Georgia pedestrian safety action plan, 2018-2022

GEORGIA
PEDESTRIAN SAFETY ACTION PLAN 20182022

Table of Contents
Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Purpose of the Pedestrian Safety Action Plan . . . . 4
Key Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Georgia Pedestrian Safety Trend . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Georgia Pedestrian Safety Goal . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Statewide Strategy Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Action Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Transportation Planning and Policy. . . . . . . . 11 Transportation Infrastructure Projects . . . . . 13 Education, Enforcement, & Outreach. . . . . . 15 Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Existing Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Georgia residents: Walking behaviors and attitudes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Pedestrian Crashes, Injuries, and Fatalities . . . 26 Focus Designations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Focus Counties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Focus Cities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 Focus Corridors and Characteristics . . . . . . . 45
Active State Policies, Programs, and Information on Pedestrian Safety . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
Data on Pedestrians . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 Transportation and Land Use Planning . . . . . . 52 Engineering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 Laws and Enforcement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
Funding allocated to pedestrian safety . . . . . . . . . 67 402 Funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 Metropolitan Planning Organization and Regional Commission Funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
Performance Report Card . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 Appendix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
Focus Designations by GDOT Districts . . . . . . . 83 Focus Designations by Regional Commissions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 PSAP Development Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Figure 1. Pedestrian Fatalities, Projections through 2018 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Figure 2. Goal for Reduction in Statewide Pedestrian Fatalities, 20182022 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Figure 3. Difference in Projected and Goal Number of Pedestrian Fatalities, 20182022 . . . 11
Figure 4. Georgia Pedestrian Fatalities, 19752017. 2017 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Figure 5. Pedestrian Crashes, Injuries, Fatalities, 20112015 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Figure 6. Percent of all transportation fatalities that were pedestrians, 20112015 . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Figure 7. Injury and Fatality Rates. All Transportation Crashes v. Pedestrian Crashes. . . 36
Figure 8. Map of Pedestrian Fatalities and Serious Injuries in Georgia, 20112015 . . . . . . . . 37
Figure 9. Pedestrian Fatalities, by Gender, 20112015 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
Figure 10. Pedestrian Fatalities, by Age Group v. Population, by Age Group, 20112015 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
Figure 11. Pedestrian Crashes & Fatalities, by Month, 20112015 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Figure 12. Pedestrian Crashes & Fatalities, by Day of the Week, 20112015 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Figure 13. Pedestrian Crashes & Fatalities, by Time of Day, 20112015 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
Figure 14. Pedestrian Crashes & Fatalities, by Lighting Condition, 20112015 . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Figure 15. Pedestrian Fatalities, by Weather Conditions, 20112015 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

Figure 16. Pedestrian Fatalities, by Road Ownership, 20112015 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Figure 17. Pedestrian Fatalities, by Road Type Classification, 20112015 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
Figure 18. Pedestrian Fatalities, by Urban v Rural Roadways, 20112015 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
Figure 19. Pedestrian Fatalities, by Intersection Type, 20112015 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
Figure 20. Pedestrian Fatalities, Distance from Marked crosswalk. State Routes, Nonintersection incidents. 20112015 . . . . . . . . 45
Figure 21. Top Pedestrian Actions at Time of Fatality, 20112015 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
Figure 22. Pedestrian Crashes, by Driver Maneuver, 20112015 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
Figure 23. Focus Counties for Pedestrian Crashes, Injuries, and Fatalities . . . . . 53
Figure 24. Focus Cities for Pedestrian Crashes, Injuries, and Fatalities . . . . . 56
Figure 25. Share of HSIP Funds spent on Pedestrian Projects, 20112015 . . . . . . 80
Figure 26. Percent of Pedestrian Improvement Project Dollars spent in Focus Counties, 20112015 (HSIP) . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
Figure 27. Percent of 402 Funding Allocated to Pedestrian Programs, 20112015 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
Figure 28. Atlanta Regional Commission-- Percent of STBG Urban Funds Authorized for Pedestrian Projects 20112015 . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
Figure 29. Savannah CORE MPO-- Percent of STBG-- Urban Funds Authorized for Pedestrian Projects, 20112015 . . . . . . . . . . . . 86

3

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Executive Summary
Pedestrian fatalities and injuries are a serious and growing problem in Georgia. The State of Georgia considers safety a priority and is committed to reversing the upward trend in serious and fatal pedestrian injuries. The Georgia Pedestrian Safety Action Plan provides strategies and action steps that make this possible. It also provides tools that enable agencies to measure progress.
Purpose of the Pedestrian Safety Action Plan
The Pedestrian Safety Action Plan (PSAP) provides guidance on pedestrian safety issues to the Georgia Department of Transportation, Georgia Department of Public Health, Georgia Governor's Office of Highway Safety, law enforcement agencies, pedestrian safety advocates, local and regional agencies, and others.
The Pedestrian Safety Action Plan:
Identifies the current state of pedestrian safety in Georgia Increases statewide understanding of pedestrian crash patterns Promotes objective, data-driven decision making Promotes investment in pedestrian safety solutions Aligns pedestrian safety funding and resources with proven safety countermeasures and
targets locations with high needs and opportunities for success Promotes public health, physical activity, and economic development by creating safe,
walkable communsities
Key Findings
From 20112015, 17,336 vehicle-pedestrian crashes occurred in Georgia. Almost 80% of pedestrian crashes resulted in an injury and 5% resulted in a fatality. Pedestrian fatalities rose sharply during this time period, accounting for an average of 14% of all traffic fatalities in Georgia.
The highest share (44%) of vehicle-pedestrian crash incidents occurred on state-owned arterial roads in urbanized areas. Roads where the most pedestrian injuries and fatalities occur have a typical, recognizable pattern:
Posted speed limits of typically 40 MPH or more Car-oriented, mixed-use areas with many destinations Infrequent pedestrian crossing opportunities Five (5) or more lanes Transit routes Other notable factors associated with pedestrian fatalities include: 80% occur at night, and 57% occurred in dark, UNLIGHTED conditions 52% occurred when pedestrians were waiting to cross a roadway or crossing a roadway 78% occurred at non-intersection locations
4

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Georgia Pedestrian Safety Trend
Pedestrian deaths spiked upwards from 20112015, rising by 58% over the 5-year period. If no action is taken to improve safety and infrastructure, pedestrian fatalities are predicted to rise further. If pedestrian fatalities continue to increase at the current rate, they would quickly reach over 300 deaths per year during the first year of this PSAP.1
In 2017, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) collaborated to create joint safety targets and published the Safety Performance Management Measures rule. This rule requires states and Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) to establish safety performance targets, including targets for non-motorized fatalities and serious injuries. Under FHWA guidance, Georgia state agencies collaborated with safety partners to set 2018 statewide performance targets based on a 5-year moving average of non-motorized fatalities and serious injuries. Flexibility in future federal funding allocations will depend on whether the state meets these targets and improves the ongoing trend of pedestrian fatalities and serious injuries.

Pedestrian Fatalities, Past and Projections through 2018
600

500

400

350

300

285

236

204

200

167 178 168

130

100

0 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022

Recorded Number of Pedestrian Fatalities

GDOT Pedestrian Fatality Projections

Figure 1 . Pedestrian Fatalities, Projections through 2018

1

Trend projection determined through the Safety Performance Management Measures Rule, 2017

5

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Georgia Pedestrian Safety Goal
The Federal Highway Administration and the Georgia Strategic Highway Safety Plan both identified zero pedestrian fatalities as their long-term goal.
The Federal Highway Administration's Strategic Agenda for Pedestrian and Bicycle Transportation establishes the following national goals:
Achieve an 80 percent reduction in pedestrian and bicycle fatalities and serious injuries in 15 years and zero pedestrian and bicycle fatalities and serious injuries in the next 20 to 30 years.
Increase the percentage of short trips represented by bicycling and walking to 30 percent by the year 2025. This will indicate a 50 percent increase over the 2009 value of 20 percent. Short trips
are defined as trips 5 miles or less for bicyclists and 1 mile or less for pedestrians2.
The Georgia Strategic Highway Safety Plan (2015) has a clear vision for pedestrian safety: Georgia will take decisive and sustained action Towards Zero Deaths a state with zero pedestrian fatalities and zero serious injuries caused by vehicle-pedestrian crashes. 3
While the trends in pedestrian fatalities are projected to rise, the state would like to reverse this trend. The goals of this 5-year PSAP are aligned with both FHWA and Strategic Highway Safety Plan goals and the outlined action steps will help Georgia achieve them.
Georgia seeks to reduce annual number of pedestrian deaths to less than 180 by 2022. Doing so requires an average reduction of 15 pedestrian deaths per year.

Goal for Reduction in Statewide Pedestrian Fatalities, 20182022

275

258

250

236

243 228

225 204

200

178

175

167

168

213 198

150 130
125

100

75

50

25

0 2011

2012

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Recorded Pedestrian Fatalities

Yearly Goals for Pedestrian Fatalities

2021

183 2022

Figure 2 . Goal for Reduction in Statewide Pedestrian Fatalities, 20182022

2

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/publications/strategic_agenda/fhwahep16086.pdf

3

http://www.gahighwaysafety.org/highway-safety/shsp/

6

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

District Target Guidelines
If Georgia is to meet the goals stated in this plan, fewer pedestrian deaths need to occur in each GDOT district with an average reduction of 6% per year.

Table 1. 5-year Rolling Average Goals for Pedestrian Fatalities 20182022, by GDOT District

Year

GDOT District

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

2018

31

26

32

15

24

21

95

2019

29

24

30

14

22

19

89

2020

27

23

28

13

21

18

83

2021

25

21

26

12

19

17

77

2022

23

19

24

11

18

16

72

If Georgia meets these targets, it would mean a cumulative savings of 1,132 pedestrian fatalities over the duration of the PSAP implementation.

Difference in Projected and Goal Number of Pedestrian Fatalities, 20182022

600

545

485 500
435

400

350

382

300

243

200

228

213

198

183

100

0 2018

2019

Projected Number of Pedestrian Fatalities

2020

2021

2022

Goal Number of Pedestrian Fatalities, PSAP

Figure 3. Difference in Projected and Goal Number of Pedestrian Fatalities, 20182022

Year 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022

Table 2. Projected and Goal Pedestrian Fatalities, 20182022

Projected # of Ped Fatalities

PSAP goal # of ped fatalities

Difference between Projected and Goal

350

243

107

382

228

154

435

213

222

485

198

287

545

183

362

Total

1,132

7

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Statewide Strategy Summary
The Georgia Pedestrian Safety Action Plan prioritizes 11 strategies organized under 5 topic areas. Each is supported by individual actions that are detailed later in the PSAP.
Data 1. Collect, map, and publish data on pedestrian safety, the walking environment, pedestrian crashes, and safety risks
Transportation Planning and Policy 2. Incorporate pedestrian safety strategies, treatments and performance measures into state transportation plans, policies, and design guides. 3. Incorporate pedestrian safety strategies and performance measures into regional and local plans.
Transportation Infrastructure Projects 4. Assess new construction and maintenance projects on state routes for opportunities to incorporate pedestrian safety elements early in the process. 5. Use crash data and annual road safety audits to identify roads with ongoing pedestrian issues. Collaborate with regional and local governments to prioritize selection and implementation of safety improvements on those roads. 6. Proactively identify and mitigate systemic pedestrian safety hazards on Georgia roads
Education, Enforcement, and Outreach 7. Create and distribute educational material to promote safety for pedestrians 8. Provide annual trainings on pedestrian safety that target transportation and public health professionals, law enforcement officers, elected officials, and community advocates 9. Increase outreach and education on pedestrian safety for state, regional, and local agencies and facilitate collaboration between them.
Funding 10. Allocate target level of HSIP, 402, 405h, regional, and local funds to pedestrian safety projects. 11. Align fund expenditures on pedestrian safety projects and programs with Focus designations, data on pedestrian crash and fatality factors, and proven countermeasures.
8

ACTION PLAN
Action Plan
Layout
Topic Area. Five topic areas identify the overarching fields the PSAP addresses. Strategy. Eleven strategies identify direction taken to address the topic area. ACTION. Actions represent key tasks. Responsible Party. The responsible party represents the position or department responsible for achieving the corresponding action item. Timeframe. The identified quarter is the anticipated deadline for achieving the corresponding action item. `Q2 2018' indicates that the item should be complete by the end of Q2 of the 2018 calendar year. Local Action. Many action items, while detailed in the PSAP for completion at the state level, are also appropriate at regional and local levels. Local agencies may need to customize action steps to suit local needs.
Action Items
DATA Strategy 1: Collect, map, and publish data on pedestrian safety, the walking environment, pedestrian crashes, and safety risks ACTION 1.1: Continue to update pedestrian statewide crash data and maps annually in GEARS. Responsible Party: GDOT Timeframe: Ongoing, with annual reporting
ACTION 1.2: Metropolitan Planning Organizations and Regional Commissions will map and analyze regional pedestrian crash and fatality data annually and publish data and analysis online. Responsible Party: MPO leaders and planners Timeframe: Ongoing, with annual reporting Local Action: Counties and cities can map and analyze local pedestrian crash data.
9

ACTION PLAN

ACTION PLAN

ACTION 1.3: Use 5-year crash, injury, and fatality data and other data to determine focus locations. Focus locations will provide guidance for where to direct pedestrian safety resources including funding, education, and technical assistance. Focus Counties: Ten counties with highest number of each of the following: pedestrian
crashes, injuries, and fatalities
Focus Cities: Ten cities with highest number of pedestrian crashes, injuries, and fatalities Focus Routes: Top routes with the highest number of pedestrian serious injuries and fatalities, excluding interstates and other roads that prohibit pedestrian access. Responsible Party: GDOT, PEDS Timeframe: Annually Local Action: Counties and cities can map and analyze local pedestrian crash data to determine high priority corridors and corridor types within their boundaries.

ACTION 1.4: Prioritize and fill identified data gaps and publish findings.

Identified data gaps include:

1. Exposure rates (pedestrian counts)

2. Enforcement statistics: Traffic operations, warnings, citations, and convictions

3. Cost of pedestrian injuries and fatalities, including medical costs and lost productivity

4. Driver and pedestrian distraction

5. Existing pedestrian infrastructure on state routes, including:

a) Total number of miles and mapped locations of:

Sidewalks

Pedestrian lighting on sidewalks

b) Total number and mapped locations of:

E nhanced or signalized crossing

Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons

treatments

Rectangular Rapid Flash Beacons

Lighted pedestrian crossings

Pedestrian Refuge Islands

ADA Ramps

School Zones

Responsible Party: Multiple [TBD]

Timeframe: Prioritize data needs, determine appropriate strategy, and responsible party for each data
gap: Q2 2018

Gather data: Fill two of the listed data gaps by Q4 2019. Fill all five gaps by Q4 2022

Local Action: Identifying and filling local data gaps will enable local and regional agencies to address pedestrian safety in their jurisdictions.

10

ACTION PLAN
ACTION 1.5: Research best practices, establish a statistically valid methodology, and initiate a pilot program to count pedestrian traffic in urbanized areas. Implement the program statewide. Responsible Party: PEDS & GDOT research; GDOT develop and implement Timeframe: Q2 2020 Best, Practices, Establish Methodology. Q4 2022 Expand the program statewide. Local Action: Counties and cities can institute local pedestrian count pilot programs.
ACTION 1.6: Analyze progress on Georgia Pedestrian Safety Action Plan, complete performance report card update report, distribute statewide. Responsible Party: PEDS Timeframe: Annually, ongoing
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING AND POLICY Strategy 2: Incorporate pedestrian safety strategies, treatments and performance measures into state transportation plans, policies, and design guides.
ACTION 2.1: Incorporate improved pedestrian safety content into Complete Streets Guidelines. Responsible Party: GDOT Bike-Ped Engineer Timeframe: Q4 2019
ACTION 2.2: Incorporate improved pedestrian safety content into the Georgia Streetscapes and Pedestrian Design Guide. Responsible Party: GDOT Bike-Ped Engineer Timeframe: Q4 2019
ACTION 2.3: Incorporate improved pedestrian safety content into the Georgia Manual on Regulations for Driveway and Encroachment Control. Responsible Party: Office of Traffic Operations, GDOT Timeframe: Q4 2019
ACTION 2.4: Engage with committees and organizations that address autonomous vehicle planning and implementation in Georgia. Responsible Party: PEDS Timeframe: Ongoing
11

ACTION PLAN
ACTION 2.5: Establish collection of pedestrian counts as a required part of traffic studies and transportation projects on corridors where people walk. Responsible Party: GDOT Timeframe: Q4 2019
Strategy 3: Incorporate pedestrian safety strategies and performance measures into regional and local plans. ACTION 3.1: Assess MPO transportation plans for incorporation of pedestrian safety. Reach out to MPOs to offer assistance to those that wish to improve their pedestrian safety planning efforts. Responsible Party: GDOT Bike-Ped Engineer, GDOT Planning, MPO leaders Timeframe: Assessment of plans, Q4 2018; Outreach, Q2 2019 Local Action: Review local comprehensive plans, neighborhood plans, transportation plans and other key planning documents and incorporate pedestrian safety language and action steps.
ACTION 3.2: Regional commissions and Metropolitan Planning Organizations will create and begin implementing assistance programs that help cities learn about, apply for, and achieve Walk Friendly Community status. Responsible Party: MPO and RC planners, GDOT Bike-Ped Engineer Timeframe: Q4 2020 Local Action: Cities can apply for Walk Friendly Community Status independently, or with assistance from MPO or regional commission.
ACTION 3.3: Work with local communities to integrate pedestrian considerations and plans into local planning documents. Responsible Party: Georgia Department of Community Affairs Timeframe: Ongoing
ACTION 3.4: Public transportation agencies will integrate pedestrian safety into their safety plans. Responsible Party: Public transportation agencies Timeframe: Ongoing
12

ACTION PLAN
TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS Strategy 4: Assess new construction and maintenance projects on state routes for opportunities to incorporate pedestrian safety elements early in the process. ACTION 4.1: Assess state and federally-funded transportation projects to incorporate pedestrian infrastructure improvements early in the planning stage. Responsible Party: GDOT Bike-Ped Engineer Timeframe: Ongoing, with annual reporting Local Action: Cities and counties should implement similar processes.
ACTION 4.2: Assess GDOT new road and road reconstruction projects to ensure installation of safe pedestrian crossing treatments on all applicable projects. Responsible Party: GDOT Bike-Ped Engineer Timeframe: Ongoing, with annual reporting
ACTION 4.3: Continue to incorporate pedestrian safety improvements into maintenance projects on corridors and corridor types with identified safety concerns for pedestrians ("twinning"). Responsible Party: GDOT district engineers Timeframe: Ongoing, with annual reporting Local Action: Few communities use federal funds for small projects. Integrating low-cost pedestrian safety improvements into maintenance projects ("twinning") is an especially valuable way to allocate funds to pedestrian safety infrastructure on local and county roads.
Strategy 5: Use crash data and annual road safety audits to identify roads with ongoing pedestrian issues. Collaborate with regional and local governments to prioritize selection and implementation of safety improvements on those roads. ACTION 5.1: Conduct at least two Road Safety Audits per year. Use Focus Corridors identified in the PSAP and collaboration with regional and local governments to help determine priorities. Responsible Party: GDOT Office of Traffic Operations Timeframe: Ongoing, with annual reporting Local Action: Conduct Pedestrian Road Safety Audits for on city or county roads that have a history of pedestrian-vehicle crashes.
13

ACTION PLAN
ACTION 5.2: Conduct two additional Road Safety Audits per year as resources allow. Prioritize Focus Counties, Cities, Corridors, Corridor types, and input from regional and local governments when selecting routes for the Road Safety Audits. Responsible Party: GDOT Office of Traffic Operations Timeframe: Ongoing, with annual reporting Local Action: Conduct Pedestrian Road Safety audits on city or county roads that have a history of pedestrian-vehicle crashes.
ACTION 5.3: Conduct at least two one-mile Bus Stop Corridor Audits per year. Corridors will be selected using Focus Designations and bus ridership data as priorities. Responsible Party: PEDS Timeframe: Annually Local Action: Conduct Bus Route Safety Audits on city or county transit routes that have a history of pedestrian-vehicle crashes.
ACTION 5.4: Implement project recommendations listed in completed Road Safety Audits and Bus Stop Corridor Audits within listed timeframes. Responsible Party: GDOT Timeframe: Ongoing
Strategy 6: Proactively identify and mitigate systemic pedestrian safety hazards on Georgia roads ACTION 6.1: Finalize draft report: Identifying, Assessing, and Improving Uncontrolled Intersections for Pedestrian Access. Incorporate recommendations into the GDOT Pedestrian and Streetscape Guide. Responsible Party: GDOT Timeframe: Q2 2018
ACTION 6.2: Ensure installation of ADA-compliant infrastructure on GDOT road projects. Responsible Party: GDOT Timeframe: Ongoing
14

