Georgia

Highway Safety Improvement Program

2014 Annual Report

Prepared by: GA 

 

 
ii 

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.”
iii 

Table of Contents

Disclaimer...................................................................................................................................................... ii

Executive Summary....................................................................................................................................... 1

Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 3

Program Structure ........................................................................................................................................ 3

Program Administration ........................................................................................................................... 3

Program Methodology.............................................................................................................................. 6

Progress in Implementing Projects............................................................................................................. 43

Funds Programmed............................................................................................................................. 43

General Listing of Projects.................................................................................................................. 46

Progress in Achieving Safety Performance Targets .................................................................................... 76

Overview of General Safety Trends........................................................................................................ 76

Application of Special Rules.................................................................................................................... 90

Assessment of the Effectiveness of the Improvements (Program Evaluation) ..........................................92

SHSP Emphasis Areas.............................................................................................................................. 93

Groups of similar project types............................................................................................................... 98

Systemic Treatments............................................................................................................................. 103

Glossary..................................................................................................................................................... 111
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

1 

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 $73,827,460 in highway safety funds during Fiscal 

Year 2014. This past year represented the eighth consecutive year of lower fatalities after reaching a 32-

year high in 2005. Georgia’s total number of fatalities decreased 1.0% from the previous year. Despite 

no discernible change in statewide travel, Georgia’s statewide fatality rate continues to decrease. 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) develops and supports the SHSP. The plan has specific 

Emphasis Area Task Teams that are organized to develop specific emphasis area countermeasures. 

Countermeasures are represented in proposed safety projects. Combining existing highway safety plans 

represented in HSIP and professional efforts of the task team members has successfully leveraged many 

existing resources to address the safety emphasis target areas. The multi-disciplinary safety teams have 

succeeded in engaging the four safety E’s into their efforts to identify safety projects. 

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 and traffic engineering studies. All public roads are included in one or more 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 a positive impact on an existing safety problem, because of 

evidence that it will prevent a hazardous condition, or because, it falls into one of several pre-approved 

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. 
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

2 

The Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO) and local governments are encouraged to develop high 

crash lists for local roads that can be used to identify hazard elimination projects. City and county 

engineers and local public agencies are encouraged annually to examine local road systems and 

recommend safety projects. These projects will be submitted to the District Traffic Engineer for approval 

and recommendation for project concept and project programming in the Office of Traffic Operations in 

exactly the same manner as projects on the State Routes. 

As Georgia highway fatalities continue to decline, the nation’s highway fatalities increased five percent 

in 2012 to approximately 36,200. The aggressive safety emphasis by Georgia DOT, the Department of 

Public Safety and the Governor’s Office of Highway Safety continue to keep the state’s numbers 

trending downward. 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. The Office of Traffic 

Operations is refining and utilizing our crash data and road safety audits to improve safety and reduce 

fatalities, injuries and crashes. 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, installing 

pedestrian accommodations to make our roads safer.
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

3 

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 MAP-21 Reporting Guidance dated February 13, 2013 and consists 

of four sections: program structure, progress in implementing HSIP projects, 

progress in achieving safety performance targets, and assessment of the 

effectiveness of the improvements. 

Program Structure

Program Administration

How are Highway Safety Improvement Program funds allocated in a State? 

Central

District

Other

Describe how local roads are addressed as part of Highway Safety Improvement Program. 

The state is continuing the high risk rural roads program as part of the HSIP. The Department 

employs consultants to coordinate 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 and have safety 

deficiencies. 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 

construction districts. This money is solely used to fund our off-system safety program. The work 
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

4 

normally consist of installing retro-reflective signage, applying pavement markings, installing rumble 

strips or guardrail.

Identify which internal partners are involved with Highway Safety Improvement Program planning. 

Design

Planning

Maintenance

Operations

Governors Highway Safety Office

Other: 

Briefly describe coordination with internal partners. 

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 in place during FY 2014 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 measureable 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 hold quarterly Safety Program Leadership Meetings for the Executive 

Board and task team leaders. GDOT’s Safety Action Plan is executed to implement engineering solutions 

to highway safety problems. GDOT’s Safety Action Plan is a key component 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, Minimizing
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

5 

Consequences of Leaving Road, Work Zones

Aggressive Driving/Super Speeder

Impaired Driver

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)

Traffic/Crash Records and Data Analysis

Identify which external partners are involved with Highway Safety Improvement Program planning. 

Metropolitan Planning Organizations

Governors Highway Safety Office

Local Government Association

Other: Other-Public Safety & Local Law Enforcement

Identify any program administration practices used to implement the HSIP that have changed since 

the last reporting period. 

Multi-disciplinary HSIP steering committee

Other: Other-GDOT and GOHS have a new cooperative agreement that runs until the end of the 
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

6 

Federal fiscal calendar. The agreement supports HSIP and SHSP development and program 

maintenance. All other HSIP practices have remained in place through the reporting 

Describe any other aspects of Highway Safety Improvement Program Administration on which you 

would like to elaborate. 

Over the past year Georgia DOT has worked to improve our crash location data. This work is a critical 

part of our program administration. Having improved crash location information will allow Georgia to 

better manage the HSIP program and improve our responsiveness in selecting the appropriate safety 

countermeasures.

In the coming year, Georgia will select a vendor to house and coordinate our crash reporting. The 

lessons learned over the past five years will be instrumental in guiding our data base design and quality 

assurance in the next contract. Some of the items that we will focus on in the latest contract with 

Appriss will be:

Geo Coding crash locations

Cross referencing FARS

Establishing separate production and reporting databases

Develop graphical QA tools

Program Methodology

Select the programs that are administered under the HSIP. 

Median Barrier Intersection Safe Corridor

Horizontal Curve Bicycle Safety Rural State Highways

Skid Hazard Crash Data Red Light Running Prevention

Roadway Departure Low-Cost Spot Improvements

Local Safety Pedestrian Safety

Sign Replacement And 

Improvement

Right Angle Crash
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

7 

Left Turn Crash Shoulder Improvement Segments

Other: 

 

Program: Median Barrier

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2012

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury 

crashes only

Population Functional classification

Other Lane miles Roadside features

Other Other 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Expected c rash frequency with EB adjustment

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment

Relative severity index
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

8 

Crash rate

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other 

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

Yes

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

Selection committee

Other 

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

Rank of Priority Consideration
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

9 

Ranking based on B/C 2

Available funding 1

Incremental B/C

Ranking based on net benefit

Other 

 

Program: Intersection

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2012

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury 

crashes only

Population Functional classification

Other Lane miles Roadside features

Other Other 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

10

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other 

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

Yes

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

Selection committee

Other 

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

Rank of Priority Consideration
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

11

Ranking based on B/C

Available funding

Incremental B/C

Ranking based on net benefit

Other 

minimum severity index 1

 

Program: Safe Corridor

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2012

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury 

crashes only

Population Functional classification

Other Lane miles Roadside features

Other Other 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

12

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other 

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

Yes

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

Selection committee

Other 

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
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

13

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C

Available funding 1

Incremental B/C

Ranking based on net benefit

Other 

 

Program: Horizontal Curve

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2012

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury 

crashes only

Population Functional classification

Other Lane miles Roadside features

Other Other 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

14

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other 

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

Yes

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

Selection committee

Other 

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).
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

15

Relative Weight in Scoring

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C

Available funding 1

Incremental B/C

Ranking based on net benefit

Other 

severity index 2

 

Program: Bicycle Safety

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2012

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury 

crashes only

Population Functional classification

Other-Bicycle Crashes Lane miles Roadside features

Other Other 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

16

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other 

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

Yes

No

If yes, are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

Selection committee
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

17

Other 

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C

Available funding 1

Incremental B/C

Ranking based on net benefit

Other 

 

Program: Rural State Highways

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2012

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury Population Functional classification

crashes only
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

18

Other Lane miles Roadside features

Other Other 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other 

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

Yes

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

19

Selection committee

Other 

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C

Available funding

Incremental B/C

Ranking based on net benefit

Other 

 

Program: Skid Hazard

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2013

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury Population Functional classification
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

20

crashes only

Other Lane miles Roadside features

Other Other 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other 

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

Yes

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

21

Competitive application process

Selection committee

Other 

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C

Available funding

Incremental B/C

Ranking based on net benefit

Other 

 

Program: Crash Data

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2013

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

22

Fatal and serious injury 

crashes only

Population Functional classification

Other Lane miles Roadside features

Other Other 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other 

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

Yes

No

If yes, are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

23

Yes

No

If no, describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.

