# General plan documents — dekalb_county-georgia

Assembled by OpenPublica from the documents it serves for this government. Each section below is a separate publication by the government; page anchors (`<!-- page N -->`) refer to pages of that section's own source PDF, linked in its heading.

**Contains 2 documents.**
OpenPublica has pinned these slots for this government: circulation, land_use. That is what we have looked for, not a statement that the government publishes nothing else — a plan element absent here may simply not have been reviewed yet. Last reviewed 2026-08-09.

---

## Land Use — 2050 Comprehensive Land Use Plan

- Source: https://dekalbcountyga.gov/sites/default/files/2026-01/2022_1115_DeKalb%202050%20Comprehensive%20Land%20Use%20Plan.pdf
- Pages: 281
- Covers: land_use
- **Transcription findings were recorded for this document;** check figures against the source.

<!-- page 1 -->
DEKALB COUNTY 2050 UNIFIED PLAN

# COMPREHENSIVE
# **LAND USE PLAN**

<<FIGURE>>

NOVEMBER 2022

<!-- page 2 -->
(blank page)

<!-- page 3 -->
DEKALB 2050

| DeKalb County GEORGIA | | Decatur, GA 30030 www.dekalbcountyga.gov/planning Office: 404-371-2155 |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |

# DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & SUSTAINABILITY

| Chief Executive Officer | | Director |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| Michael Thurmond | | Andrew A. Baker, AICP |

November 14, 2022

To Members of the DeKalb County Community:

Often as planners, we ask ourselves the question: *does transportation investment pave the way for new growth and development, or does new development spur the need for additional transportation infrastructure?* While the connection between land use and transportation is often apparent; in reality, the answer to the question above is that both can come first or second. However, as planners, we must be open to a “balanced” approach. This document seeks to identify the land use growth pattern and align timely transportation improvements along with the identified growth pattern.

Recently, DeKalb County—in partnership with the Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC)—saw an opportunity to better coordinate and align its comprehensive transportation plan (CTP) with its comprehensive land use plan to create a more holistic and coordinated plan for the County’s future. I am excited to present to you the **<u>DeKalb County 2050 Unified Plan</u>**, which includes three documents:
* The Unified Plan Executive Summary
* The Comprehensive Land Use Plan
* The Comprehensive Transportation Plan

The ***comprehensive land use plan*** includes the traditional elements such as a revised future land use map with refined character areas (particularly activity centers and residential areas) as well as a Community Work Program. Other policy elements in the plan include:
(1) recommendations on housing and economic development, and
(2) guidance on sustainability, retail, broadband, transit-oriented development, health and wellness, and arts and culture.

The ***transportation element*** of the plan includes the traditional components of ARC’s CTP program including a funding and financial strategy for transportation investments. Also included are the following key elements:
(1) a financially feasible list of roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian projects for the first ten years of the plan,
(2) policy recommendations that supplement projects, and
(3) a short-range action plan to assist the County with moving forward to implementation.

Please note that while this plan discusses transportation, it does not go into detail on the preferred alignment and form of “transit”. At this time, there are several unknowns that need to be discussed and consensus built before the future of transit (light/heavy) can be adopted. Therefore, this document references the County’s Transit Master Plan, which serves as the guide for specific recommendations and open policy questions related to future funding, projects, and timing.

All effective planning processes must include a ***robust stakeholder and community engagement effort***. This is particularly true for a countywide effort that looks 30 years into the future. Our goal has been to provide a variety of opportunities for engagement:
(1) virtual public meetings throughout the pandemic,
(2) participation at County outdoor festivals or park events to safely meet people where they are,
(3) focus groups with a variety of stakeholders, and gatherings with the County’s diverse, multicultural, and English-learning communities.

In total, more than 80 meetings occurred from the start of the plan in Spring 2021 through its conclusion at the end of 2022. We appreciate the time invested by members of the community and our governing bodies to provide guidance and direction to the planning team. We look forward to the coming years and advancing the recommendations contained within the plan toward implementation.

Sincerely,

<<FIGURE>>

Andrew Baker, AICP
Director – DeKalb County Planning & Sustainability

<!-- page 4 -->
<<FIGURE>>

# DEKALB
## 2050 UNIFIED PLAN

<!-- page 5 -->
# TABLE OF CONTENTS

**CHAPTER 01** ISSUES, OPPORTUNITIES, & GOALS ........................................1

**CHAPTER 02** LAND USE ..................................................................................... 21

**CHAPTER 03** POLICY SPOTLIGHTS...................................................................53

**CHAPTER 04** COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN ..........................73

**CHAPTER 05** SMALL AREA PLANS.................................................................. 77

**CHAPTER 06** REPORT OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS........................................... 94

**CHAPTER 07** COMMUNITY WORK PROGRAM .............................................119

**CHAPTER 08** STAKEHOLDER & PUBLIC OUTREACH ...................................140

**APPENDIX A** DOCUMENTATION OF COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT
ACTIVITIES ...................................................................................148

**APPENDIX B** DEKALB COUNTY VILLAGE CONSERVATION COMMUNITY
STRATEGY ................................................................................... 178

**APPENDIX C** PRESIDENTIAL PARKWAY REGIONAL CENTER
SUPPLEMENTAL LAND USE AND ZONING
RECOMMENDATIONS............................................................... 183

**APPENDIX D** INTOWN SUBURBAN ..................................................................186

<!-- page 6 -->
THIS PAGE LEFT
INTENTIONALLY BLANK

<!-- page 7 -->
# CHAPTER 01

# ISSUES, OPPORTUNITIES, & GOALS

<!-- page 8 -->
# INTRODUCTION

The DeKalb County 2050 Comprehensive Development Plan is a key part of the DeKalb County 2050 Unified Plan and includes policies and recommendations created to guide decision making related to development and growth within DeKalb County. As stated in the Georgia Department of Community Affairs guidance for Local Comprehensive Planning:

"Comprehensive planning should be conducted in the context of Georgia's strong and vibrant intergovernmental system that clearly recognizes the important role cities and counties play in fostering the state's image as an attractive place to invest, conduct businesses and raise a family. Comprehensive planning enhances coordination at many levels. The highest and best use of comprehensive planning for local governments is to show important relationships between community issues. A local comprehensive plan is a fact-based resource for local constituents that tracks implementation of community-based policies. Furthermore, local comprehensive planning creates an environment of predictability for business and industry, investors, property owners, tax payers and the general public. In addition, the plan helps local governments to recognize and then implement important economic development and revitalization initiatives. For these reasons, the state finds that well-planned communities are better prepared to attract new growth in a highly competitive global market."

