the state.
23

MOVING FORWARD AT THE STATE LEVEL
Moving forward at the State level
The Strategic Highway Safety Plan has a clear vision for all roadway users, including people riding bicycles:
Georgia will take decisive and sustained action Towards Zero Deaths a state with zero fatalities and zero serious injuries caused by vehicle-pedestrian crashes.
Zero deaths is a long term vision and a shorter term goal is defined by this Bicycle Safety Action Plan. In the next 5 years covered by the BSAP, 2018-2023, we envision a reduction of bicycle crash injuries and fatalities to levels lower than have previously been seen in Georgia. By 2025, the goal number is to reduce annual average bicycle fatalities to 15 and under and average annual serious injuries to 32 and under.
These numbers would establish new benchmark lows in these categories for that amount of time; while we do not accept injuries or fatalities as inevitable, casualty and fatality numbers at those levels would be a turning point to improve bicycle safety in the state.
Statewide Action Plan
The Bicycle Safety Task Team has identified statewide objectives and strategies from the existing Task Team strategies list as a part of a broader Action Plan to reduce bicycle casualties and fatalities across the state.
OBJECTIVE 1: Gather data that helps optimize selection of safety improvements OBJECTIVE 2: Systematically & reliably incorporate proven bicyclist safety
countermeasures during the design process OBJECTIVE 3: Train and engage partners on strategies that will increase bicyclist safety OBJECTIVE 4: Establish and allocate funding streams needed to achieve all strategies
The prioritizing of these objectives and strategies will lead to successful implementation of actions described in the plan below and will require cooperation, communication and coordination among many safety partners, including but not limited to the GDOT, GOHS, GDPH, Georgia Bicycle Safety Task Team, local bicycle advocacy organizations, metropolitan planning organizations, local bicycle safety committees, local municipalities and counties, as well as law enforcement officers.
Implementation of the 2017 Bicycle Safety Plan will begin in 2018 and continue for a 5-year period.
24

MOVING FORWARD AT THE STATE LEVEL
Objective 1 | Gather data that helps optimize selection of safety improvements Strategy 1.1: Continue to map collision data, update annually and use it to target key corridors and hot spots for road safety audits and improvements. Category: Engineering Responsible Party: GDOT Status: 20132015 data is 98% complete as of 11/2/16. GDOT hosted a GEARS training webinar on 11/17/16.2011-2015 data is being thoroughly analyzed and mapped for the Bicycle Safety Action Plan (BSAP). Timeline: Ongoing
Strategy 1.2: Develop a strategic bicycle count program in targeted urban areas with regional partners in order to develop rates of collisions and fatalities. Category: Engineering Responsible Party: GDOT Status: Proposed to GDOT Research Advisory Group in spring 2017. Tabled for further consideration. Timeline: TBD
Strategy 1.3: Develop method and track the annual miles built of bikeable shoulders, bike lanes, and protected bike lanes. Category: Engineering Responsible Party: GDOT Status: Not in progress Timeline: TBD
25

MOVING FORWARD AT THE STATE LEVEL
Strategy 1.4: Implement at least two road safety audits per year in each of the GDOT districts that consider bicycle and pedestrian safety when appropriate. Category: Engineering Responsible Party: GDOT Status: Ongoing. Road safety audits completed in 2017 for SR 3/Metropolitan Parkway in Atlanta and SR 120/Dallas Hwy in Kennesaw. Timeline: Ongoing
Strategy 1.5: Use data on the injury outcomes of bicyclists involved in collisions who are taken to hospitals and trauma centers to guide safety improvements. Category: EMS Responsible Party: GDOT and DPH Status: Currently working with DPH to incorporate hospitalization data into the BSAP and other documents Timeline: Ongoing
Objective 2 | Systematically & reliably incorporate proven bicyclist safety countermeasures during the design process
Strategy 2.1: Develop and implement procedures for incorporating bicycle safety improvements into maintenance projects on corridors identified by crash data as highrisk for bicyclists ("twinning"). Category: Engineering Responsible Party: GDOT Status: Ongoing. GDOT Chief Engineer issued memo instructing GDOT districts to coordinate resurfacing projects with local jurisdictions and ID opportunities to incorporate safety improvements. Timeline: Continued training and implementation with GDOT districts in 2018
26

