Page 1 of 66

GEORGIA

2018 ANNUAL REPORT
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 2 of 66

Table of Contents

Table of Contents .................................................................................................................................................... 2

Disclaimer ............................................................................................................................................................... 3

Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................................ 4

Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................. 6

Program Structure ................................................................................................................................................... 6

Program Administration...................................................................................................................................... 6

Program Methodology ...................................................................................................................................... 10

Project Implementation ......................................................................................................................................... 25

Funds Programmed ........................................................................................................................................... 25

General Listing of Projects ............................................................................................................................... 27

Safety Performance ............................................................................................................................................... 38

General Highway Safety Trends ....................................................................................................................... 38

Safety Performance Targets .............................................................................................................................. 51

Applicability of Special Rules .......................................................................................................................... 53

Evaluation ............................................................................................................................................................. 55

Program Effectiveness ...................................................................................................................................... 55

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements ...................................................................... 56

Year 2017 .............................................................................................................................................................. 56

Project Effectiveness ......................................................................................................................................... 60

Compliance Assessment ....................................................................................................................................... 61
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 3 of 66

Disclaimer 

Protection of Data from Discovery Admission into Evidence 

23 U.S.C. 148(h)(4) states “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, reports, surveys, schedules, lists, or 

data compiled or collected for any purpose relating to this section [HSIP], shall not be subject to discovery or 

admitted into evidence in a Federal or State court proceeding or considered for other purposes in any action for 

damages arising from any occurrence at a location identified or addressed in the reports, surveys, schedules, 

lists, or other data.” 

23 U.S.C. 409 states “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, reports, surveys, schedules, lists, or data 

compiled or collected for the purpose of identifying, evaluating, or planning the safety enhancement of 

potential accident sites, hazardous roadway conditions, or railway-highway crossings, pursuant to sections 

130, 144, and 148 of this title or for the purpose of developing any highway safety construction improvement 

project which may be implemented utilizing Federal-aid highway funds shall not be subject to discovery or 

admitted into evidence in a Federal or State court proceeding or considered for other purposes in any action for 

damages arising from any occurrence at a location mentioned or addressed in such reports, surveys, schedules, 

lists, or data.” 
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 4 of 66

Executive Summary 

The purpose of the Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) is to provide for a continuous and 

systematic procedure that identifies and reviews specific traffic safety issues around the state to identify 

locations with potential for improvement. The ultimate goal of the HSIP process is to reduce the number of 

crashes, injuries and fatalities by eliminating certain predominant types of crashes through the implementation 

of engineering solutions.

Each year, the Department sets aside safety funding to implement safety projects. The total Highway Safety 

Improvement Program allocated approximately $ 100,329,000 in highway safety funds during Fiscal Year 

2018. This past year, 2017, indicated a possible leveling off of motor vehicle fatalities following a two year rise. 

Georgia’s total number of fatalities decreased 1.1% from the previous year considering a 3.1% rise in 

statewide travel. It is projected that Georgia’s statewide fatalities will continue to flatten in 2018 and 2019. 

These trends are closely monitored by all highway safety professionals in Georgia and remain the focus of the 

state’s Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP).

The Governor’s Office of Highway Safety (GOHS) and the Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) 

develops and supports the SHSP. The plan has specific Emphasis Area Task Teams that are organized to 

develop specific countermeasures. This previous year, we launched two new task teams. The Distracted 

Driving and Impaired Driving teams continue to be active since their launch at the June 2016 SHSP Safety 

Summit held at Georgia Tech. These teams have continued their work over the past year and remain a critical 

part of the SHSP, HSP and HSIP collaborative. 

We have completed our second year of a three/five year contract with three engineering consulting firms. As 

part of the contract, we are aggressively identifying safety projects to meet our HSIP goals. Projects that 

comprise the HSIP are usually moderately-sized projects that include intersection improvements, signal 

upgrades (LEDs), ramp improvements, corridor improvements, turn lanes, signage, corridor improvements 

identified through RSAs and traffic engineering studies. All public roads are included in one or more of the 

various emphasis areas of the program. Safety projects may be nominated or identified from a large number of 

sources. One of the most common methods is by an analysis of vehicle crash locations and types.

Locations reported by citizens, elected officials, local governments, city and county engineers, emergency 

agencies and metropolitan planning organizations are all accepted for analysis. A project may qualify as a 

safety project because of an existing safety problem, because of evidence that it will prevent a hazardous 

condition, or because it falls into one of several identified categories of improvements that are known to 

provide safety benefits. Examples of this last category include guardrail, traffic signals, railroad crossing 

warning devices, and most intersection improvements. Public pedestrian and bicycle facilities and traffic 

calming projects may also be eligible for hazard elimination projects. Once a project has been identified, a 

benefit/cost analysis is performed.

Every Georgia DOT project is designed and constructed to meet or exceed federal safety guidelines. GDOT 

continues to look for still more ways to improve safety. This past year’s implementation of ICE (Intersection 

Control Evaluation) is a highlight of these efforts. GDOT worked with FHWA using examples from other states 

to develop both a policy and the ICE tool to promote intersection safety as part of all projects. By working 

through the ICE process and using the ICE worksheet tool, safety is integrated into the intersection control 

selection. This new practice will provide significant safety benefits over time. 

Additionally, the Office of Traffic Operations is refining and utilizing our crash data to improve safety and 

reduce fatalities, injuries and crashes. This past year GDOT working with our safety partners completed the 

launch of the State Motor Vehicle Crash Report following the SHSP and TRCC Executive Board unanimous 

approval of the proposed changes in October 2016. The revised report includes the recommended injury 
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 5 of 66

definitions and codes along with the addition of latitude and longitude being required for all crashes. Several 

other items were revised to align with MMUCC and ensure proper coding of all crashes including improved 

reporting of CMV crashes. Calendar year 2018 marks the first full year of implementation. 

Cumulatively, GDOT has advanced several initiatives to promote safety on our roads and highways. We are 

building roundabout intersections, increasing the use of cable barrier on divided roadways, raising center 

concrete median barriers, installing rumble strips, installing more retro-reflective signage, applying pavement 

markings, coordinating traffic signal timing, and installing pedestrian accommodations to make our roads safer 

for all users. 
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 6 of 66

Introduction

The Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) is a core Federal-aid program with the purpose of achieving 

a significant reduction in fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads. As per 23 U.S.C. 148(h) and 23 CFR 

924.15, States are required to report annually on the progress being made to advance HSIP implementation and 

evaluation efforts. The format of this report is consistent with the HSIP Reporting Guidance dated December 

29, 2016 and consists of five sections: program structure, progress in implementing highway safety 

improvement projects, progress in achieving safety outcomes and performance targets, effectiveness of the 

improvements and compliance assessment.

Program Structure

Program Administration

Describe the general structure of the HSIP in the State. 

The Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) is a core Federal-aid program with the purpose of achieving 

a significant reduction in fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads. As per 23 U.S.C. 148(h) and 23 CFR 

924.15, States are required to report annually on the progress being made to advance HSIP implementation 

and evaluation efforts. The format of this report is consistent with the Reporting Guidance. Projects identified 

for the program are requested by our GDOT District Engineers, local governments and GDOT Central Office 

Engineers. All ideas are evaluated to determine if the proposed projects fit our HSIP program and support the 

SHSP. If a proposed project is determined to be a candidate for the HSIP it must compete with all other non 

systemic projects based upon its benefit : cost ratio. Those projects with the highest B:C are advanced based 

on our available funding capacity. 

Following our planned HSIP budget, GDOT's program has the following core elements which will have some 

overlap:

Intersection Safety ($30-40 million)

Roadway and Lane Departure ($30-40 million)

Pedestrian & Bicycle Safety ($7-10 million)

High Risk Rural Roads ($6.5 million) 

Off System Safety ($7 million)

Where is HSIP staff located within the State DOT? 

 Operations 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Within the Office of Traffic Operations the HSIP staff is located in the Safety Section 
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 7 of 66

How are HSIP funds allocated in a State? 

Central Office via Statewide Competitive Application Process

SHSP Emphasis Area Data 

Other-systemic

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Describe how local and tribal roads are addressed as part of HSIP.

The state is continuing the high risk rural roads program as part of the HSIP. Additionally the state has an 

established Off System Safety Program that works through the same program coordinators. The Department 

employs District Coordinators that work with the Department's District Traffic Operations and local government 

to identify a group of roads that are not part of the state highway system that have safety deficiencies. The 

District coordinators use the county score-card to aid in the identification of roads and intersections. The scorecard ranks named roads based on a weighted scale. Once the roads are selected, the list is prioritized and 

selected by a review team. The cost of the planned safety improvements are taken into consideration as well 

as the effectiveness of each countermeasure. The Department dedicates $1 million annually for each of the 

state's seven districts. This money is solely used to fund our off-system safety program. Additionally, larger 

HRRR projects are individually programmed using HSIP funds. The work normally consists of installing retroreflective signage, applying pavement markings, installing rumble strips, intersection improvements or 

guardrail. GDOT has recently started programming HRRR roundabout projects and will be starting off system 

sharp curve projects in the coming years. 

Identify which internal partners (e.g., State departments of transportation (DOTs) Bureaus, Divisions) 

are involved with HSIP planning.

Traffic Engineering/Safety

Design

Planning 

Maintenance

Operations 

Districts/Regions

Local Aid Programs Office/Division

Governors Highway Safety Office 

Other-District traffic egnineers

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Describe coordination with internal partners.