<<FIGURE>>

The DeKalb 2050 Comprehensive Plan was developed with extensive outreach to and input from the community, stakeholders, elected and appointed officials and DeKalb County staff. The following sections include:

* Issues, opportunities and goals
* Land use and development policies
* Transportation
* Economic development
* Housing recommendations and policies, as well as other newly identified policy and issue areas that were identified as critical to the future of DeKalb County.

Finally, the Comprehensive Development Plan includes a Report of Accomplishments summarizing accomplishments since the last plan was adopted, a new Community Work Program, that identifies implementation activities, and a Public and Stakeholder Outreach Summary provides an overview of outreach techniques and results from this comprehensive planning process.

<!-- page 9 -->
# ISSUES, OPPORTUNITIES, & GOALS

The Issues and Opportunities in the following pages have been identified as the key areas DeKalb County should focus on over the short-term, or the next five years. The Issues and Opportunities also build upon the list identified in the previously adopted Comprehensive Plan and other recent planning efforts. These critical areas of focus have been used to develop the Community Work Program in **Chapter 8**.

Community Goals and Policies, in addition to the Character Areas and Defining Narrative, set the longer-term strategy for development and growth within DeKalb County. These provide overall policy direction and guidance for elected officials, appointed officials and staff. Issues and Opportunities, as well as the Community Goals and Policies, were developed with input from the Community, stakeholders, elected and appointed officials and DeKalb County staff. Policy areas for which specific issues, opportunities, and goals have been identified include:

*   Land Use
*   Natural Resources and Sustainability
*   Housing
*   Economic Development
*   Transportation
*   Equity
*   Arts, Culture, & Historic Resources
*   Community Health, Wellness, & Safety
*   Coordination and Communication

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 10 -->
# 01 - ISSUES, OPPORTUNITIES, & GOALS

## LAND USE

### Issues

* In order to support continued growth and development within the County while protecting existing single-family areas, new and more intense development will be focused within activity centers, nodes, and corridors.
* Many residents feel that some corridors and retail centers have uses that do not meet the needs of nearby residential neighborhoods.
* Some major corridors have a high percentage older retail strip commercial centers that are in decline or underutilized.
* Many neighborhoods lack a sense of place or identity.
* There is a need for adequate transitions and buffers between activity centers and surrounding single-family neighborhoods.
* Some areas are experiencing challenges related to industrial and residential land use conflicts
* There is not enough industrial zoned land to meet market demand.
* Annexations have impacted County land use policy which may require updating to reflect current conditions and needs of the community.

<<FIGURE>>

Figure 1: Many older strip-center developments, such as this plaza along Memorial Dr, are declining and in need of redevelopment

### Opportunities

* The location of underutilized strip commercial centers will allow for redevelopment along major corridors without intruding into established residential neighborhoods.
* Declining and underutilized strip commercial centers provide an opportunity for redevelopment and mixed use.
* A zoning code update can address development intensity and design concerns.
* The County is undergoing Gateway and Branding implementation of the Memorial Drive Revitalization Plan to identify character in the neighborhood.
* Many activity centers can transition into highly desirable mixed-use and multi-modal environments, particularly those with approved Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) studies or Small Area Plans (SAPs).
* Concentrating future development and density within activity centers can help protect existing single-family areas.
* Additional plans and policies for industrial areas can support the growth of employment areas, while protecting existing, stable single-family neighborhoods.
* The increased acceptance and demand for Transit Oriented Development (TOD) supports redevelopment around existing MARTA stations.
* Recent freight area studies have identified improvements and solutions for existing, growing industrial areas.
* Increased development intensity is acceptable in many areas if needed transportation and infrastructure investments are made.

<!-- page 11 -->
### Goals

**▶ New Development**
Focus new development and density in existing activity centers, near transit stations, and high-capacity corridors.

**▶ Commercial Corridors**
Encourage reinvestment or redevelopment of commercial corridors including the introduction of residential or other new uses to these areas.

**▶ Single-Family Neighborhoods**
Continue to protect existing, stable single-family neighborhoods, while identifying locations for appropriate infill development.

**▶ Density Transitions**
Manage height and density transitions between densely developing areas and surrounding lower intensity residential neighborhoods.

**▶ Diverse Housing and Development**
Encourage more diverse housing and development types to meet the changing needs of residents and communities.

**▶ Land Use and Economic Policies**
Coordinate with Decide DeKalb to ensure economic development is informed by land use and development policies and that policies appropriately support economic development efforts.

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

Figure 2: New townhomes incorporate live/work principles at a neighborhood scale

Figure 3: Apartments incorporated into a walkable retail development adds new housing options to the neighborhood

<!-- page 12 -->
# 01 - ISSUES, OPPORTUNITIES, & GOALS

# NATURAL RESOURCES AND SUSTAINABILITY

### Issues

* The amount of remaining, undeveloped land and natural greenspace within the County is decreasing.
* The county needs to preserve open space and its critical environmental areas.
* Some neighborhoods desire more small and local park/greenspace options.
* Adequate maintenance of County parks and greenspace is a concern for many residents and stakeholders.
* Residents in some parts of the county have raised concerns over stormwater runoff and sewer capacity problems as more intense developments have increased around their neighborhoods.
* Non-point source pollution and stormwater runoff are major concerns.
* For many years, the County's water and sewer availability have been unknown, creating uncertainty around current and future development needs.
* While the County has policies and programs related to sustainability, there is no unified vision or strategy.

<<FIGURE>>

Figure 4: Median breaks allow stormwater to drain while reducing water velocity

### Opportunities

* DeKalb County has a greenspace program that, coupled with private development and other stakeholders, could protect some of the County’s remaining undeveloped greenspace.
* The county is dedicated to using Best Management Practices (BMP) to reduce the impact of stormwater runoff and non-point source pollution.
* The County has recently developed a plan and a strategy for dealing with previous uncertainty around water and sewer availability.
* The County currently is designated as a bronze level ARC Green Community.
* Development that combines land conservation with clustered development provides an opportunity to encourage growth while preserving the limited remaining greenspace.

<<FIGURE>>

Figure 5: Keswick Park in Chamblee is connected to a community trail system and accessible from nearby development

<<FIGURE>>

Figure 6: Westside Park in Atlanta is an example of strategic infrastrcuture investment, serving as both a recreational facility and an emergency water reservoir for the community

<!-- page 13 -->
### Goals

#### Preservation
Encourage the preservation of the County’s limited remaining open space, farmland, natural and critical environmental areas.