MOVING FORWARD AT THE STATE LEVEL
Strategy 2.2: Assess state and federally-funded projects for bicycle improvements early in the planning stage. Category: Engineering Responsible Party: GDOT Status: Ongoing. Continuing to systematically review concepts. Timeline: Ongoing
Strategy 2.3: Incorporate bicycle safety strategies and performance measures into state transportation plans; incorporate bicycle safety treatments into Complete Streets Guidelines, Georgia Streetscapes and Pedestrian Design Guide, & the Driveway Manual Category: Engineering Responsible Party: GDOT Status: GDOT Pedestrian and Streetscape Guide will be updated in 2017; consultant has been hired by GDOT. GDOT Driveway Manual needs to be reviewed in full. Timeline: 2017-2018
Strategy 2.4: Incorporate bicycle safety strategies and performance measures into regional transportation plans, MPO TIP's, and LRTP's. Category: Engineering Responsible Party: GDOT Status: Ongoing Timeline: Ongoing
27

MOVING FORWARD AT THE STATE LEVEL
Strategy 2.5: Develop case for funding full time Complete Streets engineer within the Georgia DOT. Category: Engineering Responsible Party: GDOT Status: Current intern position has expanded capacity of Bike/Ped Engineer and provided support to Complete Streets assessments. Traffic Operations seeking to further expand program. Timeline: Ongoing
Objective 3 | Train and engage partners on strategies that will increase bicyclist safety Strategy 3.1: Develop and implement a targeted "Three Foot Passing Law" campaign using advertising outlets such as billboards, gas pump toppers, bus wraps, and signs on police cars. Category: Education Responsible Party: Georgia Bikes Status: Georgia Bikes has provided videos and audio promotional materials. Video linked here Timeline: 2017
Strategy 3.2: Document the enforcement of the 3 foot law Category: Enforcement Responsible Party: Georgia Bikes and Bicycle Safety Task Team Status: Bicycle Safety Task Team identified that it may be possible to obtain statewide data through GEARS. Data needs to be pulled and assessed. Timeline: TBD
28

MOVING FORWARD AT THE STATE LEVEL
Strategy 3.3: Provide training workshops on designing streets for bicycle safety to transportation professionals, including for-profit and non-profit, government officials and others. Category: Education Responsible Party: GDOT Status: GDOT hosted NACTO class for GDOT engineers in November 2016. FHWA Bike Design class will be hosted in July 2017. Timeline: Ongoing
Strategy 3.4: Improve the capacity of school-based and for-profit drivers education programs by assessing current programs, developing and distributing new materials and providing training. Category: Education Responsible Party: GDOT and Georgia Bikes Status: GDOT & Georgia Bikes provided edits that were incorporated in the 2016 manual. Need to re-evaluate for the 2018 manual. Timeline: Engage with DDS by end of 2017
Strategy 3.5: Expand the driver's permit test question bank to include questions about the three foot passing law. Category: Education Responsible Party: GDOT and Bicycle Safety Task Team Status: Bicycle Safety Task Team reached out to DDS in 2016 but did not gain traction with this effort. Timeline: Re-engage with DDS in early 2018
29

MOVING FORWARD AT THE STATE LEVEL
Strategy 3.5: Engage a law enforcement officer with the Bicycle Safety Task Team to assist with a broader enforcement campaign. Offer a small number of competitive grants to police agencies to implement a pilot targeted 3 foot passing law program. Category: Education / Enforcement Responsible Party: Georgia Bikes and Bicycle Safety Task Team Status: Brookhaven and Sandy Springs PD have been engaged. GOHS provides standard grants. Timeline: Ongoing
Strategy 3.6: Provide annual bicyclist summits or trainings targeting transportation and public health professionals, elected officials, advocates and others. Category: Education Responsible Party: Georgia Bikes Status: Successful summits in October 2015 in Milledgeville and October 2016 Summit in Jekyll Island; 2017 Summit will be in Macon late September/early October 2017. Timeline: Annually
Strategy 3.7: Develop short videos (in the style of public service announcements) explaining bicycle related laws for law enforcement offices to be shown in between officer shifts. Category: Enforcement Responsible Party: Georgia Bikes and Bicycle Safety Task Team Status: Not in progress Timeline: TBD
30