We work closely with GDOT Maintenance and District Traffic Operations. Each month we meet with each of 

our seven districts and our safety design consulting teams. We work together to identify sites based on local 

knowledge and crash data. Additionally, as road maintenance plans are being developed the district TO teams 
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 8 of 66

review sites and plans to ensure signs and pavement markings meet current specifications. The TO teams and 

HSIP/Safety Section work with our Off System Local State Aid Coordinators to identify good project locations 

using the data driven county report cards. 

The Safety Team coordinates with Design Policy and our consulting team to update and refine pedestrian 

safety through the Pedestrian Streetscape Guide and coordinate these efforts with other GDOT offices to 

ensure design elements are incorporated when appropriate. We worked with these same teams to update our 

rubble strip/stripe details and the Design Policy Manual. Lastly we worked with our GDOT Materials and 

Testing partners to update our high friction surface treatment standards.

These activities are critical pieces to support the goals of the Serious Crash Type Task Team, OSS, HRRR 

efforts. 

Identify which external partners are involved with HSIP planning.

Regional Planning Organizations (e.g. MPOs, RPOs, COGs) 

Governors Highway Safety Office 

Local Government Agency 

FHWA

Other-Public Safety & Local Law Enforcement

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Georgia’s Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) involves a variety of internal and external partners at the 

federal, state and local levels as well as the private sector. The SHSP was updated and in place during FY 

2015 with Task Teams developing plans for the various Emphasis Areas. The task teams are comprised of a 

combination of engineering, emergency management, enforcement and education professionals who come 

from community organizations, private businesses, schools, and public institutions. The teams work together to 

establish measurable goal(s) that are designed to improve one or more of the established emphasis areas. 

Throughout the year, the teams track their progress against their goal(s). The teams report their progress to 

the participating groups and to the Governor’s Office of Highway Safety (GOHS). Also, the GOHS holds semiannual Safety Program Leadership Meetings for the Executive Board and task team leaders. GDOT’s 

Pedestrian, Bicycle, Intersection and Roadway Departure Safety Action Plans are executed to implement 

engineering solutions to address highway safety problems. GDOT’s Safety Action Plans are key components 

of its HSIP and both are aligned with the goals of the state’s SHSP and a number of its Emphasis Areas.

Georgia’s SHSP Key Emphasis Areas are as follows:

Occupant Protection - Seatbelts and Air Bags

Serious Crash Type - Intersections, Keeping Vehicles on the Road - lane departure, Head-on and Cross 

Median Crashes

Consequences of Leaving Road, Work Zones

Aggressive Driving/Super Speeder

Impaired Driver
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 9 of 66

Age related issues - Graduated Driver's Licensing, Younger Adult Drivers, Older Drivers

Non-motorized User - Pedestrians, Bicyclists

Vehicle Type - Heavy Trucks, Motorcycles

Trauma System/Increasing EMS Capabilities

Traffic/Crash Records and Data Analysis

Traffic Incident Management Enhancement (TIME)

Distracted Driving

Describe coordination with external partners.

In order to execute the Governor’s Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP), the work involves a variety of 

internal and external partners at the state and local levels. A critical piece of the SHSP is the HSIP. As part of 

the planning and development of the state's HSIP, GDOT works with the Governor’s Office of Highway Safety 

to ensure that the engineering and data needs of the task teams are fulfilled. By working closely with these 

teams, the implementation elements that fit into the HSIP are advanced.

Additionally, GDOT works with local governments, agencies and MPOs to develop the HSIP. The groups 

connect with our Office of Planning, District Offices and directly to the Office of Traffic Operations. They can 

present project ideas, provide studies and relate public comment. Each request is examined to determine if it is 

a reasonable fit for HSIP funding. 

GDOT continues to work closely with the State's GOHS and MPOs to develop the state's safety performance 

targets. The process includes multiple presentations and working sessions. The crash data queries and data 

forecasting methodology was presented to local FHWA and NHTSA representatives last year and adopted by 

the TRCC working group.

Over the past year GDOT has continued meeting and presenting the updated crash report that was approved 

by the TRCC Executive Board. Additionally, we have completed or worked with the software developers that 

service the law enforcement agencies. The updates include improved alignment to MMUCC and the adoption 

of KABCO injury severity coding. These changes will improve the quality of the state’s motor vehicle crash 

reporting and advance our HSIP objectives. 

The HSIP team also worked with several safety partners to support the State’s new Hands Free bill. The team 

provided data and comparative analysis used by the state’s executive management and legislative panel in 

multiple presentations throughout the state. This example highlights how Georgia's safety partners collaborate 

across organizational boundaries to advance safety for all road users. 

Have any program administration practices used to implement the HSIP changed since the last reporting 

period?
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 10 of 66

No

Are there any other aspects of HSIP Administration on which the State would like to elaborate?

Yes

Describe other aspects of HSIP Administration on which the State would like to elaborate. 

As noted in the introduction, GDOT worked with FHWA to develop both an ICE (Intersection Control 

Evaluation) policy and tool. For every intersection project, including HSIP projects, the policy applies. An 

excerpt of the policy (below) defines the breadth of what project types will be applicable. This approach will 

"provide trace-ability, transparency, consistency and accountability when identifying and selecting an 

intersection control solution that both meets the project purpose and reflects the overall best value in terms of 

specific performance-based criteria." All HSIP intersection projects will go through an ICE evaluation.

Also, we are nearing the completion of HSM calibration of the state. Once completed, we will be leveraging this 

data to guide and support the HSIP investment decisions. This data will be shared with all of our internal and 

external safety partners.

Program Methodology

Does the State have an HSIP manual or similar that clearly describes HSIP planning, implementation 

and evaluation processes?

Yes

To upload a copy of the State processes, attach files below.

File Name:

HSIP Program Final-2016 FAST.docx

Select the programs that are administered under the HSIP.

Median Barrier

Intersection

Horizontal Curve 

Bicycle Safety

Skid Hazard

Roadway Departure

Low-Cost Spot Improvements 

Sign Replacement And Improvement 

Local Safety

Pedestrian Safety

HRRR

Wrong Way Driving 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 11 of 66

Program: Bicycle Safety 

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2012 

What is the justification for this program? [Check all that apply]

Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area 

What is the funding approach for this program? [Check one]

Funding set-aside

What data types were used in the program methodology? [Check all that apply]

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

Fatal and serious injury crashes only 

Other-Bicycle Crashes Traffic 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? [Check all that apply]

Crash frequency

Are local roads (non-state owned and operated) included or addressed in this program?

Yes

Are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

Describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

selection committee

Select the processes used to prioritize projects for implementation. For the methods selected, indicate the 

relative importance of each process in project prioritization. Enter either the weights or numerical 

rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving 

both processes the same rank and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).

Rank of Priority Consideration
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 12 of 66

Available funding : 1 

Program: Horizontal Curve 

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2012 

What is the justification for this program? [Check all that apply]

Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area 

FHWA focused approach to safety

What is the funding approach for this program? [Check one]

Funding set-aside

What data types were used in the program methodology? [Check all that apply]

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

All crashes 

Fatal and serious injury crashes only Traffic Horizontal curvature 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? [Check all that apply]

Crash frequency

Excess proportions of specific crash types 

Are local roads (non-state owned and operated) included or addressed in this program?

No

Are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

Describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

Other-Ball Bank and Systemic

Select the processes used to prioritize projects for implementation. For the methods selected, indicate the 

relative importance of each process in project prioritization. Enter either the weights or numerical 

rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving 

both processes the same rank and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 13 of 66

Rank of Priority Consideration

Available funding : 1 

Program: HRRR 

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2012 

What is the justification for this program? [Check all that apply]

FHWA focused approach to safety

What is the funding approach for this program? [Check one]

Funding set-aside

What data types were used in the program methodology? [Check all that apply]

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

All crashes 

Fatal and serious injury crashes only Functional classification 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? [Check all that apply]

Crash frequency

Are local roads (non-state owned and operated) included or addressed in this program?

Yes

Are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

Describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process 

selection committee

Select the processes used to prioritize projects for implementation. For the methods selected, indicate the 

relative importance of each process in project prioritization. Enter either the weights or numerical 
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 14 of 66

rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving 

both processes the same rank and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).

Ranking based on B/C : 1 

Other-District / Commitee : 2

Program: Intersection 

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2012 

What is the justification for this program? [Check all that apply]

Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area 

FHWA focused approach to safety

What is the funding approach for this program? [Check one]

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? [Check all that apply]

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

All crashes 

Fatal and serious injury crashes only 

Traffic 

Volume 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? [Check all that apply]

Crash frequency

Crash rate

Are local roads (non-state owned and operated) included or addressed in this program?

Yes

Are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

Describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process 
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 15 of 66

Select the processes used to prioritize projects for implementation. For the methods selected, indicate the 

relative importance of each process in project prioritization. Enter either the weights or numerical 

rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving 

both processes the same rank and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).

Relative Weight in Scoring

Ranking based on B/C : 1 

Total Relative Weight : 1

Program: Local Safety 

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2013 

What is the justification for this program? [Check all that apply]

FHWA focused approach to safety

What is the funding approach for this program? [Check one]

Funding set-aside

What data types were used in the program methodology? [Check all that apply]

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

All crashes 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? [Check all that apply]

Crash frequency

Relative severity index

Are local roads (non-state owned and operated) included or addressed in this program?

