long range transportation plan 2040 - mats · long range transportation plan 2040 6-1 ......

Macon-Bibb County Planning & Zoning Commission

Long Range Transportation Plan 2040

6-1

Chapter 6 MPO Highway Safety Plan

Currently, all states are now required to prepare a Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP). The

Governor’s Office of Highway Safety has teamed up with the Georgia Department of Transportation to

initiate the Georgia Strategic Highway Safety Plan. The SHSP for Georgia was developed incorporating

the 4Es which are enforcement, education, engineering and emergency medical services. This Plan incor-

porates the Governor’s Highway Safety Plan, the Georgia Dept. of Transportation’s Highway Safety Im-

provement Program and the Dept. of Public Safety’s Commercial Vehicle Safety Plan. Safety issues have

been incorporated into the transportation planning process as part of the LRTP. The majority of the safe-

ty issues discussed in this chapter are from the Georgia Strategic Highway Safety Plan that was completed

in 2011.

The SHSP is developed through cooperation with the Governor’s Office of Highway Safety. The

major activities of this office are related to the development of passenger restraint systems, reducing exces-

sive speeds, decreasing the amount of individuals driving under the influence and promoting overall safe

driving behavior. However, the safety issues of these activities involve other transportation planning meth-

ods in order to increase safety. The inclusion of safety factors in transportation planning relies on the in-

volvement of various groups. The development of the SHSP involved the participation of the Georgia

Dept. of Transportation, the Georgia Dept. of Public Safety, the Georgia Sheriff’s Association, the Office

of State Administrative Hearings, various MPO’s and other stakeholder groups. This will aid in the devel-

opment of a highway safety improvement program that has the main objective of reducing the amount of

accidents and the possibility of accidents on all roads. The requirements for the highway safety improve-

ment program include:

Planning - a process of assembling and developing a record of accidents, traffic data and highway reports in order to identify dangerous highway locations

Implementation - a method for instituting safety projects and allocating funds

Evaluation - a process for analyzing the effects of improvements on safety



6-2

Safety Projects

The Strategic Highway Safety Program (SHSP) process is aimed toward providing a comprehensive

strategic action plan. Currently, there are 21 safety projects specified in the Highway Safety Improvement

Program. A highway safety improvement project is consistent with the SHSP that improves a highway safe-

ty problem or an unsafe road feature. The projects include the following:

Intersection safety Pavement & shoulder widening Road Safety Audits Rumble Strips or warning devices Skid resistant surface at intersections High risk rural roads Pedestrian/bicycle safety improvements Railway/hwy. crossing protective devices Elimination of hazards at railway/hwy. crossings Traffic enforcement at railway/hwy. crossings Highway signage/pavement markings Traffic calming features Roadside obstacles/hazards Priority control/intersections for emergency vehicles Traffic control at high crash locations Transportation Safety Planning Collection and analysis of safety data Work zone safety communications Guardrails, barriers, and crash equipment Vehicle/wildlife structure retrofitting Pedestrian/bicycle signage in school zones

Safety has always been an important component of the transportation planning process. The existing

highway safety plans are aligned under the Governor’s Strategic Highway Safety Plan. This particular plan

includes the Georgia Highway Safety Plan which contains safety goals for the future. The priority goals

according to the Georgia Office of Highway Safety are as follows:

Increase the rate of observed safety belt use from the baseline figure in 2008 of 89.6% to 90.1% for

drivers and front seat outboard passengers.

Reduce the percentage of speed related fatal crashes from the 2008 baseline figure of 21% (309 fatali-

ties).

Reduce the alcohol related fatality rate from the 2008 baseline of 0.38 fatalities per 100 million VMT to

0.36 fatalities

Reduce the percentage of pedestrian related fatal crashes from the baseline figure of 9.8% established

in 2008.



6-3

Continue the implementation of the Strategic Highway Safety Plan will all roadway safety stakeholders

in the state of Georgia.

Highway safety efforts will continue to reduce the amount of highway crashes, injuries and fatalities. The

state of Georgia has adopted a goal to decrease overall fatality rates per vehicle miles traveled by 15% ac-

cording to the Highway Safety Plan.

Key Emphasis Areas

The Georgia Strategic Highway Safety Plan has developed key emphasis areas to focus on in order

to improve highway safety. Each emphasis area has a particular Task Team assigned to develop strategies

to reduce road safety hazards. The key emphasis areas are:

Aggressive Driving — Excessive speed contributes to increased frequency of vehicle crashes..