#### Environmental Sensitivity
Protect environmentally sensitive areas including wetlands, floodplains, water supply watersheds and stream corridors.

#### Develop more Neighborhood Parks
Increase the number of parks within neighborhoods that are easily accessible to nearby residents.

#### Acquisition of Open Space
Continue coordination with Recreation, Parks & Cultural Affairs to facilitate open-space acquisition and expansion

#### Sustainable Zoning
Utilize zoning tools and techniques that preserve open space, natural resources and the environment, and address resiliency.

#### Private Partnerships
Partner with nongovernmental organizations to acquire and protect land.

#### Sustainable and Conservation Development
Promote development that incorporates sustainable practices and conserves critical environmental areas.

#### Stormwater Management
Encourage techniques to reduce storm water runoff and other drainage issues as part of development activities.

#### Education
Educate the development community and the public on strategies and solutions for addressing water and sewer capacity concerns within the County.

#### Vision
Develop a unified vision and strategy for sustainability related initiatives within DeKalb County.

<!-- page 14 -->
# 01 - ISSUES, OPPORTUNITIES, & GOALS

# HOUSING

### Issues

*   The location of affordable housing is often away from major amenities, employment centers and high-income neighborhoods.
*   Many subdivisions built over the last 30 years are in need of increased upkeep, maintenance or rehabilitation.
*   The existing housing stock may not be meeting the demands of the current market, or current and future residents.
*   DeKalb is in need of additional market rate housing.
*   With increased infill development, there is added development pressure near existing, stable single-family neighborhoods.

<<FIGURE>>

Figure 7: Affordable Housing should be high quality, and located throughout the county

<<FIGURE>>

Figure 8: Zero-lot line housing can increase FAR and units closer to development nodes, increasing the housing supply

### Opportunities

*   DeKalb has proximity to downtown Atlanta and many growing in-town neighborhoods.
*   FAR and housing types are increasing within some new developments allowing for more housing options.
*   New and diverse housing types will help the County meet market demands and support continued growth.
*   Areas of existing, naturally occurring affordable housing present a unique opportunity to preserve affordability within the County.
*   Clearly stated policies on transitions and buffers between areas of higher and lower intensity can provide guidelines that address concerns and set better expectations.

<<FIGURE>>

Figure 9: Older homes in established neighborhoods offer more affordable quality housing options for residents, compared to new construction

<!-- page 15 -->
### Goals

#### Housing Variety and Choice
Focus new development and intensity in existing activity centers, near transit stations, and high-capacity corridors.

#### Workforce Housing
Encourage reinvestment or redevelopment of commercial corridors including the introduction of residential or other new uses to these areas.

#### Senior and Independent Living
Continue to protect existing, stable single-family neighborhoods, while identifying locations for appropriate infill development.

#### Mixed Use Developments
Manage height and density transitions between densely developing areas and surrounding lower density residential neighborhoods.

#### Multi-Family Housing
Encourage more diverse housing and development types to meet the changing needs of residents and communities.

#### Housing Strategy
Coordinate with Decide DeKalb to ensure economic development is informed by land use and development policies and that policies appropriately support economic development efforts.

#### Fair Housing
During the rezoning process, prevent the occurrence of discrimination in housing on the basis of age, race, religion, gender, or national origin.

#### Code Compliance
Improve the enforcement of building codes and standards to improve housing conditions within aging multifamily housing developments.

<!-- page 16 -->
# 01 - ISSUES, OPPORTUNITIES, & GOALS

# ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

### Issues

* There is public concern that more innovative economic development needs to take place.
* Some parts of central and south DeKalb lack adequate retail and employment options.
* DeKalb's economic growth has been uneven and primarily in north DeKalb and parts of central DeKalb.
* Incorporations and annexations have impacted unincorporated DeKalb's tax base and service delivery.
* There are limited locations in the County for industrial development or expansion

### Opportunities

* Due to its proximity to Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport, interstates, and major freight corridors, Southwest DeKalb has logistics and distribution opportunities.
* The DeKalb Development Authority (Decide DeKalb) is a key partner in implementing economic development activity.
* DeKalb is home to several strong, nationally recognized medical, educational and research institutions.
* The increased acceptance and demand for Transit Oriented Development (TOD) has increased redevelopment opportunities around existing MARTA stations.
* The film industry continues to expand in Georgia and DeKalb County.

### Goals

The goals listed are from the Strategic Economic Development Plan (SEDP) and are most relevant to the comprehensive plan.

* **Coordinate Regulatory Processes**
Match land use regulations to economic development vision, and continue to build a more predictable and consistent review and approval processes

* **Support Existing Businesses**
Engage and support more existing businesses, and use Incentives to support existing industry clusters and prime locations to create new ones

* **Foster Business Development**
Create a supportive environment to foster start-up businesses

* **Target Industries**
Create specific incentives for target industries, and implement a proactive target industry recruitment effort. Increase efforts to develop international business opportunities

* **Invest in Infrastructure**
Continue implementing existing infrastructure strategies

* **Create Development Plans**
Formalize economic development concepts for each employment center, and clearly define implementation roles for all parties

<<FIGURE>>

Figure 10: DeKalb-Peachtree Airport is a major economic asset for the county

<!-- page 17 -->
# BROADBAND

### Issues

* Not enough people in south portion of DeKalb County know about broadband capabilities in their neighborhood.

### Opportunities

* DeKalb provides broadband service to well over 90% of it’s citizens. The county will work to market the service on the county website.

<<FIGURE>>

Figure 11: Blackhall Film studios is part of the burgeoning Atlanta Film industry, which has become a major employment generator

<<FIGURE>>

Figure 12: Emory University is globally reknown and important education asset

### Goals

* **Broadband and Activity Centers**
Market Broadband coverage in Activity Centers to attract redevelopment partners and startup businesses.

* **Broadband Marketing**
Over 98% of DeKalb County has broadband access. And nearly 70% of DeKalb County has high speed broadband access. These factors should be used to attract investment from business, education, and healthcare sectors.