MOVING FORWARD AT THE STATE LEVEL
Objective 4 | Establish and allocate funding streams needed to achieve all strategies Strategy 4.1: Document current allocation of state funds (HSIP, STP Urban, 402, and other sources) that are going to bicycle safety education and infrastructure improvements. Category: All Responsible Party: GDOT and Georgia Bikes Status: All fund sources are being evaluated as a part of the Bicycle Safety Action Plan process by GDOT and Georgia Bikes Timeline: 4th quarter of 2017 Strategy 4.2: Use `Share the Road' tag revenues and funding from other state sources to annually fund bicycle safety outreach and education provided by nonprofit organizations such as Georgia Bikes, BikeAthens, Savannah Bicycle Campaign, the Atlanta Bicycle Coalition, and governmental agencies. Category: All Responsible Party: GOHS and Georgia Bikes Status: All fund sources are being evaluated as a part of the Bicycle Safety Action Plan process by GDOT and Georgia Bikes Timeline: 4th quarter of 2017"
31

PERFORMANCE REPORT CARD

Performance Report Card
The Performance Report Card will track annual progress towards the goals of the BSAP. It will track outputs, such as completed action items. It will also track outcomes, including the number of pedestrian fatalities. The Performance Report Card will be published annually and shared statewide. Data will be collected for crash related outcomes, non-crash related outcomes, and outputs for each action item listed in the BSAP.

Crash Related Outcomes
Annual Bicyclist Crashes
Annual Bicyclist Injuries
Annual Bicyclist Fatalities
% fatalities in relation to overall traffic deaths

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022

1018 993

744 726

23

29

2%

2%

Data Source GEARS GEARS FARS
FARS

Non-Crash Related Outcomes
# of Georgia cities designated as Bicycle Friendly Communities
# of Georgia businesses designated as Bicycle Friendly Businesses
# of Georgia universities designated as Bicycle Friendly Universities
# of School Partners participating in Safe Routes to School

2015 8


# of Schools with Adopted Travel Plans



# of Communities with

adopted Complete

21

Street Policies

Percent of Georgia residents bicycling to work

2016 8

2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 10

Data Source
League of American Bicyclists

15

19

League of American Bicyclists

5

5



427



27

22

23

League of American Bicyclists
GA SRTS Resource
Center
GA SRTS Resource
Center
Smart Growth America website

.2%

ACS

32

PERFORMANCE REPORT CARD

Output

Baseline 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022

Objective 1: Gather data that helps optimize selection of safety improvements

Strategy 1.1: Continue to map collision data, update annually and use it to target key corridors and hot spots for road safety audits and improvements.

Strategy 1.2: Develop a strategic bicycle count program in targeted urban areas with regional partners in order to develop rates of collisions and fatalities.

Strategy 1.3: Develop method and track the annual miles built of bikeable shoulders, bike lanes, and protected bike lanes.

Strategy 1.4: Implement at least two

road safety audits per year in each of the GDOT districts that consider bicycle and

2

pedestrian safety when appropriate.

Strategy 1.5: Use data on the injury outcomes of bicyclists involved in collisions who are taken to hospitals and trauma centers to guide safety improvements.

Objective 2: Systematically & reliably incorporate proven bicyclist safety countermeasures during the design process
Strategy 2.1: Develop and implement procedures for incorporating bicycle safety improvements into maintenance projects on corridors identified by crash data as highrisk for bicyclists ("twinning").
Strategy 2.2: Assess state and federallyfunded projects for bicycle improvements early in the planning stage
Strategy 2.3: Incorporate bicycle safety strategies and performance measures into state transportation plans; incorporate bicyclist safety treatments into Complete Streets Guidelines, Georgia Streetscapes and Pedestrian Design Guide, and the Driveway Manual.
Strategy 2.4: Incorporate bicycle safety strategies and performance measures into regional transportation plans, MPO TIP's, and LRTP's.
Strategy 2.5: Develop case for funding full time Complete Streets engineer within the Georgia DOT.
33

PERFORMANCE REPORT CARD

Outputs

Baseline 2018 2019 2020 2021

Objective 3: Train and engage partners on strategies that will increase bicyclist safety

Strategy 3.1: Develop and implement a targeted "Three Foot Passing Law" campaign using advertising outlets such as billboards, gas pump toppers, bus wraps, and signs on police cars.