ACTION PLAN
EDUCATION, ENFORCEMENT AND OUTREACH Strategy 7: Create and distribute educational material to promote safety for pedestrians ACTION 7.1: Administer Georgia Pedestrian Safety Attitudes and Behaviors Survey to general public and transportation practitioners. Analyze results to determine target audiences, messages, and training needs for pedestrian safety. Responsible Party: PEDS Timeframe: Q3 2022, during development of updated Georgia PSAP
ACTION 7.2: Distribute 20,000 GDOT "See & Be Seen" handouts and 20,000 GDOT safety wrist bands. Distribute at least half in Focus Counties or Focus Cities. Responsible Party: GDOT Communications and Office of Traffic Operations Timeframe: Q4 2018
ACTION 7.3: Enlist the expertise of a marketing/public relations agency to develop, pilot, and evaluate a data-driven pedestrian safety education campaign. The campaign should adopt measurable and succinct objectives for behavioral change that address the unsafe behaviors identified in the PSAP. Materials will include television and radio advertisements, handouts, social media, and other media. Responsible Party: GOHS Public Information Unit or other GOHS department responsible for marketing and public campaigns Timeframe: Q4 2018
ACTION 7.4: Distribute handouts and other marketing materials from the pedestrian safety education campaign through television and radio advertisements, social media, state conferences, partnerships with enforcement officers, and other means. Promote and make resources available via GOHS website and safety store. Notify Focus Counties and Focus Cities about availability. Responsible Party: GOHS Bicycle and Pedestrian Planner, GOHS Public Information Unit, or other GOHS department responsible for marketing and public campaigns Timeframe: Ongoing
ACTIONS 7.5: Develop a pedestrian safety communications plan that includes regular public outreach through the dissemination of topical/seasonal press releases (a minimum of one per month), op-eds, letters to the editor, appearances on public affairs programming, press events, and community-based activities.
15

ACTION PLAN
Responsible Party: GOHS Bicycle and Pedestrian Planner, GOHS Public Information Unit or other GOHS department responsible for marketing and public campaigns Timeframe: Q4 2018 ACTION 7.6: Incorporate pedestrian safety into the H.E.A.T. and Thunder Programs. Educate law enforcement partners, the media, drivers, and walkers about the danger that distracted, impaired, and aggressive driving pose to people traveling by foot. Incorporate this message into all relevant press events and materials. Responsible Party: GOHS Bicycle and Pedestrian Planner Timeframe: Q4 2019
ACTION 7.7: Work with the Georgia Department of Driver Services to ensure pedestrian safety receives increased prominence in Georgia driver education including:
1. Give pedestrian safety more prominence in the 40-Hour Parent/Teen Driving Guide 2. D etermine whether driver education curriculum adequately addresses pedestrian safety.
If not, work with DDS to develop an improved pedestrian safety lesson plan/module 3. Increase the number of questions related to pedestrian safety on the driver licensing
exam Responsible Party: GOHS Bicycle and Pedestrian Planner Timeframe: Q4 2020
ACTION 7.8: Continue to support Georgia Safe Routes to School Resource Center programs and activities. Responsible Party: Georgia Safe Routes to School Resource Center, GDOT Timeframe: Q4 2022
Strategy 8: Provide annual trainings on pedestrian safety that target transportation and public health professionals, law enforcement officers, elected officials, and community advocates ACTION 8.1: Continue providing annual Georgia Walks Summit. Responsible Party: PEDS, GDOT Timeframe: Annually
ACTION 8.2 Continue to provide ongoing regional trainings for transportation professionals. Responsible Party: GDOT, PEDS Timeframe: Annually
16

ACTION PLAN
ACTION 8.3 Develop and present trainings on pedestrian safety topics at statewide conferences listed in Table 9. Opportunities to Expand Reach with New Trainings on Pedestrian Safety. Responsible Party: GDOT, PEDS, Pedestrian Safety Task Team Timeframe: Annually
ACTION 8.4: Develop, update, and implement training that helps enforcement officers better understand pedestrian safety challenges and solutions. Coordinate with Georgia Public Safety Training Center, Georgia Association of Chiefs of Police, Prosecuting Attorney's Council of Georgia, and others to deliver trainings. Responsible Party: GOHS Bicycle and Pedestrian Planner, PEDS, Law enforcement agencies Timeframe: Q2 2019
ACTION 8.5: Ensure training on pedestrian safety law enforcement is provided at the biennial GOHS Highway Safety Summit. Responsible Party: GOHS Bicycle and Pedestrian Planner Timeframe: Initial-Q3 2019, Annually
ACTION 8.6: Increase the number of practitioners attending pedestrian safety trainings listed in Tables 8 & 9.
Responsible Party: PEDS, GDOT, GOHS, MPOs, local jurisdictions
Timeframe: Annually
Strategy 9: Increase outreach and education on pedestrian safety for state, regional, and local agencies and facilitate collaboration between them. ACTION 9.1: Publish two recurring newsletters:
1. Quarterly e-newsletters that inform practitioners about upcoming local, state, and national webinars and trainings and provide updates on pedestrian safety projects, funding and other opportunities or resources.
2. Annual e-newsletter updating departments on relevant existing or new documents and resources.
Responsible Party: GDOT Bike-Ped Engineer Timeframe: Quarterly, launched by Q2 2018
17

ACTION PLAN
ACTION 9.2: Update the GOHS website to include statistics about pedestrian safety problems (who, why, where, when), tips for pedestrians and drivers, highly-visual explanation of Georgia laws, and links to educational materials. Update the Safe Communities content on the GOHS website to include a list of current Safe Communities partners and the types of activities and initiatives GOHS seeks to fund. Responsible Party: GOHS Timeframe: Initial publication, Q2 2019 with ongoing updates
ACTION 9.3: Expand content in georgiawalks.org website to provide information and tools pertinent to pedestrian safety, as well as dashboards showing pedestrian crash and fatality statistics and a report card of progress on PSAP implementation. Responsible Party: PEDS, with support from state agencies Timeframe: Initial publication, Q4 2019 with ongoing updates
ACTION 9.4: Increase the number of law enforcement officers who participate in the Pedestrian Safety Task team. Increase by at least 5 additional law enforcement officers, at least 3 of which serve in Focus Counties or Focus Cities. Reach out to the Traffic Enforcement Networks through GOHS. Coordinate with Georgia Public Safety Training Center, Georgia Association of Chiefs of Police, Prosecuting Attorney's Council of Georgia, and others to reach target audience. Responsible Party: Pedestrian Safety Task Team, GOHS Bicycle and Pedestrian Planner Timeframe: Increase by 1 per year. Local Action: Engage enforcement officers in local pedestrian safety committees and task teams.
ACTION 9.5: Increase the number of public health districts creating and implementing local programming that promotes pedestrian safety. Increase by at least 5 public health districts, at least 3 of which serve in Focus Counties or Focus Cities. Responsible Party: Georgia Department of Public Health, Health District Leaders, GOHS Bicycle and Pedestrian Planner, Pedestrian Safety Task Team Timeframe: Increase by 1 per year.
18

ACTION PLAN
ACTION 9.6: Review and report on pedestrian safety laws in other states pertaining to automated speed enforcement. Create a strategy to move forward in Georgia. Responsible Party: PEDS, Pedestrian Safety Task Team Timeframe: Q4 2019, ongoing updates
FUNDING Strategy 10: Allocate target level of HSIP, 402, 405h, regional, and local funds to pedestrian safety projects. ACTION 10.1: Actively solicit public sector and non-profit applications for pedestrian safety projects and programs located in Focus Counties, Focus Cities, and communities along Focus Corridors. Responsible Party: GOHS, GDOT Timeframe: Annually, ongoing
ACTION 10.2: Allocate 10% of HSIP funding annually to pedestrian safety improvements. Target funding according to focus designations and proven countermeasures including:
Allocate a 5-year rolling average of 50% of funds for pedestrian safety projects for projects on Focus Corridors, in Focus Counties or in Focus Cities.
Allocate a 5-year rolling average 50% of funds for pedestrian safety projects that help people cross the street safely including: pedestrian crossing treatments, raised medians, lighting at pedestrian crossings
Responsible Party: GDOT Timeframe: Annually, ongoing
ACTION 10.3: Develop a Request for Proposals template for applicants seeking grants to fund pedestrian safety programs. The template will identify proven safety countermeasures and measurable behavioral objectives for drivers and pedestrians that GOHS seeks to fund. Responsible Party: GOHS Timeframe: Q4 2018
19

ACTION PLAN
ACTION 10.4: Allocate target level of annual 402 & 405h funds to pedestrian safety education and enforcement programs. The target level of funding should equal or exceed 5-year rolling average of transportation fatalities accounted for by pedestrians. Allocate at least 50% of the funds for pedestrian safety programs to programs in Focus Counties or Focus Cities. Responsible Party: GOHS Timeframe: Annually, ongoing
ACTION 10.5: Identify and confirm ongoing funding source for annual Georgia Walks Summit. Responsible Party: GDOT, GOHS, PEDS Timeframe: Q4 2018
ACTION 10.6 Identify and confirm ongoing funding source for Georgia Safe Routes to School Resource Center. Responsible Party: GDOT, Georgia SRTS Coordinators Timeframe: Q4 2018
ACTION 10.7 Allocate a larger share of flexible federal and state funding resources to pedestrian projects when funds become available. Responsible Party: GDOT Timeframe: Ongoing
Strategy 11: Align fund expenditures on pedestrian safety projects and programs with Focus designations, data on pedestrian crash and fatality factors, and proven countermeasures. ACTION 11.1: Evaluate the annual HSIP, 402, and 405h expenditures against FHWA and NHTSA guidebooks, Focus County, Focus City, and Focus Corridor lists, and other performance measures to determine the efficacy of funding. Responsible Party: PEDS, with assistance from GDOT and GOHS Timeframe: Ongoing, with annual updates
20

BACKGROUND AND DATA

Background
Pedestrian safety affects everyone in Georgia. All of us -- regardless of age, gender, or socioeconomic status -- are pedestrians. Every trip we take begins and ends with walking, whether we step or roll out the front door or walk across the parking lot to a car. We also walk for recreation and to improve our health.

Sadly, far too many people die or are injured while walking in Georgia. Perceived and real safety risks on Georgia roads including incomplete, inconvenient, and uncomfortable walking infrastructure discourage walking. Pedestrians are legitimate and vulnerable users of the transportation system, and transportation professionals have a responsibility to install improvements that make walking safe and convenient.
The Georgia Pedestrian Safety Action Plan (PSAP) uses available data to evaluate pedestrian crash patterns and develop a plan to reduce vehicle-pedestrian serious injuries and fatalities. The PSAP identifies strategies and action steps that will enable Georgia to save lives and achieve Strategic Highway Safety Plan goals.
History of Pedestrian Crashes
Data reveals that pedestrian fatalities declined during the 1980s and 1990s, and remained fairly flat during the first decade of this century. Beginning in 2010, pedestrian fatalities began rising again. Georgia experienced a severe spike in pedestrian deaths from 2015 2017. In 2016 & 2017, Georgia had the highest number of pedestrian fatalities since at least 1975, the earliest year for which traffic fatality data is available.

Georgia Pedestrian Fatalities, 19752017
300

250 235

223 206
200

215 210

176

225

217

216 218

214

203 196 197

181

170

188 183
176

163 164 161

167 159

150

161

168

161

156

156 153 150 148 154 147 152

259 236

206

178

167

168

137

130

100

50

1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

0

# Pedestrian Deaths

# Pedestrian Deaths

Figure 4. Georgia Pedestrian Fatalities, 19752017. 2017 21

BACKGROUND AND DATA
Georgia Strategic Highway Safety Plan
The Georgia Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) provides a comprehensive framework for reducing traffic fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads. The SHSP document is created by the Governor's Office of Highway Safety, with the most recent version published in 2015.
Pedestrians are listed as part of the Non-Motorized User Emphasis Area. The vision, goals, and strategies for pedestrian safety in the SHSP were developed by the Georgia Pedestrian Safety Task Team. This team focuses directly on improving pedestrian safety statewide. It is also the key stakeholder group for the development of the PSAP.
Pedestrian Safety Action Plan Creation4
The Georgia Pedestrian Safety Action Plan (PSAP) is built on the foundation of the Georgia Strategic Highway Safety Plan. This PSAP was created to provide guidance on strategies and action items for reducing pedestrian crashes and fatalities to state and local agencies across Georgia.
Many agencies assisted in the creation of this PSAP, including the Georgia Department of Transportation, Georgia Department of Public Health, Georgia Governor's Office of Highway Safety, law enforcement agencies, PEDS, pedestrian safety advocates, local and regional planning agencies, and others.
The PSAP is meant to address pedestrian safety challenges across the state and designate action steps for state and regional agencies. Analysis and action steps focus on the road network, state run programs, and funding administered at the state and regional levels. The PSAP also serves to guide local agencies and governments, which face similar challenges.
Pedestrian Safety Action Plan Implementation
Reducing pedestrian crashes and fatalities requires dedicated funding that aligns with the scope of the problem. Full implementation of the Georgia Pedestrian Safety Action Plan is contingent upon allocating sufficient funding throughout the duration of the plan.
The target level of funds allocated to pedestrian projects and programs should reflect the share of all traffic fatalities accounted for by pedestrians. A rolling 5-year average of the share of pedestrian fatalities will guide investment goals.
22

BACKGROUND AND DATA
Key Players and Roles at the State Level
Georgia Department of Transportation The Georgia Department of Transportation owns and manages state routes in Georgia. GDOT assesses, designs, and constructs transportation infrastructure, including pedestrian infrastructure. Due to the nature of the state route network, safety on state routes affect nearly every community in Georgia, including state-owned main streets in small cities. Mission: "Deliver a transportation system focused on innovation, safety, sustainability and mobility." Governor's Office of Highway Safety The Governor's Office of Highway Safety (GOHS) provides educational programing and materials for transportation safety in Georgia. GOHS is the leading provider of funding for education and enforcement-based transportation safety programs at regional and local levels. GOHS does not construct, maintain, or financially support infrastructure. Mission: "The Mission of the Governor's Office of Highway Safety is to educate the public on traffic safety and facilitate the implementation of programs that reduce crashes, injuries, and fatalities on Georgia roadways." Georgia Department of Public Health The Georgia Department of Public Health (DPH) promotes health through statewide health data collection and programs. The DPH also works with and funds county health departments and public health districts across the state. Mission: "To prevent disease, injury and disability; promote health and well-being; and prepare for and respond to disasters."
23

BACKGROUND AND DATA
Regional Commissions and Metropolitan Planning Organizations Regional Commissions and Metropolitan Planning Organizations provide local and intergovernmental planning and technical assistance at the regional scale. MPOs coordinate federal transportation investments and plan for regional needs, including pedestrian infrastructure and planning. Regional Commissions support local governments through assistance on regional topics such as workforce development, local economic development, transportation services, technology, or aging-related services.
Regional organizations do not build pedestrian infrastructure, but they can support pedestrian safety by creating a vision for pedestrian travel and safety in their region. Such organizations can have a significant influence on how the transportation system is developed over time, especially as they can help access and program transportation funds controlled by the state or federal agencies. MPOs and RCs can also provide valuable technical assistance and training to local agencies.
Transit Agencies Transit agencies build infrastructure for and fund transit operations in their service area. Because many transit users begin or end their transit trip with walking, transit agencies have a large role to play in increasing pedestrian safety. The location of transit stops and availability of adjacent pedestrian infrastructure is essential to building a safe pedestrian environment for transit users. Transit agencies are typically not responsible for infrastructure outside of their facility. However, their coordination with government agencies to ensure transit infrastructure integrates safety with the entire transportation network is essential.
Local Governments and Organizations Planning, design, construction, and enforcement on city and county streets is done at the local level. Therefore, local governments, neighborhood organizations, law enforcement, and others play a vital role in pedestrian safety. The PSAP provides guidance for local agencies and neighbors who want to improve pedestrian safety. The actions and corridors listed in the PSAP focus on state agencies and state-managed infrastructure, but many recommendations can also be implemented locally. The action items list identifies actions that can easily be customized for local contexts.
24

Existing Conditions

BACKGROUND AND DATA

Georgia residents: Walking behaviors and attitudes
The Georgia Pedestrian Safety Attitudes and Behaviors Survey, conducted in 2016 as a part of the development of the PSAP, confirmed that Georgia residents value walking.
Walking is an important part of people's lives and they want better, safer walking infrastructure. Survey results indicate that people walk for many reasons including health, recreation, and access to destinations. The results also indicate an unmet demand for walking infrastructure. Information provided by over 5,000 respondents provided valuable information on walking in Georgia:
Walking is popular. Nearly 9 in 10 people walk at least once per week. Over half have used walking either to access transit, to commute to work or school, or to run daily errands. 95% want to incorporate more walking into their everyday life
Safe walking infrastructure is valuable. 96% agree that safe walking infrastructure improves their quality of life 44% describe walking infrastructure in their community as unsafe. The lack of sidewalks and poor maintenance of existing sidewalks are primary deterrents to walking more.
Driver behavior matters. 61% identify driver behavior, especially speeding and distracted driving, as the primary factor that makes them feel unsafe while walking.
People support investment. Over 90% of people support increased funding for safe walking infrastructure. Only 68% support increased funding in facilities aimed at reducing automobile congestion.

25

BACKGROUND AND DATA
Pedestrian Crashes, Injuries, and Fatalities
FROM 20112015 GEORGIA HAD: 17,336 Pedestrian Crashes
13,818 Pedestrian Injuries (including fatalities) 847 Pedestrian Fatalities
14% of All Traffic Fatalities were Pedestrian
Crashes
There were over 9 vehicle-pedestrian crashes every day on average in the state of Georgia during this 5-year time period. Pedestrian crashes occurred in every county in Georgia.
Injuries and Fatalities
Pedestrian injury severity can range from minor injuries like scrapes and bruises to serious injuries that are life-threatening or life-altering such as paralysis or brain injury. Data distinguishing between the severities of injuries in pedestrian crashes is not always available or accurate. The PSAP typically groups all injuries, except where specified.
26

BACKGROUND AND DATA

450 0 400 0 350 0 300 0 250 0 200 0 150 0 100 0
500 0

Pedestrian Crashes, Injuries, Fatalities, 20112015

2646 2154

3455 2740

3514 2794

3636 2892

4085 3238

130 201 1

167

178

168

201 2 Cr ashes

201 3

201 4

Injuries Fatalities

206 201 5

Figure 5. Pedestrian Crashes, Injuries, Fatalities, 20112015

Percent of All Transportation Fatalities that were Pedestrians, 20112015

16%

14%

15%

14%

14%

14%

12%

11%

10%

8%

6%

4%

2%

0% 201 1

201 2

201 3

201 4

201 5

Figure 6. Percent of all transportation fatalities that were pedestrians, 20112015

27

BACKGROUND AND DATA

Pedestrians are among the most vulnerable users of the roadway system. They are less likely to survive a crash than their counterparts in automobiles.
From 20112015, 33% of all transportation crashes in Georgia resulted in at least one injury, with half of one percent (.005%) resulting in a fatality.
In comparison, pedestrian crashes fared far worse. From 20112015, an average of 80% of pedestrian-vehicle crashes resulted in at least one injury and 5% resulted in at least one death.

All transportations crashes

Pedestrian Crashes

Crash, No injury or fatality Injury only Fatality Figure 7. Injury and Fatality Rates. All Transportation Crashes v. Pedestrian Crashes.