<!-- page 18 -->
# 01 - ISSUES, OPPORTUNITIES, & GOALS

# TRANSPORTATION

### Issues

* Traffic congestion and commute times, especially around high growth areas, could impact future development and zoning decisions.
* Some areas of higher residential or employment density are not adequately served by public transportation.
* Pedestrian and/or bike connectivity is lacking, along major corridors, between new developments, neighborhoods, retail centers, parks and institutions and attractions.
* Many neighborhoods are dealing with cut-through traffic with limited tools to address the issue beyond speed bumps.
* Some areas of the County have dilapidated roadways and other infrastructure in need of repair
* While the County has several rail stations and higher frequency bus routes, additional transit investments are needed to support existing development and future growth.
* While the County has a transit master plan, decisions need to be made on which scenario should be pursued and funding needs to be identified.
* There is no unified vision or strategy for trail or greenway development within DeKalb County.

### Opportunities

* DeKalb has significantly increased the amount of parks and its trail network around and between existing neighborhoods.
* DeKalb's existing trails and greenways provide key connections and improve quality of life
* The County now has SPLOST which can support expanded transportation investments and maintenance.
* The County now has a transit master plan with four possible transit scenarios.

<<FIGURE>>

Figure 13: Indian Creek Station is the terminal station on MARTA's East-West heavy rail line, and an anchor for the Indian Creek Regional Activity Center

<<FIGURE>>

Figure 14: A comprehensive plan to connect trails thoughout the county could increase mobility and provide alternative transportation options for county residents

<!-- page 19 -->
### Goals

#### Provide Transportation Options through Connectivity Across Modes
Improve travel for all users by increasing connections across roadway, transit, bicycle, and pedestrian modes.

#### Promote Equity
Prioritize improvements that increase transportation access to all parts of the County, especially communities where lack of transportation options creates substantial barriers.

#### Improve Safety
Provide for safe travel by users across all modes of transportation.

#### Enable Healthy Communities and Improve Quality of Life
Leverage transportation infrastructure to encourage an active lifestyle and overall improved quality of life.

#### Respect/Improve DeKalb County’s Character
Implement transportation projects that improve mobility while taking into consideration local community context.

#### Increase Access to Jobs and Education
Prioritize transportation investments that allow workers and students to more easily access these key destinations.

#### Better Accommodate the Movement of Goods
Implement transportation projects that improve freight in the County either by truck or by rail.

#### Improve Maintenance
Ensure the long-term care for existing infrastructure including paving roads and repairing bridges and signal systems.

#### Increase Funding for Improvements
Pursue new local revenue sources that will allow the County to implement additional transportation projects.

#### Encourage Economic Development
Leverage transportation projects that help to encourage revitalization and new development throughout the County.

#### Practice Fiscal Responsibility in Transportation Investments
Prioritize transportation projects that can be implemented in a reasonable timeframe and provide a strong return on investment.

<!-- page 20 -->
# 01 - ISSUES, OPPORTUNITIES, & GOALS

## EQUITY

### Issues

* Poverty rates have increased in certain sections of central and south DeKalb County.
* The senior population is expected to continue to increase and require more housing and service options.
* Gentrification continues to displace seniors and low-income residents.
* There is a perception that many within the immigrant and refugee communities in DeKalb do not feel included or connected to decision making or the broader community.

### Opportunities

* The cost of living is relatively low in many parts of the county compared to the entire region.
* DeKalb's diverse population and cultural diversity allow for a wide range of social, cultural, and economic opportunities.
* The County is one of the most diverse communities in Metro Atlanta, the Southeast, and the Country, which provides the County with an international and multicultural character and offerings.

### Goals

* **Aging Population**
Support the aging population by creating more opportunities for residents to age in place through the addition of senior housing and coordinated services and programs.

* **Immigrant and refugee Community Inclusion**
Establish a committee or working group focused on communicating with and including immigrant and refugee communities in planning and decision making in their community.

* **Poverty**
Work with community-based organizations and non-profits to address issues around poverty, educational attainment, and other issues facing disadvantaged communities.

* **Low Broadband Coverage Areas**
The Georgia Broadband Deployment Initiative has identified low or no coverage areas within the county. DeKalb County will develop partnerships to address these areas.

* **Broadband Service Areas**
Identify Unserved Locations within Service Areas and target them through collaboration with governments, educational/institutional entities, and private sector partners.

<!-- page 21 -->
# ARTS, CULTURE, & HISTORIC RESOURCES

### Issues

* There are many historic register eligible sites that need to be evaluated for historic designation and protection.
* The County lacks a unified vision on arts and culture support, investment, and planning
* Many residents travel outside DeKalb County for arts and cultural offerings.

### Opportunities

* There are tools in place to preserve the County's historic districts.
* DeKalb County includes many unique arts and cultural experiences and organizations, many of which are not widely known within or outside the County.
* The expanding film industry can support local artists and arts organizations.

### Goals

* **Historic Preservation**
Preserve and protect the historic character of the County including historically, culturally or architecturally significant sites.
* **Development**
Maintain the character of historic areas while accommodating new residential development.
* **Analysis**
Complete a County-wide Historic Resource Survey
* **Historical Sites**
Identify additional historically significant sites and institute "formal protection" through the adoption of local historic designation and ordinances.
* **Zoning**
Establish new and enforce ordinances to protect historic areas.
* **Open Space and Agricultural Preservation**
Encourage the preservation of the few remaining rural areas, forested areas, and agricultural structures or sites within the County.
* **Cultural Events**
Establish programs and events that celebrate the unique cultures found in DeKalb. Identify community organizations to partner with on these programs or events.
* **Arts Support**
Develop a strategy to better coordinate arts related initiatives and support local artists and arts organizations within DeKalb.

<!-- page 22 -->
# 01 - ISSUES, OPPORTUNITIES, & GOALS

## COMMUNITY HEALTH, WELLNESS, & SAFETY

### Issues

* Many areas still lack access to greenspace, greenways, healthy food options, etc.
* Some areas of the County have real or perceived safety issues.
* Many dilapidated commercial areas need stronger enforcement of building codes and standards,
* Illegal dumping has become an issue in some areas of the County, especially areas with high vacancy and disinvestment.

### Opportunities

* DeKalb’s existing parks and trails offer opportunities for recreation and active living.
* The County offers many health and wellness programs that could reach more residents with additional coordination and marketing.