Strategy 3.2: Document the enforcement of the 3 foot passing law

Strategy 3.3: Provide training workshops on designing streets for bicycle safety to transportation professionals, including forprofit and non-profit, government officials and others.
Strategy 3.4: Improve the capacity of school-based and for-profit driver's education programs by assessing current programs, developing and distributing new materials and providing training.

Strategy 3.5: Expand the driver's permit test question bank to include questions about the three foot passing law

Strategy 3.6: Engage a law enforcement officer with the Bicycle Safety Task Team to assist with a broader enforcement campaign. Offer a small number of competitive grants to police agencies to implement a pilot targeted 3 foot passing law program.
Strategy 3.7: Provide annual bicyclist summits or trainings targeting transportation and public health professionals, elected officials, advocates and others.
Strategy 3.8: Develop short videos (in the style of public service announcements) explaining bicycle related laws for law enforcement offices to be shown in between officer shifts.
Objective 4: Establish and allocate funding streams needed to achieve all strategies
Strategy 4.1: Document current allocation of state funds (HSIP, STP Urban, 402, and other sources) that are going to bicycle safety education and infrastructure improvements.
Strategy 4.2: Use `Share the Road' tag revenues and a percentage of the state's funding allocation that meets or exceeds the percentage of bicyclist highway fatalities from the previous calendar year to annually fund bicycle safety outreach and education provided by nonprofit organizations
34

2022

MOVING FORWARD AT THE LOCAL LEVEL
Moving forward at the Local Level
While state-wide action is needed to improve bicycle safety, local networks and action plans could be just as effective, working in conjunction with MPOs, Regional Commissions, and county and municipal planning and transportation departments as well as law enforcement to decrease crashes and increase access to safe and comfortable roads for bicycling.
Creating a local Bicycle Safety Action Plan
A local bicycle safety action plan can be built into a pre-existing bicycle committee at the city or county level or started from scratch with staff or even a contracted firm like Toole Design or Alta Planning as the responsible party.
At the local level, it will need to be a team effort of local staff as well as engaged citizens to make a successful plan. It is important to find an elected official who can act as champion at the local level to work with staff and city/county management on allocation of resources. Citizens should be engaged at every step of the process, through an advisory board or committee that can be appointed by elected officials or nominated through citizen outreach; it is important that all people who are involved in bicycles have a seat at the table, not just one part of the broader community. While recreational cyclists may be more connected with elected officials, daily transportation bicycle users, especially those who do not have access to motor vehicles, should be included in any committee, as well as youth, seniors, parents, women, low-income residents, immigrant communities, people with disabilities, and other often-underrepresented groups.
Local data and issues It is important for any local bicycle safety action plan to incorporate data that is specific to that area. Many regional commissions have bicycle plans and documents that can be starting places for local plans; in addition, GDOT and local engineering departments may have local data about crashes from state routes and local roads in the area. This data can illuminate initial trouble spots and places to concentrate outreach to at first
Safety issues cannot be simply assessed through quantitative crash data; people riding bicycles perception of safety will determine their interest or ability to ride on a certain street by themselves or with their families. This data can be collected qualitatively or even through mapping exercises (in-person or online) that highlight areas that people currently feel comfortable riding or would like to ride but currently do not feel comfortable.
Crucial to the collecting of local data is the connectivity of bicycle routes to locations that people want to ride to: current or planned bicycle infrastructure, current or planned trails
35