Impaired Driving — There is an overall goal to reduce alcohol/drug related crashes on the road.

Occupant Protection — A significant amount of injuries are caused by drivers not using safety belts Intersection Safety — Intersection fatalities comprise 25% of the overall total amount.

Roadway Departures — Keeping vehicles on the highway

Age Related Issues — This concerns both young adult and older drivers

Non-Motorized Users — This emphasis area involves both pedestrians and bicyclists

Vehicle Types — This concerns heavy trucks and motorcycles

Traffic/Crash Records Data Analysis — The compilation and analysis of accident data is important.

Trauma System/Increasing EMS Capabilities — The development of emergency medical care for accident victims is crucial.

Traffic Incident Management Enhancement (TIME) Task Force — The response time to highway emergencies is important MPO Implementation

The MPOs develop regional safety goals that are compatible with the state crash reduction goals.

They review crash factors and focus on important issues to reduce crashes and injuries. As part of the im-

plementation process, The Macon Area Transportation Study (MATS) will cooperate with the State to de-

velop local efforts in implementing the Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP). In the past, the MATS

Committees have discussed safety issues but this matter has not been pursued accordingly. In order to



6-4

place more emphasis on safety in transportation planning, it is suggested that the MATS Policy Committee

appoint a Safety Advisory Committee that will focus on the implementation of the SHSP and local safety

issues. The Chairman of the Safety Advisory Committee should report directly to the MATS Policy Com-

mittee. The membership of the Safety Advisory Committee should include the Fire Department, Police

and Sheriff ’s Department, Emergency Management Agency, Traffic Engineering, Emergency Medical Ser-

vices, Georgia D.O.T., local Hospitals and the MATS Planning staff.

The proposed Safety Advisory Committee should focus on the following areas:

The generation of crash statistics for publication for intersections and high crash areas

The education and increased public awareness through the distribution of pertinent information

Improve the coordination and participation in the statewide safety programs

Publicize safety programs and promote state safety programs

Promote the use of Emergency 911 by the public to report dangerous situations on roadways

Improve incident response time through better coordination

Promote safe driving habits

Reduce congestion by clearing crash sites and other incidents more rapidly

Increase the response times for victims who are in need of emergency medical services

Emphasize to the public to take a space and leave a space when dealing with merging traffic on the

interstate

There may be additional areas that the Safety Advisory Committee could focus on in the future if needed.

The implementation of the SHSP is dependent on both state and local officials.

Crash Data Evaluation

The Macon Area Transportation Study has begun to analyze crash data for the MPO area. In the

past, data has been collected for the highest crash locations and for specific projects as they were devel-

oped. The previous LRTP developed a more detailed analysis of crash data. The data has been updated in

this chapter as part of the transportation planning process. A more detailed analysis of crash data is im-

portant because decreased funding will result in the construction of fewer projects and future funding may

require a more detailed analysis to justify a safety project. Furthermore, the Macon Area Transportation

Study, the MPO and local government will need to focus more on efficient and economical safety improve-

ment projects in the future.



6-5

The increased emphasis on safety will require another approach from the current system that is in use.

Some communities are analyzing safety problems along major transportation corridors. In order to evalu-

ate safety projects, an audit can be performed which could include such items as:

Road design standards for corridors

Crossing locations including mid-block crossings

Current and future traffic counts

Existing signage, striping, and lighting

Connectivity of sidewalks

Crash data analysis

Activity centers

Speed studies

This section also contains traffic count information. As part of any safety analysis, it is important to know

the most heavily traveled corridors because these areas usually contain more crashes. This information will

help to prioritize where safety projects should be concentrated. The estimated traffic counts from 2009 on

the transportation model were used to develop total traffic volumes on the interstates and the major road

corridors in the MATS area. The following information contains volume band width based on the traffic

counts. The estimated traffic counts from 2009 are used to delineate band widths along the interstate sys-

tem and the major road corridors. According to this information, several observations can be made.

The Interstate System ( I-75, I-16, I-475) including the interchanges are the most heavily traveled road-

ways in the MATS area. The interstates have been divided into different segments for further analysis.

The interstate segments are contained in Table 6-1 along with traffic count and crash data from 2008

to 2012. Figure 6-1 is a traffic volume bandwith map of the MATS Interstate System that contains

traffic counts along different segments of the Interstates. In addition, Figure 6-2 demonstrates the

amount of crashes along the interstate segments.