These projects are generally more systemic in nature 

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

Selection committee

Other 

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C

Available funding

Incremental B/C

Ranking based on net benefit

Other 

 

Program: Red Light Running Prevention
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

24

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2013

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury 

crashes only

Population Functional classification

Other Lane miles Roadside features

Other Other 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

25

Other-identification of crashes that may be correctable by red-light cameras

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

Yes

No

If yes, are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

Selection committee

Other 

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C

Available funding

Incremental B/C

Ranking based on net benefit

Other 
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

26

 

Program: Roadway Departure

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2013

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury 

crashes only

Population Functional classification

Other Lane miles Roadside features

Other Other 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

27

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other 

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

Yes

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

Selection committee

Other 

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C

Available funding

Incremental B/C

Ranking based on net benefit

Other 
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

28

 

Program: Low-Cost Spot Improvements

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2013

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury 

crashes only

Population Functional classification

Other Lane miles Roadside features

Other Other 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

29

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other 

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

Yes

No

If yes, are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

Selection committee

Other 

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C

Available funding

1
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

30

Incremental B/C

Ranking based on net benefit

Other 

 

Program: Sign Replacement And Improvement

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2013

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury 

crashes only

Population Functional classification

Other Lane miles Roadside features

Other Other 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment

Relative severity index

Crash rate
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

31

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other 

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

Yes

No

If yes, are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

Selection committee

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).

Relative Weight in Scoring
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

32

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C 1

Available funding

Incremental B/C

Ranking based on net benefit

Other 

 

Program: Local Safety

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2013

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury 

crashes only

Population Functional classification

Other Lane miles Roadside features

Other Other 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

33

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other 

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

Yes

No

If yes, are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

Selection committee

Other 
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

34

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C

Available funding 1

Incremental B/C

Ranking based on net benefit

Other 

 

Program: Pedestrian Safety

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2013

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury 

crashes only

Population Functional classification

Other Lane miles Roadside features

Other Other 
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

35

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other 

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

Yes

No

If yes, are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

36

Selection committee

Other 

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C 1

Available funding

Incremental B/C

Ranking based on net benefit

Other 

 

Program: Right Angle Crash

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2013

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury Population Functional classification
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

37

crashes only

Other Lane miles Roadside features

Other Other 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other 

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

Yes

No

If yes, are local road projects identified 

Yes

using the same methodology as state roads?
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

38

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

Selection committee

Other 

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C 1

Available funding

Incremental B/C

Ranking based on net benefit

Other 

 

Program: Left Turn Crash

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2013

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

39

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury 

crashes only

Population Functional classification

Other Lane miles Roadside features

Other Other 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other 

Are local roads (non-state owned and operated) included or addressed in this program?
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

40

Yes

No

If yes, are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

Selection committee

Other 

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C 1

Available funding

Incremental B/C

Ranking based on net benefit

Other 

What proportion of highway safety improvement program funds address systemic improvements? 
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

41

30

Highway safety improvment program funds are used to address which of the following systemic 

improvments?

Cable Median Barriers Rumble Strips

Traffic Control Device Rehabilitation Pavement/Shoulder Widening

Install/Improve Signing Install/Improve Pavement Marking and/or 

Delineation 

Upgrade Guard Rails Clear Zone Improvements

Safety Edge Install/Improve Lighting

Add/Upgrade/Modify/Remove Traffic Signal Other 

What process is used to identify potential countermeasures? 

Engineering Study

Road Safety Assessment

Other: 

Identify any program methodology practices used to implement the HSIP that have changed since the 

last reporting period.
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

42

Highway Safety Manual

Road Safety audits

Systemic Approach

Other: 

Describe any other aspects of the Highway Safety Improvement Program methodology on which you 

would like to elaborate. 

Over the past year we started using the latest data for the value of statistical life (VSL) of 9.1 million with 

an estimate growth of 1.07 percent. We used this new base to calculate our benefit cost ratios.
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

43

Progress in Implementing Projects

Funds Programmed

Reporting period for Highway Safety Improvement Program funding.

Calendar Year

State Fiscal Year

Federal Fiscal Year

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

Funding Category Programmed* Obligated

HSIP (Section 148) 60000000 94 % 58349688 97 %

HRRRP (SAFETEA-LU) 3500000 6 % 1730000 3 %

HRRR Special Rule

Penalty Transfer -

Section 154

Penalty Transfer –

Section 164

Incentive Grants - 

Section 163

Incentive Grants 

(Section 406)

Other Federal-aid 

Funds (i.e. STP, NHPP)

State and Local Funds
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

44

Totals 63500000 100% 60079688 100%

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

$7,000,000.00

How much funding is obligated to local safety projects?

$8,315,281.00

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

$450,000.00

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

$847,980.00

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

period?

$0.00
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

45

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

period? 

$0.00

Discuss impediments to obligating Highway Safety Improvement Program funds and plans to 

overcome this in the future. 

Safety is a core responsibility of Georgia DOT. We build safety into all of our programs. HSIP is only a 

part of the Department’s total program and safety effort. Each year the available funding for HSIP has 

been increased. In addition we are investigating ways to partner our program areas; for example 

maintenance and HSIP. 

Describe any other aspects of the general Highway Safety Improvement Program implementation 

progress on which you would like to elaborate.

There are no other comments on HSIP
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

46

General Listing of Projects

List each highway safety improvement project obligated during the reporting period. 

Project Improvement 

Category 

Outp

ut 

HSIP 

Cost

Total 

Cost

Fundi

ng 

Categ

ory

Functio

nal 

Classifi

cation

AA

DT

Sp

ee

d 

Road

way 

Owne

rship 

Relationship to SHSP

Empha

sis 

Area

Strategy

0006026CarrollSR 5 @ SR 16/US 

27 ALT - ROUNDABOUT

Intersection traffic 

control Modify 

control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

1 

Num

bers

95000 95000 HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Rural 

Major 

Collect

or

26

80

35 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Interse

ctions

Serious 

Crash 

Type/Inter

section

0013197WayneCR 

396/RAYONIER ROAD @ CR 

392/SPRING GROVE ROAD - 

HRRR

Intersection 

geometry 

Intersection 

geometrics - 

modify skew angle

1 

Num

bers

15000

00

15000

00

HRRR

P 

(SAFE

TEALU)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

28

70

50 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Interse

ctions

Serious 

Crash 

Type/Inter

section

0009918ScrevenSR 73 LOOP 

@ CR 248/BUTTERMILK 

ROAD/SINGLETON ROAD - 

ROUNDABOUT

Intersection traffic 

control Modify 

control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

1 

Num

bers

30000

0 

30000

0 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Rural 

Princip

al 

Arterial 

- Other

42

30

55 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Interse

ctions

Serious 

Crash 

Type/Inter

section

0009949LumpkinSR 9 @ SR 

52-Roundabout

Intersection traffic 

control Modify 

1 

Num

17500

0 

17500

0 

HSIP 

(Secti

Rural 

Minor 

44

20

45 State 

Highw

Interse

ctions

Serious 

Crash 
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

47

control -

modifications to 

roundabout

bers on 

148)