28

BACKGROUND AND DATA
Map of Pedestrian Fatalities and Serious Injuries in Georgia, 20112015
The map below shows all pedestrian fatalities and serious injuries that occurred in Georgia from 20112015. Most incidents occurred in large urban areas, but many small cities and rural communities are also impacted by pedestrian fatalities and serious injuries.
Figure 8. Map of Pedestrian Fatalities and Serious Injuries in Georgia, 20112015 29

BACKGROUND AND DATA
Demographics
Men are consistently overrepresented in pedestrian deaths in Georgia, accounting for over 70% of all pedestrian fatalities from 20112015. Data shows similar trends nationwide.
Pedestrian Fatalities, by Gender, 20112015

27.9% 72.1%

Male

Female

Figure 9 . Pedestrian Fatalities, by Gender, 20112015
People between the ages of 20 and 59 accounted for 71% of pedestrian deaths in Georgia, despite accounting for only 55% of the population of the state. Unlike most other states, older adults are underrepresented in pedestrian fatalities in Georgia. Children also account for a smaller share of pedestrian fatalities in Georgia than they do of the population at large.

Pedestrian Fatalities, by Age Group v. Population, by Age Group, 20112015
25%

20% 15% 10%
5%

13% 4%

14% 8%

19% 14%

15% 14%

17% 14%

21% 13%

11% 10%

5% 5%

3% 1%

0% 0-9 10-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 80+

Percent of Population

Percent of Pedestrian Fatalities

Figure 10. Pedestrian Fatalities, by Age Group v. Population, by Age Group, 20112015

30

BACKGROUND AND DATA

Day of Week and Time of Day
Pedestrian crashes and fatalities peak in the fall and winter months, when pedestrian exposure to dark and unlit conditions is greater. Fatalities increase after Daylight Savings Time ends in November. Halloween, together with holidays in December are also influential factors. Thursday, Friday, and Saturday are the peak days for pedestrian fatalities.

Pedestrian Crashes

Pedestrian Fatalities

Pedestrian Crashes & Fatalities, by Month, 20112015

120

200 0

180 0 100
160 0

140 0 80
120 0

60

100 0

800

40

600

400 20
200

0 January

February

March

April

May

June

Pedestrian Crashes

0

July

August

September

October

November

December

Pedestrian Fatalities

Figure 11. Pedestrian Crashes & Fatalities, by Month, 20112015

Pedestrian Crashes

Pedestrian Fatalities

Pedestrian Crashes & Fatalities, by Day of the Week, 20112015

160

350 0

140

300 0

120 250 0
100 200 0
80 150 0
60
100 0 40

20

500

0 Sun day

Mon day

Tue sday

Wednesday

Pedestrian Crashes

Thu rsday

Fri day

Pedestrian Fatalities

0 Saturday

Figure 12. Pedestrian Crashes & Fatalities, by Day of the Week, 20112015

31

BACKGROUND AND DATA

The time of day and lighting conditions play a role in the visibility of pedestrians to drivers. Most crashes occur during daylight conditions. Crashes peak from 4:00 PM 8:00 PM, when more people are traveling. The biggest spike in crashes occurs from 6:00 7:00 PM, which coincides with rush hour and dusk or dark conditions. This is especially true after daylight savings time ends in November.
Pedestrian crashes at night are far more likely to be fatal, especially on dark roads without lighting. Over 8 in 10 pedestrian fatalities occur between 6:00 PM and 7:00 AM. Fatalities peak between 6:00 PM and 12:00 AM.

Pedestrian Crashse Pedestrian Fatalities

Pedestrian Crashes & Fatalities, by Time of Day, 20112015

160 0

100

140 0

90

80 120 0
70

100 0

60

800

50

600

40

30
400 20

200

10

0

0

0:00am-10::0509aamm-21::0509aamm-32::0509aamm-43::0509aamm-54::0509aamm-65::0509aamm-76::0509aamm-87::0509aamm-98::0509aam1m0-:90:059ama1m-11:00:05a9ma1m-21:100:5p9mam-112::0509ppmm-21::0509ppmm-32::0509ppmm-43::0509ppmm-54::0509ppmm-65::0509ppmm-76::0509ppmm-87::0509ppmm-98::0509pp1mm0-:90:05p9mp1m-11:00:05p9mpm-11:59pm

Crashes

Fatalities

Figure 13. Pedestrian Crashes & Fatalities, by Time of Day, 20112015

Pedestrian Crashes & Fatalities, by Lighting Condition, 20112015

70%

60%

58%

57%

50%

40%

30%

20% 22%

20%

19%

18%

10% 0%

Dark Lighted

Daylight Crashes

Dark Not Lighted Fatalities

3% 2% Dawn /Dusk

Figure 14. Pedestrian Crashes & Fatalities, by Lighting Condition, 20112015

32

BACKGROUND AND DATA
Most fatalities occur during clear weather conditions. Since visibility is highest during clear weather conditions, the likelihood that more people walk during clear weather conditions may be an influential factor. Drivers may also drive faster during clear conditions, which could be a factor in crashes and fatalities.

Pedestrian Fatalities, by Weather Conditions, 20112015
Other 1%
Rain 5%

Cloudy 16%

Clear 78%

Figure 15. Pedestrian Fatalities, by Weather Conditions, 20112015

33

BACKGROUND AND DATA

Crash locations
Road Types A high percentage of pedestrian fatalities in Georgia occur on state-owned (45%), arterial roads (60%) in urban and suburban areas (81%). Here, these roads are undivided, lack a comprehensive sidewalk network or frequent crossing opportunities, and have high posted speed limits.
State-owned roads are managed by GDOT. These roads typically carry the heaviest volumes of vehicular traffic and have the largest demand for the fast throughput of car traffic. Yet these roads also have other users including bus riders and people walking. Managing the needs of all road users can be challenging but is essential.

Pedestrian Fatalities, by Road Ownership, 20112015

80%

70%

70%

60% 50%

46%

40% 30% 20%

13%

20%

16% 20%

14%

10%
0% State Roads
(excluding interstates)

County Roads

Local Roads Municipality

1% Interstate

Percent of Roads in Category Fatalities

Figure 16. Pedestrian Fatalities, by Road Ownership, 20112015

Pedestrian Fatalities, by Road Type Classification, 20112015

80% 70%

69%

60%

50%

40% 30% 20% 10%
0%

16% 1%

29% 4%

31% 8%

Interstate, Principle Arterial Minor Arterial Freeway

18% 12%
Collector

12% City Streets

Percent of Roads in Category

Percent of Fatalities on Road Type

Figure 17. Pedestrian Fatalities, by Road Type Classification, 20112015 34

BACKGROUND AND DATA
Pedestrian Fatalities, by Urban v. Rural Roadways, 20112015
Rural 19%
Urban 81%
Figure 18. Pedestrian Fatalities, by Urban v Rural Roadways, 20112015
Intersections
Over 75% of pedestrian fatalities occur at non-intersection locations, meaning that most of these occur away from marked crosswalks as well. This is not surprising, since most fatal crashes occur on arterial roads, which often have long block lengths and long distances between intersections or other safe crossing infrastructure .
Pedestrian Deaths, by Intersection Type
Y-Intersection, T-Intersection, 0.12%
7.40% Four-Way Intersection, 13.83%
Not An Intersection,
78.16%
Not An Intersection Four-Way Intersection T-Intersection Y-Intersection Figure 19. Pedestrian Fatalities, by Intersection Type, 20112015
35

BACKGROUND AND DATA

In locations where pedestrians walk, the availability of safe and convenient crossing treatments is essential. Research shows that few people will walk more than 300 ft. (about 1.5 minutes) out of their way to cross at a crosswalk.5 The 2003 Georgia Pedestrian and Streetscape Guide provides similar design guidance: "Street crossings are typically most effective when located approximately 300 to 600 ft. apart in areas heavily used by pedestrians." 6
In the field, the distance between intersections often doesn't follow these guidelines. Over 75% of pedestrian fatalities on state routes that occur outside of intersections are located over 1/10 of a mile away (approximately 663 ft. or 2.7 minutes one way) from the nearest marked crosswalk. The distance between fatality locations and a marked crosswalk often exceeds one mile.

Pedestrian Fatalities, Distance from Marked Crosswalk. State Routes, Non-intersection Incidents. 20112015

40%

38%

37%

35%

30%

25%

20% 16%
15%

15%

10%

5%

0% Within 300 ft.

Between 301-600 ft

Between 601-5279 ft.

Over 1 Mile

Figure 20. Pedestrian Fatalities, Distance from Marked crosswalk. State Routes, Non-intersection incidents. 20112015

5

Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings. http://www.trb.org/Publications/Blurbs/157723.aspx

6

http://www.dot.ga.gov/PartnerSmart/DesignManuals/TrafficOps/GDOT%20Pedestrian%20and%20

Streetscape%20Guide.pdf

36

BACKGROUND AND DATA
Crash type
Over half of fatal injuries occur while the pedestrian was crossing roadway. These could have occurred either in or outside of a crosswalk.
Over 20% of fatal crashes involved a person moving along or adjacent to the roadway. This may include standing or moving along the paved or unpaved shoulder, sidewalk, median, or driveway access. Such crashes occur when a vehicle runs off the road and onto a sidewalk or shoulder or when a pedestrian moved into the path of a vehicle to avoid an obstacle along their path. Policies and standards that require a clear zone along arterial roadways, yet place sidewalks at the curb without a buffer increase risk to pedestrians. The lack of or obstruction of sidewalks that force walkers into the road put them at further risk.

60. 0% 50. 0%

Top Pedestrian Actions at Time of Fatality, 20112015
52%

40. 0%

30. 0% 20. 0% 10. 0%

21% 14% 8%

0. 0%

Crossing Roadway

Moving Along or Adjacent In Roadway - Other

to Roadway

Working, Playing, Etc.

Figure 21. Top Pedestrian Actions at Time of Fatality, 20112015

Disabled Vehicle Related Working On, Pushing, Leaving/Approaching

37

BACKGROUND AND DATA
Over half of drivers involved in pedestrian crashes were traveling straight. Vehicles traveling straight are more likely to be accelerating or traveling at higher speeds than turning vehicles. Higher speeds increase stopping distance and result in more severe impacts. Traveling straight is a key factor in crashes occurring away from intersections.
Crashes related to turning movements represent 20% of all pedestrian crashes. Turning movements are a key factor in crashes that occur at intersections.

Pedestrian Crashes, by Driver Maneuver, 20112015

60%

56%

50%

40%

30%

20% 10%

12% 9%

15% 8%

0% Straight

Turning Left

Backing
Crashes

Turning Right

Other

Figure 22. Pedestrian Crashes, by Driver Maneuver, 20112015

Contributing Behavioral Factors for Pedestrian Crashes
Police reports may list one or more contributing factors or behaviors following a crash. Data on contributing behavioral factors for pedestrian crashes is very limited. Strikingly, over 66% of crashes are categorized as either having "no contributing factor" or "other." The "other" category offers no information on the driver's behavior during the time of the crash. Following crashes, most people do not want to admit liability or wrongdoing, which is why contributing factors are likely underreported across the board. Increased data about contributing factors would offer insight into the degree to which behavior is a factor in crashes.
Of the 34% of crashes where a contributing behavioral factor was identified, two behaviors stand out: Failure to stop and distraction

38

BACKGROUND AND DATA

Failure to Stop
A driver or pedestrian's failure to stop is documented in over 10% of pedestrian crashes in Georgia. The Georgia Code (40-6-91) requires drivers to stop and stay stopped to allow a pedestrian to cross the roadway within a marked or unmarked crosswalk when the pedestrian is upon the half of the roadway upon which the vehicle is traveling, or when the pedestrian is approaching and within one lane of the half of the roadway on which the vehicle is traveling or onto which it is turning. For the purposes of this section, "half of the roadway" means all traffic lanes carrying traffic in one direction of travel. When pedestrians cross the street outside of a crosswalk, they must yield the right of way to vehicles.

Distraction
Conclusive data on the prevalence and role of distracted driving or walking in vehiclepedestrian crashes is not yet available. Distracted driving increases the likelihood of traffic fatalities and has been cited as the likely culprit in the recent increase in traffic crashes and fatalities nationwide.
Georgia law prohibits texting while driving. Crash reports in Georgia cite distraction on the part of the driver or pedestrian in at least 7.4% of all pedestrian crashes. This includes reports listing inattention, distraction, or cell phone usage as causal factors. It is likely that distraction is underreported because persons involved in crashes are reluctant to share the role of distraction on their part. As smart phones and in-car computer systems become more prevalent, filling this data gap becomes more critical to addressing the scope and solutions to this growing issue.

Table 3. Pedestrian Crashes with distraction listed as a contributing factor, 20112015

Classification

Number of vehicle-pedestrian crashes with classification

Percent of all vehiclepedestrian crashes

Inattentive

1,881

5.58%

Distracted

542

1.61%

Cell Phone

89

0.26%

Total

2,512

7.45%

39

BACKGROUND AND DATA
Speed

Crash report data on whether the driver was speeding was incomplete. What is known, is that speed has a direct relationship to the severity of crashes with pedestrians. Higher speeds, even by just 5 or 10 mph, can make a large difference in crash outcomes.
Research by the National Transportation Safety Board showed that high travel speed increases the likelihood of crashes and increases the severity of injuries sustained by all road users in a crash7.
The Federal Highway Administration identifies four methods for setting speed limits. Transportation engineers commonly use 85th Percentile Speed methodology to set posted speed limits. This method encourages drivers to travel at about the same speed and is based on the concept that limits should be set at what 85 percent of drivers feel is comfortable. The 85th percentile approach does not incorporate crash history or safety of vulnerable road users, including cyclists or pedestrians.
The FHWA also developed a model called USLIMITS2. This model uses an expert system with a fact-based set of decision rules to determine an appropriate speed limit for all roadway users. For roads that experience high pedestrian and bicyclist activities, USLIMITS2 recommends speed limits close to 50th percentile instead of 85th percentile speed.8 For additional information about how to set speed limits, please refer to Methods and Practices for Setting Speed Limits: An Informational Report, published by FHWA in 2012.

7

https://www.ntsb.gov/safety/safety-studies/Documents/SS1701.pdf

8

https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/uslimits/

40

BACKGROUND AND DATA

Focus Designations
The PSAP identifies three `focus designations'. These identify locations and recurring road characteristics associated with pedestrian crashes throughout Georgia. They are meant to help ensure that resources for pedestrian infrastructure and programming align with the greatest investment need.
These are recognized as priority designations, but acknowledge that they are not the only locations that need attention and investment. Communities identified here are encouraged to work with GDOT and locally to determine ways to address pedestrian safety within their jurisdiction. Communities that are not identified here should not assume that they have no safety issues to address. On the contrary, most counties, including suburban areas, small towns, and rural areas experience pedestrian crash incidents.
This plan also identifies Focus Designations for each GDOT District and Regional Commission. Data for a specific district can be found in the appendix.
Focus Counties
From 20112015, the majority of all pedestrian crashes, injuries, and fatalities occurred in just 12 counties.9 The PSAP identifies these as Focus Counties.
The list of Focus Counties is not a perfect match with the 12 counties with the highest population. Nor is it a match for the 12 counties with the highest number of Vehicle Miles Traveled. Systemic factors other than population size and amounts of driving likely account for higher levels of fatalities in these counties. Each of the Focus Counties met at least one of the following criteria from 20112015: One of the top ten counties with highest number of pedestrian crashes One of the top ten counties with highest number of pedestrian injuries One of the top ten counties with highest number of pedestrian fatalities
These twelve Focus Counties account for: 47% of Georgia's population 66% of pedestrian crashes 67% of pedestrian injuries 60% of pedestrian fatalities
Statewide, 8 in 10 crashes result in an injury. Counties with higher than average injury rates include: Clarke (92%), Clayton (84%), Cobb (85%), and Fulton (87%) counties. Newton County has a significantly lower injury rate (47%) than the rest of the state.
Statewide, 5% of all pedestrian crashes led to at least one fatality. Counties with a higher fatality rate include Bartow (11%), Bibb (7%), Cobb (9%), and Richmond (8%) counties.

9

The appendix includes a list of the top 25 counties.

41

BACKGROUND AND DATA

Table 4. Focus Counties: Counties with the highest number of pedestrian crashes, injuries, and fatalities, 20112015

County

Crashes

Injuries

Fatalities

Injury Rate

Fatality Rate

Population Rank (2010)

BARTOW BIBB CHATHAM CLARKE CLAYTON COBB DEKALB FULTON GWINNETT MUSCOGEE NEWTON RICHMOND TOTAL

150 377 930 279 706 763 2,488 3,023 1,380 527 311 462 11,396

115

17

299

27

766

28

258

11

596

37

649

65

1,955

96

2,637

119

1,101

54

415

15

146

9

354

38

9,291

516

77%

11%

25

79%

7%

13

82%

3%

5

92%

4%

19

84%

5%

6

85%

9%

3

79%

4%

4

87%

4%

1

80%

4%

2

79%

3%

10

47%

3%

24

77%

8%

9

Figure 23. Focus Counties for Pedestrian Crashes, Injuries, and Fatalities 42

BACKGROUND AND DATA

Focus Cities
From 20112015, over half of the pedestrian fatalities occurred in a city. One out of every four (1/4) pedestrian fatalities, injuries, and crashes occurred in just 20 cities in Georgia. The PSAP identifies these cities as Focus Cities.
This list does not correspond to the cities with the highest population in Georgia, signaling that systemic factors beyond higher populations likely account for higher levels of fatalities.
Each of these Focus Cities10 met at least one of the following criteria from 20112015: Averaged at least one death per year Was in the top ten cities with the highest number of pedestrian crashes Was in the top ten cities with the highest number of pedestrian injuries Was in the top ten cities with the highest number of pedestrian fatalities In half of the identified Focus Cities, more than 5% of all pedestrian-vehicle crashes result in a fatality. Seven of the Focus Cities are located outside of Focus Counties.

Table 5. Focus Cities: Cities with the highest number of pedestrian crashes, injuries, and fatalities, 20112015

Population rank (2010) Crashes Injuries Injury Rate Fatalities Fatality Rate

Albany*

7

156

131

84%

7

4%

Atlanta

1

1,990 1,638 82%

75

4%

Brookhaven

14

92

70

76%

10

11%

Brunswick*

53

79

65

82%

5

6%

Carrollton*

31

29

23

79%

6

21%

Cartersville

37

48

39

81%

5

10%

College Park

61

80

64

80%

13

16%

Doraville

102

271

66

24%

4

1%

Douglasville*

25

18

12

67%

5

28%

East Point

20

117

93

79%

3

3%

LaGrange*

27

89

76

85%

1

1%

Lawrenceville

28

73

61

84%

6

8%

Lilburn

69

207

53

26%

4

2%

Marietta

11

157

135

86%

17

11%

Norcross

97

44

38

86%

8

18%

Rome*

17

158

122

77%

6

4%

Sandy Springs

7

186

163

88%

6

3%

Savannah

5

637

500

78%

18

3%

Smyrna

13

72

56

78%

8

11%

Valdosta*

12

81

71

88%

4

5%

Total

4,584 3,476

210

*Focus City located outside of a Focus County

10

Consolidated City-Counties were included in the Focus County list only.

43

BACKGROUND AND DATA
Figure 24. Focus Cities for Pedestrian Crashes, Injuries, and Fatalities 44

BACKGROUND AND DATA

Focus Corridors and Characteristics
The PSAP identifies the top corridors in Georgia with clear patterns of pedestrian crashes that resulted in serious or fatal injuries as Focus Corridors.11
Twenty-eight (28) segments of roadway totaling approximately 75 miles are identified here as Focus Corridors. Roadway characteristics associated with these corridors were also identified. These are intended to be used in conjunction with other factors for selecting future road safety audits and pedestrian infrastructure improvements.

While this analysis identifies 28 focus corridors, there are also a number of other roads that have a clear and continuing pattern of
pedestrian incidents. MPOs and local governments can commission studies to determine their most challenging corridors.

Methodology Factors for inclusion in the Focus Corridor list were:
A minimum of 3 incidents resulting in a serious or fatal pedestrian injury
An average of at least 1 incident per half mile
An intensity scoring was used to provide 1 point to serious injuries and 3 points to fatalities
This methodology does not include non-injury or minor injury crashes in the analysis. Interstate highways, where proven pedestrian safety countermeasures are inappropriate, are also not included as Focus Corridors.

11

Regional Corridors grouped by GDOT district can be found in the appendix.

45

BACKGROUND AND DATA Table 6. Focus Corridors 20112015

Routes Name Route # County # Serious Injuries # Of Fatalities Corridor Length (Miles) From To Speed Limit Daily Traffic Volumes Transit? GDOT District GDOT Road Safety Audit Conducted Average distance between marked crossings, In Feet

Old National Highway
Tara Blvd.
Buford Highway

GA 279 Fulton

US 19, GA 3
GA 13

Clayton
Fulton/ DeKalb

12

10 5.36

Roosevelt Highway

Jonesboro Rd.