The MATS Major Road Corridors are contained in Table 6- 2 along with the traffic counts and crash

data from 2008 to 2012. Figure 6-3 is a traffic volume bandwidth map from the MATS transportation

model that contains traffic counts for the major road corridors. In addition, Figure 6-4 contains the

amount of crashes along each corridor.

Figure 6-5 shows the traffic volume bandwidth for both the Interstate System and the MATS Major

Road Corridors. The bandwidth map shows the most heavily traveled roadways in the area.



6-6

The locations with the highest amount of crashes in the MATS area are shown in Table 6-3. In total,

there are 100 crash locations that are listed starting with the highest amount of crashes.

Figure 6-6 shows the location of pedestrian/auto crashes from 2008 to 2012. In total, there were 123

accidents of this type during the time period 2008-2012.

Figure 6-7 contains the bicycle/auto crash locations in which there were 48 accidents of this type from

2008 to 2012.

This information will serve as a guide in order to provide funding for specific areas in terms of safety pro-

jects for the future. In addition, the Macon Transit Authority has developed their own security and safety

plan which can be found in the Appendix.

A major step towards making our streets safer would the adoption and implementation of a “Complete

Streets Policy and Program”. This information contained in the first part of this chapter can be used to

help prioritize which streets should be addressed under the Complete Streets concept.

The discussion of “Complete Streets” is at the end of this chapter along with some recommendations that

should be considered as future improvements to the transportation network are being developed.



6-7

Table 6-1

CR

ASH

DA

TA

2

008

- 20

12

A

ccid

ent

Typ

e

M

AT

S E

stim

ated

T

otal

T

ime

Rig

ht

Rea

r L

eft

In

ters

tate

Loc

atio

ns

2009

AD

T

Acc

iden

ts

Day

N

igh

t A

ngl

e E

nd

T

urn

O

ther

F

atal

itie

s In

juri

es

I-75

- S

outh

of

Bas

s R

d. to

Riv

ersi

de D

r. 43

,400

58

34

24

7

29

8 14

0

19

I-75

-So

uth

of R

iver

side

Dr.

to A

rkw

right

Rd.

48

,000

12

8

4 4

4 0

4 0

0 I-

75 -

Sou

th o

f A

rkw

right

Rd.

to P

ierc

e A

ve.

60,0

00

230

160

70

19

134

2 75

0

97

I-75

- S

outh

of

Pier

ce A

ve. t

o I-

16

66,0

00

499

323

176

62

152

3 28

2 3

184

I-75

-Sou

th o

f I-

16 to

For

syth

/Har

dem

an A

ve.

86,0

00

378

260

118

94

133

36

115

1 15

5 I-

75-S

outh

of

For

syth

/Har

dem

an to

Mer

cer

Uni

v. D

r 85

,000

17

9 12

8 51

21

73

7

78

2 81

I-

75-S

outh

of

Mer

cer

Uni

v. D

r. to

Eis

enho

wer

Pk

wy

83,0

00

153

98

55

19

65

15

54

1 45

I-

75 -

Sou

th o

f E

isen

how

er to

Pio

Non

o A

ve.

72,0

00

167

109

58

29

47

17

74

0 81

I-

75 -

Sou

th o

f Pi

o N

on A

ve. t

o I-

475

39,0

00

9 7

2 0

5 0

4 0

2 I-

16 -

Eas

t of

I-75

86

,000

99

5 64

8 34

7 10

8 45

2 28

40

7 3

364

I-16

- E

ast o

f Sp

ring

St.

49,0

00

172

129

43

15

97

17

43

1 84

I-

16 -

Eas

t of

Col

iseu

m D

r. 42

,000

19

12

7

2 9

1 7

0 13

I-

16 -

Eas

t of

Ocm

ulge

e E

ast B

lvd.

24

,000

16

11

5

2 6

1 7

0 13

I-

475

at E

isen

how

er P

kwy

59,0

00-6

3,00

0 73

52

21

5

42

26

0 0

42

I-47

5 at

I-7

5 98

,000

8

6 2

0 4

0 4

0 2

TO

TA

LS

2,96

8 1,

985

983

387

1,25

2 16

1 1,

168

11

1,18

2



6-8

Figure 6-1



6-9

Figure 6-2

58

12

230

499

995

172

19

16

I‐16

I‐75

378

179

153

167

I‐75

9

I‐75

I‐475

8

73



6-10

Table 6-2

C

RA

SH D

AT

A 2

008-

2012

Acc

iden

t T

ype

M

AT

S E

stim

ated

T

otal

T

ime

Rig

ht

Rea

r L

eft

MA

TS

Maj

or R

oad

Cor

rid

ors

2009

AD

T

Acc

iden

ts

Day

N

igh

t A

ngl

e E

nd

T

urn

O

ther

F

atal

itie

s In

juri

es

Fors

yth

Rd.