Yes

Are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

Describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 16 of 66

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

selection committee

Select the processes used to prioritize projects for implementation. For the methods selected, indicate the 

relative importance of each process in project prioritization. Enter either the weights or numerical 

rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving 

both processes the same rank and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).

Rank of Priority Consideration

Available funding : 1 

Program: Low-Cost Spot Improvements 

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2013 

What is the justification for this program? [Check all that apply]

Other-GDOT Focus

What is the funding approach for this program? [Check one]

Other-Available Funding 

What data types were used in the program methodology? [Check all that apply]

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

All crashes Traffic 

Volume Roadside features 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? [Check all that apply]

Crash frequency

Probability of specific crash types

Are local roads (non-state owned and operated) included or addressed in this program?

Yes

Are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

Describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 17 of 66

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

selection committee

Select the processes used to prioritize projects for implementation. For the methods selected, indicate the 

relative importance of each process in project prioritization. Enter either the weights or numerical 

rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving 

both processes the same rank and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).

Rank of Priority Consideration

Available funding : 1 

Program: Median Barrier 

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2012 

What is the justification for this program? [Check all that apply]

FHWA focused approach to safety

What is the funding approach for this program? [Check one]

Other-Available Funding 

What data types were used in the program methodology? [Check all that apply]

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

All crashes Traffic Median width 

Functional classification 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? [Check all that apply]

Probability of specific crash types

Are local roads (non-state owned and operated) included or addressed in this program?

No

Are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 18 of 66

Describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

Other-Systemic

Select the processes used to prioritize projects for implementation. For the methods selected, indicate the 

relative importance of each process in project prioritization. Enter either the weights or numerical 

rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving 

both processes the same rank and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).

Rank of Priority Consideration

Available funding : 1 

Program: Pedestrian Safety 

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2013 

What is the justification for this program? [Check all that apply]

Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area 

FHWA focused approach to safety

What is the funding approach for this program? [Check one]

Funding set-aside

What data types were used in the program methodology? [Check all that apply]

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

All crashes 

Fatal and serious injury crashes only 

Traffic 

Volume Functional classification 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? [Check all that apply]

Excess proportions of specific crash types 

Are local roads (non-state owned and operated) included or addressed in this program?

Yes

Are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 19 of 66

Yes

Describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

selection committee

Select the processes used to prioritize projects for implementation. For the methods selected, indicate the 

relative importance of each process in project prioritization. Enter either the weights or numerical 

rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving 

both processes the same rank and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).

Rank of Priority Consideration

Available funding : 1 

Program: Roadway Departure 

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2013 

What is the justification for this program? [Check all that apply]

Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area 

FHWA focused approach to safety

What is the funding approach for this program? [Check one]

Funding set-aside

What data types were used in the program methodology? [Check all that apply]

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

All crashes 

Fatal and serious injury crashes only 

Traffic 

Volume 

Horizontal curvature 

Functional classification 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? [Check all that apply]

Crash frequency

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Excess proportions of specific crash types 
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 20 of 66

Are local roads (non-state owned and operated) included or addressed in this program?

No

Are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

Describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

selection committee

Select the processes used to prioritize projects for implementation. For the methods selected, indicate the 

relative importance of each process in project prioritization. Enter either the weights or numerical 

rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving 

both processes the same rank and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C : 1 

Available funding : 2 

Program: Sign Replacement And Improvement 

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2013 

What is the justification for this program? [Check all that apply]

Other-GDOT Focus

What is the funding approach for this program? [Check one]

Other-Available Funding 

What data types were used in the program methodology? [Check all that apply]

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

All crashes Traffic Functional classification 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? [Check all that apply]

Crash frequency
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 21 of 66

Are local roads (non-state owned and operated) included or addressed in this program?

Yes

Are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

No

Describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.

Coordination between GDOT District Office and Local Government is used to identify project locations 

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process 

Other-Off system route can receive marking upgrades from the off system safety program application

Select the processes used to prioritize projects for implementation. For the methods selected, indicate the 

relative importance of each process in project prioritization. Enter either the weights or numerical 

rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving 

both processes the same rank and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).

Rank of Priority Consideration

Available funding : 1 

Program: Skid Hazard 

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2013 

What is the justification for this program? [Check all that apply]

FHWA focused approach to safety

What is the funding approach for this program? [Check one]

Funding set-aside

What data types were used in the program methodology? [Check all that apply]

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

All crashes 

Fatal and serious injury crashes only Traffic Horizontal curvature 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? [Check all that apply]
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 22 of 66

Crash frequency

Crash rate

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types 

Are local roads (non-state owned and operated) included or addressed in this program?

No

Are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

No

Describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.

Coordination between GDOT District Office and Local Government is used to identify project locations 

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

selection committee

Select the processes used to prioritize projects for implementation. For the methods selected, indicate the 

relative importance of each process in project prioritization. Enter either the weights or numerical 

rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving 

both processes the same rank and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C : 1 

Available funding : 2 

Program: Wrong Way Driving 

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2013 

What is the justification for this program? [Check all that apply]

Other-GDOT Focus

What is the funding approach for this program? [Check one]

Other-Available Funding 

What data types were used in the program methodology? [Check all that apply]

Crashes Exposure Roadway 
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 23 of 66

All crashes 

Fatal and serious injury crashes only Traffic Other-Interchange Design 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? [Check all that apply]

Probability of specific crash types

Are local roads (non-state owned and operated) included or addressed in this program?

No

Are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

No

Describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.

Coordination between GDOT District Office and Local Government is used to identify project locations 

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

Other-Systemic

Select the processes used to prioritize projects for implementation. For the methods selected, indicate the 

relative importance of each process in project prioritization. Enter either the weights or numerical 

rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving 

both processes the same rank and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).

Rank of Priority Consideration

Available funding : 1 

What percentage of HSIP funds address systemic improvements?

 30 

 HSIP funds are used to address which of the following systemic improvements? Please check all that 

apply.

Cable Median Barriers

Rumble Strips

Install/Improve Signing

Install/Improve Pavement Marking and/or Delineation

Upgrade Guard Rails

Add/Upgrade/Modify/Remove Traffic Signal 

Horizontal curve signs 

High friction surface treatment

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 24 of 66

What process is used to identify potential countermeasures? [Check all that apply]

Engineering Study 

Road Safety Assessment

Crash data analysis

Data-driven safety analysis tools (HSM, CMF Clearinghouse, SafetyAnalyst, usRAP) 

Other-ICE

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

The HSIP team takes suggestions from all our safety partners and evaluates those using available data. GDOT 

performs a benefit cost analysis on all non systemic safety projects using the CMFs from the CMF 

Clearinghouse. Also, our safety consultant uses the HSM to evaluate expected crash frequency as part of our 

engineering studies.

Does the State HSIP consider connected vehicles and ITS technologies? 

No

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Does the State use the Highway Safety Manual to support HSIP efforts?

Yes

Please describe how the State uses the HSM to support HSIP efforts.

GDOT has been working with our engineering consultants to calibrate the state using our geo-located crash 

data. We have been leveraging the Empirical Bayes method to identify roadways for analysis. To date we have 

calibrated three of our seven districts. We hope to have all seven districts calibrated by the end of September, 

2018.

Have any program methodology practices used to implement the HSIP changed since the last reporting 

period?

No

Are there any other aspects of the HSIP methodology on which the State would like to elaborate?

No
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 25 of 66

Project Implementation

Funds Programmed

Reporting period for HSIP funding.

State Fiscal Year

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Enter the programmed and obligated funding for each applicable funding category.

FUNDING CATEGORY PROGRAMMED OBLIGATED % OBLIGATED/PROGRAMMED

HSIP (23 U.S.C. 148) $88,700,548 $90,864,549 102.44%

HRRR Special Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

$6,299,452 $9,464,308 150.24%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 154) $0 $0 0%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 164) $0 $0 0%

RHCP (for HSIP purposes) (23 

U.S.C. 130(e)(2))

$0 $0 0%

Other Federal-aid Funds (i.e. 

STBG, NHPP)

$0 $0 0%

State and Local Funds $0 $0 0%

Totals $95,000,000 $100,328,857 105.61%

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

How much funding is programmed to local (non-state owned and operated) or tribal safety projects?

$7,000,000 

How much funding is obligated to local or tribal safety projects?

$7,788,430 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

How much funding is programmed to non-infrastructure safety projects?

$0 

How much funding is obligated to non-infrastructure safety projects?

$0 
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 26 of 66

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

It is the state's understanding of the current safety funding guidance that all HSIP funding is to be used for only 

infrastructure related projects/activities. Below is a paragraph directly from the FHWA Safety web site at this 

link: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/fastact/factsheets/hsipfs.cfm

"The FAST Act continues the overarching requirement that HSIP funds be used for safety projects that are 

consistent with the State’s strategic highway safety plan (SHSP) and that correct or improve a hazardous road 

location or feature or address a highway safety problem. Under MAP-21, the HSIP statute listed a range of 

eligible HSIP projects. However, the list was non-exhaustive, and a State could use HSIP funds on any safety 

project (infrastructure-related or non-infrastructure) that met the overarching requirement. In contrast, the 

FAST Act limits HSIP eligibility to only those listed in statute—most of which are infrastructure-safety related ."