<<FIGURE>>

Figure 15: DeKalb's Mobile Wellness Clinic helps address health issues in underserved communities

### Goals

* **Food Access**
Work with public, private and non-profit partners to address challenges related to access to healthy foods within some areas of DeKalb.
* **Quality of Life**
Improve quality of life by increasing the number of sidewalks and trails that connect homes to regional trail networks, nearby businesses, schools, parks and other community services and amenities.
* **Active Living**
Create communities designed to encourage active living and healthy lifestyles
* **Crime and Safety**
Work across departments, with public safety partners and local community organizations to address safety issues including adequate pedestrian facilities and lighting, cut-through and speeding in residential areas, and within areas of high crime.
* **Code Enforcement**
Enforce existing building codes and other ordinances to address safety issues related to dilapidated or abandoned structures and illegal dumping,

<!-- page 23 -->
# COORDINATION & COMMUNICATION

### Issues

* Historically there has been a lack of communication between DeKalb County Government and the DeKalb School District.
* Communication between DeKalb County and its municipalities could be improved.
* New incorporations and annexations have impacted DeKalb County’s service delivery, as well as planning and economic development efforts.
* There is a perceived lack of communication between DeKalb County and County residents and stakeholders.

### Opportunities

* Land use, economic development, transportation and bicycle and pedestrian planning could be improved with increased coordination between DeKalb County and its municipalities.
* Increased coordination between DeKalb County and its municipalities, specifically in areas of recent or future annexations would benefit residents of all DeKalb communities.
* Creating regular and sustained methods of communication with residents and stakeholders will build community involvement, community support and ultimately implementation.
* Former DeKalb County school sites present a unique opportunity for public and private investment.
* Increased coordination around existing DeKalb County schools may provide unique solutions to community, transportation, or safety issues.

### Goals

* **City-County Coordination**
Encourage better communication and coordination between County and City staff around issues related to land use, transportation, and other relevant issues.
* **Joint Planning**
Consider joint planning initiatives with municipalities to adequately plan for and coordinate land use, development, transportation and other relevant initiatives.
* **School-County Coordination**
Encourage better communication and coordination between County and DeKalb County School District (DCSD) staff around issues related to land use and transportation near schools and other DCSD owned land.
* **Education**
Identify opportunities or programs to educate County residents and stakeholders on planning and development related priorities and issues and current demographic, market or development trends on an ongoing basis.
* **Outreach and Involvement**
Identify opportunities and events to involve the general public in current planning initiative.

<!-- page 24 -->
01 - ISSUES, OPPORTUNITIES, & GOALS

# TRANSPORTATION NEXUS

The central goal of the DeKalb 2050 Unified Plan is to combine the County's transportation and land use visions into a single unified, actionable plan. Transportation and land use elements have direct and intrinsically interlinked relationships with each other.

The Transportation Nexus (center of page) explores those interlinked relationships in detail. A product of substantial public and community engagement, the Transportation Nexus was developed to convey top line issues that the project team gathered through the engagement and technical analysis processes, mapping them to better understand the themes and connections between them.

Based on these efforts, the project team uncovered a total of seven top line issues pertinent to DeKalb County’s transportation and land use future:

**Housing:** Providing enough quality affordable housing and a variety of housing options to meet demands and needs of DeKalb County residents to slow down rapid increases of housing prices

**Activity Centers:** Establishing and maintaining dynamic activity centers throughout the County tailored to residents' needs and promoting higher population and/or jobs densities in these areas

**Economic Development:** Promoting and incentivizing new population and job opportunities and celebrating the County's diversity as an asset

**Freight/Industrial:** Focusing on the County's well-established freight and industrial sector and continuing to encourage further development opportunities for jobs and skillsets it can generate

**Roadway/Vehicular:** Investing in improvements to the County's vast roadway network to mitigate congestion, contribute to efficiencies in the movement of both people and goods, achieve a state-of-good-repair, and enhance safety and mobility

**Transit:** Leveraging, expanding, and enhancing the County's existing transit network in strategic ways to increase regional mobility, connect residents to jobs, and provide an equitable balance of transportation options

**Active Transportation:** Enhancing and expanding the County's vast sidewalk and bicycle infrastructure to enhance quality-of-life, increase local connectivity, and promote the well-being of all County residents

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 25 -->
<<FIGURE>>

| | |
| :--- | :--- |
| ● Top line issues | ↑ Major connection/interaction |
| ■ Subheadings/secondary issues | ↑ Limited connection/interaction |
| | ↑ Potential policy conflict |
| | ⟳ High-level policy goals |

Clustered around these top line issues are a series of word clouds that were uncovered as themes around each top line issue. These themes are rarely in isolation; rather, they are almost always shared elements. As illustrated, these themes often transcend multiple top line issues identified, conveying the underlying relationships that connect them. These relationships are represented by connecting arrows, and as shown in the legend, can be either complimentary connections or in some cases potentially conflicting connections.

On a higher level, four overarching guiding principles of Equity, Funding Availability, and Agency and Inter-Agency Coordination tended to transcend every issue, theme, and stakeholder conversation. They are shown prominently around the periphery of the Transportation Nexus. Balancing all of these guiding principles helps anchor the prioritization of all transportation and land use investments as projects are evaluated and prioritized.

### Development of Recommendations
The early work of the plan including the visioning, existing conditions/needs, and the transportation nexus—established a framework for the development of recommendations. The following sections outline the draft phases, establishing a framework for the development of recommendations. The following sections outline the draft transportation and land use recommendations, as well as the path to implementation.

<!-- page 26 -->
THIS PAGE LEFT
INTENTIONALLY BLANK

<!-- page 27 -->
# CHAPTER 02
## LAND USE

<!-- page 28 -->
# FUTURE LAND USE & DEVELOPMENT

A community’s land use patterns both guide and reflect its character and sense of place - what kinds of homes, businesses, institutions, amenities, and natural environments the community has, the forms they take, and where they are located and should be.

The Future Land Use Plan is intended to provide direction for development patterns across the County, and to inform decision making related to timing, phasing, and magnitude of infrastructure investments. These decisions determine the types of places the County’s residents can live, the types of jobs that are attracted, and what types of services and amenities are available. They also shape land use patterns and connectivity across the County, which influences how people interact with each other, how they travel to accomplish their daily activities, and their transportation choices and priorities.

This chapter lays the foundation for land use policies and decision making in DeKalb County between today and 2050, and will guide the development of physical infrastructure to accommodate anticipated growth.

<<FIGURE>>

### Future Land Use Plan Key Concepts

DeKalb County’s Future Land Use Plan is predicated on several key concepts. These include:

* **Character Areas** - provide high-level guidance on development character for the County; each Character Area also has it’s own sub-principles that guide land-use decisions within the character area’s boundaries.
* **Activity Centers** are a special kind of character area, and serve as one of the lynch-pins of DeKalb County’s Land Use strategy, which are intended to serve as hubs of higher intensity and more clustered uses, providing focal points for the community that serve as employment and service destinations.
* **Guiding Principles** - a set of overarching principles that inform decision making and intent across the County.