MOVING FORWARD AT THE LOCAL LEVEL
and greenways schools and colleges/universities, business districts and downtowns, job centers, parks and community centers, transit stations and hubs, neighborhood nodes, and other bicycle-friendly areas. These places need to be the highlighted points that should be prioritized in any bicycle plan.
Local Prioritization This data can be analyzed to create a template map of connected bikeways that people would rate and use as comfortable for themselves and their families. Corridors and areas with high levels of destinations and needs with low levels of connected infrastructure should be prioritized. Solutions may be context-sensitive based upon the nature of the area; rural, suburban, and rural areas may have different infrastructure solutions based on a number of factors. However, all options should be considered for all locations there may be places in rural areas where a buffered bike lane would be appropriate, just a low-traffic/stress city street may only need signage and inclusion in a neighborhood greenway plan to be comfortable for a wide array of users.
Accessibility for the widest array of users is the optimal framework for users of a bicycle network, including young people who cannot drive cars as well as older adults. Parents should be able to ride with their kids, whether on trailers, child seats, or trail-a-bikes. And new bicyclists should feel comfortable to ride alongside a seasoned veteran, both using the network to access amenities and institutions in the community.
Most importantly, equity in the plan has to be considered, acknowledging that many communities do not bicycle infrastructure despite the deep need. Many of these communities are low/moderate income, majority people of color and/or immigrant populations, and may be near or close to highways or major arterials. These communities are often more reliant on transit as well but may not have sidewalks or adequate lighting in their areas to connect them safely to rail and bus services. This creates vulnerable populations in deep need of better pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure that can connect them to transit as well as other community resources like job centers, schools and recreations centers, government institutions, medical facilities, as well as commercial nodes and parks. Equity needs to be addressed on the front end through project identification as well as the back end in the evaluation stage.
Implementation At the local level, it is crucial that there is collaboration between city/county departments that are active around bicycle safety and access. These departments would likely include planning and public works/engineering, as well as parks departments and school systems. If these departments and individuals work in silos, connections cannot be made regarding education, infrastructure, and other bicycle safety initiatives. For example, a Safe Routes to
36

MOVING FORWARD AT THE LOCAL LEVEL
Schools project that seeks to increase bicycle safety for youth who want to ride their bicycles to school might include all the above mentioned departments and others; if they are not coordinating their efforts locally, opportunities could be missed. Collaboration at the local level should be encouraged in every way and at every level of a project or plan.
Local jurisdictions looking to implement bicycle safety measures through bicycle facilities could follow GDOT by adopting a Complete Streets policy. Many municipalities have passed them as a way of taking a more holistic approach to planning and implementing transportation projects that take into account all modes. There are national organizations like the National Complete Streets Coalition that advise communities on best practices in Complete Streets policy. In addition, Georgia Bikes contracted leading transportation and Complete Streets experts Naomi Doerner and Dr. Charles Brown to write a report on Complete Streets equity and implementation at the local level in Georgia that would be worthwhile as a reference for any community looking to adopt a Complete Streets policy. That report can be found here.
Local implementation should seek to use guidebooks for engineering and design that are reflective of the best practices of bicycle safety. These guidebooks include the NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide, Alta Planning's Small Town and Rural Design Guide: Facilities for Biking and Walking. In addition, they should strive to exceed the minimum allowed design guidelines from these guides and build exemplary bicycle infrastructure that is accessible for all ages and abilities.
To test the success of infrastructure and efficiently expend local resources, local practitioners should take advantage of "tactical urbanism": temporary road projects that can be used to gauge resident reactions as well as data on usage and crashes. Examples of tactical urbanism include bicycle lanes (buffered and protected), road diets, temporary planters, and other traffic calming techniques. Connected temporary projects are even more effective in testing out a network approach for bicycle transportation.
Funding bicycle projects will always be a challenge at the local level, as transportation infrastructure projects are costly ventures. Passing local Complete Streets policies and adopting community-wide bicycle plans can help leverage existing projects, like ongoing repaving or a road reconstruction. Ongoing projects should always been seen as opportunities to add bicycle facilities to continue to expand a network, allowing more people to travel by bicycle for commuting, recreation, or health. In areas with Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs), bicycle facilities should be included as a part of all transportation plans and people who ride bicycles should be included on all boards with public members. Local practitioners should also leverage relationships with Regional Commissions, who can help coordinate multi-jurisdiction plans and projects. Lastly, locals should also leverage their relationship with GDOT to increase GDOT's implementation of
37