- F

ores

t Hill

Rd.

to Z

ebul

on

22,0

00

300

218

82

47

156

55

42

3 82

Gra

y H

wy

- Sh

urlin

g D

r. to

Jon

es C

o.

19,0

00-2

3,00

0 37

1 25

2 11

9 38

19

7 52

84

1

181

Gra

y H

wy

Cor

rido

r -N

orth

Ave

. to

Shur

ling

Dr.

42,0

00

587

389

198

74

304

109

100

1 22

1

Fore

st H

ill R

d.-

Vin

evill

e A

ve. t

o W

imbi

sh

14,0

00

155

96

59

24

80

22

29

0 45

Mer

cer

Uni

v. D

r.- C

olle

ge S

t. to

Tho

mas

ton

Rd.

26

,000

1,

655

1,08

8 56

7 21

9 81

8 32

2 29

6 9

841

Pio

Non

o A

ve.-

Vin

evill

e to

1-7

5/R

ocky

Cre

ek

16,0

00-2

0,00

0 1,

455

989

466

242

612

355

246

5 77

0

Vin

evill

e A

ve.-

I-75

to F

ores

t Hill

Rd.

18

,000

94

0 69

5 24

5 12

8 42

4 21

4 17

4 1

311

Riv

ersi

de D

r. -

Spri

ng S

t. to

Nor

thsi

de D

r. 13

,000

-29,

000

745

491

254

121

337

162

125

0 29

5

Shur

ling

Dr.

- G

ray

Hw

y to

Jon

es C

o.

18,0

00-2

9,00

0 74

3 48

5 25

8 11

2 33

4 15

6 14

1 1

359

Em

ery

Hw

y -

Nor

th A

ve. t

o O

cmul

gee

E. B

lvd.

18

,000

57

3 41

0 16

3 78

27

8 11

1 10

6 4

247

ML

K /

Col

iseu

m D

r.-E

mer

y H

wy.

to H

oust

on

15,0

00

651

496

155

106

262

113

170

2 24

4

Sprin

g St

. - R

iver

side

Dr.

to I

-16

22,8

00

646

423

223

88

343

67

148

0 26

3

Roc

ky C

reek

Rd.

- I-

75 to

Blo

omfie

ld D

r. 10

,000

-22,

000

523

332

191

102

175

119

127

6 25

7

Ocm

ulge

e E

ast B

lvd.

- I

-16

to W

eave

r R

d.

16,0

00

16

11

5 2

6 1

7 0

13

Eis

enho

wer

Pkw

y - S

econ

d St

. to

I-47

5 17

,000

-26,

000

1,51

5 1,

034

481

198

853

248

216

2 72

3

Nor

thsi

de D

r. -

Fore

st H

ill R

d. to

Riv

ersi

de D

r. 14

,000

38

20

18

9

14

5 10

0

8

Pio

Non

o A

ve. -

I-7

5 to

Haw

kins

ville

Rd.