Arterial ay 

Agenc

y 

Type/Inter

section

0009928NewtonSR 11 @ SR 

142 - ROUNDABOUT

Intersection traffic 

control Modify 

control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

1 

Num

bers

40000

0 

40000

0 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

44

20

55 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Interse

ctions

Serious 

Crash 

Type/Inter

section

0008884MonroeSR 18 @ SR 

87

Intersection traffic 

control Modify 

control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

1 

Num

bers

23000

0 

23000

0 

HRRR

P 

(SAFE

TEALU)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

45

40

55 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Interse

ctions

Serious 

Crash 

Type/Inter

section

0009576BibbSR 22 @ HOLLEY 

ROAD - ROUNDABOUT

Intersection traffic 

control Modify 

control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

1 

Num

bers

18336

27.11

18336

27.11

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial 

52

80

55 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Interse

ctions

Serious 

Crash 

Type/Inter

section

0007126ThomasSR 3/US 19 

FM N OF FLORIDA STATE LN 

TO S OF CR 219 - 19 LOCS

Intersection 

geometry Auxiliary 

lanes - 

miscellaneous/oth

er/unspecified

19 

Num

bers

60412

7.94

60412

7.94

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Rural 

Princip

al 

Arterial 

- Other

54

70

55 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Interse

ctions

Serious 

Crash 

Type/Inter

section

0008375DouglasSR 8/US 78@ 

CR 268/MANN RD/MASON 

CREEK RD & @ CR 808/POST 

Intersection 

geometry 

Intersection 

1 

Num

37100

00

37100

00

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

Urban 

Minor 

55

90

55 State 

Highw

ay 

Interse

ctions

Serious 

Crash 

Type/Inter
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

48

RD geometrics -

realignment to 

align offset cross 

streets

bers 148) Arterial Agenc

y 

section

0000409SpaldingSR 16 @ CR 

496/688/OLD 85 

CONNECTOR/HOLLONVILLE 

RD - ROUNDABOUT

Intersection traffic 

control Modify 

control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

1 

Num

bers

16470

72.37

16470

72.37

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

66

00

55 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Interse

ctions

Serious 

Crash 

Type/Inter

section

0000409SpaldingSR 16 @ CR 

496/688/OLD 85 

CONNECTOR/HOLLONVILLE 

RD - ROUNDABOUT

Intersection traffic 

control Modify 

control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

1 

Num

bers

45000 45000 HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

66

00

55 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Interse

ctions

Serious 

Crash 

Type/Inter

section

0000409SpaldingSR 16 @ CR 

496/688/OLD 85 

CONNECTOR/HOLLONVILLE 

RD - ROUNDABOUT

Intersection traffic 

control Modify 

control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

1 

Num

bers

60000 60000 HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

66

00

55 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Interse

ctions

Serious 

Crash 

Type/Inter

section

0008420LowndesSR 38/US 84 

@ CR 439/CLAY ROAD/CS 

1271/HOLLYWOOD STREET - 

INTERSECTION 

IMPROVEMENT

Intersection 

geometry 

Intersection 

geometrics - 

realignment to 

align offset cross 

streets

1 

Num

bers

48945 48945 HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Urban 

Princip

al 

Arterial 

- Other

73

10

45 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Interse

ctions

Serious 

Crash 

Type/Inter

section
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

49

0008420LowndesSR 38/US 84 

@ CR 439/CLAY ROAD/CS 

1271/HOLLYWOOD STREET - 

INTERSECTION 

IMPROVEMENT

Intersection 

geometry 

Intersection 

geometrics - 

realignment to 

align offset cross 

streets

1 

Num

bers

68000

0 

68000

0 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Urban 

Princip

al 

Arterial 

- Other

73

10

45 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Interse

ctions

Serious 

Crash 

Type/Inter

section

0009846ColquittSR 33/US 

319 @ SR 33 SO - 

ROUNDABOUT

Intersection traffic 

control Modify 

control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

1 

Num

bers

49000

0 

49000

0 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Urban 

Princip

al 

Arterial 

- Other

73

40

35 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Interse

ctions

Serious 

Crash 

Type/Inter

section

0012681JacksonSR 11BU @ 

CS 936/OLD PENDERGRASS 

ROAD

Intersection traffic 

control Modify 

traffic signal - 

modernization/rep

lacement

1 

Num

bers

31405

0.33

31405

0.33

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

76

60

45 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Interse

ctions

Serious 

Crash 

Type/Inter

section

0010364BullochSR 26 @ CR 

585/BURKHALTER ROAD

Intersection traffic 

control Modify 

control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

1 

Num

bers

51000

0 

51000

0 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

79

20

55 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Interse

ctions

Serious 

Crash 

Type/Inter

section

0000410SpaldingSR 362 @ CR 

507/ROVER-WILLIAMSON 

ROADS-TURN LANES

Intersection 

geometry Auxiliary 

lanes - add leftturn lane

1 

Num

bers

92000

0 

92000

0 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Urban 

Major 

Collect

or

85

70

55 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

Interse

ctions

Serious 

Crash 

Type/Inter

section
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

50

y

0007311FultonCR 3266/Bell 

Road @ CR 72/Boles Road

Intersection traffic 

control Modify 

control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

1 

Num

bers

97500

0 

97500

0 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Rural 

Major 

Collect

or

93

00

45 City 

of 

Munic

ipal 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Interse

ctions

Serious 

Crash 

Type/Inter

section

0009218PauldingSR 61 @ 

NEBO ROAD/MAYFIELD ROAD

Intersection traffic 

control Modify 

traffic signal - 

miscellaneous/oth

er/unspecified

1 

Num

bers

17400

00

17400

00

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

96

60

55 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Interse

ctions

Serious 

Crash 

Type/Inter

section

232330NewtonSR 36 @ CR 

181/FLAT SHOALS/STEELE 

RD & CR 506/HENDERSON 

MILL

Intersection 

geometry 

Intersection 

geometrics - 

realignment to 

align offset cross 

streets

1 

Num

bers

10000

0 

10000

0 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial 

97

00

55 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Interse

ctions

Serious 

Crash 

Type/Inter

section

232330NewtonSR 36 @ CR 

181/FLAT SHOALS/STEELE 

RD & CR 506/HENDERSON 

MILL

Intersection 

geometry 

Intersection 

geometrics - 

realignment to 

align offset cross 

1 

Num

bers

58000

0 

58000

0 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

97

00

55 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Interse

ctions

Serious 

Crash 

Type/Inter

section
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

51

streets

0010926DecaturUS 84/SR 38 

BUS @ US 84/SR 38 BYPASS 