17 8 4.84 Flint River Rd. I-75

3545

28,700

Y

7

2013

4055

59,000 69,000

Y

7

2014

9 7 4.48 I-85

Bragg St. 45 26,000 Y 7 2013

4,042 2,839 1,478

South Cobb GA 280 Cobb

4 6 3.79 Pinehill Dr.

Appleton Dr. 45

23,000 37,000

Y

7

Updated in 2017

2,501

Windy Hill Rd. NA

NorcrossTucker Rd.

NA

Cobb

4 6 3.69 Wakita Dr.

Westminster Sq. at Windy 40 Hill

26,000 33,000

Y

7

NA

Gwinnett

3

6

0.47

Old Norcross Tucker Rd.

Kelton Woods Dr.

40 24,000 Y 1 NA

Abercorn St. GA 204 Chatham 6 4 3.96 Largo Dr.

Johnston St. 45

29,000 52,000

Y

5

2016

Thornton Rd. GA 6

Douglas

9

3

1.84

Markham Rd.

Blairs Rd.

Bridge

45

45,000 73,000

Y

7

NA

Memorial Dr. GA 154 DeKalb 6 4 3.38 Line St.

Ladonna Dr. 45

23,000 27,000

Y

7

NA

1,392 1,241 1,697 1,943 1,189

Gray Highway

US 129, US 41

Bibb

Shorter Ave. GA 204 Floyd

Old Dixie Rd. US 19 Clayton

Mableton Pkwy.

GA 139 Cobb

5 4 1.5 Clinton St.

4 4 3.17 East Dr.

3 4 0.83 Hilltop Dr.

2

4

1.51

Pine Valley Rd.

Woodlawn Dr.

35 55

23,700 47,600

Y

3

2016

Sherwood Rd.
Tara Blvd.

40

24,000 30,000

Y

6

NA

40 55

14,700 20,200

Y

7

NA

S Gordon Rd.

45

21,000 27,000

Y

7

NA

2,640 1,364 1,095 1,993

Lee St./ Whitehall St.

US 29

Fulton

2

4 1.3

Ralph David Abernathy

Avon Rd.

30 9,000 55 22,000

Y

7

2015

Joseph Boone NA

Fulton

5 3 1.62 Paines Ave.

Richardson Rd.

35

4,700 5,400

Y 7 NA

Ogeechee

US 17, GA 25

Chatham

4

3 2.28 Gamble Rd.

Tower Dr.

35 55

22,200 26,800

Y

5

2016

Covington Hwy.

US 278 DeKalb 4 3 2.26 Panola Rd. Phillips Rd. 45 26,800 Y 7 NA

858 713 6,019 2,983

46

BACKGROUND AND DATA

Routes Name Route # County # Serious Injuries # Of Fatalities Corridor Length (Miles) From To Speed Limit Daily Traffic Volumes Transit? GDOT District GDOT Road Safety Audit Conducted Average distance between marked crossings, In Feet

S. Marietta Pkwy
Ga-85

GA 120 Cobb

1

GA 85 Clayton 9

Metropolitan Parkway

US 19, GA3

Fulton

3

MLK Jr Drive GA 139 Fulton 3

Washington Rd.

GA 28 Richmond 0

Donald Lee Hollowell

US 278 Fulton

8

Joe Frank Harris Parkway

US 411, US 41, GA 20

Bartow

5

Deans Bridge US 1,

Rd.

GA 4

Richmond 5

Martin Luther King Jr. Parkway
Ralph David Abernathy

US 19, US 41, GA 92, GA 3

Spaulding 5

GA 139 Fulton 2

Wesley Chapel NA

DeKalb 5

4

0.71

S Fairground St.

Rose Dr.

Walmart

35 55

27,500

Y

7

NA

1 3.47 Lee St.

Super

45 44,000 Y 7 NA

Center

3

Old 2.38 Deckner Ave. Jonesboro
Rd.

35

12,800 16,100

Y

7

2017

3

1.24

Boulder Park Dr.

Adamsville Dr.

35 22,200 Y 7 2014

4

0.63

Charlestowne Sherwood

Way

Dr.

45 35,000 Y 2 NA

1 3.75 Oliver St. Peek Rd. 35 20,000 Y 7 2017

2

3.09

Mac Johnson

Market Blvd.

Place

55

44,900

N

6

NA

2 3.37 Dover St.

Mt Olive Memorial Gardens

45

23,000 34,000

N

2

NA

2 1.97 Ellis Rd.

Manley Dr. 45 34,800 N 3 NA

3

0.93 Whitehall St.

Atwood St.

30

13,000 15,000

Y

7

2014

2

2.11

Kelley Chapel Rd.

Newgate Dr.

45

14,000 31,000

Y

7

NA

1,249 1,832 1,142 727 1,663 1,980 2,719 2,965
2600
701 1,592

This list reflects the routes with the highest numbers and concentrations of serious pedestrian injuries and fatalities from 20112015. GDOT has completed a Road Safety Audit on many of these corridors since 2011.

Many other streets exhibit the same characteristics as these roads and are likely to exhibit the same challenges and conditions that lead to pedestrian crashes.

47

BACKGROUND AND DATA
Focus Corridor Characteristics The Focus Corridor segments exhibit a clear and continuing pattern of pedestrian fatalities. They also share similar characteristics, including:
4 to 8 travel lanes, plus turn lanes or slip lanes Higher numbers of travel lanes contribute to higher speeds, more conflict points with pedestrians, and wider crossing distances. Each factor contributes to higher crash rates and more severe crash outcomes.
Lack of a raised or separated median A median can play an important role in helping pedestrians cross the street, especially at locations that are not controlled by traffic signals. Crossing at such locations is legal in many cases,12 although it may be unsafe. Raised or otherwise separated medians can provide a refuge area for people walking. They allow people to navigate one direction of traffic at a time. They also reduce the amount pedestrian sight distance required.
Infrequent opportunities and distance to safe pedestrian crossing Along Focus Corridors, the average distance between marked or signalized crossing opportunities is over 2,000 ft. Focus Corridors with the most frequent crossings have them every 700 ft. Focus Corridors with the greatest distance between crossings span over a mile (5,280 ft.) between them.
Mix of high density residential or commercial uses on both sides of the road A dense mix of land uses enables and encourages people to walk to destinations. In areas with a greater proportion of zero car households and/or high transit use, the need to walk to access destinations is more pronounced.
Transit routes Nearly all (22 of 25) of the Focus Corridors are also transit routes. Most transit trips begin and end with walking trips, which makes safe pedestrian access to transit especially important. In 2010, research on the proximity of pedestrian crashes to transit stops in the Atlanta region showed that nearly half of all pedestrian crashes were within 300 ft. of a stop and over 20% were within 100 ft. of a stop. The data does not confirm that the crashes involved a transit user. It does, however, indicate that many areas near transit stops need pedestrian safety improvements.

12

See Laws & Enforcement section

48

POLICIES AND PROGRAMS
Active State Policies, Programs, and Information on Pedestrian Safety
This section of the PSAP details the current state of pedestrian policies, programs, and information statewide. This information is meant to be used as a baseline assessment and a starting point for future actions.
Data on Pedestrians Data on pedestrians helps enable us to understand the demand for walking, challenges associated with walking, and safety conditions for people who walk. Data exists for many issues related to pedestrians, yet Georgia lacks a central location for such data. Further, data gaps limit the ability of transportation and public health professionals and others to gain a deep understanding of safety risks to pedestrians, make better decisions about outreach, education, programs, and infrastructure, and evaluate the effectiveness of implemented safety improvements. Better data would: Help planners understand levels and locations of demand for pedestrian infrastructure Determine levels for funding needed for pedestrian infrastructure and programs Determine feasibility for using the existing right of way for pedestrian infrastructure Enable communities to measure the benefits and cost effectiveness of pedestrian projects
and programs
Identified data gaps include:
1. Exposure Rates (Pedestrian Counts) The number of people walking on a road is called the exposure rate. As with car traffic counts, pedestrian exposure rates show where there is a demand for walking and infrastructure. It also helps to understand risks at different locations and promotes better decision making for infrastructure investments.
GDOT's statewide counting program measures the number of cars traveling on state roads.13 GDOT does not currently have a similar program or requirement for counting pedestrians in a systemic manner. The number of pedestrians using a roadway is typically not counted unless pedestrian safety is specifically part of a project. Exposure rates that do exist are not housed in a centrally accessible location. Many local agencies and organizations have developed programs for pedestrian counts in their jurisdiction.14 These studies are useful for projects within specific areas, but are not easily comparable and do not cover a diverse enough cross section of street types to be useful at the state level.

13

http://geocounts.com/GDOT/

14

http://www.midtownatl.com/_files/docs/intersection-counts_weekday.pdf

49

POLICIES AND PROGRAMS
Creating a robust statewide program for pedestrian counts would enable GDOT and others to better understand where and how much people are walking. From a safety standpoint, pedestrian count data helps to assess crash data in relation to pedestrian exposure. It also helps in prioritizing where pedestrian safety treatments are most needed. Until a routine counting system can be established, transit ridership data can serve as a proxy for pedestrian exposure along transit routes. These numbers can help also prioritize investments that increase safe pedestrian access to transit. 2. Enforcement Statistics: Traffic operations, warnings, citations, and convictions Law enforcement agencies play an important role in raising awareness about safety issues, influencing behaviors and cultural norms, and reinforcing educational programs. More comprehensive data would enable us to assess the efficacy of certain law enforcement actions. It would also allow us to better develop training and resources for law enforcement departments. 3. Cost of pedestrian injuries and fatalities, including medical costs and lost
productivity Transportation professionals, elected officials and others often use data on traffic congestion and costs of lost productivity to justify the need for infrastructure and investment. Data that measure the costs of pedestrian delay, injuries, and loss of life is rarely cited. Increased knowledge and awareness of such costs would help direct resources and investment to pedestrian infrastructure and other pedestrian safety solutions. 4. Driver and Pedestrian Distraction Increased use of smart phones and other electronic devices has resulted in more distracted driving and walking. Data on the prevalence and role of distraction in pedestrian crashes and fatalities is inconclusive at this time. Better data on the extent of smartphone use on our roads can assist in developing effective policy and technology solutions.
50

POLICIES AND PROGRAMS
5. Existing Pedestrian Infrastructure on State Routes: Georgia lacks comprehensive data of pedestrian infrastructure. It also lacks an ongoing process for inventorying pedestrian infrastructure. Currently, data on pedestrian infrastructure on the state route system is updated only through individual transportation projects. Increased data on existing infrastructure would support planning for and estimating costs needed for improving safety on the statewide infrastructure network. Needed data types include: On state owned roads in urban areas (excluding interstates) n Total number of miles and mapped locations of:
sidewalks lighted sidewalks n Total number and mapped locations of: enhanced or signalized crossing treatments lighted pedestrian crossings ADA Ramps Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons Rectangular Rapid Flash Beacons Pedestrian Refuge Islands School Zones
51

POLICIES AND PROGRAMS
Transportation and Land Use Planning
State, regional, and local planners have unique processes, timelines, and scopes for their transportation plans. Each needs to integrate the needs of people walking into these processes, including comprehensive transportation plans. Standalone pedestrian or pedestrian-bicycle infrastructure plans are especially valuable, as they create opportunities to build consensus and determine principles, priorities and action steps.
National Resources In 2014, the U.S. Department of Transportation Office of Planning in the Federal Highway Administration published the Statewide Pedestrian and Bicycle Planning Handbook.15 This handbook is available online and guides states on developing standalone bicycle and pedestrian plans. FHWA released "How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan" in 2017 to provide guidance to state and local agencies on pedestrian planning issues.16
The 2004 AASHTO Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities includes a section on "Planning for Pedestrians" and details the characteristics of pedestrians, pedestrian planning strategies, site development, and neighborhood traffic management.
Walk Friendly Communities Walk Friendly Communities is a nationwide recognition program that encourages communities to commit to supporting safer walking environments and improved mobility, access, and comfort for pedestrians. At the heart of the program is a comprehensive assessment tool that evaluates walkability and pedestrian safety related to engineering, education, encouragement, enforcement, evaluation, and planning. The tool helps evaluate on the ground conditions for walking and provide unique feedback and ideas for improving walkability. The Atlanta Regional Commission has used this program to assist communities in developing more walk friendly policies and places.
Georgia Statewide Planning and Resources The Georgia Department of Transportation's Guidebook for Pedestrian Planning17 offers guidance to local and regional agencies in Georgia on how to plan for pedestrian infrastructure. The guidebook was published in 2003 and is currently being updated as of late 2017.

15

FHWA Statewide Pedestrian and Bicycle Planning Handbook https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/processes/

pedestrian_bicycle/publications/pedestrian_bicycle_handbook/

16

https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike/ped_focus/

17

http://www.dot.ga.gov/DriveSmart/Travel/Documents/ga_ped_guide.pdf

52

POLICIES AND PROGRAMS
Chapter 9 of the GDOT Design Policy Manual defines the Georgia Complete Streets Policy, including planning and design applications, is defined in Chapter 9 of the GDOT Design Policy Manual.18 GDOT currently does not have a standalone pedestrian infrastructure plan.
GDOT's Office of Planning develops and updates the Statewide Strategic Transportation Plan (SSTP) and Statewide Transportation Plan (SWTP).19 The combined SSTP/SWTP is a long range plan that provides a comprehensive look at transportation issues facing Georgia currently and through 2040. The plan cites the need to address the rising states of pedestrian crashes in the state with enhanced design and construction efforts. It states, however, that "due to the scale and trip length for most pedestrians and cyclists, needs for non-motorized transportation are generally identified and sponsored at the regional and/or local level." The plan recommends allocating 2% of transportation funding to pedestrian and bicycle projects.
GDOT's Office of Planning also develops the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP),20 Georgia's four-year, fiscally constrained, transportation and capital improvements program. The STIP lists federally-funded transportation projects that are located outside Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) boundaries. Each MPO develops its own Transportation Improvement Program (TIP).
The STIP includes pedestrian safety projects funded by Highway Safety Improvement Program(HSIP) dollars or the Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG) Transportation Alternatives Set Aside (formerly known as the Transportation Alternatives Program--TAP). In contrast to an interchange or road widening project, it is challenging to get stand-alone pedestrian projects into the STIP outside of a specifically dedicated funding program like HSIP or TAP. This is because pedestrian projects typically have a much lower cost and much more localized benefit in comparison to more "traditional" transportation projects.
Regional Commissions and Metropolitan Planning Organizations Georgia has 12 Regional Commissions (RCs), which provide planning and development assistance to counties throughout the state. Services include implementing the Georgia Planning Act of 1989, administering the Area Agency on Aging, and administering the Workforce Investment Act. Each RC provides pedestrian planning support to local jurisdictions. Support ranges from a limited, as-needed, basis to creating master pedestrian

18

http://www.dot.ga.gov/PartnerSmart/DesignManuals/DesignPolicy/GDOT-DPM.pdf

19

GDOT SSTP/SWTP http://www.dot.ga.gov/InvestSmart/Documents/SSTP/SWTP-SSTP%20Reports/

SWTPSSTP%20FINAL%20REPORT-00.pdf

20

GDOT STIP http://www.dot.ga.gov/BuildSmart/Programs/Documents/STIP/2015-2018/Final/STIPFY15-18.pdf

53

POLICIES AND PROGRAMS
plans for their regions. The RCs help local jurisdictions plan for infrastructure and assist local governments in applying for grants, but do not fund the design or construction of transportation infrastructure. Georgia also has 16 Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs), which are composed of local jurisdictions in urbanized area with combined populations of at least 50,000. MPOs are federally-mandated and federally-funded organizations that make transportation policy, receive and prioritize use of federal transportation dollars, and allocate funds to local projects. Each MPO has both a long-range regional transportation plan (RTP) and a short-term fiscally-constrained Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP). Many MPOs in Georgia integrate pedestrian needs into both their RTP and TIP. Several have stand-alone pedestrian and bicycle plans. In some organizations, MPO, RC, and/or county government staff overlap. Local Jurisdiction Planning The Georgia Planning Act requires cities and counties to maintain comprehensive plans that help shape future growth. Transportation needs are included as part of plans with broad scopes. Local jurisdictions, including counties and cities also plan transportation investments and land use, often with standalone transportation and land use plans. Many business improvement districts and neighborhood organizations work with government agencies to develop local transportation plans.
54

POLICIES AND PROGRAMS
Engineering
Complete Streets Policies The Georgia Department of Transportation adopted a Complete Streets policy in September 2012. Complete Streets policies support the planning, design, and construction of streets and roadways that serve all transportation modes and people of all ages and abilities. The Georgia Complete Streets Policy, including planning and design application, is defined in Chapter 9 of the GDOT Design Policy Manual.21
The following counties, communities and Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) have also adopted a Complete Streets policy, resolution, plan, or ordinance: Athens-Clark, Cobb, DeKalb, Douglas, and Rockdale counties; Gainesville-Hall, Savannah and ValdostaLowndes MPOs; and the cities of Americus, Brunswick, Carrollton, Clarkson, Columbus, Decatur, Dunwoody, Gainesville, Macon, Milledgeville, Norcross, Roswell, Savannah, Suwanee, and Woodstock.
Road Safety Audits (RSA) A Road Safety Audit (RSA) is a formal safety performance examination of a specific road by a multidisciplinary team. Teams consists of a range of stakeholders, including technical experts and community leaders. RSAs identify potential road safety issues and identifies opportunities for improvements in safety for all road users. Local or regional agencies can request an RSA through GDOT. RSAs should be selected and implemented in coordination with regional and local governments. The Focus Corridor list in this document should also guide priorities at the state and regional level.
Beginning in 2012, GDOT aimed to conduct two RSAs per GDOT district each year. These consider pedestrian safety when appropriate. GDOT also aims to conduct at least two additional RSAs as resources permit. GDOT uses crash history and other data to prioritize projects.

21

http://www.dot.ga.gov/PartnerSmart/DesignManuals/DesignPolicy/GDOT-DPM.pdf

55

POLICIES AND PROGRAMS

From 20122017, GDOT completed RSAs on the following roads:

District Corridor

7

SR 154 FROM SR 42 TO SR 155 - ROAD SAFETY AUDIT

6

US 76 Bypass @ Piney Ridge Rd.

4

US 19/SR 3 @ CR 39/Nelms Rd.

5

I-516/SR 21 FM CS 1074/MONTGOMERY ST TO CR 975/VETERANS PKWY

7

CS 3096 & CS 6382 (Cleveland Ave.) FROM SR 14 TO CS 1334/OLD HAPEVILLE ROAD

7

SR 5 at SR 166

6

US27/ SR1/ Rome Boulevard at SR 48/ Commerce Street

7

SR 279 FM FLAT SHOALS RD TO I-85/I-285 - ROAD SAFETY AUDIT

7

SR 6/Camp Creek Parkway from I-85 to Fulotn Pkwy (11.5 miles) - RSA #2

5

SR 27/US 341 from M.P. 9.13 to M.P. 10.93 (SR 4) - RSA #3

4

SR 376 at Loch Laurel - RSA #4

1

US 129/SR 15/Prince Ave. from Pulaski St. to Oglethorp Ave./Satula Ave.

7

SR 3/Tara Blvd

7

SR 139/MLK JR FM SR 280 TO CS 2744/BOLTON ROAD - ROAD SAFETY AUDIT

7

SR 154/SR 139/SR 14/Lee Street

3

JR Allen Pkwy

2

Milledgeville

1

SR 15/US-23/US-441 from Stove Mill to Ramey

5

SR 204/Abercorn St.

6

SR 6 from Old harris Road to S. Main St.