MOVING FORWARD AT THE LOCAL LEVEL
their Complete Streets policy as well as coordination of bicycle facilities between local and state roads. As bicycle facilities are built, evaluation is needed to see what works to decrease crashes and increase access for bicyclists. This could also include counting users and surveying the public overall to understand how to improve future projects. There should be constant feedback loop regarding bicycle facilities to assess success and areas to improve. Local education and encouragement plan should go hand-in-hand with facility and infrastructure plans and should not focus solely on bicyclists. All roadway users need to understand the rules and laws regarding bicyclists operating in the public right-of-way. Local advocacy organizations, bicycle clubs, and LCIs (licensed cycling instructors) are the best resources for these plans, as they are often already engaged in this work at the local level. Lastly, law enforcement locally need to understand and effectively enforce the laws regarding bicyclists to help create a safer environment for bicycling, including the 3 foot passing law. Again, local advocacy organizations are the best resource in this area, as they may be already engaged with law enforcement in one way or another.
38

RESOURCES
Resources:
Other Statewide Plans: Georgia Strategic Highway Safety Plan (2015) http://www.gahighwaysafety.org/highway-safety/shsp/ http://www.gahighwaysafety.org/fullpanel/uploads/files/non-motorized-users.pdf
Georgia Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Action Plan (2010) http://www.dot.ga.gov/drivesmart/travel/Documents/BikePedSAP.pdf
PEDS Pedestrian Safety Action Plan (2018) http://peds.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Georgia-Pedestrian-Safety-Action-Plan-
Final.pdf
Regional Plans: Atlanta Regional Commission -- Walk Bike Thrive (2016) http://atlantaregional.org/plans-reports/bike-pedestrian-plan-walk-bike-thrive/
Atlanta Regional Commission -- Safe Streets Action Plan (2018) https://atlantaregional.org/wp-content/uploads/arc-safe-streets-062018.pdf River Valley Regional Commission Regional Bicycle & Pedestrian Plan (2016) https://www.rivervalleyrc.org/images/16RBPP.pdf
Gainesville-Hall Metropolitan Planning Organization Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan (2016) https://www.ghmpo.org/153/Bicycle-Pedestrian-Plan
Heart of Georgia Altamaha Regional Commission Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan (2016) http://www.hogarc.org/assets/hogarc-bike-plan-2016.pdf
Augusta Regional Transportation Study (ARTS) Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan (2012) https://www.augustaga.gov/1458/ARTSAiken-County-Bicycle-and-Pedestrian-
Northeast Georgia Plan for Bicycling and Walking (2011) http://www.negrc.org/user_files/1349190518_BikeWalk%20PlanFINAL%20
2011.02.pdf
39

RESOURCES
Safe Routes to School Planning Guide/Workbook and Updated Travel Plans http://www.saferoutesga.org/content/georgia-safe-routes-school-guide-and-workbook http://www.saferoutesga.org/content/completed-travel-plans
City or County Bicycle Plans City of Dunwoody Bicycle Network(2016) http://www.dunwoodyga.gov/index.php?section=departments_public_works_ bicycle_network
City of Decatur PATH Connectivity and Implementation Plan (2016) http://www.decaturga.com/home/showdocument?id=10233
Athens in Motion -- Athens-Clarke County Bicycle/Pedestrian Master Plan (2018) https://athensclarkecounty.com/7604/Athens-In-Motion-Plan
City of Brookehaven Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Trail Plan (2016) https://www.brookhavenga.gov/publicworks/page/bicycle-pedestrian-and-trail-plan
Connecting Morgan County -- Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan (2014) https://www.morganga.org/DocumentCenter/View/1174/Morgan-County-BikePedPlan
Glynn County Bike/Multipurpose Trail Study (2016) https://www.glynncounty.org/DocumentCenter/View/55459/2016-BATS-Bike-andMultipurpose-Trail-Study-Body-13-MB
Cycle Atlanta Phase 1.0 (2013) https://www.atlantaga.gov/Home/ShowDocument?id=11173 https://altaplanning.com/projects/cycle-atlanta-phase-1-0/
City Bicycle Annual Reports City of Atlanta 2017 Annual Bicycle Report (2017) https://www.atlantaga.gov/government/departments/city-planning/office-of-mobilityplanning/bicycles/2017-annual-bicycle-report
40