AND FRONTAGE ROAD

Intersection 

geometry 

Intersection 

geometrics - 

realignment to 

align offset cross 

streets

1 

Num

bers

13043

1.84

13043

1.84

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Urban 

Princip

al 

Arterial 

- Other

99

20

45 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Interse

ctions

Serious 

Crash 

Type/Inter

section

0008618BullochSR 67 

BYPASS @ CR 142/PULASKI 

ROAD

Intersection traffic 

control Modify 

traffic signal - 

miscellaneous/oth

er/unspecified

1 

Num

bers

10533

30.53

10533

30.53

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Urban 

Princip

al 

Arterial 

- Other

10

42

0 

55 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Interse

ctions

Serious 

Crash 

Type/Inter

section

662650-CherokeeSR 20 @ SR 

108; CR 17/WHITE RD & CR 

13/MT CARMEL LANE

Intersection 

geometry 

Intersection 

geometrics - 

realignment to 

align offset cross 

streets

1 

Num

bers

32223

53.75

32223

53.75

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Rural 

Princip

al 

Arterial 

- Other

12

44

0 

55 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Interse

ctions

Serious 

Crash 

Type/Inter

section

662650-CherokeeSR 20 @ SR 

108; CR 17/WHITE RD & CR 

13/MT CARMEL LANE

Intersection 

geometry 

Intersection 

geometrics - 

realignment to 

align offset cross 

1 

Num

bers

75000 75000 HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Rural 

Princip

al 

Arterial 

- Other

12

44

0 

55 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Interse

ctions

Serious 

Crash 

Type/Inter

section
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

52

streets

0009931BarrowSR 11 @ SR 

211 - ROUNDABOUT

Intersection traffic 

control Modify 

control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

1 

Num

bers

40000

0 

40000

0 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Urban 

Princip

al 

Arterial 

- Other

14

04

0 

30 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Interse

ctions

Serious 

Crash 

Type/Inter

section

0009971FayetteSR 92 @ CR 

149/ANTIOCH ROAD & CR 

308/LOCKWOOD ROAD - 

ROUNDABOUT

Intersection traffic 

control Modify 

control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

1 

Num

bers

30000

0 

30000

0 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

16

14

0 

55 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Interse

ctions

Serious 

Crash 

Type/Inter

section

0009972FayetteSR 92 @ CR 

138/SEAY ROAD & CR 

129/HARP ROAD - 

ROUNDABOUT

Intersection traffic 

control Modify 

control - 

modifications to 

roundabout

1 

Num

bers

30000

0 

30000

0 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

16

14

0 

55 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Interse

ctions

Serious 

Crash 

Type/Inter

section

0008457LeeSR 3/US 19 @ CR 

101/CENTURY ROAD - 

INTERSECTION 

IMPROVEMENT

Intersection traffic 

control Modify 

traffic signal - 

miscellaneous/oth

er/unspecified

1 

Num

bers

28000

0 

28000

0 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Urban 

Princip

al 

Arterial 

- Other

16

61

0 

55 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Interse

ctions

Serious 

Crash 

Type/Inter

section

0006864FultonSR 154 @ CR 

1376/CEDAR GROVE ROAD & 

CR 1374/RIDGE ROADROUNDABOUT

Intersection traffic 

control Modify 

control - 

modifications to 

1 

Num

bers

39448

79.23

39448

79.23

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

24

59

0 

40 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

Interse

ctions

Serious 

Crash 

Type/Inter

section
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

53

roundabout y

0008947CherokeeSR 20 FM 

BARTOW TO FORSYTH & SR 

140 FM BARTOW TO FULTON

Roadway 

delineation 

Roadway 

delineation - other

20.7 

Mile

s 

12633

82.05

12633

82.05

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Rural 

Princip

al 

Arterial 

- Other

25

18

0 

55 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Lane 

Depart

ure

Serious 

Crash Type

0013174DeKalbSR 12 @ CR 

700/YOUNG ROAD

Roadway Roadway 

- other

1 

Num

bers

20000

0 

20000

0 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

29

68

0 

45 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Roadw

ay 

Depart

ure

Serious 

Crash Type

0013194FultonSR 9/US 19 @ 

CS 351/GLENRIDGE DRIVE - 

REALIGNMENT

Intersection 

geometry 

Intersection 

geometrics - 

realignment to 

align offset cross 

streets

1 

Num

bers

75000 75000 HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Urban 

Princip

al 

Arterial 

- Other

33

63

0 

35 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Interse

ctions

Serious 

Crash 

Type/Inter

section

532780-ChathamSR 

204/ABERCORN ST @ LARGO 

DRIVE IN SAVANNAH

Intersection 

geometry 

Intersection 

geometrics - 

miscellaneous/oth

er/unspecified

1 

Num

bers

64031

3.47

64031

3.47

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Urban 

Princip

al 

Arterial 

- Other

42

10

0 

45 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Interse

ctions

Serious 

Crash 

Type/Inter

section

0006664Districts 2 and 

3SIGNAL HEAD 

Intersection traffic 

control Modify 

33 

Num

11502 11502 HSIP 

(Secti

Multipl

e 

0 0 State 

Highw

Interse Serious 

Crash 
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

54

REPLACEMENT @ VAR 

LOCATIONS IN SEVERAL 

DISTRICTS

traffic signal -

modernization/rep

lacement

bers 47.96 47.96 on 

148)

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

ay 

Agenc

y 

ctions Type/Inter

section

0006664Districts 2 and 

3SIGNAL HEAD 

REPLACEMENT @ VAR 

LOCATIONS IN SEVERAL 

DISTRICTS

Intersection traffic 

control Modify 

traffic signal - 

modernization/rep

lacement

35 

Num

bers

40000 40000 HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Interse

ctions

Serious 

Crash 

Type/Inter

section

0013094AllCRASH 

REPORTING VALIDATION & 

LOCATING

Non-infrastructure 

Data/traffic 

records

1625

000 

Num

bers

27198

0 

27198

0 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Data Education/

Research

0012908AllSAFETY 

INFOMERCIALS TOWARDS 

ZERO DEATHS - SHSP

Non-infrastructure 

Outreach

12 

Num

bers

12600

0 

12600

0 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Safety 

Educati

on All 

Areas

Education

0008332ALLSAFE ROUTES TO 

SCHOOL RESOURCE CENTER 

(COORDINATORS AND 

WEBSITE)

Non-infrastructure 

Outreach

1 

Num

bers

45000

0 

45000

0 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

0 0 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

Pedest

rians

Non 

Motorized 
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

55

FC y

0013099CobbSR 280/SOUTH 

COBB FM CR 2236/MANER 

ROAD TO SR 3 - ROAD SAFETY 

AUDIT

Non-infrastructure 

Road safety audits

1 

Num

bers

5000 5000 HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

All 

empha

sis 

Areas -

ped, 

bike, 

interse

ctions 

Serious 

Crash 

Type/Inter

section

0009400DeKalbSR 13 FROM 

AFTON LN TO SHALLOWFORD 

TERRACE - PHASE II

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists Medians 

and pedestrian 

refuge areas

1 

Num

bers

72000

3.61

72000

3.61

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148) 