How much funding was transferred in to the HSIP from other core program areas during the reporting 

period under 23 U.S.C. 126?

$0 

How much funding was transferred out of the HSIP to other core program areas during the reporting 

period under 23 U.S.C. 126?

$0 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Discuss impediments to obligating HSIP funds and plans to overcome this challenge in the future.

In previous years the state was challenged to obligate all available HSIP funds. We were often faced with 

projects being pushed into the next fiscal year because of design, ROW or environmental schedules. Over the 

past few years we have been actively improving our crash data, and we have enhanced project delivery by 

executing our safety design contracts. This has allowed the HSIP team to actively seek out quality safety 

projects and advance them through the plan development process. By working closely with our design 

consultants and program delivery project managers, we have minimized the impacts created by shifting 

schedules. This helps to ensure that the department has the capability to deliver our annual HSIP 

commitments. 

Our management of Road Safety Audits (RSA) is an example of our improved HSIP planning. Historically, 

RSAs would be conducted at any given time of the year. We have now implemented the business practice of 

completing our RSAs within the first two quarters of the state fiscal year and completing the RSA reports by the 

end of the third quarter. This is followed by maintenance activities and plan development in the fourth quarter. 

By scheduling activities to better align with our fiscal calendar, we have improved our delivery and mitigated 

project delivery delays and scheduling impacts.

Does the State want to elaborate on any other aspects of it’s progress in implementing HSIP projects?

No
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 27 of 66

General Listing of Projects

List the projects obligated using HSIP funds for the reporting period.

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE SELECTION

EMPHASIS 

AREA

STRATEGY

0001572 SR 

300/US 19 Turn 

Lanes from 

Doughtery Co to 

Warwick

Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - 

modify left-turn 

lane offset

1 Locations $10235177.24 $10235177.24 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

4,500 65 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections

0003948 SR 3/US 

41 @ CR 

381/GRAYSVILLE 

ROAD - 

ROUNDABOUT

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

4 Locations $10000 $10000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

6,420 45 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections

0004166 SR 

3/Northside Drive 

@ CS 53/Collier 

Rd

Roadway Roadway 

narrowing (road 

diet, roadway 

reconfiguration)

17 Locations $2719470.64 $2719470.64 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

11,700 35 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Pedestrians Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure

0006294 

PEDESTRIAN 

IMPROVEMENTS 

@ 5 SR 

LOCATIONS IN 

DISTRICT 6

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Pedestrian signal - 

modify existing

5 Locations $1622884.79 $1622884.79 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Varies 99 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Pedestrians Reduce 

Pedestrian and 

Bicyclest Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes

0006416 SR 53 FM 

E OF CR 269/RYO 

MOUNTAIN RD 

TO W OF CR 

178/DAVIS RD

Roadway Pavement surface 

- high friction 

surface

1 Miles $1045301.07 $1045301.07 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

3,630 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure

0006463 

PEDESTRIAN 

UPGRADES @ 58 

INTERSECTIONS 

IN DISTRICT 2

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Pedestrian signal - 

modify existing

58 Intersections $240000 $240000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Varies 99 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Pedestrians Reduce 

Pedestrian and 

Bicyclest Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes

0007495 

PEDESTRIAN 

UPGRADES @ 19 

INTERSECTIONS 

IN DISTRICT 1

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Pedestrian signal - 

modify existing

19 Locations $95000 $95000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Varies 99 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Pedestrians Reduce 

Pedestrian and 

Bicyclest Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes

0008314 SR 136 

FROM SR 136 

CONN TO SR 515 

- ROUNDABOUT

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

1 Intersections $3930000 $3930000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

4,210 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections

0008375 SR 8 @ 

CONNERS RD; 

MANN RD/MASON 

CREEK RD & @ 

POST RD

Roadway Roadway - other 3 Intersections $49896 $49896 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

5,570 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Mitigate high 

crash area

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections

0009400 SR 13 

FROM AFTON LN 

TO 

SHALLOWFORD 

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Medians and 

pedestrian refuge 

areas

2.6 Miles $5706236.94 $5706236.94 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Other

33,900 45 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Pedestrians Reduce 

Pedestrian and 

Bicyclest Fatality 
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 28 of 66

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE SELECTION

EMPHASIS 

AREA

STRATEGY

TERRACE - 

PHASE II

and Serious Injury 

Crashes

0009620 SR 225 

@ MT CARMEL 

CHURCH 

RD/MITCHELL 

BRIDGE ROAD 

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

1 Intersections $2263006 $2263006 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Major 

Collector

6,030 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections

0009872 SR 275 

@ CR 

307/RINCONSTILL ROADROUNDABOUT

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

1 Locations $3027572.19 $3027572.19 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Local Road 

or Street

1,040 45 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections

0009874 SR 25/US 

17 @ SR 99

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

1 Intersections $500000 $500000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

7,720 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections

0009880 SR 23/US 

25/US 301 @ SR 

196

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

2 Intersections $340000 $340000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

6,550 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections

0009887 SR 372 at 

SR 369

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

1 Intersections $78775.3 $78775.3 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

6,110 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections

0009901 I-20 at SR 

348/Waco Road - 

EB & WB Ramps - 

Roundabout 

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

2 Intersections $220816.16 $220816.16 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Interstate

34,300 70 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections

0009903 I-575 @ 

SR 5BU - SB & NB 

Ramps

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

2 Intersections $220816 $220816 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Interstate

56,900 65 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections

0009919 SR 81 @ 

SR 12 - 

ROUNDABOUT

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

1 Intersections $2687020.55 $2687020.55 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

7,050 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections

0009938 SR 53 @ 

SR 183

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

1 Intersections $102618.52 $102618.52 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

5,540 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections

0009948 SR 52 @ 

SR 115/CR 

41/COPPER MINE 

ROADROUNDABOUT

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

1 Locations $2988870.1 $2988870.1 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

1,610 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections

0009950 SR 9 @ 

SR 60-

ROUNDABOUT

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

1 Intersections $4877321.11 $4877321.11 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

1,550 45 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 29 of 66

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE SELECTION

EMPHASIS 

AREA

STRATEGY

0009953 SR 81 @ 

CR 461/CR 

462/BOLD 

SPRINGS ROAD

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

1 Locations $144099.49 $144099.49 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

8,640 45 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections

0009988 SR 212 

@ CR 593/SALEM 

ROADROUNDABOUT

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

1 Intersections $4877321.11 $4877321.11 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

8,600 45 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections

0009993 SHARP 

CURVE 

TREATMENTS @ 

SEV LOCS IN 

DISTRICT 2

Roadway Pavement surface 

- high friction 

surface

1 Locations $136602.7 $136602.7 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Varies 99 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure

0009996 SHARP 

CURVE 

TREATMENTS @ 

SEV LOCS IN 

DISTRICT 4

Roadway Pavement surface 

- high friction 

surface

1 Locations $305674.26 $305674.26 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Varies 99 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure

0010347 SR 

154/SR 166 @ CR 

1386/STONEWALL 

TELL ROAD

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

1 Intersections $650000 $650000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Other

15,400 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections

0010419 SR 140 

@ CS 

186/HEMBREE 

ROAD

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

1 Intersections $14503.06 $14503.06 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor

Arterial

12,200 35 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections

0010739 SR 144 

@ I-95 SB & NB 

OFF RAMPS

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

2 Intersections $2430000 $2430000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

13,800 45 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections

0010925 I-285 

RAMPS @ CR 

209/RIVERSIDE 

DRIVE

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

2 Intersections $270000 $270000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Interstate

216,000 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections

0012870 SR 9/US 

19 FROM CS 

3377/PHARR RD 

TO BUFORDSPRING CONN 

RAMP

Roadway Roadway - other 2.8 Miles $35268.8 $35268.8 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Other

41,100 35 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections

0013061 SR 42 FM 

CS 

1795/MANSFIELD 

AVE TO CS 

3694/DEKALB 

AVE

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Miscellaneous 

pedestrians and 

bicyclists

1 Locations $910000 $910000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Other

99 35 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Pedestrians Reduce 

Pedestrian and 

Bicyclest Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes

0013149 OFFSYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS 

@ 9 LOCS IN 

CALHOUN 

COUNTY

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings - 

remarking

9 Locations $1075.53 $1075.53 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Collectors 

and Rural Local

99 45 Other Spot Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 30 of 66

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE SELECTION

EMPHASIS 

AREA

STRATEGY

0013174 SR 12 @ 

CR 700/Young 

Road

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection 

geometry - other

1 Intersections $400000 $400000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

29,700 45 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections

0013175 SR 12 @ 

CR 5192/Cove 

Lake 

Road/Wellborn Rd

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection 

geometry - other

1 Intersections $420000 $420000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

22,900 45 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections

0013197 CR 

396/RAYONIER 

ROAD @ cr 

392/SPRING 

GROVE ROAD - 

HRRR

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

1 Locations $400000 $400000 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Minor 

Collector

2,870 50 County Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections

0013333 I-20 EB 

@ CS 

2776/MAYNARD 

TERRACE 

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

1 Intersections $600000 $600000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Interstate

167,000 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections

0013334 SR 42 @ 

CR 331/JACKSON 

STREET & CR 

3092/LOCUST 

ROAD - 

Roundabout 

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

1 Intersections $200000 $200000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

11,800 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections

0013557 SR 38/US 

84 FM 

BAINBRIDGE TO 

GRADY COUNTY - 

MEDIAN TURN 

LANES

Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - 

modify left-turn 

lane offset

11.5 Miles $100000 $100000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Other

6,460 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections

0013643 I-16 @ 6 

Locs in Dist 2 &@ 

5 Locs in Dist 5 - 

Cable Barriers

Roadside Barrier - cable 11 Locations $1914491.11 $1914491.11 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Interstate