7

SR 8/US 78/Ponce Ave from SR 42/Moreland Ave to SR 155/Clairmont

6

SR 6/SR 120/US 278/Jimmy Campbell Parkway

1

SR 15 ALT/JEFFERSON RD, ATHENS-CLARKE

2

SR 17 @ SR 17BYP/WIRE RD, MCDUFFIE

2

SR 57 AT FALL LINE FREEWAY, WILKINSON

3

SR 22/US 80 (Eisenhower Pkwy) Road Safety Audit

3

US 23/SR 80/SR 19/Emory Hwy, MACON-BIBB

4

SR 520/US 82/SR 7, TIFTON

4

SR 7/VALDOSTA RD AT VAL-DEL RD, LOWNDES

5

OGEECHEE RD, CHATHAM

6

SR 108 AT UPPER BETHANY RD, PICKENS

7

US 23/SR 42/Moreland Avenue @ E Confederate Avenue and Skyhaven Road

7

SR 42/Briarcliff from Ponce to North Druid Hills

7

I-75/I-85 Connector at Edgewood Ave

1

SR 378/Beaver Ruin Road

5

SR 17 at Marlow Rd/Sandhill Rd

1

SR 369 from SR 53 to SR 53 Conn (Gainsville)

2

Peach Orchard Road from Windsor Spring Road to Denmark Street

2

Bobby Jones Expressway from Scott Nixon Ramps to Columbia Road (SR 232)

3

SR 42/83 (N. Lee Street) in Monroe County (City of Forsyth)

3

SR 34 in Coweta County Limits: Holtz Pkwy to Posey Road

4

US 41/SR 7, Tifton

4

SR 122 @ SR 125

5

SR 196 From Veterans Parkway to Live Oak Church Road

6

I-20 EB @ US 27/SR1

6

SR 52 @ SR 3 (Whitfield County)

7

SR 3/Metropolitan Pkwy from Dogwood Road to Whitehall

7

SR 120 from Garrison Commons to Casteel Rd (2.1 miles)

7

SR 279/ OLD NATIONAL HWY

7

SR 280/ SOUTH COBB DR

1

SR 17A (Big A Rd) from SR 184 (E Tugalo St) to Fernside Dr. - Stephens County

1

SR 17 from Forest Street to SR 72 - Elbert County

2

SR 28/Washington Rd. from SR 28/Furys Ferry to Old Berkman: 2.1 miles (Augusta, GA)

2

SR 383/Jimmy Dyess from Wheeler Rd. to Wrightsboro Rd: 1.0 mile (Columbia County)

3

SR 247 (Pio Nono Avenue) from SR 22 (Eisenhower Pkwy) to Dora Street

3

SR 74 (Mercer University Drive) from Oglesby Place to SR 247 (Pio Nono Avenue)

4

SR 93/N Broad Street @ SR 111 (Grady County from Syrupmaker Drive to 3rd Avenue)

4

SR 112/E Washington Ave @ Hudson Ave/Gorday Dr

5

SR 73 @ Fair Rd. (Statesboro)

5

SR 30 @ Midland Rd, SR 30 @ Kolic Helmey Rd - Effingham & SR 30 @ Milledgeville Rd - Chatham Co.

6

SR 3 @ Zena Dr & Collins Dr. (corridor) - Bartow Co.

6

SR 1 (Floyd Co.)

7

SR 10/College Ave from SR 155/Chandler Rd to East Lake Transit Station

7

Donald Hollowway

7

SR 5 Austell Rd. from Bankhead Hwy to South Cobb Dr. (7 miles)

56

Year 2012 2012 2012 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2014 2014 2014 2014 2014 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2016 2016 2016 2016 2016 2016 2016 2016 2016 2016 2016 2016 2016 2016 2017 2017 2017
2017
2017
2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017
2017
2017
2017
2017
2017
2017
2017 2017 2017 2017
2013-2017

POLICIES AND PROGRAMS
Education
Education is important in creating a safe transportation system. People who design and construct transportation facilities, as well as elected officials, enforcement officers and people who walk, use assistive devices, ride bicycles or drive all have a responsibility to understand pedestrian safety needs and solutions. Existing educational pedestrian safety resources include:
National Trainings At the national level, there are several resources for educational resources and training. America Walks is a nation-wide pedestrian advocacy organization. They host advocacy resources on their website and hold a biennial National Walking Summit. The Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals (APBP) offers technical training and resources for transportation professionals, including a monthly webinar and a biennial Professional Development Seminar.
Georgia Department of Transportation Marketing GDOT launched the "See & Be Seen" campaign in 2016.22 This campaign includes facts about when and where pedestrian fatalities occur, as well as downloadable flyer with tips for drivers and pedestrians. GDOT also launched a "Drive Alert / Arrive Alive" campaign targeting distracted driving. Evaluation data regarding impact of these campaigns is currently unavailable.
GDOT Regional Trainings GDOT currently provides annual trainings to each of its 7 districts, including trainings on pedestrian safety. In collaboration with PEDS, regional trainings will be provided semiannually to each district starting in 2017.
PEDS PEDS is a pedestrian safety advocacy organization that partners with others to make communities in Georgia safe and inviting places to walk. PEDS educates transportation, public health professionals, elected officials, enforcement officers, community advocates and others about creating walkable communities and improving pedestrian safety. It also provides regional training workshops and programs that promote increased investment in safe sidewalks and crossing treatments.

22

http://www.dot.ga.gov/DS/SafetyOperation/SBS

57

POLICIES AND PROGRAMS
Georgia Walks Summit PEDS partners with GDOT and others to provide an annual Georgia Walks Summit. 23 Launched in 2016, the summit educates and inspires a diverse audience of transportation, law enforcement, education and public health professionals, community activists and others about pedestrian safety needs and solutions. GDOT has committed financial support for the summit through 2018.
Georgia Safe Routes to School Resource Center Safe Routes to School is a nationwide program focusing on enabling and encouraging children to walk or ride their bicycles to school safely. The Georgia Safe Routes to School (SRTS) program is administered by GDOT which funds infrastructure spending as well as the Georgia SRTS Resource Center. The Georgia SRTS resource center budget averages $500,000 annually. The resource center is funded from June 2017June 2020 through a contract with AECOM. Five regional outreach coordinators staff the resource center. They assist schools across Georgia with School Road Safety Audits, and projects such as: education, encouragement, enforcement, evaluation, and planning. The SRTS website hosts information for developing a SRTS program, safety tips and tools, and links to safety education resources.24
Georgia Governor's Office of Highway Safety (GOHS) The Georgia Governor's Office of Highway Safety is tasked with creating and disseminating educational information about safe use of Georgia's roads. Its marketing campaign schedule is aligned with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's communications calendar.25
The GOHS website provides educational information.26 The current GOHS pedestrian safety provides web page provides links to: Georgia Code laws addressing pedestrians Pedestrian Safety Tips PEDS website Safe Routes to School website GOHS Safety Store The GOHS safety store allows agencies to order safety brochures and other educational materials. The GOHS Safety Store currently lacks flyers or other material on pedestrian safety.

23

Georgiawalks.org

24

http://saferoutesga.org/

25

https://www.trafficsafetymarketing.gov/sites/tsm.nhtsa.dot.gov/files/nhtsa-2017-commscalendar.pdf

26

http://www.gahighwaysafety.org/campaigns/pedestrian-safety/pedestrian-safety/

58

POLICIES AND PROGRAMS
Driver's Education Curriculum New drivers are required to complete a driver's education course and complete a set number of supervised driving hours. Pedestrian safety is a topic addressed in the provided curriculum. Updates to the Georgia Driver's Manual require regular review to ensure content related to pedestrian safety is complete and accurate. Georgia does not require people to complete tests as part of the license renewal process. Safe Kids Georgia Safe Kids Georgia focuses on reducing preventable injuries to children. It implements programs on many issues affecting children, including pedestrian safety. Safe Kids teaches safe behavior to motorists, child pedestrians and parents. It partners with schools, families, the media, and community organizations to spread pedestrian safety messages and conduct research on child pedestrian safety issues. It makes presentations at conferences and participates Safe Routes to School, Walk Georgia, and other programs. Public Health Districts Public Health Districts provide education on public health issues at local and regional levels. At least three public health districts currently provide information or campaigns targeting pedestrian safety. These include: Cobb/Douglas, Fulton, and DeKalb counties.
59

POLICIES AND PROGRAMS

Schedule for Pedestrian Safety Trainings in Georgia

Table 8. Existing Training Opportunities Addressing Pedestrian Safety Topics

Biennial

Annual

Ongoing, Monthly

Ad Hoc

APBP Professional Development
Seminar

Georgia Walks Summit

GOHS: SHSP Summit, Highway
Safety Summit

GDOT District Trainings

Webinars (APBP, America
Walks, etc)

GA Public Safety Training Center

Federal Highway Administration's Resource Center

January February
March
April

GW Summit

May

June
July August September

National Summit (Next: 2019)

October

November December

Highway Safety Summit
SHSP Summit

Ongoing Ongoing

Ongoing Ongoing

Ongoing Ongoing

Ongoing Ongoing

Districts 4, 5, 7

Ongoing

Ongoing

Ongoing Ongoing

Districts 1, 2, 3, 6

Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing Ongoing

Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing Ongoing

By request By request By request
By request
By request
By request
By request By request By request By request By request By request

60

POLICIES AND PROGRAMS

Table 9. Opportunities To Expand Reach With New Trainings On Pedestrian Safety

Annual

Bi-Annual

Ongoing, Monthly

Georgia Downtown Conference

Mayors' Day Conference

Georgia Public Health Association Annual Meeting and
Conference

Georgia Planning Association Conference

Georgia Public Safety Training
Center

2018

Audience

January

2019

February March April May June July August
September October
November December

January

February March April May June July August
September October
November December

P, EO Statewide Statewide

EO Mayors' Day Conference
Mayors' Day Conference

PHP Statewide
Statewide

P, EO, A Statewide Statewide
Statewide Statewide

LE
Ongoing
Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing

61

POLICIES AND PROGRAMS
Laws and Enforcement
The 2016 Georgia Code includes motor vehicle and traffic laws and is available online.27 The 2016 Drivers Manual, which is published by the Georgia Department of Drivers Services, describes laws related to pedestrians.28
There is no central location for information about enforcement operations statewide. At this time, little is known about the extent of enforcement of laws that would protect pedestrians.
What is known is that safe behavior is critical to improving pedestrian safety. The top behaviors negatively affecting pedestrian safety include speeding, failing to stop for pedestrians, and texting while driving.
Speeding Much of the threat to pedestrians comes from drivers' speed. The faster a motorist drives, the more likely he or she is to be in a crash, and the more likely injuries to a person on foot will be serious or fatal.

62

27

http://law.justia.com/codes/georgia/2016

POLICIES AND PROGRAMS
Speed Detection Devices (GA Code 40-14-2) The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) states that "Automated speed enforcement is an effective countermeasure to reduce speeding-related crashes, fatalities, and injuries. The lack of state-level automated speed enforcement (ASE) enabling legislation, and restrictions on the use of ASE in states where legislation exists, have led to underuse of this effective speeding countermeasure."
The Georgia code prohibits the use of unmarked police cars when issuing tickets. It also requires officers using electronic devices to be visible from at least 500 ft. With just a few exceptions, it also prohibits local enforcement officers from using electronic devices to ticket speeders unless violators are exceeding the speed limit by at least 11 mph.
The Georgia Code does not allow use of automated speed enforcement. The NTSB recommends that states not allowing ASE should "amend current laws to authorize state and local agencies to use automated speed enforcement." Allowing such automated devices would increase compliance with the law and would help ensure uniform law enforcement.
The FHWA states that when used appropriately, automated enforcement can be a valuable tool for speed enforcement.29 The Governors Highway Safety Association also supports automated speed enforcement devices: "Advanced technologies, such as Lidar and speed cameras, have proven to be effective tools in ensuring compliance with speed limits and other traffic laws. GHSA supports the use of automated enforcement in efforts to enforce speeding and urges states to enact legislation allowing the use of these technologies by the law enforcement community."30
Distraction Forms of distraction include talking on mobile phones, texting, eating, interacting with other passengers, drowsiness, and others. Data on the extent of distracted driving in Georgia is limited. Some broad statistics on distraction enforcement have been cited by news sources:
Citations Texting while driving Georgia prohibits texting while driving and bars anyone under 18 from using mobile phones or other wireless devices while driving, 40-6-241.2. From 20102014, enforcement officers in Georgia issued more than 7,100 citations for violating these two laws.31

29

https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/speedmgt/ref_mats/fhwasa1304/resources2/27%20-%20Automated%20

Enforcement%20for%20Speeding%20and%20Red%20Light%20Running.pdf

30

http://www.ghsa.org/issues/speed-and-red-light-cameras

31

http://www.myajc.com/news/local/georgia-motor-vehicle-deaths-jump-third-two-years/

JUpDheU8eFb3GJlrobSn4I/

63

POLICIES AND PROGRAMS
Convictions Texting while driving Between Aug 1, 2010 and Sept 1, 2013, jurisdictions in Georgia issued 3,062 tickets for texting while driving. Nearly 60% of the tickets were issued in Gwinnett County. 32 Clayton County 43 Cobb County 219 DeKalb County 29 Fulton County 100 Gwinnett County 1,822 Other counties not cited individually
Texting. The Georgia Code prohibits driving while using a device to text, email, or use the internet. 40-6-241.2 (2016). Anyone under 18 is prohibited from using a wireless device while driving.
Some say that proving that a person was texting while driving can be challenging. A law enforcement officer may suspect texting or internet use, but lack evidence to support a citation. Officers in Gwinnett County have issued thousands of citations, and providing training on how to replicate their methods would help officers in other jurisdictions enforce these laws. Media coverage of enforcement operations would increase their impact, as many people do not realize the scope of phone use that is considered texting. Strategies to make enforcement of texting while driving easier include:
Laws banning use of handheld devices while driving Technology that automatically shuts down mobile devices while driving
Failure to Yield Right of Way in Crosswalks (GA Code 40-6-91) The Georgia Code requires drivers to stop and stay stopped while pedestrians are in a crosswalk on their side of the road or if they're approaching and within one lane of the driver's side of the road. "Half of the roadway" means all traffic lanes carrying traffic in one direction of travel. Drivers who are turning must also stop and stay stopped when a pedestrian is in a crosswalk on the half of the road or approaching the half of the road onto which the driver is turning. Drivers who are approaching another vehicle from the rear may not pass the vehicle that is stopped at any marked crosswalk or at any unmarked crosswalk at an intersection.

32

http://www.myajc.com/news/texting-while-driving-convictions-the-rise/NzcCuFSQzVJnTVNVQM2YwO/

64

POLICIES AND PROGRAMS

Traffic-Control Signal Monitoring Devices (GA Code 40-14-20) (Red light running) Crashes caused by drivers who run red lights often result in severe or fatal injuries. Enforcing red light laws by officer pursuit is difficult and dangerous. The Georgia Highway Safety Association supports the use of automated enforcement in efforts to enforce red light running and urges states to enact legislation allowing the use of these technologies by the law enforcement community.33
The Georgia Code authorizes use of red light cameras, but caps fines at $75. The maximum fine has not been increased since passage of the law in 2001. The low fines together with the reality that photo-enforcement leads to reduced violations, means that the cost of implementing red light camera programs typically exceeds the revenue produced by fines. This has prompted many cities to remove red light cameras. Jurisdictions seeking to use photo-enforcement to reduce red light running long-term should identify funding sources other than fines.
Enforcing Pedestrian Behavior Safe pedestrian behavior is important. Crossing the street within 50 feet of intersections, for example, increases the risk of being struck by drivers who are turning. Risk also increases when people walk in the road with their back to traffic. Over half of pedestrian fatalities occur when the person is trying to cross the street. Georgia's crosswalk law is complicated, and increased training is needed to help avoid issuing tickets to people who are actually crossing legally.

33

http://www.ghsa.org/issues/speed-and-red-light-cameras

65

POLICIES AND PROGRAMS
Crossing a Roadway Other Than in a Crosswalk (GA Code 40-6-92) Some people refer to crossing outside of crosswalks as "jaywalking." However, "jaywalking" does not appear in the Georgia code, and the behavior is actually legal in most locations. The Georgia Code only prohibits pedestrians from crossing outside of crosswalks at locations where the adjacent intersections on both sides are controlled by traffic signals. Outside of urban business districts, most intersections are not controlled by traffic signals. As long as at least one of the adjacent intersections is not signalized, pedestrians can cross the roadway legally wherever they want, as long as they yield the right of way to vehicles. Crossing outside of crosswalks at many of these locations is often unsafe, but it isn't illegal. Most pedestrian fatalities occur away from intersections or crosswalks. This leads many agencies to use messaging and enforcement operations to encourage pedestrians to cross at crosswalks. Yet in many locations where pedestrian crashes occur, the nearest crosswalk is over a half-mile away. Increasing the frequency of safe and legal crossing opportunities would increase compliance and improve safety more than messaging in these situations. Automated Vehicles The potential impacts from vehicle automation in some form are quickly approaching. Automation will have many impacts on transportation. As new technologies are introduced, it will be important for agencies to stay involved in the decision making processes surrounding the impacts on pedestrians. There will be choices for engineering and enforcement of streets. Ensuring that pedestrians are not negatively affected is critical.
66

FUNDING
Funding allocated to pedestrian safety
Georgia invests a share of Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) funds, Surface Transportation Block Grants (STBG) [formerly known as Surface Transportation Program funds], Section 402 and 405h grants, capital improvement programs, intersection maintenance and upgrade projects, as well as other federal, state and local funding sources in pedestrian safety improvements.
The PSAP analysis identifies funding allocated to stand alone pedestrian safety projects. This review does not reflect other resources used to pay for pedestrian infrastructure as part of road resurfacing, redesign or other larger transportation projects. Three funding sources were analyzed: Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) funds, Section 402 funds, and Surface Transportation Block Grants (STBG).
402 Funds
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) administers the Section 402 State Highway Safety Program at the national level. It passes Section 402 funding to the Georgia Governor's Office of Highway Safety (GOHS), which uses a grant program to allocate the funds annually to Georgia communities. These funds must be used for highway safety education and enforcement programs that address a broad range of issues, including improving pedestrian safety:34
From 20112015, funding spent on pedestrian-specific projects ranged between 0.95% and 2.65% of the total 402 budget administered by GOHS. The share of all 402 funds allocated to pedestrian safety declined significantly during the five-year period.
Pedestrians accounted for an average of 14% of all traffic fatalities during the 5-year period, which suggests that a larger share of 402 funding should be allocated to pedestrian safety projects.
Low funding levels is largely due to the lack of applications for 402 funds for pedestrian programs in recent years. GOHS distributes grant information annually to eligible recipients. Without a stronger application response, grant awards for pedestrian education and enforcement will likely remain low. A new approach to soliciting applications may be necessary.

34

https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/legislationandpolicy/policy/section402/

67

FUNDING

Percent of 402 Funding Allocated to Pedestrian Programs, 20112015
$160,000 $147,870

$140,000

$131,021

$120,000

$109,334

100% 90% 80% 70%

$100,000

60%

$80,000 $60,000 $40,000 $20,000
$-

$69,984

11%

14%

15%

2.65% 20 11 Total 402 Budget

1.72%

0.95%

20 12

20 13

% of 402 Budget spent on Pedestrian Programs

50% $64,930
40%

30%

14%

14% 20%

10%

20 14

1.88%

20 15

1.02% 0%

% of Traffic Fatalities that were Pedestrians

Figure 27. Percent of 402 Funding Allocated to Pedestrian Programs, 20112015

68

FUNDING

From 20112015, GOHS used 402 funds to grants to 9 pedestrian safety programs. All programs that received grants are located in Focus Counties identified by the PSAP.

Table 11. 402 Funds allocated to Pedestrian Education and Enforcement Programs, 20112015
"Pedestrian Advocates of the Coastal Empire (PACE)" The Chatham County Health Department developed Safe Routes to School for walking or biking children in areas identified as High Risk Zones. Established PACE (Pedestrian Advocates of the Coastal Empire) as a multi-faceted pedestrian safety committee in collaboration with community agencies and citizens promoting pedestrian and bicycle safety.

2011
2012 2013 2014 2015

"Pedestrians Educating Drivers on Safety (PEDS)" Focused on raising awareness for pedestrian safety issues in the metro Atlanta area by advocating for the need for investment in pedestrian facilities, improved street design, and the modification of driver behavior. During FFY 2011, PEDS included a radio campaign, crosswalk crackdowns and pedestrian-friendly design training for engineers.

$147,869.90*

"Atlanta Bike Campaign Share the Road Awareness" The Atlanta Bike Campaign provided PI&E on bicycle traffic safety. Target populations included both motorists and bicyclists in the Atlanta metropolitan area, where the need to "Share the Road" was emphasized.
"No Kidding! Pay Attention in a School Zone" A program in Athens, GA dedicated to reducing the number of vehicles speeding in school zones, endangering child pedestrians and others.
PEDS, focused on raising awareness for pedestrian safety issues in the metro Atlanta area by advocating for the need for investment in pedestrian facilities, improved street design, and the modification of driver behavior. Included a radio campaign, crosswalk crackdowns and pedestrian-friendly design training for engineers.