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Pedest

rians

Non 

Motorized 

M005115ChathamSR 21 From 

SR 204 to SR 25

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists 

Miscellaneous 

pedestrians and 

bicyclists

3.62 

Mile

s 

10000

0 

10000

0 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Pedest

rians

Non 

Motorized 

0009444GwinnettLAWRENCE

VILLE & MARGARET WINN 

HOLT ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS 

- SRTS

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists 

Miscellaneous 

pedestrians and 

bicyclists

1 

Num

bers

83418

7.46

83418

7.46

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

0 0 City 

of 

Munic

ipal 

Highw

ay 

Pedest

rians

Non 

Motorized 
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

56

FC Agenc

y 

0009446HallCITY OF 

GAINESVILLE SAFE PASSAGE 

@ 5 SCHOOLS - SRTS

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists 

Miscellaneous 

pedestrians and 

bicyclists

1 

Num

bers

54367

2.94

54367

2.94

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 City 

of 

Munic

ipal 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Pedest

rians

Non 

Motorized 

0010400HabershamCITY OF 

CORNELIA

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists 

Miscellaneous 

pedestrians and 

bicyclists

1 

Num

bers

93868

6.67

93868

6.67

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 City 

of 

Munic

ipal 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Pedest

rians

Non 

Motorized 

0009439ChattahoocheeCHAT

TAHOOCHEE COUNTY 

ELEMENTARY SCHOOL - SRTS

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists 

Miscellaneous 

pedestrians and 

bicyclists

1 

Num

bers

32041

6.16

32041

6.16

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Pedest

rians

Non 

Motorized 

0010013CowetaNEWNAN 

CROSSING ELEMENTARY - 

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists 

Miscellaneous 

1 

Num

68758

.83

68758

.83

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

Multipl

e 

locatio

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

Pedest

rians

Non 

Motorized 
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

57

SRTS pedestrians and 

bicyclists

bers 148) ns have 

varying 

FC 

ay 

Agenc

y 

0010452CrawfordCITYOF 

ROBERTA - SRTS

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists 

Miscellaneous 

pedestrians and 

bicyclists

1 

Num

bers

30353

4.84

30353

4.84

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 City 

of 

Munic

ipal 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Pedest

rians

Non 

Motorized 

0010018TiftG.O. BAILEY 

SCHOOL - SRTS

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists 

Miscellaneous 

pedestrians and 

bicyclists

1 

Num

bers

23268

0.85

23268

0.85

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 City 

of 

Munic

ipal 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Pedest

rians

Non 

Motorized 

0010379LowndesJ L 

NEWBERN MIDDLE SCHOOL - 

SRTS

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists 

Miscellaneous 

pedestrians and 

bicyclists

1 

Num

bers

27900

0 

27900

0 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 City 

of 

Munic

ipal 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Pedest

rians

Non 

Motorized 
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

58

0010398LaurensSUSIE 

DASHER & SAXON HEIGHTS - 

SRTS

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists 

Miscellaneous 

pedestrians and 

bicyclists

1 

Num

bers

26181

2.2

26181

2.2

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 City 

of 

Munic

ipal 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Pedest

rians

Non 

Motorized 

0010399WhitfieldDALTON 

PUBLIC SCHOOLS - SRTS

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists 

Miscellaneous 

pedestrians and 

bicyclists

1 

Num

bers

72911

2.76

72911

2.76

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 City 

of 

Munic

ipal 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Pedest

rians

Non 

Motorized 

0010014DekalbFIVE 

SCHOOLS IN CITY OF 

DECATUR - SRTS

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists 

Miscellaneous 

pedestrians and 

bicyclists

1 

Num

bers

41829

3.29

41829

3.29

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 City 

of 

Munic

ipal 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Pedest

rians

Non 

Motorized 

0010019ForsythVICKERY 

CREEK ELEMENTARY AND 

MIDDLE SCHOOLS - SRTS

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists 

Miscellaneous 

1 

Num

bers

58317

7.25

58317

7.25

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

Multipl

e 

locatio

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

Pedest

rians

Non 

Motorized 
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

59

pedestrians and 

bicyclists

148) ns have 

varying 

FC 

ay 

Agenc

y 

0010021CobbFOUR SCHOOLS 

IN MARIETTA - SRTS

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists 

Miscellaneous 

pedestrians and 

bicyclists

1 

Num

bers

50465

8.36

50465

8.36

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 City 

of 

Munic

ipal 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Pedest

rians

Non 

Motorized 

0010023FultonPALMETTO 

ELEMENTARY SCHOOL - SRTS

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists 

Miscellaneous 

pedestrians and 

bicyclists

1 

Num

bers

53785

2.26

53785

2.26

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 City 

of 

Munic

ipal 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Pedest

rians

Non 

Motorized 

0010394DeKalbDEKALB 

PUBLIC WORKS 5 SCHOOLS

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists 

Miscellaneous 

pedestrians and 

bicyclists

1 

Num

bers

61026

5.07

61026

5.07

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Pedest

rians

Non 

Motorized 

0010401CobbKINCAID & 

CHEATHAM ELEMENTARY - 

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists 

1 

Num

65673 65673 HSIP 

(Secti

Multipl

e 

0 0 Count

y 

Pedest Non 
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

60

SRTS Miscellaneous 

pedestrians and 

bicyclists

bers 3.24 3.24 on 

148)