44

,000

42

7 29

8 12

9 53

21

7 46

11

1 1

239

T

OT

AL

S 11

,340

7,

727

3,61

3 1,

641

5,41

0 2,

157

2,13

2 36

5,

099



6-11

Figure 6-3



6-12

Figure 6-4



6-13

Figure 6-5



6-14

Table 6-3

Int

Stre

etT

otal

Rig

ht

Rea

rL

eft

Stre

et N

ame

/B

lock

No

Acc

iden

tsD

ayN

igh

tA

ngl

eE

nd

Tu

rnO

ther

Fat

alit

ies

Inju

ries

I-

16I-

7549

232

017

262

149

227

93

173

I-16

SPR

ING

ST

RE

ET

446

294

152

4527

124

106

018

2G

RA

Y H

IGH

WA

YSH

UR

LIN

G D

RIV

E30

219

510

733

164

6342

111

9H

AR

DE

MA

N A

VE

NU

EI-

7524

515

194

6775

1885

111

3P

IO N

ON

O A

VE

NU

ER

OC

KY

CR

EE

K R

D22

014

971

3988

6429

011

5I-

75P

IER

CE

AV

EN

UE

207

144

6317

121

267

078

EIS

EN

HO

WE

R P

KW

YL

OG

CA

BIN

DR

IVE

192

124

6814

113

5015

011

8L

OG

CA

BIN

DR

IVE

ME

RC

ER

UN

IV B

LV

D19

013

060

1311

633

281

79B

LO

OM

FIE

LD

RO

AD

ME

RC

ER

UN

IV B

LV

D19

011

773

2588

5423

011

6B

LO

OM

FIE

LD

RO

AD

EIS

EN

HO

WE

R P

KW

Y17

812

355

1213

711

180

50E

DN

A P

LA

CE

RO

AD

ME

RC

ER

UN

IV B

LV

D17

610

076

3085

4516

183

I-75

ME

RC

ER

UN

IV B

LV

D17

612

650

2073

776

281

EIS

EN

HO

WE

R P

KW

YP

IO N

ON

O A

VE

NU

E17

312

746

2879

4026

090

RIV

ER

SID

E D

RIV

ESP

RIN

G S

TR

EE

T16

310

657

3661

3828

072

EIS

EN

HO

WE

R P

KW

YI-

7515

297

5518

6515

541

45M

ER

CE

R U

NIV

BL

VD

PIO

NO

NO

AV

EN

UE

139

9742

1578

2323

072

CO

LIS

EU

M D

RIV

EI-

1613

810

533

1379

1333

168

EIS

EN

HO

WE

R P

KW

YPR

ESI

DE

NT

IAL

PK

WY

124

8044

992

1013

129

FO

RSY

TH

ST

RE

ET

I-75

123

101

2225

5517

260

39P

IER

CE

AV

EN

UE

RIV

ER

SID

E D

RIV

E12

389

3410

7417

220

49H

AR

DE

MA

N A

VE

NU

EP

UR

SLE

Y S

TR

EE

T11

577

3811

379

220

26C

OL

UM

BU

S R

OA

DM

ER

CE

R U

NIV

BL

VD

115

8134

1276

720

031

CL

INT

ON

RO

AD

GR

AY

HIG

HW

AY

106

7333

882

511

042

GU

Y P

AIN

E R

OA

DP

IO N

ON

O A

VE

NU

E10

581

246

767

160

50G

RA

Y H

IGH

WA

YH

AL

L S

TR

EE

T10

273

2915

5215

200

40E

ME

RY

HIG

HW

AY

SEC

ON

D S

TR

EE

T10

076

2414

4824

141

38E

ISE

NH

OW

ER

PK

WY

MA

CO

N T

EC

H D

RIV

E99

6336

1061

1513

035

FO

RSY

TH

RO

AD

TU

CK

ER

RO

AD

9974

2516

5819

63

22R

IVE

RSI

DE

DR

IVE

WIM

BIS

H R

OA

D98

6632

1155

1814

033

MO

NT

PE

LIE

R A

VE

PIO

NO

NO

AV

EN

UE

9057

336

5020

141

38H

OU

STO

N A

VE

NU

EP

IO N

ON

O A

VE

NU

E89

6326

1148

822

157

I-75

RO

CK

Y C

RE

EK

RD

8855

3315

268

390

36M

AY

NA

RD

ST

RE

ET

SHU

RL

ING

DR

IVE

8246

3610

4513

140

43

Acc

iden

t T

ype

Tim

e

100

HIG

HE

ST T

RA

FF

IC A

CC

IDE

NT

LO

CA

TIO

NS

M

acon