99 65 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure

0013650 I-20 fm 

Walton Co Line to 

Taliaferro Co Line - 

Cable Barriers

Roadside Barrier - cable 42.2 Miles $385511.75 $385511.75 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Interstate

32,000 70 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure

0013690 

PEDESTRIAN 

UPGRADES @ 21 

LOCS IN FLOYD 

COUNTY

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Pedestrian signal - 

modify existing

21 Locations $315000 $315000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Varies 99 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Pedestrians Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure

0013696 SR 42 @ 

CS 716/ENGLAND 

CHAPEL 

ROAD/BURG 

ROAD

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

1 Intersections $500000 $500000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

9,930 45 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections

0013697 SR 81 @ 

CR 434/JACKSON 

LAKE ROAD/CR 

656/SNAPPING 

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

1 Intersections $500000 $500000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Other

4,400 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 31 of 66

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE SELECTION

EMPHASIS 

AREA

STRATEGY

SHOALS ROAD - 

Roundabout 

0013780 OFFSYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS 

@ 5 LOCS IN 

WARE COUNTY

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings - 

remarking

5 Locations $1000 $1000 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Collectors 

and Rural Local

99 45 Other Spot Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure

0013782 OFFSYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS 

@ 9 LOCS IN 

CANDLER 

COUNTY

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings - 

remarking

9 Locations $149.72 $149.72 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Collectors 

and Rural Local

99 45 Other Spot Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure

0013784 OFFSYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS 

@ 9 LOCS IN 

OGLETHORPE 

COUNTY

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings - 

remarking

9 Locations $2500 $2500 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Collectors 

and Rural Local

99 45 Other Spot Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure

0013786 OFFSYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS 

@ 7 LOCS IN 

MCDUFFIE 

COUNTY

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings - 

remarking

7 Locations $2000 $2000 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Collectors 

and Rural Local

99 45 Other Spot Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road

Departure

0013788 SAFETY 

PROJECT 

IDENTIFICATION 

& EVALUATION - 

PHASE II

Non-infrastructure Transportation 

safety planning

1 Locations $1222000 $1222000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Varies 99 0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Data Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure

0013790 OFFSYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS 

@ 25 LOCS IN 

CRISP COUNTY

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings - 

remarking

25 Locations $5000 $5000 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Collectors 

and Rural Local

99 45 Other Spot Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure

0013805 OFFSYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS 

@ 37 LOCS IN 

STEPHENS 

COUNTY

Roadway

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings - 

remarking

37 Locations $7000 $7000 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Collectors 

and Rural Local

99 45 Other Spot Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure

0013845 OFFSYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS 

@ 8 LOCS IN 

WILCOX COUNTY

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings - 

remarking

8 Locations $7000 $7000 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Collectors 

and Rural Local

99 45 Other Spot Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure

0013862 SR 16 @ 

SR 42

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

1 Intersections $250000 $250000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

5,660 35 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections

0013865 OFFSYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS 

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings - 

remarking

14 Locations $3000 $3000 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Collectors 

and Rural Local

99 45 Other Spot Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 32 of 66

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE SELECTION

EMPHASIS 

AREA

STRATEGY

@ 14 LOCS IN 

UPSON COUNTY

and Road 

Departure

0013871 OFFSYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS 

@ 3 LOCS IN 

DEKALB COUNTY

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings - 

remarking

3 Locations $8093.26 $8093.26 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Varies 99 45 Other Spot Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure

0015152 SR 6 @ 

BUTNER RD; @ 

OLD FAIRBURN 

RD & @ 

WELCOME ALL 

ROAD

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings - 

remarking

1 Intersections $300000 $300000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Other

40,400 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure

0015170 OFFSYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS 

@ 46 LOCS IN 

BRYAN COUNTY

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings - 

remarking

46 Locations $2500 $2500 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Collectors 

and Rural Local

99 45 Other Spot Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure

0015181 OFF 

SYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS 

@ 32 LOCS IN 

ELBERT COUNTY

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings - 

remarking

32 Locations $30815.25 $30815.25 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Collectors 

and Rural Local

99 45 Other Spot Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure

0015184 OFFSYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS 

@ 7 LOCS IN 

HALL COUNTY

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings - 

remarking

7 Locations $5000 $5000 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Collectors 

and Rural Local

99 45 Other Spot Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure

0015185 OFFSYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS 

@ 28 LOCS IN 

LOWNDES 

COUNTY

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings - 

remarking

28 Locations $13000 $13000 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Collectors 

and Rural Local

99 45 Other Spot Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure

0015195 OFF 

SYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS 

@ 15 LOCS IN 

DOUGLAS 

COUNTY

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings - 

remarking

15 Locations $725074.64 $725074.64 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Collectors 

and Rural Local

99 45 Other Spot Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure

0015201 I-95 AT 5 

LOCS IN 

MCINTOSH 

COUNTY - CABLE 

BARRIERS

Roadside Barrier - cable 5 Locations $173411.95 $173411.95 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Interstate

99 70 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure

0015589 SR 17 @ 

CR 156/BLUE JAY 

ROAD

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

1 Intersections $30000 $30000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

5,170 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections

0015595 SR 9 

FROM SR 9 SO 

TO CS 

361/WINDSOR 

Roadside Removal of 

roadside objects 

(trees, poles, etc.)

0.53 Miles $5000000 $5000000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Other

29,220 35 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 33 of 66

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE SELECTION

EMPHASIS 

AREA

STRATEGY

PKWY - UTILITY 

RELOCATION 

0015725 OFFSYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS 

@ 15 LOC IN 

MADISON 

COUNTY

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings - 

remarking

15 Locations $5500 $5500 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Collectors 

and Rural Local

99 45 Other Spot Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure

0015726 OFFSYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS 

@ 45 LOC IN 

TOWNS COUNTY

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings - 

remarking

44 Locations $212111.31 $212111.31 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Collectors 

and Rural Local

99 45 Other Spot Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure

0015727 OFFSYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS 

@ 44 LOC IN 

WHITE COUNTY

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings - 

remarking

44 Locations $275267.12 $275267.12 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Collectors 

and Rural Local

99 45 Other Spot Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure

0015728 OFFSYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS 

@ 16 LOC IN 

GLASCOCK 

COUNTY

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings - 

remarking

16 Locations $302409.98 $302409.98 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Collectors 

and Rural Local

99 45 Other Spot Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure

0015729 OFFSYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS 

@ 11 LOC IN 

JENKINS 

COUNTY

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings - 

remarking

11 Locations $369124.4 $369124.4 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Collectors 

and Rural Local

99 45 Other Spot Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure

0015730 OFFSYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS 

@ 22 LOC IN 

TREUTLEN 

COUNTY

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings - 

remarking

22 Locations $534129.41 $534129.41 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Collectors 

and Rural Local

99 45 Other Spot Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure

0015731 OFFSYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS 

@ 19 LOC IN 

WARREN 

COUNTY

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings - 

remarking

19 Locations $402225.06 $402225.06 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Collectors 

and Rural Local

99 45 Other Spot Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure

0015732 OFFSYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS 

@ 1 LOC IN 

PULASKI 

COUNTY

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings - 

remarking

7.39 Miles $439170.72 $439170.72 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Local Road 

or Street

320 50 County Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure

0015733 OFFSYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS 

@ 27 LOC IN 

COFFEE COUNTY

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings - 

remarking

27 Locations $282125.43 $282125.43 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Collectors 

and Rural Local

99 45 Other Spot Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 34 of 66

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE SELECTION

EMPHASIS 

AREA

STRATEGY

0015734 OFFSYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS 

@ 27 LOC IN 

COOK COUNTY

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings - 

remarking

27 Locations $359526.08 $359526.08 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Collectors 

and Rural Local

99 45 Other Spot Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure

0015735 OFFSYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS 

@ 22 LOC IN 

WORTH COUNTY

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings - 

remarking

22 Locations $2000 $2000 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Collectors 

and Rural Local

99 45 Other Spot Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure

0015736 OFFSYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS 

@ 2 LOC IN 

CHATHAM 

COUNTY

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings - 

remarking

2 Locations $428064.79 $428064.79 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Varies 99 45 Other Spot Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure

0015740 OFFSYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS 

@ 9 LOC IN 

CAMDEN 

COUNTY

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings - 

remarking

9 Locations $527904.48 $527904.48 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Collectors 

and Rural Local

99 45 Other Spot Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure

0015741 OFFSYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS 

@ 12 LOC IN 

LIBERTY COUNTY

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings - 

remarking

12 Locations $537411.1 $537411.1 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Collectors 

and Rural Local

99 45 Other Spot Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure

0015742 CR 337 

@ 1 LOC IN 

TOOMBS - OFFSYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS

Roadway Roadway - other 6.47 Miles $535815.91 $535815.91 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Minor 