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

rians Motorized 

0010403FultonBETHUNE 

ELEMENTARY

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists 

Miscellaneous 

pedestrians and 

bicyclists

1 

Num

bers

69120

2.81

69120

2.81

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Pedest

rians

Non 

Motorized 

0010017GwinnettGRAYSON 

CITY SCHOOLS - SRTS

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists 

Miscellaneous 

pedestrians and 

bicyclists

1 

Num

bers

45773

0.12

45773

0.12

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 City 

of 

Munic

ipal 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Pedest

rians

Non 

Motorized 

0010020ChathamSAVANNAHCHATHAM CO PUBLIC SCHOOL 

SYSTEM @ 4 SCHOOLS - SRTS

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists 

Miscellaneous 

pedestrians and 

bicyclists

1 

Num

bers

23535

0.68

23535

0.68

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 City 

of 

Munic

ipal 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Pedest

rians

Non 

Motorized 
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

61

0010392MuscogeeCLUBVIEW 

ELEMENTARY SCHOOL - SRTS 

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists 

Miscellaneous 

pedestrians and 

bicyclists

1 

Num

bers

16756

6.88

16756

6.88

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 City 

of 

Munic

ipal 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Pedest

rians

Non 

Motorized 

0010393Henry6 SCHOOLS IN 

HENRY COUNTY

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists 

Miscellaneous 

pedestrians and 

bicyclists

1 

Num

bers

67495

5.1

67495

5.1

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Pedest

rians

Non 

Motorized 

0010396CherokeeCHEROKEE 

CTY SCHOOL DISTRICT @ 5 

SCHOOLS

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists 

Miscellaneous 

pedestrians and 

bicyclists

1 

Num

bers

33471

9.37

33471

9.37

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 City 

of 

Munic

ipal 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Pedest

rians

Non 

Motorized 

0010397NewtonNEWTON 

COUNTY SCHOOL SYSTEM @ 5 

SCHOOLS - SRTS

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists 

Miscellaneous 

pedestrians and 

bicyclists

1 

Num

bers

56625

3.87

56625

3.87

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

Pedest

rians

Non 

Motorized 
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

62

FC y

0010451LanierLANIER 

COUNTY PRIMARY, ELEM & 

MIDDLE - SRTS 

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists 

Miscellaneous 

pedestrians and 

bicyclists

1 

Num

bers

13156

3.79

13156

3.79

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Pedest

rians

Non 

Motorized 

0010453BarrowCITY OF 

STATHAM - SRTS

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists 

Miscellaneous 

pedestrians and 

bicyclists

1 

Num

bers

39494

5.79

39494

5.79

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 City 

of 

Munic

ipal 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Pedest

rians

Non 

Motorized 

0010454ColumbiaLEWISTON 

ELEMENTARY SCHOOL - SRTS

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists 

Miscellaneous 

pedestrians and 

bicyclists

1 

Num

bers

15064

2.45

15064

2.45

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Pedest

rians

Non 

Motorized 

0006294AllPEDESTRIAN 

IMPROVEMENTS @ 10 SR 

LOCATIONS IN DISTRICT 6

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists 

Pedestrian signal

10 

Num

bers

97000 97000 HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

0 0 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Pedest

rians

Non 

Motorized 
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

63

FC

0006463District 

2PEDESTRIAN UPGRADES @ 

24 INTERSECTIONS IN 

DISTRICT 2-PED UPGRADE

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists 

Pedestrian signal

24 

Num

bers

35000

0 

35000

0 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Pedest

rians

Non 

Motorized 

0007457Franklin/Hart/Madis

onI-85; SR 8; SR 17; SR 59 & 

SR 72 @ 12 LOCS-PED 

UPGRADE

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists 

Pedestrian signal

12 

Num

bers

20212

06.68

20212

06.68

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Pedest

rians

Non 

Motorized 

0007495Lumpkin/Towns/Uni

on/WhitePEDESTRIAN 

UPGRADES @ 20 SR 

LOCATIONS IN DISTRICT 1-

PED UPGRADE

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists 

Pedestrian signal

20 

Num

bers

20000 20000 HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Pedest

rians

Non 

Motorized 

0007495Lumpkin/Towns/Uni

on/WhitePEDESTRIAN 

UPGRADES @ 20 SR 

LOCATIONS IN DISTRICT 1-

PED UPGRADE

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists 

Pedestrian signal

20 

Num

bers

56000

0 

56000

0 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Pedest

rians

Non 

Motorized 
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

64

0013171AllPEDESTRIAN 

UPGRADES @ 35 LOCS IN 

DISTRICT 1

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists 

Pedestrian signal

35 

Num

bers

10500

00

10500

00

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Pedest

rians

Non 

Motorized 

0013173AllPEDESTRIAN 

UPGRADES @ 59 LOCS IN 

DISTRICT 6

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists 

Pedestrian signal

59 

Num

bers

10000

00

10000

00

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Pedest

rians

Non 

Motorized 

0009982AllDISTRICT 1 & 2 @ 

SEV LOCS - GUARDRAIL 

ANCHOR REPLACEMENT

Roadside Barrier 

end treatments 

(crash cushions, 

terminals) 

100 

Num

bers

83726

6.33

83726

6.33

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Roadw

ay 

Depart

ure

Serious 

Crash Type

0009727FultonSR 8 FROM 

MARIETTA BLVD TO STRONG 

ST/NORTHYARD DR (Utility 

Relocations)

Roadside Removal 

of roadside 

objects (trees, 

poles, etc.)

1.50 

Mile

s 

50000

00

50000

00

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Roadw

ay 

Depart

ure

Serious 

Crash Type

0009997AllSHARP CURVE 

TREATMENTS @ SEV LOCS IN 

Roadway 

Pavement surface 

- high friction 

12 

Num

17696

83.94

17696

83.94

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

Multipl

e 

locatio

0 0 State 

Highw

ay 

Roadw

ay 

Depart

Serious 

Crash Type
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

65

DISTRICT 5 surface bers 148) ns have 

varying 

FC 

Agenc

y 

ure

0011650FloydOFF-SYSTEM 

SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS @14 

CR LOCS IN FLOYD CO

Roadway Roadway 

- other

14 

Num

bers

42855

5 

42855

5 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Roadw

ay 

Depart

ure

Serious 

Crash Type

0011813McIntoshOFFSYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS @ 13 CR LOC 

IN MCINTOSH COUNTY

Roadway Roadway 

- other

13 

Num

bers

34200

0 

34200

0 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Roadw

ay 

Depart

ure

Serious 

Crash Type

0011834BartowOFF-SYSTEM 

SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS @ 9 

CR LOCS IN BARTOW COUNTY

Roadway Roadway 

- other

9 

Num

bers

23358

1 

23358

1 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Roadw

ay 

Depart

ure

Serious 

Crash Type

0011839BartowOFF-SYSTEM 

SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS @ 10 

CS LOCS IN CARTERSVILLE

Roadway Roadway 

- other

10 

Num

bers

93862

.68

93862

.68

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

Roadw

ay 

Depart

ure

Serious 

Crash Type
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

66

FC y

0012654WayneOFF-SYSTEM 

SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS @ 25 

LOCS IN WAYNE COUNTY

Roadway Roadway 

- other

25 

Num

bers

15300

0 

15300

0 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Roadw

ay 

Depart

ure

Serious 

Crash Type

0012656BaconOFF-SYSTEM 

SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS @14 

LOCs IN BACON COUNTY

Roadway Roadway 

- other

14 

Num

bers

25900

0 

25900

0 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Roadw

ay 

Depart

ure

Serious 

Crash Type

0012657Jeff DavisOFFSYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS @ 9 CR LOCS 

IN JEFF DAVIS COUNTY

Roadway Roadway 

- other

9 

Num

bers

22600

0 

22600

0 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Roadw

ay 

Depart

ure

Serious 

Crash Type

0012679JacksonOFF-SYSTEM 

SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS @ 18 

CR LOC IN JACKSON COUNTY

Roadway Roadway 

- other

18 

Num

bers

25000

0 

25000

0 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Roadw

ay 

Depart

ure

Serious 

Crash Type
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

67

0012680LowndesOFFSYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS @ 9 LOCS IN 

LOWNDES COUNTY

Roadway Roadway 

- other

9 

Num

bers

14249

1.75

14249

1.75

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Roadw

ay 

Depart

ure

Serious 

Crash Type

0012697MurrayOFF-SYSTEM 

IMPROVEMENTS @ 48 CR 

LOCS IN MURRAY COUNTY

Roadway Roadway 

- other

48 

Num

bers

20232

3 

20232

3 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Roadw

ay 

Depart

ure

Serious 

Crash Type

0012725PierceOFF-SYSTEM 

SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS @ 15 

LOCS IN PIERCE COUNTY

Roadway Roadway 

- other

15 

Num

bers

26800

0 

26800

0 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Roadw

ay 

Depart

ure

Serious 

Crash Type

0012726HancockOFF-SYSTEM 

SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS @ 

VAR LOCS IN HANCOCK 

COUNTY

Roadway Roadway 

- other

2 

Num

bers

48000

0 

48000

0 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Roadw

ay 

Depart

ure

Serious 

Crash Type

0012727TaliaferroOFFSYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS @ VAR LOCS 

Roadway Roadway 

- other

2 

Num

35000

0 

35000

0 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

Multipl

e 

locatio

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

Roadw

ay 

Depart

Serious 

Crash Type
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

68

IN TALIAFERRO COUNTY bers 148) ns have 

varying 

FC 

ay 

Agenc

y 

ure

0012728PutnamOFF-SYSTEM 

SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS @ 

VAR LOCS IN EATONTON

Roadway Roadway 

- other

12 

Num

bers

25000

0 

25000

0 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Roadw

ay 

Depart

ure

Serious 

Crash Type

0012729NewtonOFF-SYSTEM 

SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS @ 

VAR LOCS IN COVINGTON

Roadway Roadway 

- other

10 

Num

bers

35000

0 

35000

0 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Roadw

ay 

Depart

ure

Serious 

Crash Type

0012730GreeneOFF-SYSTEM 

SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS @ 

VAR LOCS IN GREENSBORO

Roadway Roadway 

- other

8 

Num

bers

22500

0 

22500

0 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Roadw

ay 

Depart

ure

Serious 

Crash Type

0012731WilkesOFF-SYSTEM 

SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS @ 

VAR LOCS IN WASHINGTON 

CITY

Roadway Roadway 

- other

7 

Num

bers

22500

0 

22500

0 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

Roadw

ay 

Depart

ure

Serious 

Crash Type
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

69

FC y

0012732BurkeOFF-SYSTEM 

SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS @ 

VAR LOCS IN WAYNESBORO

Roadway Roadway 

- other

5 

Num

bers

20000

0 

20000

0 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Roadw

ay 

Depart

ure

Serious 

Crash Type

0012733JenkinsOFF-SYSTEM 

SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS @ 

VAR LOCS IN MILLEN

Roadway Roadway 

- other

3 

Num

bers

17500

0 

17500

0 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Roadw

ay 

Depart

ure

Serious 

Crash Type

0012734MorganOFF-SYSTEM 

SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS @ 

VAR LOCS IN MADISON CITY

Roadway Roadway 

- other

6 

Num

bers

22500

0 

22500

0 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Roadw

ay 

Depart

ure

Serious 

Crash Type

0012735JasperOFF-SYSTEM 

SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS @ 

VAR LOCS IN MONTICELLO

Roadway Roadway 

- other

5 

Num

bers

22500

0 

22500

0 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Roadw

ay 

Depart

ure

Serious 

Crash Type
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

70

0012768MontgomeryOFFSYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS @ 18 LOC IN 