/B

ibb

Cou

nty

01/

01/

2008

th

ru 0

6/30

/20

12



6-15

Table 6-3 cont’d

Int

Stre

etT

otal

Rig

ht

Rea

rL

eft

Stre

et N

ame

/B

lock

No

Acc

iden

tsD

ayN

igh

tA

ngl

eE

nd

Tu

rnO

ther

Fat

alit

ies

Inju

ries

GR

AY

HIG

HW

AY

LE

XIN

GT

ON

ST

RE

ET

8156

2512

3119

190

36E

ISE

NH

OW

ER

PK

WY

HA

RR

ISO

N R

OA

D80

5327

748

196

054

BR

OO

KD

AL

E A

VE

VIN

EV

ILL

E A

VE

NU

E80

5822

1340

189

011

I-75

PIO

NO

NO

AV

EN

UE

7651

2513

219

330

41E

ISE

NH

OW

ER

PK

WY

I-47

573

5221

542

260

042

MU

LB

ER

RY

ST

SEC

ON

D S

TR

EE

T73

5617

2426

419

012

EM

ER

Y H

IGH

WA

YN

OR

TH

AV

EN

UE

7245

2712

3513

121

28E

ISE

NH

OW

ER

PK

WY

KE

Y S

TR

EE

T68

5513

845

69

037

CO

LIS

EU

M D

RIV

EE

ME

RY

HIG

HW

AY

6849

197

3015

160

8A

TW

OO

D D

RIV

EM

ER

CE

R U

NIV

BL

VD

6745

2212

2320

120

38A

NT

HO

NY

RD

ME

RC

ER

UN

IV B

LV

D66

3432

1135

164

057

EM

ER

Y H

IGH

WA

YM

AY

NA

RD

ST

RE

ET

6641

2516

3213

50

34G

RA

Y H

IGH

WA

YSE

CO

ND

ST

RE

ET

6650

166

454

110

49H

ILL

CR

EST

AV

EN

UE

PIO

NO

NO

AV

EN

UE

6551

1416

1921

90

16P

IO N

ON

O A

VE

NU

EV

INE

VIL

LE

AV

EN

UE

6541

248

337

170

9B

UR

TO

N A

VE

NU

EM

ER

CE

R U

NIV

BL

VD

6434

3010

2420

101

35L

OG

CA

BIN

DR

IVE

PRE

SID

EN

TIA

L P

KW

Y63

4914

1033

137

040

MU

LB

ER

RY

ST

TH

IRD

ST

RE

ET

6350

1327

610

200

7A

NT

HO

NY

RD

PIO

NO

NO

AV

EN

UE

6137

2412

2916

40

29N

EW

CL

INT

ON

RD

SHU

RL

ING

DR

IVE

6037

2322

1613

90

30I-

75R

IVE

RSI

DE

DR

IVE

5834

247

298

140

19E

ME

RY

HIG

HW

AY

JEF

FER

SON

VIL

LE

RD

5844

144

395

100

29F

OR

SYT

H S

TR

EE

TP

RO

FE

SSIO

NA

L D

RI

5846

1217

620

150

13P

IO N

ON

O A

VE

NU

ER

OF

F A

VE

NU

E57

4611

726

168

016

ML

K J

R B

LV

DR

IVE

RSI

DE

DR

IVE

5543

129

1516

150

23F

OR

EST

HIL

L R

DV

INE

VIL

LE

AV

EN

UE

5534

216

2910

100

8C

OL

LE

GE

ST

RE

ET

FO

RSY

TH

ST

RE

ET

5443

1115

197

130

11E

ISE

NH

OW

ER

PK

WY

OG

LE

SBY

PL

AC

E53

4112

834

56

019

HA

RD

EM

AN

AV

EN

UE

PR

OF

ESS

ION

AL

DR

I53

467

135

2114

012

ME

RC

ER

UN

IV B

LV

DSU

MM

ER

HIL

L D

RIV

E52

4210

636

46

027

BR

OA

DW

AY

PIO

NO

NO

AV

EN

UE

5235

176

296

110

27B

ILL

Y W

ILL

IAM

SON

PRE

SID

EN

TIA

L P

KW

Y52

3319

275

137

028

HIG

HT

OW

ER

RO

AD

PIO

NO

NO

AV

EN

UE

5035

156

1917

80

28I-

16N

OR

TH

AV

EN

UE

5031

191

301

180

8C

HE

RR

Y S

TR

EE

TT

HIR

D S

TR

EE

T49

3019

258

610

06

FO

RSY

TH

ST

RE

ET

MO

NR

OE

ST

RE

ET

4840

86

725

100

22

Acc

iden

t T

ype

Tim

e

100

HIG

HE

ST T

RA

FF

IC A

CC

IDE

NT

LO

CA

TIO

NS

(co

nt'

d)