$109,334.26*

"Atlanta Bicycle Coalition Share the Road Awareness" Provided PI&E on bicycle traffic safety. Target populations included both motorists and bicyclists in the Atlanta metropolitan area, where the need to "Share the Road" was emphasized.

PEDS program consisted of professional traffic safety entities which worked together with GOHS to continue to improve the state's pedestrian thoroughfares.

$69,984.28

PEDS program consisted of professional traffic safety entities which worked together with GOHS to continue to improve the state's pedestrian thoroughfares.

DeKalb County Safe Communities: the DeKalb County Board of Health was able to disseminate over 62,000 pieces of educational literature regarding child passenger safety and pedestrian safety to the citizens of DeKalb County.
Walk to School Day: DeKalb County Board of Health was an integral part of International Walk to School Day and Georgia Walk to School Day during FY2014. Other partners include the Brookhaven City Council, Georgia Safe Routes to School, Brookhaven City Police Department, DeKalb County Sheriff's Office, the Latin American Association and many others.

$131,020.66*

PEDS program consisted of professional traffic safety entities which worked together with GOHS to continue to improve the state's pedestrian thoroughfares.

$64,930.00

*Several pedestrian safety grantees used portions of their grants for bicycle-related education and enforcement or child safety seat education, so the actual funding dedicated pedestrian safety is likely lower than the numbers shown in Table 11 (above) and the percentages shown in Figure 27 (below).

69

FUNDING

Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP)
Georgia uses federal Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) funds to implement engineering solutions that reduce crash incidents and address common crash types. GDOT is responsible for allocating HSIP funds to projects statewide. The Georgia HSIP program identifies and reviews specific traffic safety issues in Georgia. It also identifies and audits locations with potential for improvement. The Focus Corridors identified by the PSAP align with goals and purpose of HSIP funds.
HSIP Funding Amounts GDOT aims to invest 10% of HSIP dollars to pedestrian projects. From 20112015, the Georgia Department of Transportation allocated HSIP funds to 317 projects. Of these, 38 were designated improvements for pedestrian safety. From 20112015, the Georgia Department of Transportation allocated $17,200,000 of HSIP funds to pedestrian safety improvement projects. This represents 6.4% of the HSIP funds over those 5 years.

Share of HSIP Funds spent on Pedestrian Projects, 20112015

70000000

$67,633,060

1

60000000 50000000

$51,174,129

$54,876,196

0.9
$58,349,688
0.8
0.7

40000000 30000000

0.6
$32,714,306 0.5
0.4

20000000 10000000
0

2.39%
2011

0.3

12.79%

1.92%

6.82%

2012

2013

2014

Total HSIP Funding Allocated

Percent of HSIP funds allocated to pedestrian safety projects Target share of HSIP $ for Pedestrian Projects - 10%

0.2

2015

0.1
8.62% 0

Figure 25. Share of HSIP Funds spent on Pedestrian Projects, 20112015

70

FUNDING

HSIP Fund Targeting FOCUS COUNTY TARGETS From 20112015, over 60% of pedestrian crash and fatality incidents occurred in Focus Counties identified by PSAP. During the same time period, 42% ($7,600,000) of HSIP funds that were used for pedestrian improvement projects were spent in Focus Counties.

$8, 000, 000 $7, 000, 000 $6, 000, 000 $5, 000, 000 $4, 000, 000 $3, 000, 000

Percent of Pedestrian Improvement Project Dollars Spent in Focus Counties, 20112015 (HSIP)
$7,463,210

$4,610,916 90%

$2,818,497

$2, 000, 000 $1, 000, 000
$0

$1,221,000 84%

$1,053,338 23%

2011

2012

2013

26% 2014

10% 2015

$ spent on all pedestrian safety projects

$ spent on pedestrian projects in focus counties

Figure 26. Percent of Pedestrian Improvement Project Dollars spent in Focus Counties, 20112015 (HSIP)
Infrastructure Type Targets Safe crossing treatments such as crosswalks, Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons, Rectangular Rapid Flash Beacons, lighting, and median islands received over 57% of funding for pedestrian improvements. ADA improvements accounted for over 36% of pedestrian projects funded by HSIP. This includes elements such as curb ramps, audible signals, and detectable rumble strips. Less than 6% of the funds were spent on new sidewalks.

Infrastructure Type

Table 10. Infrastructure constructed for all pedestrian improvements using HSIP funds, 20112015

Funds Spent % of Funds Approximate # of locations receiving

Spent

treatment

Crossing Treatments

$9,876,416.82 57.5%

56

Crosswalks

25

Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon

4

Rectangular Rapid Flash Beacon

16

Pedestrian Signals Lighting ADA Sidewalks

$6,321,206.68 36.8% $969,338.40 5.6%

7 4 15 10 (approximately 6.8 miles)

71

FUNDING
OTHER STATE TRANSPORTATION FUNDS GDOT also administers state-funded projects. These projects are relieved of many of the federal funding requirements. Funding allocation is also more flexible than federally-funded projects.
Multimodal Safety and Access Grant GDOT developed the Multimodal Safety and Access Grant to enable jurisdictions to close small gaps in the walking and biking networks on state routes. GDOT issued an initial call for projects in 2017. GDOT received sixty-five proposals, predominantly for sidewalk gap projects in local communities. GDOT selected twenty-eight projects for fiscal years 2017 and 2018. Investments totaled $6 million in investments. The state provides 70% of the funds, with a 30% local match.
Partnering with Local Jurisdictions With the exception of limited access highways, GDOT policy requires sidewalks to be included in all road projects in urbanized areas. GDOT sometimes partners with local jurisdictions provide lighting and sidewalks. Contracts between state agencies and local jurisdictions typically require local jurisdictions to pay for electricity and sidewalk maintenance. Many jurisdictions are unable or unwilling to cover lighting or maintenance costs, which prevents them from pursuing this opportunity.
Metropolitan Planning Organization and Regional Commission Funds
The analysis of funds in this section represents stand-alone pedestrian projects that received funds at the MPO and RC levels from 20112015. Other transportation projects across the state have included pedestrian infrastructure during this time period. Because cost data for pedestrian infrastructure is difficult to distinguish in larger projects, only stand-alone pedestrian projects were analyzed. The funds analyzed here are typically not available in equal proportions each year. Further, project schedules, which are outside of the control of MPOs, can create large differences in funding allocation percentages from year to year. Therefore, it is highly unlikely that MPOs will allocate equal levels of money to pedestrian projects each year.
Surface Transportation Block Grant Urban (STBG Urban) The Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG) Program is a federal-aid transportation program administered by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA). The STBG Urban program (formerly known as STP Urban) provides funds to state, regional and local agencies for transportation improvement projects.
72

FUNDING

MPOs allocate STBG Urban funds to many regional transportation projects. Only MPOs in urbanized areas with 200,000+ people are eligible to allocate STBG Urban funds. This includes MPOs for the following Georgia regions: Atlanta, Augusta, Columbus, Savannah, and Chattanooga (MPO area covers parts of Georgia). Eligible project types include recreational trails, pedestrian and bicycle projects, and Safe Routes to School, as well as other projects and programs.
From 20112015, the Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC) and Savannah's Coastal Region Metropolitan Planning Organization (CORE MPO) authorized STBG Urban funds to pedestrian-specific projects. Data on authorized funding was pulled from published Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) documents listing authorized funds for the 20112015 timeframe. ARC authorized 1575% of its STBG Urban funds to pedestrian projects each year. Savannah authorized 055% of its STBG - Urban funds for pedestrian projects.

Atlanta Regional Commission -- Percent of STP Urban/ STBG Urban Funds Spent on Pedestrian Projects 20112015

$85 ,000 ,000 $80 ,000 ,000 $75 ,000 ,000 $70 ,000 ,000 $65 ,000 ,000 $60 ,000 ,000 $55 ,000 ,000 $50 ,000 ,000 $45 ,000 ,000 $40 ,000 ,000 $35 ,000 ,000 $30 ,000 ,000 $25 ,000 ,000 $20 ,000 ,000 $15 ,000 ,000 $10 ,000 ,000
$5, 000, 000 $0

$84,538,517

$58,275,046

$55,500,965

$59,545,978

20%

17%

$19,073,332 75%

41%

53%

201 1

201 2

201 3

201 4

201 5

All STP Urban/STBG Urban funds allocated

STP Urban/STBG Urban funds allocated for pedestrian projects

Figure 28. Atlanta Regional Commission - Percent of STBG Urban Funds Authorized for Pedestrian Projects 20112015

73

FUNDING

Savannah Metropolitan Planning Commission -- Percent of STP Urban/ STBG Urban Funds Spent on Pedestrian Projects, 20112015

$20 ,000 ,000

$20,446,857

$18 ,000 ,000

$16 ,000 ,000

$14 ,000 ,000

$12 ,000 ,000 $10 ,000 ,000

$9,482,950

$8, 000, 000

$6, 000, 000

$4, 000, 000

$2,973,000

$2,850,000

$2, 000, 000 $0

0% 2011

$500,000 100%
2012

10% 2013

55% 2014

6% 2015

All STP Urban/STBG Urban funds allocated STP Urban/STBG Urban funds allocated for pedestrian projects

Figure 29. Savannah CORE MPO- Percent of STBG - Urban Funds Authorized for Pedestrian Projects, 20112015

Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG) Transportation Alternatives Set Aside (formerly known as the Transportation Alternatives Program or TAP) The STBG Transportation Alternatives Set Aside "authorizes funding for programs and projects defined as transportation alternatives," including:
Community improvement such as historic preservation and vegetation management Environmental mitigation related to storm water and habitat connectivity Projects for planning, designing, or constructing boulevards and other roadways
largely in the right-of-way of former divided highways Infrastructure projects for improving non-driver access to public transportation and
enhanced mobility Recreational trail projects Safe routes to school projects On- and off-road pedestrian and bicycle facilities

The 2015 FAST Act renamed the program as a set-aside of funds under the Surface Transportation Block Grant Program; the program is still colloquially known as TAP.

74

FUNDING

MPOs administer half of TAP funds allocated to states. GDOT administers the other half. The FAST Act allows GDOT to assign the statewide portion of TAP funds to alternative projects such as the ones defined above or to "flex" them into general funding programs. In the past, it has been challenging for pedestrian projects to receive funding from programs such as TAP that can be "flexed" in this way.
From 20112015, four MPOs allocated Surface Transportation Block Grant Transportation Alternatives Set Aside funds to pedestrian projects. These funds are intended to support a variety of small-scale transportation projects such as pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, recreational trails, safe routes to school, historic preservation, vegetation management, and environmental mitigation.

Table 12. STBG Transportation Alternatives Set Aside Funds used for pedestrian projects, 20112015

Atlanta Regional Commission

$ Amount of TAP funds allocated % allocated to pedestrian projects

2011 2012 2013 2014

2015







$14,573,396 $5,725,000







92%

100%

Savannah

$ Amount of TAP funds allocated



% allocated to pedestrian projects













$ Amount of TAP funds allocated









Columbus

% allocated to pedestrian projects







Augusta

$ Amount of TAP funds allocated









% allocated to pedestrian projects







$ Amount of TAP funds allocated









Chattanooga

% allocated to pedestrian projects







$175,453 44% $2,209,000 0% $1,724,450 100% $0 0%

Local funds Small and mid-size regional commissions and local governments report that Special-LocalOption-Sales-Tax (SPLOST) other local dollars fund most pedestrian projects. Local jurisdictions also install pedestrian infrastructure as part of larger transportation projects. For example, when a transportation agency reconstructs a road or intersection, it may also install or upgrade pedestrian infrastructure.

75

PERFORMANCE MEASURES

Performance Report Card
The Performance Report Card will track annual progress towards the goals of the PSAP. 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 PSAP.

Crash Related Outcomes 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Data Source

Annual Pedestrian Crashes 4085 4174 4229

GEARS

Annual Pedestrian Injuries 3238 3316 3387

GEARS

Annual Pedestrian Fatalities 206 236 258

FARS/GEARS

% fatalities in relation to overall traffic deaths
Non-Crash Related Outcomes
Percent of people who walk at least once a week

14% 15% 16.8%

FARS

2015 2016 2017



87.6%

2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Data Source









Behaviors and Attitudes Survey

Percent of people who walk

for daily needs, such as



commuting, errands

39.6%









Behaviors and Attitudes Survey

Percent of people who support increased funding



90.0%





# of Georgia cities

designated as Walk Friendly 2

2

2

Communities

# of School Partners

participating in Safe Routes



427

to School

# of Schools with Adopted Travel Plans





27





Behaviors and Attitudes Survey
Walk Friendly Cities
GA SRTS Resource Center
GA SRTS Resource Center

# of Communities/

Organizations with adopted 22 23

24

Complete Street Policies

Smart Growth America website

Percent of Georgia residents walking to work

1.6%

1.6%

Percent of Georgia residents taking public transit to work

2.1%

2.1%

American Community Survey
American Community Survey

76

PERFORMANCE MEASURES

Action Item Outputs

Baseline

2018

2019

2020

2021

2022

DATA

Strategy 1: Collect, map, and publish data on pedestrian safety, the walking environment, pedestrian crashes, and safety risks

Action 1.1: Continue to update

pedestrian statewide crash data

Y

and maps annually in GEARS.

Y/N

Y/N

Y/N

Y/N

Y/N

Action 1.2: Metropolitan Planning Organizations and Regional Commissions will map and analyze regional pedestrian crash and fatality data annually and publish data and analysis online.

x/15 MPOs; x/12 RCs

x/15 MPOs; x/12 RCs

x/15 MPOs; x/12 RCs

x/15 MPOs; x/12 RCs

x/15 MPOs; x/12 RCs

x/15 MPOs; x/12 RCs

Action 1.3: Use 5-year crash, injury, and fatality data and other data to determine focus locations. Focus locations will provide guidance for where to direct pedestrian safety resources including funding, education, and technical assistance.

Done

Updated Updated Updated Updated Updated

List

List

List

List

List

Action 1.4: Prioritize and fill identified data gaps and publish 0/5 findings.

x/5

x/5

x/5

x/5

x/5

Action 1.5: Research best

practices, establish a statistically

valid methodology, and initiate a pilot program to count pedestrian

N

traffic in urbanized areas.

Implement the program statewide.

Y/N

Y/N

Y/N

Y/N

Y/N

Action 1.6: Analyze progress on Georgia Pedestrian Safety Action Plan, complete performance report card update report, distribute statewide.

Y/N

Y/N

Y/N

Y/N

Y/N

TRANSPORTATION PLANNING AND POLICY

Strategy 2: Incorporate pedestrian safety strategies, treatments and performance measures into state transportation plans, policies, and design guides.

Action 2.1: Incorporate improved

pedestrian safety content into

N

Complete Streets Guidelines.

Y/N

Y/N

Action 2.2: Incorporate improved

pedestrian safety content into the Georgia Streetscapes and

N

Pedestrian Design Guide.

Y/N

Y/N

Action 2.3: Incorporate improved

pedestrian safety content into the

Georgia Manual on Regulations

N

for Driveway and Encroachment

Control

Y/N

Y/N

77

PERFORMANCE MEASURES

Action 2.4: Engage with committees and organizations that address autonomous vehicle planning and implementation in Georgia.

None

Action 2.5: Establish collection of pedestrian counts a required part of traffic studies and transportation N projects on corridors where people walk.

Updates Updates Updates Updates Updates

Y/N

Y/N

Strategy 3: Incorporate pedestrian safety strategies and performance measures into regional and local plans

Action 3.1: Assess MPO transportation plans

for incorporation of pedestrian safety. Reach

out to MPOs to offer assistance to those

N

that wish to improve their pedestrian safety

planning efforts.

Y/N

Y/N

Action 3.2: Regional commissions and

Metropolitan Planning Organizations will

create and begin implementing assistance

N

programs that help cities apply for and

achieve Walk Friendly Community status.

Y/N

Y/N

Y/N

Action 3.3: Work with local communities to integrate pedestrian considerations and plans into local planning documents.
Action 3.4: Public transportation agencies will integrate pedestrian safety into their safety plans.

Y/N

Y/N

Y/N

Y/N

Y/N

Y/N

Y/N

Y/N

Y/N

Y/N

Action Item Outputs

Baseline 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022

TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS

Strategy 4: Assess new construction and maintenance projects on state routes for opportunities to incorporate pedestrian safety elements early in the process.

Action 4.1: Assess state and federallyfunded transportation projects to incorporate pedestrian infrastructure improvements early in the planning stage.

Y/N

Y/N

Y/N Y/N

Y/N

Action 4.2: Assess all GDOT new road and road reconstruction projects to ensure installation of safe pedestrian crossing treatments on all applicable projects.

Y/N

Y/N

Y/N Y/N

Y/N

78

PERFORMANCE MEASURES

Action 4.3: Continue to incorporate pedestrian safety improvements into maintenance projects on corridors and corridor types with identified safety concerns for pedestrians ("twinning").

Y/N

Y/N

Y/N Y/N

Y/N

Strategy 5: Use crash data and annual road safety audits to identify state roads with ongoing pedestrian issues. Collaborate with regional and local governments to prioritize implementation of safety improvements on those roads.

Action 5.1: Conduct at least two Road Safety

Audits per year. Use Focus Corridors identified in the PSAP and collaboration with regional and

x/ per year

x/2

local governments to help determine priorities.

x/2

x/2 x/2

x/2

Action 5.2: Conduct two additional Road

Safety Audits per year as resources allow.

Prioritize Focus Counties, Cities, Corridors, Corridor types, and input from regional and

x/ per year x/2

local governments when selecting routes for the

Road Safety Audits.

x/2

x/2 x/2

x/2

Action 5.3: Conduct at least two one-mile Bus Stop Corridor Audits per year. Corridors will be selected using Focus Designations and bus ridership data as priorities.

x/2

x/2

x/2 x/2

x/2

Action 5.4: Implement project recommendations listed in completed Road Safety Audits and Bus Stop Corridor Audits within listed timeframes.

Y/N

Y/N

Y/N Y/N

Y/N

Strategy 6: Proactively identify and mitigate systemic pedestrian safety hazards on Georgia routes.

Action 6.1: Finalize draft report: Identifying,

Assessing, and Improving Uncontrolled

Intersections for Pedestrian Access. Incorporate N

Y/N

recommendations into the GDOT Pedestrian

and Streetscape Guide.

Action 6.2: Ensure installation of ADAcompliant infrastructure on all GDOT road projects

Y/N

Y/N

Y/N Y/N

Y/N

EDUCATION, ENFORCEMENT AND OUTREACH

Strategy 7: Create and distribute educational material to promote pedestrian safety.

Action Item Outputs

Baseline 2018

2019

2020

Action 7.1: Administer Georgia Pedestrian Safety Attitudes and Behaviors Survey to general public and transportation practitioners. Analyze results to determine target audiences, messages, and training needs for pedestrian safety.

Action 7.2: Distribute 20,000 GDOT "See &

Be Seen" handouts and 20,000 GDOT safety wrist bands. Distribute at least half in Focus

N

Y/N

Counties or Focus Cities.

2021

2022 Y/N

79

PERFORMANCE MEASURES

Action 7.3: Enlist the expertise of a

marketing/public relations agency to develop, pilot, and evaluate a data-driven

N

pedestrian safety education campaign.

Action 7.4: Distribute handouts and other marketing materials from the pedestrian safety education campaign through television and radio advertisements, social media, state conferences, partnerships with enforcement officers, and other means.

Actions 7.5: Develop a pedestrian safety

communications plan that includes regular

public outreach through the dissemination

of topical/seasonal press releases (a minimum of one per month), op-eds, letters

N

to the editor, appearances on public affairs

programming, press events, and community-

based activities.

Action 7.6: Incorporate pedestrian safety into the H.E.A.T. and Thunder Programs.

N

Action 7.7: Work with the Georgia Department of Driver Services to ensure pedestrian safety is given increased prominence in Georgia driver education including:

1. G ive pedestrian safety more prominence in the 40-Hour Parent/Teen Driving Guide

N

2. Determine if pedestrian safety is

adequately addressed in driver education

curriculum. If not, work with DDS to

N

develop an improved pedestrian safety

lesson plan/module.

3. Increase the number of questions related to pedestrian safety on the driver licensing N exam

Action 7.8: Continue to support the Georgia Safe Routes to School Resource Center programs and activities.