Collector

1,650 55 Other Spot Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure

0015745 COVE 

RD@1 LOC IN 

PICKENS CO - 

OFF-SYSTEM 

SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS

Roadway Pavement surface 

- high friction 

surface

9.9 Miles $384404.28 $384404.28 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Collectors 

and Rural Local

99 45 Other Spot Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure

0015747 OFFSYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS 

@ 12 LOCS IN 

FULTON COUNTY

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings - 

remarking

12 Locations $294599.83 $294599.83 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Varies 99 45 Other Spot Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure

0015748 NORTH 

CLARENDON AVE 

@ 1 LOC - OFFSYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Modify existing 

crosswalk

1 Locations $2000 $2000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Major 

Collector

21,100 55 County Highway 

Agency

Spot Pedestrians Reduce 

Pedestrian and 

Bicyclest Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes

0015749 OFFSYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS 

@ 13 LOCS IN 

COLLEGE PARK

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings - 

remarking

13 Locations $180819.69 $180819.69 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Varies 99 45 Other Spot Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 35 of 66

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE SELECTION

EMPHASIS 

AREA

STRATEGY

0015750 OFFSYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS 

@ 4 LOCS IN 

ROCKDALE 

COUNTY

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings - 

remarking

4 Locations $117135.35 $117135.35 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Varies 99 45 Other Spot Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure

0015751 OFFSYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS 

@ 10 LOC IN 

FULTON COUNTY

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings - 

remarking

10 Locations $2000 $2000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Varies 99 45 Other Spot Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure

0015754 OFFSYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS 

@ 30 LOCS IN 

MACON COUNTY

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings - 

remarking

30 Locations $494888.43 $494888.43 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Collectors 

and Rural Local

99 45 Other Spot Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure

0015761 OFFSYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS 

@ 15 LOCS IN 

TAYLOR COUNTY

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings - 

remarking

15 Locations $292681.69 $292681.69 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Collectors 

and Rural Local

99 45 Other Spot Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure

0015775 TRAFFIC 

OPERATIONS 

PROGRAM 

SUPPORT - FY 

2018

Non-infrastructure Transportation 

safety planning

1 Locations $4000000 $4000000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Varies 99 0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Data Reduce Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes - Data

0015776 TRAFFIC 

ENGINEERING 

STUDIES - FY 

2018

Non-infrastructure Transportation 

safety planning

1 Locations $5000000 $5000000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Varies 99 0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Data Reduce Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes - Data

0015777 TRAFFIC 

OPERATIONS 

INITIAL CONCEPT 

DEVELOPMENT

Non-infrastructure Transportation 

safety planning

1 Locations $6000000 $6000000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Varies 99 0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Data Reduce Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes - Data

0015778 ROAD 

SAFETY AUDITS - 

FY 2018

Non-infrastructure Road safety audits 1 Locations $5000000 $5000000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Varies 99 0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Mitigate high 

crash area

Reduce Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes - Data

0015786 WRONG 

WAY DRIVING 

SAFETY 

ENHANCEMENTS 

IN DISTRICT 1

Interchange 

design

Interchange 

design - other

1 Locations $300000 $300000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Varies 99 35 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic WRONG WAY 

DRIVING

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections

0015787 WRONG 

WAY DRIVING 

SAFETY 

ENHANCEMENTS 

IN DISTRICT 2

Interchange 

design

Interchange 

design - other

1 Locations $300000 $300000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Varies 99 35 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic WRONG WAY 

DRIVING

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections

0015788 WRONG 

WAY DRIVING 

SAFETY 

ENHANCEMENTS 

IN DISTRICT 3

Interchange 

design

Interchange 

design - other

1 Locations $300000 $300000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Varies 99 35 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic WRONG WAY 

DRIVING

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 36 of 66

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE SELECTION

EMPHASIS 

AREA

STRATEGY

0015789 WRONG 

WAY DRIVING 

SAFETY 

ENHANCEMENTS 

IN DISTRICT 4

Interchange 

design

Interchange 

design - other

1 Locations $300000 $300000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Varies 99 35 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic WRONG WAY 

DRIVING

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections

0015790 WRONG 

WAY DRIVING 

SAFETY 

ENHANCEMENTS 

IN DISTRICT 5

Interchange 

design

Interchange 

design - other

1 Locations $300000 $300000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Varies 99 35 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic WRONG WAY 

DRIVING

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections

0015791 WRONG 

WAY DRIVING 

SAFETY 

ENHANCEMENTS 

IN DISTRICT 6

Interchange 

design

Interchange 

design - other

1 Locations $300000 $300000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Varies 99 35 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic WRONG WAY 

DRIVING

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections

0015792 WRONG 

WAY DRIVING 

SAFETY 

ENHANCEMENTS 

IN DISTRICT 7

Interchange 

design

Interchange 

design - other

1 Locations $300000 $300000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Varies 99 35 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic WRONG WAY 

DRIVING

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections

0015815 OFFSYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS 

@ 2 LOCS IN 

ATLANTA

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings - 

remarking

2 Locations $2000 $2000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Varies 99 45 Other Spot Roadway 

Departure

Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes by Lane 

and Road 

Departure

0015817 SAFETY 

INNOVATIVE 

INTERSECTIONS

Non-infrastructure Transportation 

safety planning

1 Locations $1000000 $1000000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Varies 99 0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Data Reduce Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes - Data

0015844 SR 14/US 

29 @ CS 

2334/CORINTH 

ROAD IN 

NEWNAN

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

1 Locations $400000 $400000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Other

11,400 45 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections

0015852 

STRATEGIC 

HIGHWAY 

SAFETY PLAN 

COORDINATION - 

FY 2018

Non-infrastructure Transportation 

safety planning

1 Locations $540000 $540000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Varies 99 0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Data Reduce Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes - Data

0015882 SR 124 

@ CR 47/OLD 

HOG MOUNTAIN 

ROAD

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

1 Locations $600000 $600000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

6,130 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections

0015883 SR 211 

@ CR 47/OLD 

HOG MOUNTAIN 

ROAD 

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

1 Locations $600000 $600000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

6,130 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections

0015917 SR 60/SR 

11/Green Street at 

SR 60/Thompson 

Brg Rd and SR 

11/Riverside Dr RA

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

1 Locations $900000 $900000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Other

30,000 45 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 37 of 66

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE SELECTION

EMPHASIS 

AREA

STRATEGY

0015918 SR 60/SR 

11/E Butler 

Parkway/Green 

Street at Academy 

Street - 

Roundabout 

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

1 Locations $900000 $900000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Other

35,900 35 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections

232330- SR 36 @ 

CR 181/FLAT 

SHOALS 

ROAD/STEELE 

RD & CR 

506/HENDERSON 

MILL ROAD 

Intersection traffic 

control

Intersection traffic 

control - other

1 Locations $28000 $28000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

10,200 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections

532780- SR 204 @ 

LARGO DRIVE IN 

SAVANNAH

Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - 

modify turn lane 

storage

1 Locations $19667.13 $19667.13 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Other

49,400 45 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Mitigate Fatality 

and Serious Injury 

Crashes at 

Intersections

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 38 of 66

Safety Performance

General Highway Safety Trends

Present data showing the general highway safety trends in the State for the past five years.

PERFORMANCE 

MEASURES 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Fatalities 1,292 1,247 1,226 1,192 1,180 1,164 1,430 1,560 1,549

Serious Injuries 12,482 14,696 17,898 19,909 21,022 20,993 24,573 24,398 24,648

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 1.184 1.116 1.136 1.122 1.081 1.045 1.213 1.283 1.242

Serious injury rate (per 

HMVMT)

11.441 13.155 16.581 18.744 19.261 18.854 20.840 20.068 19.760

Number non-motorized 

fatalities

178 192 152 188 209 183 228 265 275

Number of non-motorized 

serious injuries

350 472 586 690 657 686 774 737 878
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 39 of 66

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Annual Fatalities

Fatalities 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Annual Serious Injuries

Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 40 of 66

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Fatality rate (per HMVMT)

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

5

10

15

20

25

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT)

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 41 of 66

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Describe fatality data source.

FARS

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

To the maximum extent possible, present this data by functional classification and ownership.

Year 2017

Functional Classification Number of Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Rural Principal Arterial 

(RPA) - Interstate

119.2 2,004.8 1.63 27.57

Rural Principal Arterial 

(RPA) - Other Freeways 

and Expressways

0 0 0 0

Rural Principal Arterial 

(RPA) - Other

107.6 1,807.8 1.92 32.31

Rural Minor Arterial 156.4 2,631.4 2.95 51.17

Rural Minor Collector 38.2 644.6 3.68 53.1

Rural Major Collector 171.4 2,881.6 3.61 62.03

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Non Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries

Fatalities and Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 42 of 66

Functional Classification Number of Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Rural Local Road or Street 133.2 2,237.4 3.24 54.74

Urban Principal Arterial 

(UPA) - Interstate

104.2 1,754.2 0.44 7.46

Urban Principal Arterial 

(UPA) - Other Freeways 

and Expressways

14 232.6 0.4 6.71

Urban Principal Arterial 

(UPA) - Other

169.4 2,846 1.04 17.58

Urban Minor Arterial 176 2,953.6 1.03 17.39

Urban Minor Collector 57.6 966.6 0.89 14.87

Urban Major Collector 0 0 0 0

Urban Local Road or Street 129.4 2,165.4 0.56 9.48
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 43 of 66

Year 2017

Roadways Number of Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

State Highway Agency 876.6 14,306.6 1.24 20.34

County Highway Agency 411.8 6,925.2 1.28 21.54

Town or Township 

Highway Agency

City of Municipal Highway 

Agency

88.4 1,894.2 0.59 12.69

State Park, Forest, or 

Reservation Agency

Local Park, Forest or 

Reservation Agency

Other State Agency

Other Local Agency

Private (Other than 

Railroad)

Railroad

State Toll Authority

Local Toll Authority

Other Public 

Instrumentality (e.g. 