Mac

on/

Bib

b C

oun

ty01

/01

/20

08 t

hru

06/

30/

2012



6-16

Table 6-3 cont’d

Int

Stre

etT

otal

Rig

ht

Rea

rL

eft

Stre

et N

ame

/B

lock

No

Acc

iden

tsD

ayN

igh

tA

ngl

eE

nd

Tu

rnO

ther

Fat

alit

ies

Inju

ries

ING

LE

SID

E A

VE

NU

ER

IVE

RSI

DE

DR

IVE

4740

75

229

110

25B

UR

RU

S R

OA

DR

IVE

RSI

DE

DR

IVE

4732

155

1915

80

8B

LO

OM

FIE

LD

RO

AD

STA

CY

DR

IVE

4637

914

815

90

19G

RA

Y H

IGH

WA

YN

OR

TH

AV

EN

UE

4626

206

313

60

11D

EW

EY

ST

RE

ET

PIO

NO

NO

AV

EN

UE

4632

147

199

110

34E

ME

RY

HIG

HW

AY

WIL

SON

ST

EM

Y46

3313

108

1810

010

PIO

NO

NO

AV

EN

UE

SPE

NC

ER

CIR

CL

E46

2818

1411

165

031

PO

PL

AR

ST

RE

ET

SEC

ON

D S

TR

EE

T46

3016

1513

315

08

RIV

OL

I D

RW

ESL

EY

AN

DR

IVE

4633

133

1222

90

13R

OC

KY

CR

EE

K R

DST

CH

AR

LE

S P

LA

CE

4628

1811

712

160

23F

OR

SYT

H R

OA

DN

API

ER

AV

EN

UE

4534

116

228

90

15L

OG

CA

BIN

DR

IVE

NA

PIE

R A

VE

NU

E44

2816

825

38

019

ME

RC

ER

UN

IV B

LV

DO

GL

ESB

Y P

LA

CE

4432

126

259

40

23N

EW

BE

RG

AV

EN

UE

PIO

NO

NO

AV

EN

UE

4422

225

1518

60

42A

NT

HO

NY

TE

RR

AC

EE

ISE

NH

OW

ER

PK

WY

4431

1311

172

140

27B

AC

ON

SFIE

LD

DR

NO

RT

H A

VE

NU

E44

2816

135

179

014

BR

AD

WA

LSH

PK

WY

EIS

EN

HO

WE

R P

KW

Y44

3410

523

97

027

ML

K J

R B

LV

DW

AL

NU

T S

TR

EE

T42

3012

68

1315

016

CH

AM

BE

RS

RO

AD

EIS

EN

HO

WE

R P

KW

Y41

2417

225

122

08

NA

PIE

R A

VE

NU

EP

IO N

ON

O A

VE

NU

E40

3010

1017

67

022

EIS

EN

HO

WE

R P

KW

YSE

CO

ND

ST

RE

ET

4032

819

114

60

43IN

GL

ESI

DE

AV

EN

UE

PIE

RC

E A

VE

NU

E40

319

822

46

010

LE

E R

OA

DR

IVE

RSI

DE

DR

IVE

3924

156

1515

30

22M

UM

FO

RD

RO

AD

NA

PIE

R A

VE

NU

E39

2811

726

51

038

PIE

RC

E A

VE

NU

EV

INE

VIL

LE

AV

EN

UE

3931

84

281

60

8JE

FF

ER

SON

VIL

LE

RD

MIL

LE

RF

IEL

D R

OA

D38

2711

328

52

09

BR

OO

KD

AL

E A

VE

NA

PIE

R A

VE

NU

E38

2810

227

63

015

CH

ER

RY

ST

RE

ET

SEC

ON

D S

TR

EE

T38

2117

169

49

05

CO

LIS

EU

M D

RIV

EM

AIN

ST

RE

ET

3731

610

515

70

18B

LO

OM

FIE

LD

DR

IVE

RO

CK

Y C

RE

EK

RD

3726

114

208

50

24R

ED

OA

K D

RIV

ER

IVE

RSI

DE

DR

IVE

3725

125

199

40

13

Tot

als

8984

6143

2841

1336

4234

1541

1873

2037

71

Acc

iden

t T

ype

Tim

e

100

HIG

HE

ST T

RA

FF

IC A

CC

IDE

NT

LO

CA

TIO

NS

(co

nt'

d)

Mac

on/

Bib

b C

oun

ty01

/01

/20

08 t

hru

06/

30/

2012



6-17

Figure 6-6



6-18

Figure 6-7



6-19

Complete Streets Complete Streets is a concept that is being promoted by the FHWA and has been adopted by GDOT. Complete Streets programs & legislation is being adopted by local communities throughout the country

from Seattle, Portland, even in Milledgeville just a few miles away and the City of Macon.