RESOURCES
Trails or Parks Master Plans Augusta-Richmond County Recreation and Parks Master Plan (2016) http://www.planaugustaparks.com/
Campus Bicycle Plans Georgia Tech Campus Bicycle Master Plan (2015) http://www.space.gatech.edu/sites/default/files/documents/GT%20Campus%20 Bicycle%20Master%20Plan_lowres1.pdf
Existing Health Programs Healthy Savannah -- http://www.healthysavannah.org/
Live Healthy Baldwin -- http://livehealthybaldwin.weebly.com/
Other Resources Georgia DOT Complete Streets Policy (2012) http://www.dot.ga.gov/PartnerSmart/DesignManuals/DesignPolicy/GDOT-DPM.pdf
NHTSA Everyone is a Bicyclist https://www.nhtsa.gov/road-safety/bicyclists
Local Advocacy Organizations BikeAthens -- https://www.bikeathens.org/ Atlanta Bicycle Coalition -- http://www.atlantabike.org/ Bike Walk Macon -- http://www.bikewalkmacon.com/ Savannah Bicycle Campaign -- https://bicyclecampaign.org/ Wheel Movement of the CSRA -- http://www.wheelmovementcsra.org/ Bicycle Columbus -- http://bicyclecolumbus.godaddysites.com/ Bike Walk Baldwin -- http://bikewalkbaldwin.org/ Bike Roswell -- http://www.bikeroswell.com/ Bike Alpharetta -- https://bikealpharetta.org/ Bike Walk Dunwoody -- http://bikewalkdunwoody.org/ Bike Fayette -- https://www.facebook.com/bikefayette/ Decatur Bicycle Coalition -- https://decaturbicyclecoalition.org/ Bike Coweta -- http://bikecoweta.com/ Sumter Cycling -- https://www.sumtercycling.org/ Pecan City Pedalers (Albany) -- https://www.pecancitypedalers.org/
41

APPENDIXES
Appendix A:
BSAP Development Process
Task Team The Bicycle Safety Task Team, a group of practitioners from across Georgia who are committed to increasing bicycle safety, helped launch the BSAP plan in 2016. Team members meet bi-monthly and will remain involved in refining and implementing the BSAP. Data The BSAP uses data for bicycle crashes and fatalities over a 10-year period, 20052015. Data was extracted from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) and Georgia Electronic Accident Reporting System (GEARS). Data covers the years from that period. Surveys The BSAP uses data obtained from surveys conducted in 2011 and 2016. In collaboration with the Governor's Office of Highway Safety and the University of Georgia's Survey Research Center, Georgia Bikes completed the first ever statewide survey of Georgians' attitudes toward and awareness of bicycling issues in 2011. In 2016, Georgia Bikes partnered with Voices for Healthy Kids, a collaboration of the American Heart Association and Robert Wood Johnson Foundation on a Complete Streets opinion survey of the 5 biggest cities in Georgia (excluding Atlanta): Athens, Augusta, Columbus, Macon, and Savannah. Lastly, in 2016, Georgia Bikes engaged with nearly 900 individuals (through online and in person surveys) to specifically get input on Georgians' perceptions of bicycling safety, their priorities and goals for improving bicycling safety, and their hopes and expectations for the BSAP. Draft Bicycle Safety Action Plan Following completion of the draft Bicycle Safety Action Plan in 2017, Bicycle Safety Task Team members, practitioners who had been involved throughout the process, and members of the public reviewed and provided feedback on the plan.
42

Appendix B: Existing Facilities

APPENDIXES

Bike Box, green lane, and contra-flow buffered bike lane on the campus of the University of Georgia, Sanford Drive at Baldwin Street (Athens)

Buffered bike lane (Atlanta) 43

APPENDIXES
Standard bike lanes with reverse-angle parking (Macon)
Protected left turn bay, aka "Dutch Left" (Atlanta) 44

APPENDIXES
Standard bike lane with bikeable shoulder (Savannah)
Two-way protected bike lane, aka cycle track (Atlanta) 45

APPENDIXES
Two-way protected bike lane, aka cycle track (Atlanta)
Multi-use path with push button activated hawk beacon (Columbus) 46

APPENDIXES Multi-use path (Athens) Multi-use path (Carrollton)
47

APPENDIXES
Shared lane marking, aka "sharrow" (Atlanta)
Off-street bike parking (Decatur) 48

APPENDIXES
On-street bike parking, aka "Bike corral" (Savannah)
49