Airport, School, University)

Indian Tribe Nation
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 44 of 66

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities by Functional Classification 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 45 of 66

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries by Functional 

Classification 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 46 of 66

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

Fatality Rate

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) by Functional 

Classification 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 47 of 66

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Serious Injury Rate

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) by Functional 

Classification 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 48 of 66

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

State Highway

Agency

County Highway

Agency

Town or Township

Highway Agency

City of Municipal

Highway Agency

Other Public

Instrumentality

(e.g. Airport,

School, University)

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities by Roadway Ownership 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 49 of 66

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

State Highway Agency County Highway Agency Town or Township

Highway Agency

City of Municipal

Highway Agency

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries by Roadway 

Ownership 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 50 of 66

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

State Highway Agency County Highway Agency Town or Township

Highway Agency

City of Municipal

Highway Agency

Fatality Rate

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) by Roadway 

Ownership 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 51 of 66

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Are there any other aspects of the general highway safety trends on which the State would like to 

elaborate?

No

Safety Performance Targets

Safety Performance Targets

Calendar Year 2019 Targets * 

Number of Fatalities 1652.0 

Describe the basis for established target, including how it supports SHSP goals. 

To maintain the 5-year moving average traffic fatalities under the projected 1,655 

(2015-2019) 5-year average by December 2019. Using 5-year moving averaging 

method and using polynomial modeling (R2 of 0.98) The state has worked in 

collaboration with our safety partners to establish the 2018 the 5-year moving average 

traffic fatality target based on the 2015 - 2019 calendar year. 

Number of Serious Injuries 24324.0 

0

5

10

15

20

25

State Highway Agency County Highway Agency Town or Township

Highway Agency

City of Municipal

Highway Agency

Serious Injury Rate

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) by Roadway 

Ownership 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 52 of 66

Describe the basis for established target, including how it supports SHSP goals. 

To maintain the 5-year moving average serious traffic injuries under the projected 

24,324 (2015-2019) 5-year average by December 2019 Using 5-year moving 

averaging method and using polynomial modeling (R2 of 0.98) The state has worked 

in collaboration with our safety partners to establish the 2018 the 5-year moving 

average traffic fatality target based on the 2015 - 2019 calendar year. 

Fatality Rate 1.310 

Describe the basis for established target, including how it supports SHSP goals. 

To maintain the 5-year moving average traffic fatalities per 100M VMT under the 

projected 1.31 (2015-2019) 5-year average by December 2019. Using 5-year moving 

averaging method and using polynomial modeling (R2 of 0.98) The state has worked 

in collaboration with our safety partners to establish the 2018 the 5-year moving 

average traffic fatality target based on the 2015 - 2019 calendar year. 

Serious Injury Rate 18.900 

Describe the basis for established target, including how it supports SHSP goals. 

To reduce the 5-year moving average serious traffic injuries for every 100 million 

vehicle miles traveled by 3% from baseline 19.6 (2012-2016) 5-year average to 18.9 

(2015-2019) 5-year average by December 2019. Using 5-year moving averaging 

method and using polynomial modeling (R2 of 0.98) The state has worked in 

collaboration with our safety partners to establish the 2018 the 5-year moving average 

traffic fatality target based on the 2015 - 2019 calendar year. 

Total Number of Non-Motorized 

Fatalities and Serious Injuries 1126.0 

Describe the basis for established target, including how it supports SHSP goals. 

To maintain the 5-year moving average non-motorist fatalities and serious injuries 

under the projected 1,126 (2017-2021) 5-year average by December 2021. Using 5-

year moving averaging method and using polynomial modeling (R2 of 0.98) The state 

has worked in collaboration with our safety partners to establish the 2018 the 5-year 

moving average traffic fatality target based on the 2015 - 2019 calendar year. 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Describe efforts to coordinate with other stakeholders (e.g. MPOs, SHSO) to establish safety performance 

targets. 

GDOT met multiple times with Governor's Office of Highway Safety, FHWA, the State's MPO's, NHTSA and 

our safety partners. In particular the SHSP data team conducted several working sessions to review the state's 

data and the state's approach to developing performance targets. GDOT presented the finding and approach 

to GDOT Planning and the State's MPOs.
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 53 of 66

Does the State want to report additional optional targets? 

No

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Applicability of Special Rules

Does the HRRR special rule apply to the State for this reporting period? 

Yes

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Provide the number of older driver and pedestrian fatalities and serious injuries 65 years of age and 

older for the past seven years.

PERFORMANCE 

MEASURES 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Number of Older Driver and 

Pedestrian Fatalities

168 153 150 139 206 229 226

Number of Older Driver and 

Pedestrian Serious Injuries

1,556 1,362 1,355 1,276 1,271 1,547 1,771
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 54 of 66

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

# of Fatalities and Serious Injuries

Years

Number of Older Driver and Pedestrian Fatalities and Serious Injuries by 

Year.

Fatalities Serious Injuries
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 55 of 66

Evaluation

Program Effectiveness

How does the State measure effectiveness of the HSIP?

Change in fatalities and serious injuries

Benefit/Cost Ratio

Other-Fatality Rates

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Based on the measures of effectiveness selected previously, describe the results of the State's program 

level evaluations.

The state samples the effectiveness of the safety projects delivered by calculating the b:c ratios after projects 

have been constructed. This effort is focused on non-systemic programs such as intersection improvements. 

The state challenges our District Engineers to reduce both the number and rate of serious injuries. Each district 

engineer and senior staff engineer has a performance measure tied to minimizing fatalities and serious injuries 

in their district. The district engineering teams and the central office work closely to identify and evaluate 

locations that would be good candidates for the safety program. These locations are studied and ranked based 

upon the benefit cost. 

What other indicators of success does the State use to demonstrate effectiveness and success of the 

Highway Safety Improvement Program?

More systemic programs

# RSAs completed

Policy change 

Increased awareness of safety and data-driven process

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Over the past year, we instituted the ICE policy. This change has ensured that safety will be a critical aspect of 

every intersection project. This will increase safety awareness of everyone that plans, studies and designs 

intersections.

Also, over the past year we have updated our transverse rumble strip design details and will ensure that these 

updates will be included with all applicable projects let in the next fiscal year. This simple change will integrate 

a systemic change that will have significant long term benefits that will enhance intersection safety.

We have also collected curve data that will be used to drive our systemic Sharp Curve/High Friction Surface 

projects.
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 56 of 66

Are there any significant programmatic changes that have occurred since the last reporting period? 

Yes

Describe significant program changes that have occurred since the last reporting period.

Yes, ICE policy, previously discussed in the Executive Summary.

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements

Present and describe trends in SHSP emphasis area performance measures.

Year 2017 

SHSP Emphasis Area Targeted 

Crash Type

Number of 

Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of 

Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality 

Rate

(per 

HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious 

Injury Rate

(per 

HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Other 1 Other 2 Other 3

Lane Departure 269.8 2,307.2 0.23 1.96 0 0 0

Roadway Departure 756 3,889.4 0.64 3.32 0 0 0

Intersections 334.2 7,950.4 0.28 6.75 0 0 0

Pedestrians 209.2 635 0.18 0.54 0 0 0

Bicyclists 22.6 111.4 0.02 0.1 0 0 0

Older Drivers 256.6 2,349.6 0.22 2 0 0 0

Motorcyclists 142.4 876 0.12 0.74 0 0 0

Work Zones 55.6 341.2 0.05 0.29 0 0 0

Data 1,376.6 23,126 1.17 19.67 0 0 0
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 57 of 66

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 58 of 66

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Has the State completed any countermeasure effectiveness evaluations during the reporting period?

No

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

Fatality Rate

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017

0

5

10

15

20

25

Serious Injury Rate

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 59 of 66

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 60 of 66

Project Effectiveness

Provide the following information for previously implemented projects that the State evaluated this reporting period. 