#### Character Areas

DeKalb is a large and diverse County, with varied conditions, character, and land uses across the County. This comprehensive plan is predicated on the concept of character areas, which frame the general use of land envisioned for the neighborhoods and communities across DeKalb. These character areas are intended to describe the overall character, quality, intensity of use, and design of certain area. They identify predominant land uses, as well as supporting uses allowed within each character area.

Character Areas do not directly dictate zoning and design requirements on individual parcels, but rather provide general guidance. This provides flexibility in the zoning and development process and allows the market to shape the location of supporting land uses while providing local communities with protection from potential incompatibilities between adjacent developments. This type of flexibility provides the Future Land Use Plan with the ability needed to respond to changes in community needs, a growing population, and an evolving market.

#### Activity Centers

Activity Centers are a special type of character area, intended to serve as concentrated nodes of development and activity throughout the County. There are three types; Regional Center, Town Center, and Neighborhood Center, depending on the levels of development intensity and activity and whether the area is intended to serve local neighborhoods or the larger region.

<!-- page 29 -->
### Guiding Principles
The Guiding Principles are a set of overarching themes that provide guidance and direction for development across DeKalb County. They are aspirational in nature, and serve as a foundation for the County to achieve the vision established by Future Land use Plan. These principles apply in all character areas across the County, and shape the more detailed principles that are outlined in each character area, such as Activity Centers or Traditional neighborhoods.

<<FIGURE>>
#### Activity Centers, Nodes, and Corridors
In order to support continued growth and development within the County while protecting existing single-family areas, new and more intense development will be focused within activity centers, nodes, and corridors.

<<FIGURE>>
#### Protect Existing Single-Family Neighborhoods
Preserve and enhance the integrity and quality of existing residential neighborhoods through appropriate transitions, buffers, and infill

<<FIGURE>>
#### Development Intensity
Focus new and higher intensity development in existing developed areas, particularly in locations with existing services, facilities, and infrastructure with capacity to support additional development.

<<FIGURE>>
#### Density Bonuses
Provide density bonuses for projects that provide community benefits, such as affordable workforce and senior housing components, pedestrian and bicycle connectivity improvements, or functional green space, and if they do not negatively impact or affect surrounding single-family neighborhoods.

<<FIGURE>>
#### Housing Options
Provide a variety of housing options for County residents at all stages of life. Denser and more innovative housing options should be focused in or near activity centers, nodes, and corridors

<<FIGURE>>
#### Environment & Sustainability
Development should prioritize sustainability and the preservation of DeKalb County’s dwindling natural spaces and undeveloped areas and be focused in areas where it will have the least negative impacts to the natural environment.

<<FIGURE>>
#### Multimodal Development
Reduce Vehicle Miles Traveled by promoting new development and redevelopment at or near activity centers, developing quality bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and providing better transit access

<<FIGURE>>
#### Cultural Diversity
Promote activities to highlight historic and cultural assets in the community and provide opportunities for community interaction.

<<FIGURE>>
#### Healthy Neighborhoods
Promote healthy living in neighborhoods by incorporating a pedestrian environment that encourages socialization, walking, biking and connectivity. Update or implement the recommendations of the Master Active Living Plans (MALPs).

<<FIGURE>>
#### Transit Oriented Development
Promote and provide incentives for transit-oriented development near existing rail stations. Identify locations for additional development near planned premium transit stations.

<<FIGURE>>
#### Tree & Greenspace Preservation
Establish tree preservation and landscaping standards. Prioritize the preservation of existing tree canopy and undeveloped areas.

<!-- page 30 -->
02 - LAND USE

# FUTURE LAND USE MAP

In this plan, “Character Areas” represent the various categories of land uses envisioned for Unincorporated DeKalb County, and are assigned to areas based upon the general characteristics outlined on the following page.

These character area types are consistent with the guiding principles outlined on the previous page, and unique sub-principles have been identified for each unique character area.

This approach is designed to help guide zoning decisions and frame policies that promote the preservation, enhancement, and development of the community in the future.

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 31 -->
<<FIGURE>>

## REGIONAL CENTER

**Density (du/ac)**
75 & Over; *No Max*

**Preferred Uses**
Townhomes / Condominiums / Apartments / Retail & Commercial / Office / Civic / Entertainment & Cultural / Parks & Recreation / Health Care / Institutional / Technology Centers

**Permitted Zoning**
MR-1, MR-2, HR-1, HR-2, HR-3, MU-1, MU-2, MU-3, MU-4, MU-5, OI, OIT, C-1, C-2

## TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOODS

**Density (du/ac)**
Up to 12

**Preferred Uses**
Traditional Single-Family Homes / Townhomes / Cottages / ADU’s / Apartments / Assisted Living / Neighborhood Retail / Schools / Institutional / Conservation Villages and Hamlets

**Permitted Zoning**
R-60, RNC, MU-1, MU-2, MR-1, C-1, OI, OIT, NS, RSM

## LIGHT INDUSTRIAL

**Density (du/ac)**
Up to 120 (live-work units)

**Preferred Uses**
Warehouse Distribution / Wholesale-Trade / Automotive / Entertainment

**Permitted Zoning**
OD, C-2, M-1, OI, M-2

## TOWN CENTER

**Density (du/ac)**
Up to 60 (*75 with approved SAP*)[^*]

**Preferred Uses**
Townhomes / Condominiums / Apartments / Retail & Commercial / Office / Civic / Entertainment & Cultural / Parks & Recreation / Health Care / Institutional / Technology Centers

**Permitted Zoning**
RSM, MR-1, MR-2, HR-1, HR-2, MU-1, MU-2, MU-3, MU-4, MU-5, OI, OIT, C-1, C-2, MALP

## SUBURBAN

**Density (du/ac)**
Up to 8

**Preferred Uses**
Single-Family Detached / Townhomes / Clustered Residential / Conservation Villages and Hamlets / Neighborhood Retail / Schools / Libraries / Assisted Living / Parks and Recreation / Health Care / Civic / Cottages

**Permitted Zoning**
MU-1, C-1, OI, NS, RE, RLG, R-100, R-85,

## EMPLOYMENT CENTERS

Based on the DeKalb Strategic Economic Development Plan, of areas located within unincorporated DeKalb County. Other areas have been identified in select DeKalb Municipalities.
---------------------------------------
Kensington MARTA Station, South DeKalb Cluster, Bouldercrest Cluster, Medline/Scottdale North Druid Hills / Briarcliff, Emory, CDC

## NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER

**Density (du/ac)**
Up to 40 (*50 with approved SAP*)[^*]
(Briarcliff-Clairmont SAP - up to 70)

**Preferred Uses**
Townhomes / Condominiums / Apartments / Retail and Commercial / Office / Civic / Parks & Recreation / Institutional

**Permitted Zoning**
R-60, RSM, MR-1, MR-2, MU-1, MU-2, MU-3, NS, OI, OIT, C-1

## INSTITUTIONAL

**Density (du/ac)**
N/A

**Preferred Uses**
Schools / Religious Facilities / Healthcare Facilities / Civic / Institutional Uses / Libraries / Jails / Prisons / Government Facilities

**Permitted Zoning**
R-100, R-85, R-75, R-60, RSM, MR-1, MR-2, MU-1, MU-2, MU-3, OI, OIT

## CONSERVATION OPEN SPACE

**Density (du/ac)**
N/A

**Preferred Uses**
Passive Parks / Nature Trails / Floodplains / Wetlands / Watersheds / Golf Courses / Athletic Fields / Amphitheaters

**Permitted Zoning**
All zoning designations

## COMMERCIAL REDEVELOPMENT CORRIDOR

**Density (du/ac)**
Up to 30 (*40 with approved SAP*)[^*]

**Preferred Uses**
Townhomes / Condominiums / Apartments / Retail and Commercial / Office Mixed Use / Institutional

**Permitted Zoning**
MU-1, MU-2, MU-3, MR-1, RSM, C-1, C-2, OI, OD, OIT

## INDUSTRIAL

**Density (du/ac)**
N/A

**Preferred Uses**
Manufacturing / Warehouse Distribution / Wholesale-Trade / Automotive / Entertainment

**Permitted Zoning**
OD, C-2, M and M-2

[^*]: with approved SAP

<!-- page 32 -->
# ACTIVITY CENTERS

The foundation of DeKalb County’s Future Land Use Plan is to focus more intense development within Activity Centers. This approach is intended to protect existing neighborhoods from incompatible land uses, while allowing for continued growth and investment within the County. This plan identifies three distinct Activity Center Types: Regional Center, Town Center, and Neighborhood Center.

<<FIGURE>>

### Small Area Plans
One of the primary tools to guide development within Activity Centers is through the use of Small Area Plans (SAPs). These plans allow policy makers and the community to guide development, policies, and investments at a much finer level of detail than can be provided in the overall comprehensive plan.

SAP’s address specific land use issues where needed and support general development policies with detailed design guidelines. They can also control the transitions of land uses between an Activity Center and surrounding land uses, protecting surrounding uses, such as single family development, from negative impacts created by land uses within the area.

For areas where there is an approved SAP, completed and adopted within the last 10 years, density and height regulations as defined in the SAP override any underlying Future Land Use regulations whose maximums may be more limiting, including Activity Center definitions.

### Development Core
Activity Centers should focus the most intense development near the “core” or geographic center of the area, and around major intersections and transit stations. Development should be more clustered and walkable in nature, with a mix of commercial, office, and residential uses. Other design or community elements may include a more connected street grid, multimodal transportation options such as wide sidewalks and bike lanes, and an enhanced level of urban amenities such as improved streetscapes, small parks, or plazas.

### Transitions
Development intensity should transition between the activity center’s core and the edges/periphery. Smaller scale development, such as residential and low rise professional services may serve as a transition zone between the core and adjacent neighborhoods outside the activity center. Staggered building heights, setbacks, buffers, and greenspaces can serve as effective tools to mitigate compatibility issues.

### Infrastructure
Activity Centers can take advantage of limited public dollars by focusing infrastructure needs and investments in smaller geographic areas. Focusing infill in both existing and emerging activity centers can reduce both initial investments and long term maintenance costs for the County, particularly when infrastructure can be combined with community amenities, such as the integration of stormwater infrastructure with usable community greenspace.

<!-- page 33 -->
### Neighborhood Center

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

### Town Center

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

### Regional Center

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 34 -->
# 03 - LAND USE

## Activity Center Location Map

<<FIGURE>>

* RC - Regional Center
* TC - Town Center
* NC - Neighborhood Center
* CRC - Commercial Redevelopment Corridor
* TN - Traditional Neighborhood
* SUB - Suburban
* IND - Industrial
* LIND - Light Industrial
* INS - Institutional
* COS - Conservation Open Space

* SAP - Small Area Plan
* EC - Employment Center

<!-- page 35 -->
# REGIONAL CENTERS

| Map ID | Name | Small Area Plans | Employment Center |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| R-1 | Presidential Parkway | None | I-85/I-285 Cluster |
| R-2 | Kensington MARTA Station | Kensington MARTA Station LCI and Supplemental LCI | Kensington |
| R-3 | South DeKalb Mall | Flat Shoals and Candler Rd LCI | South DeKalb Center |

# TOWN CENTERS

| Map ID | Name | Small Area Plans | Employment Center |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| T-1 | I-285 & Chamblee Tucker Rd | None | None |
| T-2 | Northlake Mall | Northlake LCI | Northlake |
| T-3 | Toco Hills | North Druid Hills LCI | None |
| T-4 | North DeKalb Mall | None | None |
| T-5 | Sage Hill | None | Emory/CDC |
| T-6 | N. Decatur & Scott Blvd | Medline LCI | Medline/Scottsdale |
| T-7 | North Decatur at Clairmont | None | Emory/CDC |
| T-8 | Redan Rd & Indian Creek Dr | Master Active Living Plan | None |
| T-9 | Memorial Dr and Columbia Dr | Master Active Living Plan | None |
| T-10 | I-20 and Wesley Chapel Rd | Wesley Chapel LCI and MARTA I-20 TOD Plan | None |
| T-11 | I-20 and Gresham Rd | Master Active Living Plan | None |

# NEIGHBORHOOD CENTERS

| Map ID | Name | Small Area Plans | Employment Center |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| N-1 | Briarcliff & Clairmont | Briarcliff -Clairmont SAP | Druid Hills/Briarcliff |
| N-2 | Briarcliff & N Druid Hills | North Druid Hills LCI | Druid Hills/Briarcliff |
| N-3 | LaVista Rd & Briarcliff Rd | None | None |
| N-4 | North Druid Hills Rd and Clairmont/Mason Mill | North Druid Hills LCI | None |
| N-5 | GSU/Georgia Piedmont | Memorial Drive Plan | None |
| N-6 | Emory Village | Emory Village LCI | Emory/CDC |
| N-7 | Hairston & Rockbridge | None | None |
| N-8 | Redan & Hairston Rd | None | None |
| N-9 | Swift Creek | None | None |
| N-10 | Covington Hwy & Hairston Rd | None | None |
| N-11 | Kelly Lake | None | None |
| N-12 | Flat Shoals Pkwy & Clifton Rd | Candler-Flat Shoals LCI | South DeKalb Cluster |