MONTGOMERY COUNTY

Roadway Roadway 

- other

18 

Num

bers

31000

0 

31000

0 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Roadw

ay 

Depart

ure

Serious 

Crash Type

0012775BrooksOFF-SYSTEM 

SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS @ 9 

CR LOCS IN BROOKS COUNTY

Roadway Roadway 

- other

9 

Num

bers

16614

5 

16614

5 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Roadw

ay 

Depart

ure

Serious 

Crash Type

0012776MillerOFF-SYSTEM 

SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS @ 8 

CR LOCS IN MILLER COUNTY

Roadway Roadway 

- other

8 

Num

bers

12729

1.5

12729

1.5

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Roadw

ay 

Depart

ure

Serious 

Crash Type

0012799ClarkeOFF-SYSTEM 

SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS @ 39 

LOCS COUNTY

Roadway Roadway 

- other

39 

Num

bers

25000

0 

25000

0 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Roadw

ay 

Depart

ure

Serious 

Crash Type

0012844EvansOFF-SYSTEM 

SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS @ 32 

Roadway Roadway 

- other

32 

Num

77000 77000 HSIP 

(Secti

on 

Multipl

e 

locatio

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

Roadw

ay 

Depart

Serious 

Crash Type
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

71

LOCS IN EVANS COUNTY bers 148) ns have 

varying 

FC 

ay 

Agenc

y 

ure

0012849RabunOFF-SYSTEM 

SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS @ 6 

LOCS IN RABUN COUNTY

Roadway Roadway 

- other

6 

Num

bers

25000

0 

25000

0 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Roadw

ay 

Depart

ure

Serious 

Crash Type

0012890ClayOFF-SYSTEM 

SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS @ 6 

LOCS IN CLAY COUNTY

Roadway Roadway 

- other

6 

Num

bers

78262

.75

78262

.75

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Roadw

ay 

Depart

ure

Serious 

Crash Type

0012891LeeOFF-SYSTEM 

SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS @ 4 

CR LOCS IN LEE COUNTY

Roadway Roadway 

- other

4 

Num

bers

74478 74478 HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Roadw

ay 

Depart

ure

Serious 

Crash Type

0012897LumpkinOFFSYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS @ 28 LOCS IN 

LUMPKIN COUNTY

Roadway Roadway 

- other

28 

Num

bers

25000

0 

25000

0 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

Roadw

ay 

Depart

ure

Serious 

Crash Type
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

72

FC y

0012906RandolphOFFSYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS @ 5 CR LOCS 

IN RANDOLPH COUNTY

Roadway Roadway 

- other

5 

Num

bers

13036

6 

13036

6 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Roadw

ay 

Depart

ure

Serious 

Crash Type

0012907SeminoleOFFSYSTEM SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS

Roadway Roadway 

- other

1 

Num

bers

10859

6.25

10859

6.25

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Roadw

ay 

Depart

ure

Serious 

Crash Type

0012909CrispOFF-SYSTEM 

SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS @ 8 

CR LOCS IN CRISP COUNTY

Roadway Roadway 

- other

8 

Num

bers

15856

0.5

15856

0.5

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Roadw

ay 

Depart

ure

Serious 

Crash Type

0012910TiftOFF-SYSTEM 

SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS @ 11 

LOCS IN TIFT COUNTY

Roadway Roadway 

- other

11 

Num

bers

11384

6 

11384

6 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Roadw

ay 

Depart

ure

Serious 

Crash Type
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

73

0012940DecaturOFF-SYSTEM 

SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS @ 13 

LOCS IN DECATUR COUNTY

Roadway Roadway 

- other

13 

Num

bers

13841

3 

13841

3 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Roadw

ay 

Depart

ure

Serious 

Crash Type

0012941ThomasOFF-SYSTEM 

SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS @ 9 

LOCS IN THOMAS COUNTY

Roadway Roadway 

- other

9 

Num

bers

17986

5 

17986

5 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Roadw

ay 

Depart

ure

Serious 

Crash Type

0013045BarrowOFF-SYSTEM 

SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS @ 20 

LOCS IN BARROW COUNTY

Roadway Roadway 

- other

20 

Num

bers

27500

0 

27500

0 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Roadw

ay 

Depart

ure

Serious 

Crash Type

0013049Ben HillOFF-SYSTEM 

SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS @ 10 

CR LOCS IN BEN HILL CO

Roadway Roadway 

- other

10 

Num

bers

58742

.25

58742

.25

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Roadw

ay 

Depart

ure

Serious 

Crash Type

0013050ColquittOFF-SYSTEM 

SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS 

Roadway Roadway 

- other

1 

Num

16449

5.25

16449

5.25

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

Multipl

e 

locatio

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

Roadw

ay 

Depart

Serious 

Crash Type
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

74

bers 148) ns have 

varying 

FC 

ay 

Agenc

y 

ure

0013153MitchellOFF-SYSTEM 

SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS @ 7 

LOCS IN MITCHELL

Roadway Roadway 

- other

7 

Num

bers

10040

6 

10040

6 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Roadw

ay 

Depart

ure

Serious 

Crash Type

771210-ClaytonCR 

1350/ANVIL BLOCK FM 

LUNSFORD RD TO 

BOULDERCREST RD - GRTA

Roadway Roadway 

- restripe to revise 

separation 

between opposing 

lanes and/or 

shoulder widths 

0.64 

Mile

s 

26485

05

26485

05

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 Count

y 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Lane 

Depart

ure

Serious 

Crash Type

0010350FultonSR 8/SR 10 

FROM CS 1860/PIEDMONT 

AVE TO SR 42-PED UPGRADE

Roadway Roadway 

narrowing (road 

diet, roadway 

reconfiguration)

1.89 

Mile

s 

60000

0 

60000

0 

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Pedest

rians

Non 

Motorized

0013061FultonSR 

42/MORELAND AVE FROM 

MANSFIELD AVE TO DEKALB 

AVE - PED UPGRADE

Roadway Roadway 

narrowing (road 

diet, roadway 

reconfiguration)

0.53 

Mile

s 

20000 20000 HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

0 0 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Pedest

rians

Non 

Motorized
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

75

FC

0004638Clayton/HenryANVIL 

BLOCK FM 

BOULDERCREST/CLAYTON TO 

ALLEN DR/HENRY-GRTA

Roadway Roadway 

widening - add 

lane(s) along 

segment

0.64 

Mile

s 

45350

00

45350

00

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multipl

e 

locatio

ns have 

varying 

FC 

0 0 State 

Highw

ay 

Agenc

y 

Lane 

Depart

ure

Serious 

Crash Type
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

76

Progress in Achieving Safety Performance Targets

Overview of General 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

Number of fatalities 1580 1482 1388 1298 1233

Number of serious injuries 5301 4655 4042 3468 2974

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 1 1 1 1 1

Serious injury rate (per 

HMVMT)

5 4 4 3 3

*Performance measure data is presented using a five-year rolling average.
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

77
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

78
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

79

To the maximum extent possible, present performance measure* data by functional classification and ownership. 