LOCATION FUNCTIONAL 

CLASS

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

IMPROVEMENT 

TYPE

PDO

BEFORE

PDO

AFTER

FATALITY

BEFORE

FATALITY

AFTER

SERIOUS 

INJURY

BEFORE

SERIOUS 

INJURY

AFTER

ALL OTHER 

INJURY

BEFORE

ALL OTHER 

INJURY

AFTER

TOTAL

BEFORE

TOTAL

AFTER

EVALUATION 

RESULTS

(BENEFIT/COST 

RATIO)

0007644 Bibb 

County SR 

74/THOMASTON 

ROAD @ CR 

61/LAMAR ROAD 

RA

Urban Minor 

Arterial

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

two-way stop to 

roundabout

14.00 9.00 1.00 9.00 24.00 9.00 5.47 : 1

0008533 Floyd 

County SR 1/US 

27 @ SR 140 

Install Signal and 

Turn Lanes

Rural Minor 

Arterial

Intersection traffic 

control

Intersection traffic 

control - other

11.00 19.00 1.00 5.00 4.00 11.00 11.00 28.00 34.00 93.53 : 1

0001933 Jackson 

County SR 98 @ 

CR 286/B 

WILSON & CR 

536/KING ROAD

Urban Minor 

Arterial

Intersection traffic 

control

Intersection traffic 

control - other

13.00 10.00 1.00 1.00 14.00 2.00 28.00 13.00 2.85 : 1

0008534 Peach 

County SR 247 

CONN @ CR 

189/JOHN E 

SULLIVAN 

ROAD/WALKER 

ROAD RA

Urban Minor 

Arterial

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

two-way stop to 

roundabout

9.00 20.00 16.00 1.00 25.00 21.00 8.2 : 1

0000408 Spalding 

County SR 16 @ 

CR 35/VAUGHN 

RD & CR 

507/ROVER RD - 

SIGNAL & TURN 

LANES

Urban Minor 

Arterial

Intersection traffic 

control

Intersection traffic 

control - other

5.00 6.00 11.00 2.00 10.00 2.00 26.00 10.00 6.99 : 1

221875 Wilkinson 

County SR 57 @ 

SR 18 RA

Rural Minor 

Arterial

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - 

two-way stop to 

roundabout

8.00 2.00 1.00 5.00 14.00 2.00 4.74 : 1

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Are there any other aspects of the overall HSIP effectiveness on which the State would like to elaborate?

No
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 61 of 66

Compliance Assessment

What date was the State’s current SHSP approved by the Governor or designated State representative?

 12/09/2015 

What are the years being covered by the current SHSP?

From: 2016 To: 2018 

When does the State anticipate completing it’s next SHSP update?

 2018 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

The SHSP Coordinator and task teams are currently working on the next update to the SHSP. The updated plan should be finalized for publication by mid December 2018. 

Provide the current status (percent complete) of MIRE fundamental data elements collection efforts using the table below. 

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

MIRE NAME (MIRE NO.) STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE

ROADWAY SEGMENT

Segment Identifier (12) 0 0 0 0 0 0

Route Number (8) 100 100

Route/Street Name (9) 20 20

Federal Aid/Route Type 

(21)

100 100

Rural/Urban Designation 

(20)

100 100 100 100

Surface Type (23) 100 100 0 0

Begin Point Segment 

Descriptor (10)

0 0 0 0 0 0

End Point Segment 

Descriptor (11)

0 0 0 0 0 0

Segment Length (13) 100 100

Direction of Inventory (18) 100 100

Functional Class (19) 100 100 100 100 100 100
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 62 of 66

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

MIRE NAME (MIRE NO.) STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE

Median Type (54) 100 100

Access Control (22) 100 100

One/Two Way Operations 

(91)

100 100

Number of Through Lanes 

(31)

100 100 100 100

Average Annual Daily 

Traffic (79)

100 100 100 100

AADT Year (80) 100 100

Type of Governmental 

Ownership (4)

100 100 100 100 100 100

INTERSECTION

Unique Junction Identifier 

(120)

0 0

Location Identifier for 

Road 1 Crossing Point 

(122)

0 0

Location Identifier for 

Road 2 Crossing Point 

(123)

0 0

Intersection/Junction 

Geometry (126)

0 0

Intersection/Junction 

Traffic Control (131)

0 0

AADT for Each 

Intersecting Road (79)

0 0

AADT Year (80) 0 0

Unique Approach 

Identifier (139)

0 0

INTERCHANGE/RAMP

Unique Interchange 

Identifier (178)

0 0

Location Identifier for 

Roadway at Beginning of 

Ramp Terminal (197)

0 0

Location Identifier for 

Roadway at Ending Ramp 

Terminal (201)

0 0

Ramp Length (187) 100 100
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 63 of 66

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

MIRE NAME (MIRE NO.) STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE

Roadway Type at 

Beginning of Ramp 

Terminal (195)

0 0

Roadway Type at End 

Ramp Terminal (199)

0 0

Interchange Type (182) 0 0

Ramp AADT (191) 100 100

Year of Ramp AADT (192) 100 100

Functional Class (19) 100 100

Type of Governmental 

Ownership (4)

100 100

Totals (Average Percent 

Complete):

78.89 78.89 0.00 0.00 45.45 45.45 55.56 55.56 40.00 40.00

*Based on Functional Classification

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Describe actions the State will take moving forward to meet the requirement to have complete access to the MIRE fundamental data elements on all public roads by September 30, 2026.

The state DOT is nearing the end of a complete update of the state's road center-line model. The state is migrating the data into the ESRI model. As part of the effort, considerable care has been made to document the needs and actions 

that will be met as part of the Georgia DOT Roads and Highways Implementation Logical Roads and Highways Geo-database Design. Specific care has been taken to ensure the MIRE requirements have been achieved. These steps 

support the state's efforts to meet the September 30, 2026, deadline.

Provide the suspected serious injury identifier, definition and attributes used by the State for both the crash report form and the crash database using the table below. Please also indicate whether or not these elements are 

compliant with the MMUCC 4th edition criteria for data element P5. Injury Status, suspected serious injury. 

CRITERIA SUSPECTED SERIOUS INJURY 

IDENTIFIER(NAME) MMUCC 4TH EDITION COMPLIANT * SUSPECTED SERIOUS INJURY DEFINITION MMUCC 4TH EDITION COMPLIANT * SUSPECTED SERIOUS INJURY ATTRIBUTES(DESCRIPTORS) MMUCC 4TH EDITION COMPLIANT * 

Crash Report Form Serious Injury Yes N/A Yes N/A Yes

Crash Report Form Instruction Manual Serious Injury Yes A suspected serious injury is any injury 

other than fatal which results in one or 

more of the follow

Yes 2(A) Yes

Crash Database Serious Injury Yes N/A Yes N/A Yes

Crash Database Data Dictionary Serious Injury Yes A suspected serious injury is any injury 

other than fatal which results in one or 

more of the follow

Yes 2 (A)Suspected Serious Injury Yes

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 64 of 66

Because our crash report has been recently updated, our crash database contains both our old injury definitions and the MMUCC definitions. Because of limited space in the table above, the state's complete definition for suspected 

serious injury: 

A suspected serious injury is any injury other than fatal which results in one or more of the following: Severe laceration resulting in exposure of underlying tissues/muscle/organs or resulting in significant loss of blood; Broken or distorted 

extremity (arm or leg); Crush injuries; Suspected skull, chest or abdominal injury other than bruises or minor lacerations; Significant burns (second and third degree burns over 10% or more of the body); Unconsciousness when taken from 

the crash scene; or Paralysis

Did the State conduct an HSIP program assessment during the reporting period?

No

When does the State plan to complete it’s next HSIP program assessment.

2019 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Georgia had several accomplishments over the past year. These have been highlighted throughout the report. There are a few other efforts that should be completed in early fall of 2018. Among these are: the state's HSM calibration 

using the state's crash data, the full implementation and use of the new crash report, update of the state's Design Policy Manual incorporating the use of the revised transverse rumble strip details and the delivery of crash diagramming 

software using our crash query reporting format. Therefore, a well timed assessment of the state's HSIP program could be conducted sometime after October of 2018.
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 65 of 66

Optional Attachments

Program Structure:

HSIP Program Final-2016 FAST.docx

Project Implementation:

Safety Performance:

Evaluation: 

Compliance Assessment:
2018 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 66 of 66

Glossary

5 year rolling 

average 

means the average of five individuals, consecutive annual points of data (e.g. annual 

fatality rate). 

Emphasis area means a highway safety priority in a State’s SHSP, identified through a data-driven, 

collaborative process. 

Highway safety 

improvement 

project 

means strategies, activities and projects on a public road that are consistent with a State 

strategic highway safety plan and corrects or improves a hazardous road location or 

feature or addresses a highway safety problem. 

HMVMT means hundred million vehicle miles traveled. 

Non-infrastructure 

projects 

are projects that do not result in construction. Examples of non-infrastructure projects 

include road safety audits, transportation safety planning activities, improvements in the 

collection and analysis of data, education and outreach, and enforcement activities. 

Older driver special 

rule 

applies if traffic fatalities and serious injuries per capita for drivers and pedestrians over 

the age of 65 in a State increases during the most recent 2-year period for which data are 

available, as defined in the Older Driver and Pedestrian Special Rule Interim Guidance 

dated February 13, 2013. 

Performance 

measure 

means indicators that enable decision-makers and other stakeholders to monitor changes 

in system condition and performance against established visions, goals, and objectives. 

Programmed funds mean those funds that have been programmed in the Statewide Transportation 

Improvement Program (STIP) to be expended on highway safety improvement projects. 

Roadway 

Functional 

Classification 

means the process by which streets and highways are grouped into classes, or systems, 

according to the character of service they are intended to provide. 

Strategic Highway 

Safety Plan (SHSP) 

means a comprehensive, multi-disciplinary plan, based on safety data developed by a 

State Department of Transportation in accordance with 23 U.S.C. 148. 

Systematic refers to an approach where an agency deploys countermeasures at all locations across a 

system. 

Systemic safety 

improvement 

means an improvement that is widely implemented based on high risk roadway features 

that are correlated with specific severe crash types. 

Transfer 

means, in accordance with provisions of 23 U.S.C. 126, a State may transfer from an 

apportionment under section 104(b) not to exceed 50 percent of the amount apportioned 

for the fiscal year to any other apportionment of the State under that section.