Complete streets are designed and operated so that they are safe, comfortable, and convenient for all us-

ers of all ages and abilities:

Pedestrians Bicyclists Motorized scooters Transit riders of all ages and abilities

Motorists Freight

Need is there because: Limited future funding and increasing urban populations will require better utilization of our transportation network. There will be fewer new transportation facilities including street and highways being built on new locations. To provide better mobility for aging population. Demand for transportation modes besides auto is increasing and will continue to do so.

If improving the livability of this community and making it more attractive to current as well as future

residents is important to our citizens, the development of complete streets policies and programs are defi-

nitely needed. Adopting more complete streets policies and programs will not just require revising the

design of streets and highways. It will require new laws, rules, and regulations to be passed and imple-

mented.

Many questions remained unanswered such as:

How will the many different modes of transportation be accommodated in the future? What modes will be allowed to use what facilities? How will they be regulated? Who will enforce these regulations? Will we allow golf carts? Which facilities? Will we allow low horse power/low emission motorized scooters on bicycle lanes or on multi-use paths? Will pullover transit stops be incorporated into future street designs? Will zoning and development regulations require better facilities and access for transit users and pedestrians in the future? Will zoning and development regulations require increased access management and limit the



6-20

number of curb cuts by making developers combine driveways for commercial development? Will zoning and development regulations require increase building setback on arterial streets in ru-ral and suburban settings to lessen negative impacts when these streets are widened in the future?

Context Sensitive Solutions Complete Streets Policies strives not only to serve all modes of transportation, but to provide context sen-

sitive solutions where possible. A key component of context sensitive solutions is to define identifiable

neighborhoods. These are areas with existing high level of interaction within the area including walking

& bicycling to neighborhood facilities such as parks, school, & churches.

Context Sensitive Solutions is a process, guided by the following core principles: Strive towards a shared stakeholder vision to provide a basis for decisions.

Demonstrate a comprehensive understanding of contexts including the impact the project will have on the overall efficiency of the network.

Foster continuing communication and collaboration to achieve consensus Exercise flexibility and creativity to shape effective transportation solutions, while preserving and enhancing community and natural environments. Consider design exceptions and their impacts on the network efficiency.

The result is a Complete Streets Design: Safe pedestrian crossings. Sidewalks. Bicycle lanes. Transit stops and pullovers.

Raised medians with protected turn lanes and turn-a-rounds.

Impact There is a misconception that a complete streets policy and programs would greatly reduce the footprints

of projects. To make most projects better complete streets projects, the footprint on many projects will

need to be widened to better accommodate all users by putting sidewalks on sides of the street or by re-

placing sidewalks with multi-use paths.

Safety Safety for all modes of transportation is critical and is a high national priority. This will require design

modifications and retrofitting many of our existing transportation facilities. This will require in many cases

larger footprints for many of our streets and highways to better accommodate pedestrians, bicyclists, and

increasing vehicular traffic.



6-21

Safety for all modes of transportation is a key component of a complete streets policy. Almost everyone

agrees that the flush medians, center turn lanes, are dangerous. Most have experienced a few moments of

terror while driving on streets with flush medians. The more congested the street is the greater the dan-

ger. Flush medians make it much more difficult and dangerous for pedestrians to cross a street, especial-

ly, mid-block crossings.

Raised medians with protected turn lanes and turn-a-rounds can do more to improve overall safety of our

transportation system than any other single implementable action. It is easy to implement at least techni-

cally. Politically, it is much more difficult. Until the general public understands and supports this whole

heartedly so that it becomes the standard or goal within the complete streets policy of our community,

our streets will not be as safe as they could or should be.

This would also improve the efficiency of the network. It would help to maintain the overall connectivity

and the overall accessibility of the transportation system.

Recommendations

All streets including local, collector, principal & minor arterials excluding Interstates:

New projects should be complete streets except in very special & unusual cases where it is clearly justified. Raised medians with protected turn lanes and turn-a-rounds should be on any new project with turn lanes as part of a complete streets policy. Begin replacing existing flush medians with raised medians, protected turn lanes, and turn-a - rounds to improve safety where possible. All principal and minor arterials excluding Interstates should:

Increase the level of access management.

Increase the building setbacks from ROW in newly developing areas.

Combine access (driveways) for new commercial & residential development where possi

ble.

Have new residential development to front onto subdivision streets within the subdivision and not onto principal & minor arterials.

Designate important truck routes where applicable.

Designate important transit routes where applicable.

long range transportation plan 2040 - mats · long range transportation plan 2040 6-1 ......

Documents