Y/N

Y/N

Y/N

Y/N

Y/N

Y/N

Y/N

Y/N

Y/N

Y/N

Y/N

Y/N

Y/N

Y/N

Y/N

Y/N

Y/N

Y/N

Updates Updates Updates Updates Y/N

Action Item Outputs

Baseline 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022

Strategy 8: Provide annual trainings addressing pedestrian safety that target transportation and public health professionals, law enforcement officers, elected officials, and community advocates.

Action 8.1: Continue providing annual Georgia Walks Summit.

Y/N

Y/N

Y/N Y/N

Y/N

Action 8.2:Continue to provide ongoing regional trainings for transportation professionals.

Y/N

Y/N

Y/N Y/N

Y/N

Action 8.3: Develop and present trainings on pedestrian safety topics at statewide conferences listed in Table 9. Opportunities to Expand Reach with New Trainings on Pedestrian Safety.

Y/N

Y/N

Y/N Y/N

Y/N

80

PERFORMANCE MEASURES

Action 8.4: Develop, update, and implement training that helps enforcement officers better understand pedestrian safety challenges and solutions.

Y/N

Y/N

Action 8.5: Ensure training on pedestrian safety law enforcement is provided at the bi-annual GOHS Highway Safety Summit.

Y/N

Y/N

Y/N Y/N

Y/N

Action 8.6: Increase the number of practitioners attending pedestrian safety trainings listed in Tables X 8 & 9.

#

#

#

#

#

Strategy 9: Increase outreach and education on pedestrian safety for state, regional, and local agencies and facilitate collaboration between them.

Action 9.1: Publish two recurring newsletters.

Partial

Y/N

Y/N

Y/N Y/N

Y/N

Action 9.2: Update the GOHS website to include statistics about pedestrian safety problems (who, why, where, when), tips for pedestrians and drivers, N highly-visual explanation of Georgia laws, and links to educational materials.

Y/N

Y/N

Action 9.3: Expand content in georgiawalks.org

website to provide information and tools pertinent

to pedestrian safety, as well as dashboards showing N

Y/N

pedestrian crash and fatality statistics and a report

card of progress on PSAP implementation.

Action 9.4: Increase the number of law enforcement officers who participate in the Pedestrian Safety Task team.

Current number

x/ 5

Y/N

x/ 5

x/ 5 x/ 5

x/ 5

Action 9.5: Increase the number of public health districts creating and implementing local programming that promotes pedestrian safety.

Current number

x/ 5

x/ 5

x/ 5 x/ 5

x/ 5

Action 9.6: Review and report on pedestrian safety laws in other states pertaining to automated speed enforcement. Create a strategy to move forward in Georgia.

Updates Y/N

81

PERFORMANCE MEASURES

FUNDING

Strategy 10: Allocate target level of HSIP, 402, 405h, regional, and local funds to pedestrian safety projects.

Action Item Outputs
Action 10.1: Actively solicit public sector and non-profit applications for pedestrian safety projects and programs located in Focus Counties, Focus Cities, and communities along Focus Corridors
Action 10.2: Allocate 10% of HSIP funding annually to pedestrian safety improvements. Target funding according to focus designations and proven countermeasures.

Baseline 2018

2019

2020

2021

2022

Updates Updates Updates Updates Updates

Current number

X/target %; x/ focusarea;

X/target %; x/ focusarea;

X/target %; x/ focusarea;

X/target %; x/ focusarea;

x/safe- x/safe- x/safe- x/safecrossings crossings crossings crossings

X/target %; x/ focusarea;
x/safecrossings

Action 10.3: Develop a Request for

Proposals template for applicants

seeking grants to fund pedestrian

safety programs. The template will identify proven safety countermeasures

N

Y/N

and measurable behavioral objectives

for drivers and pedestrians that GOHS

seeks to fund.

Action 10.4: Allocate target level of annual 402 & 405h funds to pedestrian safety education and enforcement programs.

Current number

X/target %

X/target X/target

%

%

X/target %

X/target %

Action 10.5: Identify and confirm ongoing funding source for annual Georgia Walks Summit.
Action 10.6 Identify and confirm ongoing funding source for Georgia Safe Routes to School Resource Center
Action 10.7 Allocate a larger share of flexible federal and state funding resources to pedestrian projects when funds become available.

Y/N Y/N Updates Updates Updates Updates Updates

Strategy 11: Align fund expenditures on pedestrian safety projects and programs with Focus designations, data on pedestrian crash and fatality factors, and proven countermeasures.

Action 11.1: Evaluate the annual HSIP, 402, and 405h expenditures against FHWA and NHTSA guidebooks, Focus County, Focus City, and Focus Corridor lists, and other performance measures to determine the efficacy of funding.

Updates Updates Updates Updates Updates

82

APPENDIX

Appendix

Focus Designations by GDOT Districts
District 1

% of Statewide Total Pedestrian incidents in District 1

Crashes 15%

Injuries 15%

Serious Injuries Fatalities

16%

12%

CLARKE FORSYTH GWINNETT HALL JACKSON WALTON

Table 12. District 1 Focus Counties & Statistics, 20112015

Focus County

Fatalities

Serious Injuries

Injuries

Yes

11

32

258

Yes

6

15

83

Yes

53

89

1101

Yes

8

66

190

Yes

6

13

53

Yes

3

31

65

Crashes 279 94 1380 228 130 74

BANKS BARROW DAWSON ELBERT FRANKLIN HABERSHAM HART LUMPKIN MADISON OCONEE RABUN STEPHENS TOWNS UNION WHITE

2

7

3

4

0

7

1

10

2

8

0

7

0

8

1

9

2

12

3

8

1

5

1

11

0

3

0

4

1

1

12

10

66

105

22

27

18

30

19

34

27

41

18

25

19

23

22

40

20

22

18

24

33

42

6

9

10

17

11

17

83

APPENDIX

ATHENS GAINESVILLE LAWRENCEVILLE LILBURN NORCROSS PEACHTREE CORNERS

Table 13. GDOT DISTRICT 1 FOCUS CITIES

Fatalities

Injuries

11

240

3

68

6

61

4

53

8

38

3

65

Crashes 283 85 73 207 44 77

Table 14. GDOT District 1 Focus Corridors, 20112015

State Routes name Route Number County # Serious Injuries # of Fatalities Corridor Length (miles) From To Statewide Focus Corridor?

US 441 S

US 441 S

GA 15 W Broad St GA 10, US 78 BR Atlanta Highway

GA 15
GA 10 GA 10, US 78 BR GA 9

Lawrenceville Hwy US 29

Holcomb Bridge Rd GA 140

Jimmy Carter Blvd GA 140

W Pikes St

GA 120

Buford Highway 2 GA 13

Stone Mountain Hwy US 78, GA 10

Atlanta Highway

GA 13

Candler Rd

GA 60

N/S Broad St

GA 11

Leon Ave

GA 81

Loganville Hwy

GA 20

Banks

2

1

Clarke

2

1

Clarke

3

2

Clarke

1

2

Forsyth 1

2

Gwinnett 6

4

Gwinnett 2

1

Gwinnett 2

1

Gwinnett 2

1

Gwinnett 2

1

Gwinnett 1

2

Hall

4

0

Hall

2

1

Walton 5

0

Walton Walton

384 0

2

1

S Of

0.35 Hampton Ct Industrial

No

Park Dr.

1.83 N Bluff Rd

Newton Bridge Rd

No

0.41

Camellia Dr.

St Mary's Hospital

No

1.16 Tall Tree Rd Cleveland D No

1.07

Peachtree Parkway

Reidi Rd.

No

7.27

Mountain Industrial Blvd

Amberwood Dr.

No

0.55

Peachtree Corners Cir

Crooked Creek Rd

No

0.1

@ Buford Highway

No

1.32

University Pkwy

W Crogan St No

0.85

Old

Magnolia

Suwanee Rd Club Dr.

No

2.18

Glen Club Dr.

Paxton Dr.

No

2.52 Winder Hwy 1st St

No

0.99

W Ridge Rd

Old Candler Rd

No

1.58

W Marable St

Pannell Rd

No

2.24

Hightower Trl.

Guthrie Cemetery

No

0.17 Moon Rd

Windermere No

APPENDIX

District 2

% of Statewide Total Pedestrian incidents in District 2

Crashes 7%

Injuries 7%

Serious Injuries 9%

Fatalities 11%

BALDWIN BURKE COLUMBIA EMANUEL GREENE LAURENS MCDUFFIE MORGAN NEWTON RICHMOND

Table 15. District 2 Focus Counties & Statistics, 20112015

Focus County Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Fatalities 6 5 5 4 4 4 1 1 9 38

Serious Injuries 7 3 9 5 11 14 15 13 21 57

Injuries 64 16 65 12 27 60 33 27 146 354

Crashes 87 18 73 19 30 61 37 22 311 462

BLECKLEY DODGE GLASCOCK HANCOCK JASPER JEFFERSON JENKINS JOHNSON LINCOLN OGLETHORPE PUTNAM TALIAFERRO TREUTLEN WARREN WASHINGTON WILKES WILKINSON

0

1

1

3

0

0

0

2

1

4

3

4

2

4

0

2

1

0

1

1

1

6

0

2

1

0

1

3

1

7

0

4

0

2

5

5

18

22

0

1

3

5

8

6

12

25

4

6

3

3

3

5

7

10

21

29

2

2

0

2

5

9

14

17

7

9

3

3

85

State Route Name Route Number County # Serious Injuries # Of Fatalities Corridor Length (Miles) From To Statewide Focus Corridor?

APPENDIX
AUGUSTA COVINGTON DUBLIN EASTMAN MADISON MILLEDGEVILLE SWAINSBORO THOMSON

Table 16. GDOT District 2 Focus Cities

Fatalities 35 3 1 1 1 3 2 1

Injuries 282 16 29 11 13 36 9 15

Crashes 392 25 32 18 14 46 14 21

Table 17. GDOT District 2 Focus Corridors

Deans Bridge Rd

US 1, GA 4

Richmond

5

2

Mike Padgett Hwy

GA 56

Richmond 2

1

Peach Orchard Rd

US 25, GA 121

Richmond 3

1

Peach Orchard Rd

US 25, GA 121

Richmond 2

1

South Main St GA 57

Emanuel 2

2

Washington Rd

GA 28

Richmond 0

4

Salem Rd

GA 162

Newton 3

0

Madison Main St

US 129

Morgan 2

1

Gordon Highway

US 1

Richmond 1

2

3.37 1.55 1.62 0.69 2.69 0.63 1.52 1.03 0.15

Dover St
Chester Ave Windsor Spring Rd

Mt Olive

Memorial

Yes

Gardens

Apple Valley Dr.

No

Bungalow Rd No

Boykin Rd

Byrd Rd

No

Ponderosa Dr.

Meadowlake Parkway

No

Charlestowne Way

Sherwood Dr. Yes

Brown Bridge Rd

Galloway Rd

No

Burnett St

Bowman St No

Truman Rd

Old Savannah Dr.

No

86

APPENDIX

District 3
% of Statewide Total Pedestrian incidents in District 3

Crashes 11%

Injuries 11%

Serious Injuries
14%

Fatalities 13%

BIBB COWETA DOOLY FAYETTE HENRY HOUSTON LAMAR MUSCOGEE SPALDING SUMTER TROUP

Table 18. District 3 Focus Counties & Statistics, 20112015

Focus County Fatalities

Serious Injuries Injuries

Yes

27

53

299

Yes

2

33

79

Yes

1

12

24

Yes

3

12

53

Yes

12

17

218

Yes

9

11

60

Yes

7

1

10

Yes

15

29

415

Yes

5

43

85

Yes

6

10

29

Yes

4

19

113

Crashes 378 116 31 56 248 78 21 527 101 40 129

BUTTS CHATTAHOOCHEE CRAWFORD HARRIS HEARD JONES MACON MARION MERIWETHER MONROE PEACH PIKE PULASKI SCHLEY STEWART TALBOT TAYLOR TWIGGS UPSON WEBSTER

2

4

14

13

0

0

1

1

1

1

1

5

2

3

7

8

1

3

4

5

0

0

9

10

2

5

18

17

3

1

2

3

0

8

23

36

2

4

17

26

3

8

42

62

2

0

4

7

0

3

4

5

0

1

2

2

2

1

2

2

0

3

3

4

0

0

2

4

0

2

3

3

2

11

23

33

0

0

0

0

87

APPENDIX
AMERICUS COLUMBUS FORT VALLEY GRIFFIN LA GRANGE MACON STOCKBRIDGE WARNER ROBINS

Table 19. GDOT District 3 Focus Cities

Fatalities

Injuries

4

13

15

345

1

20

4

39

1

76

21

200

1

34

4

34

Crashes 21 468 44 52 89 261 39 45

Table 20. GDOT District 3 Focus Corridors

State Route Name Route Number County # Serious Injuries # Of Fatalities Corridor Length (Miles) From To Statewide Focus Corridor?

13th St

GA 22

Muscogee 2

2

0.34

Bullsboro Dr. GA 34

Coweta

3

0

0.17

Eisenhower Parkway

US 80

Bibb

5

2

4.46

Gray Highway

US 129, US 41

Bibb

5

4

1.5

Herman

Talmadge/

Bear Creek Blvd/ Martin

US 41, US Henry/ 19, GA 3 Spalding

4

2

2.32

Luther King Jr

Pkwy

Houston Ave, US 129, Hawkinsville Rd US 41

Bibb

2

3

4.45

Jeffersonville Rd

US 80 GA 57

Bibb

0

3

0.4

Joel Cowan Parkway

GA 74

Fayette

2

1

0.93

Manchester Expressway

GA 85

Muscogee 0

3

0.9

Martin Luther King Junior Parkway

US 19, GA 3

Spaulding 5

2

1.94

Mcintosh/ Fayetville Rd

GA 92

Spaulding 2

1

1.75

Martin Luther King Jr Blvd

US 19, GA 3

Sumter

1

3

0.37

Broadway Herring Rd. Raley Rd.
Clinton St.

Veterans Parkway

No

I 85

No

I-75

No

Woodlawn Dr.

Yes

Woolsey Rd. Malier Rd No

Industrial Park Dr.

Pio Nono Ave

No

Darity Dr.

Duggan Pl No

Dogwood Trail

Crabapple Lane

No

I-185

17th Ave No

Manley Dr.

S Of Bowling No Ln.

Westmoreland Hallmark

Rd

Dr.

No

Rucker St

Patterson St

No

88

APPENDIX

Martin Luther King Jr Pkwy

US 19, GA 92, GA 3

Spaulding 5

2

1.97

N Henry Blvd US 23

Henry

3

1

1.67

Pio Nono Ave

US 41, GA 7

Bibb

2

2

0.46

Pio Nono Ave

US 41, GA 7

Bibb

3

1

0.3

US 27 Alt

US 27 ALT, GA 14

Coweta

4

0

0.31

Veterans Parkway

US 27, GA1

Muscogee 2

2

0.26

Watson Blvd

GA 247 Houston

3

1

1.21

Ellis Rd

Manley Dr. Yes

Rock Quarry Rd Rocky Creek Rd
Dent St

Redwood Valley Rd

No

Spencer Circle

No

Moseley Ave

No

Ga 16

I 85

No

15th St Collins Ave

13th St

No

Austin Ave No

89

APPENDIX

District 4
% of Statewide Total Pedestrian incidents in District 4

Crashes 6%

Injuries 6%

Serious Injuries 9%

Fatalities 6%

BROOKS COFFEE CRISP DECATUR DOUGHERTY GRADY LOWNDES THOMAS TIFT WORTH

Table 21. District 4 Focus Counties & Statistics, 20112015

Focus County

Fatalities

Serious Injuries

Injuries

Yes

0

8

18

Yes

3

17

42

Yes

3

6

45

Yes

0

11

37

Yes

7

27

168

Yes

6

4

13

Yes

12

35

158

Yes

1

14

71

Yes

4

22

42

Yes

3

3

12

Crashes 23 60 41 44 184 18 143 199 64 20

ATKINSON BAKER BEN HILL BERRIEN CALHOUN CLAY COLQUITT COOK EARLY ECHOLS IRWIN LANIER LEE MILLER MITCHELL QUITMAN RANDOLPH SEMINOLE TERRELL TURNER WILCOX

0

1

1

0

1

3

0

4

0

0

0

0

1

7

0

7

1

1

0

2

1

0

1

4

0

5

0

0

1

4

0

0

1

1

1

6

2

5

1

6

1

1

4

4

5

2

12

13

11

21

0

2

0

0

31

45

15

21

7

12

2

2

1

6

6

7

16

26

4

6

40

77

0

0

1

3

8

8

9

10

8

9

1

2

90

ALBANY CAIRO CORDELE MOULTRIE THOMASVILLE TIFTON VALDOSTA

APPENDIX

Table 22. GDOT District 4 Focus Cities

Fatalities

Injuries

7

131

4

7

1

26

1

23

1

31

3

16

4

71

Crashes 156 10 28 36 66 24 81

Table 23. GDOT District 4 Focus Corridors

State Routes name Route Number County # serious injuries # of Fatalities Corridor Length (miles) From To Statewide Focus Corridor? State route

7th St./ 5th St.

US 319, GA 35

Tift

1

2

0.47

Main St.

Ridge Ave.

N

y

S Patterson Rd

US 41, GA 7

Lowndes

2

1

0.96

Copeland Rd.

Newsome Rd.

N

y

Wiregrass GA Parkway

US 221, US 84

Lowndes

2

1

0.42

Mack Hill Rd.

Winwood Cir.

n

y

Columbus HWY, MLK Dr., Roundtree Dr.

GA 45/ GA 520

Terrell

3

1

4

Ga 45

S Main St. n

y

Bemiss Rd US 125 Lowndes 2

1

2.26

Plaza Dr.

Oak St Ext n

y

Mt Zion Church

NA

Lowndes 3

0

Susie Hayes Rd.

N Forrest St.

n

n

W

Oglethorpe GA 62 Dougherty 4

2

0.87

Blvd

S Jackson St.

S Harding St.

n

y

E

520/

Oglethorpe/ 62, US Dougherty 1

2

1.38

Sylvester Rd 82

Olivia St.

Thornton Dr.

n

y

S Slappey Blvd

GA 62, US 234?

Dougherty

3

0

1.26

W Oakland Ridge Dr.

W Gordon Ave.

n

y

91

APPENDIX

District 5

Crashes Injuries

% of Statewide Total Pedestrian incidents in District 5 10%

10%

Serious Injuries Fatalities

11%

10%

BULLOCH CHATHAM GLYNN LIBERTY

Table 24. District 5 Focus Counties & Statistics, 20112015

Focus County Fatalities

Serious Injuries

Injuries

Yes

6

20

57

Yes

28

92

766

Yes

11

25

158

Yes

3

15

39

Crashes 74 930 184 82

APPLING BACON BRANTLEY BRYAN CAMDEN CANDLER CHARLTON CLINCH EFFINGHAM EVANS JEFF DAVIS LONG MCINTOSH MONTGOMERY PIERCE SCREVEN TATTNALL TELFAIR TOOMBS WARE WAYNE WHEELER

0

6

0

1

2

6

2

5

2

5

0

8

1

3

2

6

1

11

0

4

3

6

0

4

3

1

0

0

2

4

2

2

3

4

1

1

4

4

2

9

3

4

1

0

12

14

6

8

12

13

19

32

51

65

11

11

8

8

7

12

30

34

5

5

12

15

5

6

4

4

0

0

10

18

6

10

9

20

7

10

24

36

30

36

26

42

0

1

92

BRUNSWICK GARDEN CITY HINESVILLE KINGSLAND SAVANNAH STATESBORO VIDALIA

APPENDIX

Table 26. GDOT District 5 Focus Cities

Fatalities

Injuries

5

65

2

25

3

10

0

23

18

500

3

40

2

15

Table 23. GDOT District 5 Focus Corridors

Crashes 79 32 15 34 637 54 23

State Routes name Route Number County # serious injuries # of Fatalities Corridor Length (miles) From To Statewide Focus Corridor? State route

Abercorn St. GA 204 Chatham 6

4

4.18

Mohawk St. E 61st St.

y

y

Ogeechee

US 17, GA 25

Chatham

4

3

2.28

Tower Dr.

Gamble Rd. y

y

Gloucester St. GA 25 Glynn

4

2

0.87

Lanier Blvd.

Newcastle St.

n

y

EG Miles Parkway

GA 119 /196

Liberty

5

1

1.81

Hearn Rd.