Year - 2013

Function 

Classification

Number of fatalities Number of serious injuries Fatality rate (per HMVMT) Serious injury rate (per HMVMT)

RURAL PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - INTERSTATE

82 74 0.87 0.77

RURAL PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER 

FREEWAYS AND 

EXPRESSWAYS

0 0 0 0

RURAL PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER

97 122 1.49 1.82

RURAL MINOR 

ARTERIAL

140 165 2.19 2.37

RURAL MINOR 

COLLECTOR

37 37 2.7 1.41

RURAL MAJOR 

COLLECTOR

167 158 2.95 2.61

RURAL LOCAL ROAD OR 

STREET

102 129 1.54 1.9

URBAN PRINCIPAL 96 313 0.5 1.59
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

80

ARTERIAL - INTERSTATE

URBAN PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER 

FREEWAYS AND 

EXPRESSWAYS

11 39 0.37 1.6

URBAN PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER

153 632 1.24 4.93

URBAN MINOR 

ARTERIAL

176 712 1.16 4.6

URBAN MINOR 

COLLECTOR

0 0 0 0

URBAN MAJOR 

COLLECTOR

52 195 1.06 3.88

URBAN LOCAL ROAD 

OR STREET

120 398 0.67 2.83
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

81
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

82
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

83
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

84
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

85

Year - 2013

Roadway Ownership Number of 

fatalities

Number of serious 

injuries

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT) 

Serious injury rate (per 

HMVMT) 

STATE HIGHWAY AGENCY 736 1781 1.12 2.71

COUNTY HIGHWAY AGENCY 353 854 1.2 2.86

TOWN OR TOWNSHIP HIGHWAY AGENCY 0 0 0 0

CITY OF MUNICIPAL HIGHWAY AGENCY 145 340 0.13 2.75

STATE PARK, FOREST, OR RESERVATION AGENCY 0 0 0 0

LOCAL PARK, FOREST OR RESERVATION AGENCY 0 0 0 0

OTHER STATE AGENCY 0 0 0 0

OTHER LOCAL AGENCY 0 0 0 0

PRIVATE (OTHER THAN RAILROAD) 0 0 0 0

RAILROAD 0 0 0 0

STATE TOLL AUTHORITY 0 0 0 0

LOCAL TOLL AUTHORITY 0 0 0 0

OTHER PUBLIC INSTRUMENTALITY (E.G. AIRPORT, 

SCHOOL, UNIVERSITY)

0 0 0 0
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

86
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

87
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

88
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

89
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

90

Describe any other aspects of the general highway safety trends on which you would like to elaborate. 

n/a

Application of Special Rules

Present the rate of traffic fatalities and serious injuries per capita for drivers and pedestrians over the 

age of 65. 

Older Driver

Performance Measures

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Fatality rate (per 

capita)

0.22 0.19 0.15 0.12 0.09

Serious injury rate 

(per capita)

0.54 0.54 0.47 0.38 0.31

Fatality and serious 

injury rate (per capita)

0.75 0.73 0.61 0.5 0.4

*Performance measure data is presented using a five-year rolling average.

(F+SI 65+ 2011/2011 population figure)+(F+SI 65+ 2010/2010 pop. Figure)+...../5

equation and it looks like this:

2008 - 2012 ((331/101)+(367/103)+(332/106)+(284/110)+(391/115))/5 = 3.19

2006-2010 ((456/97)+(463/99)+(331/101)+(367/103)+(332/106))/5 = 3.87
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

91

Does the older driver special rule apply to your state? 

No
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

92

Assessment of the Effectiveness of the Improvements (Program 

Evaluation)

What indicators of success can you use to demonstrate effectiveness and success in the Highway 

Safety Improvement Program? 

None

Benefit/cost

Policy change

Other: Other-Annual reduction in the over all number of fatalities for the past several years.

What significant programmatic changes have occurred since the last reporting period? 

Shift Focus to Fatalities and Serious Injuries

Include Local Roads in Highway Safety Improvement Program

Organizational Changes

None

Other: 

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

n/a
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

93

SHSP Emphasis Areas

For each SHSP emphasis area that relates to the HSIP, present trends in emphasis area performance measures. 

Year - 2013

HSIP-related SHSP 

Emphasis Areas

Target 

Crash Type

Number of 

fatalities

Number of 

serious injuries

Fatality rate 

(per HMVMT)

Serious injury rate 

(per HMVMT)

Other1 Other2 Other3 

Lane Departure 171 554 0.16 0.51 0 0 0

Roadway Departure 229 599 0.21 0.55 0 0 0

Intersections 411 1632 0.38 1.5 0 0 0

Pedestrians 159 206 0.15 0.19 0 0 0

Bicyclists 19 41 0.02 0.04 0 0 0

Older Drivers 191 267 0.17 0.24 0 0 0

Motorcyclists 137 317 0.12 0.29 0 0 0

Work Zones 16 73 0.02 0.07 0 0 0

Data 1233 3248 1.13 2.98 0 0 0
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

94
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

95
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

96
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

97
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

98

Groups of similar project types

Present the overall effectiveness of groups of similar types of projects.

Year - 2013

HSIP Sub-program 

Types

Target 

Crash Type

Number of 

fatalities

Number of 

serious injuries

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT) 

Serious injury rate 

(per HMVMT)

Other1 Other2 Other3 

Pedestrian Safety 159 206 0.15 0.19 0 0 0

Median Barrier 6 15 0.01 0.01 0 0 0

Red Light Running 

Prevention

19 55 0.02 0.05 0 0 0

Rural State 

Highways

0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Intersection 411 1632 0.38 1.5 0 0 0
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

99
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

100
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

101
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

102
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

103

Systemic Treatments

Present the overall effectiveness of systemic treatments.

Year - 2013

Systemic 

improvement

Target 

Crash Type

Number of 

fatalities

Number of 

serious injuries

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT) 

Serious injury rate 

(per HMVMT)

Other1 Other2 Other3 

Cable Median 

Barriers 

26 102 0.02 0.09 0 0 0
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

104
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

105
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

106
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

107
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

108

Describe any other aspects of the overall Highway Safety Improvement Program effectiveness on 

which you would like to elaborate. 

The state has aggressively worked to promote highway safety through education, emergency response, 

enforcement and engineering. GDOT has made key engineering changes to support the HSIP and the 

state's safety goals. With the application of the new 31 inch guardrail standard and the safety edge 

design standard approved in March of 2005, later mandated in 2012, the department has been working 

to upgrade all locations on the state route network within our construction and maintenance programs. 

Additionally, the state has continued the median cable barrier installation program by establishing 

projects for an additional $4,000,000 of treatment on our state highways. The Interstate corridors and 

freeways that showed the occurrence of median crossovers were identified and prioritized. Going 

forward, we will continue to target limited access facilities and other applicable divided highways to 

install cable barriers. The impact that these programs will have on fatalities and serious injuries will not 

be evident for another one to two years following the installation. Nevertheless, the data will be closely 

monitored to identify valid deviations in median crossover and lane departure crashes. 

The Office of Traffic Operations completed 41 full signal upgrades and 87 signal modifications as part of 

our systemic signal safety program. Additionally, we began the installation of the flashing yellow left 

turn arrow and reflectorized back plates. The revision to the state signal manual has been in place for FY 

2014. 
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

109

Provide project evaluation data for completed projects (optional). 

Location Functional 

Class

Improvement 

Category

Improvement 

Type

BefFatalBefSerious 

Injury

BefOther 

Injury

BefPDOBefTotalAftFatalAftSerious 

Injury

AftOther 

Injury

AftPDOAftTotalEvaluation 

Results 

(Benefit/ 

Cost Ratio)

GA 7/US 341 

at SR 74

Monroe 

County, GA

Rural Minor 

Arterial

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control 

- modifications 

to roundabout

1 6 0 3 10 0 0 0 7 7

Dawson 

Forrest Rd. 

at Lumpkin 

Campground 

Rd.

Dawson 

County, GA

Urban 

Major 

Collector 

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control 

- modifications 

to roundabout

0 9 0 7 16 0 2 0 4 6
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

110

Optional Attachments

Sections Files Attached
2014 Georgia Highway Safety Improvement Program

111

Glossary

5 year rolling average means the average of five individual, 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 noninfrastructure 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. 

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.