Curtis Rd. n

y

E President NA

Chatham 2

2

1.54

Harry Truman Parkway

Capital St.

n

n

MLK Jr. Blvd.

GA 25 CONN

Chatham

1

2

0.86

Gwinnet St.

W Broughton n St.

y

W Gwinnett St.

NA

Chatham 1

2

0.77

Stiles St.

ML Jr Blvd. n

n

Montgomery St.

NA

Chatham 3

1

1.5

W 61st St.

W 34th St. n

n

W Bay St.

GA 25 CONN

Chatham

5

0

0.57

E Lathrop Ave. Baker St.

n

y

State Highway 21

GA 21 Chatham

2

1

0.24

Prince Preston Leon Village n

y

Memorial Dr.

US 1 Ware

3

0

0.04

Palm Beach Drive

Palmetto Ave.

n

y

Fair Rd.

GA 67 Bulloch

3

0

1.34

Burkhalter Rd. Benson Dr. n

y

S Columbia Ave.

GA 21 Effingham 3

0

1.41

Weisenbacher Silverwood

Rd.

Ct.

n

y

E Victory Dr. US 80 Chatham 3

0

1.2

Ott St.

Walin St.

n

y

Broughton St. NA

Chatham 3

0

0.4

Drayton St. MLK Jr. Blvd. n

n

Whitaker St. NA

Chatham 3

0

0.14

Bay St.

Broughton St.

n

n

93

APPENDIX

District 6
% of Statewide Total Pedestrian incidents in District 6

Crashes 8%

Injuries 7%

Serious Injuries
12%

Fatalities 8%

BARTOW CARROLL CHEROKEE FLOYD GORDON PAULDING WHITFIELD

Table 27. District 6 Focus Counties & Statistics, 20112015

Focus County Fatalities

Serious Injuries

Injuries

Yes

17

36

115

Yes

12

36

114

Yes

12

21

122

Yes

8

17

181

Yes

6

16

61

Yes

5

36

125

Yes

2

21

65

Crashes 151 132 163 208 73 189 82

CATOOSA CHATTOOGA DADE FANNIN GILMER HARALSON MURRAY PICKENS POLK WALKER

1

11

1

4

0

2

2

6

0

5

0

10

0

9

0

11

2

9

3

12

39

92

16

19

6

17

18

27

11

34

35

46

23

26

20

23

48

67

26

40

CALHOUN CANTON CARROLLTON CARTERSVILLE DALTON HIRAM ROME FORT OGLETHORPE

Table 28. GDOT District 6 Focus Cities

Fatalities

Injuries

2

21

3

16

6

23

5

39

2

29

3

25

6

122

0

12

Crashes 33 26 29 48 44 78 158 53

94

Table 29. GDOT District 6 Focus Corridors

APPENDIX

State Route Name Route Number County # Serious Injuries # Of Fatalities Corridor Length (Miles) From To Statewide Focus Corridor?

Joe Frank Harris Parkway

US 411, US 41, GA 20

Bartow

5

2

3.09

Mac Johnson

Market Place Blvd

Yes

Cassville Rd

GA 293

Bartow

4

0

1.24 Dean St

Grassdale

No

Alabama St/ Newnan St

GA 16, GA

BUSINESS Carroll

2

1

0.94 N Alma St

166

John Wesley Pl

No

Bankhead Highway

GA 166,

GA BUS Carroll

1

3

1.78 Somerset Place Maple Hill Rd No

166

Alabama Rd

GA 92

Cherokee 2

2

2.05 Wade Green Sharon Way No

Bells Ferry Rd

GA 205

Cherokee 1

2

1.69 Lake Forest Dr. Linton Drive No

Blue Ridge Dr.

GA 5

Fannin

3

0

1.41 Tail Oaks Ln

Appalachian Hwy

No

Shorter Ave

GA 204

Floyd

4

3

1.55 East Dr.

Sherwood Rd Yes

N Wall St

US 41, GA 3

Gordon

1

2

0.28

David Lake Rd

Gideon Cemetery

No

Villa Rica Highway GA 61

Paulding 4

0

3

Campground School Rd

Winndale Rd No

Hiram Sudie Rd. GA 120

Paulding 3

0

1.88

Southern Oaks Dr.

Mc Clung Rd

No

Lyle Jones Parkway

US 27, GA 1

Walker

2

1

2.84 E Villanow St

Lake Howard Rd

No

Chattanooga Rd

US 41, GA 7

Whitfield 2

1

0.74 Webb Way

I 75

No

95

APPENDIX

District 7
Crashes % of Statewide Total Pedestrian incidents in District 7 42%

Injuries 44%

Serious Injuries Fatalities

29%

39%

CLAYTON COBB DEKALB FULTON

Table 30. District 7 Focus Counties & Statistics, 20112015

Focus County Fatalities

Serious Injuries Injuries

Yes

36

77

596

Yes

65

73

649

Yes

95

162

1955

Yes

118

235

2637

Crashes 706 763 2491 3077

DOUGLAS ROCKDALE
ATLANTA BROOKHAVEN COLLEGE PARK DORAVILLE EAST POINT MARIETTA SANDY SPRINGS SMYRNA SOUTH FULTON STONECREST TUCKER

9

68

133

147

5

12

96

116

Table 31. GDOT District 7 Focus Cities

Fatalities

Injuries

74

1638

10

70

13

64

4

66

3

93

17

135

6

163

8

56

17

84

9

84

6

68

Crashes 1990 92 80 271 117 157 186 72 163 111 84

96

Table 32. GDOT District 7 Focus Corridors

APPENDIX

State Routes name Route Number County # serious injuries # of Fatalities Corridor Length (miles) From To Statewide Focus Corridor? State Route

Old National Highway

GA 279

Fulton

12

10

5.36

Roosvelt Highway

Jonesboro Rd.

y

y

Tara Blvd

US 19, GA 3

Clayton 17

8

4.84

Flint River Rd.

I 75

y

y

Buford Highway

GA 13

Fulton/ DeKalb

9

7

4.48 I 85

Bragg St.

y

y

South Cobb GA 280 Cobb

4

6

3.79

Pinehill Drive

Appleton Dr. y

y

Windy Hill Rd.

Westminster

Cobb

4

6

3.69 Wakita Dr. Sq. At Windy y

n

Hill

Thornton Rd. GA 6

Douglas 9

3

1.84

Markham Rd.

Blairs Bridge Rd.

y

y

Memorial Dr. GA 154 DeKalb 6

4

3.38 Line St

Ladonna Dr. y

y

Old Dixie Rd. US 19

Clayton 3

4

0.83

Hilltop Drive

Tara Blvd.

y

y

Mableton Pkwy GA 139 Cobb

2

4

1.51

Pine Valley Rd.

S Gordon Rd. y

y

Lee St/ Whitehall St.

US 29

Fulton

2

4

Ralph

1.3 David

Avon Rd.

Abernathy

y

y

Joseph Boone

Fulton

5

3

1.62

Paines Ave.

Richardson Rd.

y

N

Covington Hwy.

US 278 DeKalb 4

3

2.26 Panola Rd. Phillips Rd. y

y

S Marietta Pkwy.

S

GA 120 Cobb

1

4

0.71 Fairground Rose Dr.

St.

y

y

Ga 85

GA 85

Clayton 9

1

3.47 Lee St.

Walmart Super Center

y

y

Metropolitan Parkway

US 19, GA3

Fulton

3

3

2.38

Deckner Ave.

Old Jonesboro Rd.

y

y

MLK Jr. Drive. GA 139 Fulton

3

3

1.24

Boulder Park Dr.

Adamsville Dr.

y

y

Donald Lee Hollowell

US 278 Fulton

8

1

3.75 Oliver St. Peek Rd.

y

y

Ralph David Abernathy

GA 139 Fulton

2

3

0.93

Whitehall ST.

Atwood St.

y

y

Wesley Chapel

DeKalb 5

2

2.11

Kelley Chapel Rd.

Newgate Dr.

y

n

97

APPENDIX

Roswell Rd.. GA 9

Fulton

9

1

7.09

Dunwoody Pl.

Glenridge Dr.

n

y

Riverdale Rd. GA 139 Clayton 4

2

2.9

Forest Parkway

King Rd.

n

y

Ponce De Leon US 278 Fulton

4

2

1.83

Piedmont Ave.

Seminole Ave.

n

y

Cleveland Ave.

Fulton

4

2

1.46 Acadia St.

Old Hapeville Rd.

n

n

Pleasantdale Rd.

DeKalb 4

2

2

Best Friend Rd.

Lynnray Dr.

n

n

Flat Shoals Pkwy.

GA 155 DeKalb 3

2

1.21

Warriors Path

Glen Hollow Dr.

n

y

Moreland Ave.

US 23, GA 42

DeKalb/ Fulton

0

3

1.49

North Of I-285

Isa Dr.

n

y

Redan Rd.

DeKalb 0

3

0.84 Ellis Rd.

Mainstreet Valley Dr.

n

n

Peachtree Rd GA 141 Fulton

5

1

1.6

Dresden Dr.

Lenox Rd.

n

y

Fairburn Rd.

GA 92

Douglas 2

2

1.61 Durelee Ln. Midway Rd. n

y

Cobb PKWY N

US 41, GA 3

Cobb

2

2

0.91

Dobbs Dr.

Crooked Creek Dr.

n

y

Fulton Industrial Blvd.

GA 70

Fulton

2

2

0.21

Wendell Dr.

MLK Jr. Drive n

y

Evans Mill Rd.

DeKalb 2

2

0.36

Covington Highway

I-20

n

n

98

APPENDIX

Focus Designations by Regional Commissions
Georgia Mountains RC

Counties Banks Dawson Forsyth Franklin Habersham Hall Hart Lumpkin Rabun Stephens Towns Union White

Table 33. Georgia Mountains Regional Commission County Statistics, Focus Counties, 20112015

Focus County

Fatalities

Serious Injuries

Injuries

Crashes

2

7

0

7

Yes

6

15

2

8

0

7

Yes

9

66

0

8

1

9

1

5

1

11

0

3

0

4

1

1

12

10

22

27

83

94

19

34

27

41

190

228

18

25

19

23

18

24

33

42

6

9

10

17

11

17

Northwest Georgia RC

Counties Bartow Catoosa Chattooga Dade Fannin Floyd Gilmer Gordon Haralson Murray Paulding Pickens Polk Walker Whitfield

Table 34. Northwest Georgia Regional Commission County Statistics, Focus Counties, 20112015

Focus County Yes
Yes Yes Yes
Yes

Fatalities 17 1 1 0 2 8 0 6 0 0 5 0 2 4 2

Serious Injuries 36 11 4 2 6 17 5 16 10 9 36 11 9 12 21

Injuries 115 39 16 6 18 181 11 61 35 23 125 20 48 26 65

Crashes 151 92 19 17 27 208 34 73 46 26 189 23 67 40 82

99

APPENDIX

Atlanta RC
Counties Cherokee Clayton Cobb DeKalb Douglas Fayette Fulton Gwinnett Henry Rockdale

Table 35. Atlanta Regional Commission County Statistics, Focus Counties, 20112015

Focus County Yes Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes Yes

Fatalities 12 36 65 96 9 3 118 54 12 5

Serious Injuries 21 77 73 162 68 12 235 89 17 12

Injuries 122 596 649 1955 133 53 2637 1101 218 96

Crashes 163 706 763 2491 147 56 3077 1380 248 116

Northeast Georgia RC

Table 36. Northeast Georgia Regional Commission County Statistics, Focus Counties, 20112015

Counties Barrow Clarke Elbert Greene Jackson Jasper Madison Morgan Newton Oconee Oglethorpe Walton

Focus County Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes
Yes

Fatalities 3 11 1 4 6 1 3 1 9 3 1 3

Serious Injuries 4 32 10 11 13 4 12 13 21 8 1 31

Injuries 66 258 18 27 53 8 22 27 146 20 7 65

Crashes 105 279 30 30 130 6 40 22 311 22 10 74

100

APPENDIX

Central Savannah River Area RC

Table 37. Central Savannah River Area Regional Commission County Statistics, Focus Counties, 20112015

Counties Burke Columbia Glascock Hancock Jefferson Jenkins Lincoln McDuffie Richmond Taliaferro Warren Washington Wilkes

Focus County Yes Yes
Yes Yes

Fatalities 5 5 0 0 3 2 1 1 38 0 1 1 0

Serious Injuries 3 9 0 2 4 4 0 15 57 2 3 7 4

Injuries 16 65 0 3 12 4 3 33 354 2 5 14 7

Crashes 18 73 1 5 25 6 5 37 462 2 9 17 9

Middle Georgia RC

Counties Baldwin Bibb Crawford Houston Jones Monroe Peach Pulaski Putnam Twiggs Wilkinson

Table 38. Middle Georgia Regional Commission County Statistics, Focus Counties, 20112015

Focus County Yes Yes
Yes

Fatalities 6 27 1 9 0 2 3 0 1 0 0

Serious Injuries 7 53 1 11 0 4 8 3 6 2 2

Injuries 64 299 1 60 9 17 42 4 21 3 3

Crashes 87 378 5 78 10 26 62 5 29 3 3

101

APPENDIX

Three Rivers RC

Counties Carroll Butts Coweta Heard Lamar Meriwether Pike Spalding Troup Upson

Table 39. Three Rivers Regional Commission County Statistics, Focus Counties, 20112015

Focus County Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes

Fatalities 12 2 2 1 7 0 2 5 4 2

Serious Injuries 36 4 33 3 1 8 0 43 19 11

Injuries 114 14 79 4 10 23 4 85 113 23

Crashes 132 13 116 5 21 36 7 101 129 33

River Valley RC

Counties Clay Crisp Quitman Randolph Chattahoochee Dooly Harris Macon Marion Muscogee Schley Stewart Sumter Talbot Taylor Webster

Table 40. River Valley Regional Commission County Statistics, Focus Counties, 20112015

Focus County Yes

Fatalities 0 3 0 1

Serious Injuries 0 6 0 1

Injuries 0 45 0 1

0

0

1

Yes

1

12

24

2

3

7

2

5

18

3

1

2

Yes

15

29

415

0

1

2

2

1

2

Yes

6

10

29

0

3

3

0

0

2

0

0

0

Crashes 0 41 0 3 1 31 8 17 3 527 2 2 40 4 4 0

102

APPENDIX

Heart of Georgia Altamaha RC

Table 41. Heart of Georgia Altamaha Regional Commission County Statistics, Focus Counties, 20112015

Counties Appling Bleckley Candler Dodge Emanuel Evans Jeff Davis Johnson

Focus County Yes

Fatalities 0 0 0 1 4 0 3 0

Serious Injuries 6 1 8 3 5 4 6 2

Injuries 12 5 11 18 12 5 12 3

Crashes 14 5 11 22 19 5 15 3

Laurens

Yes

Montgomery

Tattnall

4

14

0

0

3

4

60

61

0

0

9

20

Telfair Toombs Treutlen

1

1

4

4

1

0

7

10

24

36

0

2

Wayne Wheeler Wilcox

3

4

1

0

1

1

26

42

0

1

1

2

Coastal RC

Table 42. Coastal Regional Commission County Statistics, Focus Counties, 20112015

Counties

Focus County

Fatalities

Serious Injuries

Injuries

Crashes

Bryan

2

5

19

32

Bulloch

Yes

6

20

57

74

Camden

2

5

51

65

Chatham

Yes

28

92

766

930

Effingham

1

11

30

34

Glynn

Yes

11

25

158

184

Liberty

Yes

3

15

39

82

Long

0

4

5

6

Mcintosh

1

1

4

4

Screven

3

2

6

10

103

APPENDIX

Southern Georgia RC

Counties Atkinson Bacon Ben Hill Berrien Brantley Brooks Charlton Clinch Coffee Cook Echols Irwin Lanier Lowndes Pierce Tift Turner Ware

Table 43. Southern Georgia Regional Commission County Statistics, Focus Counties, 20112015

Focus County

Fatalities

Serious Injuries

Injuries

Crashes

0

1

4

4

0

1

6

8

1

3

12

13

0

4

2

6

11

21

12

13

Yes

0

8

18

23

1

3

8

8

2

6

7

12

Yes

3

17

42

60

0

7

15

21

0

2

2

2

1

0

1

6

1

4

6

7

Yes

12

35

158

146

2

4

10

18

Yes

5

22

42

64

1

6

8

9

3

9

30

36

Southwest Georgia RC

Counties Baker Calhoun Colquitt Decatur Dougherty Early Grady Lee Miller Mitchell Seminole Terrell Thomas Worth

Table 33. Southwest Georgia Regional Commission County Statistics, Focus Counties, 20112015

Focus County

Fatalities 1 0

Serious Injuries 0 0

Injuries 5 0

Crashes 2 2

1

7

Yes

0

11

Yes

7

27

1

1

31

45

37

44

168

184

7

12

Yes

6

4

0

5

0

0

13

18

16

26

4

6

1

4

1

6

2

5

40

77

8

8

9

10

Yes

1

14

Yes

3

3

71

199

12

20

104

APPENDIX
PSAP Development Process
Task Team The Pedestrian Safety Task Team, a group of practitioners from across Georgia who are committed to increasing pedestrian safety, launched the PSAP in 2016. Team members meet bi-monthly and will remain involved in refining and implementing the PSAP.
Survey: Walking behaviors and attitudes During 2016, 5,125 practitioners and residents from throughout Georgia participated in a walking behaviors and attitudes survey. The PSAP incorporates respondents' behaviors and attitudes about walking.
Workshops To help ensure that the PSAP addresses concerns of municipalities of different sizes and resources, planners held workshops in both Perry and Atlanta. Over 50 professionals, representing diverse professions and regions, attended. Workshop participants recommended strategies and countermeasures that were practical and relevant to their community. They also provided input on resources and training that will enable them to successfully create safe places for walking.
Representatives of the following organizations participated: AARP Alta Planning + Design Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Cities of Atlanta, Brookhaven, Byron, Canton, Decatur, Duluth, Eatonton, Fayetteville,
Fitzgerald, Norcross, Reynolds, Sandy Springs, Savannah, and Warner Robins. Counties of Athens-Clarke, Cherokee, Cobb, Fulton, and Houston. Disability Connections Georgia College and State University Georgia Department of Public Health Georgia Department of Transportation Georgia Regional Transportation Authority Governor's Office of Highway Safety MARTA Metropolitan Planning Organizations: Atlanta Regional Commission, Chatham County
- Savannah Metropolitan Planning Commission, Gainesville-Hall MPO, Hinesville MPO, Macon Bibb County Planning and Zoning Commission, Middle Georgia Regional Commission, and Southwest Georgia Regional Commission PEDS RS&H Safe Kids Georgia Safe Routes to School Atlanta Metro Area Simpson Property Group
105

APPENDIX
Terrell County Chamber of Commerce UGA Extension: Athens- Clarke County, Pulaski County, and Terrell County
Data The Georgia Pedestrian Safety Action Plan uses a data-driven approach to improving pedestrian safety statewide. Crash data provides valuable information about demographics, when and where fatalities are occurring and other issues affecting safety. This PSAP uses data for pedestrian crashes and fatalities over a 5-year period, 20112015. Data was extracted from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) and Georgia Electronic Accident Reporting System (GEARS). Data covers the years from 20112015.
Data on preferences and perceptions surrounding walking and walking infrastructure was collected via a statewide Georgia Pedestrian Safety Attitudes and Behaviors Survey. This was conducted in 2016 and received input from 5,125 residents of Georgia.
Crash data was reviewed to ensure the accuracy of `pedestrian' crash classifications. Planners then analyzed the data to identify risk factors associated with pedestrian crashes and fatalities including demographics of people hit, road types and features, individual behaviors, and other factors.
Crashes identified as occurring `on private property' were not removed from the overall counts of pedestrian-vehicle crashes. These crashes were typically not identified as occurring on a state route system. PEDS is working with GDOT to separate these incidents during relevant analyses.
Data on HSIP funding was collected from Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program Annual Reports. 402 Funding information was collected from Governor's Office of Highway Safety Annual Reports. Regional funding was gathered from Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) documents from each MPO or Regional Commission.
Other data or citations are referenced in the text.
Draft Pedestrian Safety Action Plan Following completion of the draft Pedestrian Safety Action Plan in 2017, Pedestrian Safety Task Team members, practitioners who had been involved throughout the process, and members of the public reviewed and provided feedback on the PSAP. Comments were incorporated into the PSAP.
106