<!-- page 36 -->
02 - LAND USE

# REGIONAL CENTER

<<FIGURE>>

* RC - Regional Center
* TC - Town Center
* NC - Neighborhood Center
* CRC - Commercial Redevelopment Corridor
* TN - Traditional Neighborhood
* SUB - Suburban
* IND - Industrial
* LIND - Light Industrial
* INS - Institutional
* COS - Conservation Open Space

<!-- page 37 -->
### Description

The intent of the Regional Activity Center is to promote the concentration of intensity, development and regional serving activities in a centralized location that allows for a variety of uses, reduces dependency on automobile travel, and promotes walkability and increased transit usage. These areas include the highest intensity residential, commercial, office, and higher-education facilities allowed within DeKalb County and serve as regional destinations for employment, shopping, and services. These areas are characterized by high accessibility via the interstates and major roadways, transit, and trails. The areas also have on-site parking, high floor-area-ratios, large tracts of land, and campus or unified development.

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

### Regional Center

Encourage density of residential in mixed-use projects at 75 dwelling units or greater and with the most intense development located towards the commercial and/or office core of the Regional Center. Properties located along the outer edges of the Regional Center should be sensitive to the building height and density of adjacent single family residential.

### Height Transition

The most intense development types and tallest buildings should be concentrated in the core of the activity center, gradually transitioning to less intense uses and lower building heights as one moves further from the core. The edge of the activity center should serve as a transition zone, buffering more intense uses in the core from adjacent single-family neighborhoods and other uses outside the Activity Center's boundaries.

<!-- page 38 -->
02 - LAND USE

# TOWN CENTER

<<FIGURE>>

* RC - Regional Center
* TC - Town Center
* NC - Neighborhood Center
* CRC - Commercial Redevelopment Corridor
* TN - Traditional Neighborhood
* SUB - Suburban
* IND - Industrial
* LIND - Light Industrial
* INS - Institutional
* COS - Conservation Open Space

<!-- page 39 -->
### Description

The intent of the Town Center is to promote the concentration of higher intensity residential and commercial uses, which serve several communities surrounding the center, in order to reduce automobile travel, promote walkability and increased transit usage. The areas act as a focal point for several neighborhoods with moderate densities and a variety of activities such as retail, commercial, professional office, housing, and public open space that are all easily accessible by pedestrians. Town Centers are typically smaller in size and scale than Regional Centers and have a character similar to Neighborhood Centers, but at a larger scale. Additional density beyond the identified baseline may be allowed if there is an adopted small area plan for the activity center that is no more than 10 years old. At a minimum, the small area plan should include a process to engage nearby residents and stakeholders, identify where core, intermediate, and edge areas are located and include additional detail on the location of heights and densities that will allow for appropriate transitions to any adjacent, stable, single-family neighborhoods.

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

### Town Center

Encourage density of residential in mixed-use projects, not to exceed 60 dwelling units per acre (except in locations with an approved SAP providing other guidance) and with the most intense development located towards the commercial and/or office core of the Town Center. Properties located along the outer edges of the Town Center shall be sensitive to the building height and density of adjacent single-family residential

### Height Transition

The most intense development types and tallest buildings should be concentrated in the core of the activity center, gradually transitioning to less intense uses and lower building heights as one moves further from the core. The edge of the activity center should serve as a transition zone, buffering more intense uses in the core from adjacent single-family neighborhoods and other uses outside the Activity Center’s boundaries.

<!-- page 40 -->
02 - LAND USE

# NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER

<<FIGURE>>

*   RC - Regional Center
*   TC - Town Center
*   NC - Neighborhood Center
*   CRC - Commercial Redevelopment Corridor
*   TN - Traditional Neighborhood
*   SUB - Suburban
*   IND - Industrial
*   LIND - Light Industrial
*   INS - Institutional
*   COS - Conservation Open Space

<!-- page 41 -->
### Description

The intent of the Neighborhood Center Character Area is to promote a concentration of clustered residential and commercial uses that serve the goods and service needs of a few surrounding, local neighborhoods. These areas and their uses shall complement the smaller scale character of nearby neighborhoods while reducing automobile travel and promote walkability and increased transit usage. These areas act as a neighborhood focal point with a concentration of activities including retail, neighborhood commercial, professional office, moderate-density housing, and public open space that are all easily accessible by pedestrians. Neighborhood Centers are often the smallest Activity Centers in terms of size and scale. Additional density beyond the identified baseline may be allowed if there is an adopted small area plan for the activity center that is no more than 10 years old. At a minimum, the small area plan should include a process to engage nearby residents and stakeholders, identify where core, intermediate, and edge areas are located and include additional detail on the location of heights and densities that will allow for appropriate transitions to any adjacent, stable, single-family neighborhoods.

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

### Neighborhood Center

Encourage compact residential in mixed-use projects, not to exceed 40 dwelling units per acre, (except in locations with an approved SAP providing other guidance). Concentrate the most intense commercial and/or office development around a focal point at the core of the neighborhood center. Properties located along the outer edges of the Neighborhood Center shall be sensitive to the building height and density of adjacent single family residential.

### Height Transition

The most intense development types and tallest buildings should be concentrated in the core of the activity center, gradually transitioning to less intense uses and lower building heights as one moves further from the core. The edge of the activity center should serve as a transition zone, buffering more intense uses in the core from adjacent single-family neighborhoods and other uses outside the Activity Center’s boundaries.

<!-- page 42 -->
# 02 - LAND USE

# COMMERCIAL REDEVELOPMENT CORRIDOR

<<FIGURE>>

*   RC - Regional Center
*   TC - Town Center
*   NC - Neighborhood Center
*   CRC - Commercial Redevelopment Corridor
*   TN - Traditional Neighborhood
*   SUB - Suburban
*   IND - Industrial
*   LIND - Light Industrial
*   INS - Institutional
*   COS - Conservation Open Space

<!-- page 43 -->
### Identifying Features

*   Townhomes
*   Condominiums
*   Apartments
*   Retail and Commercial
*   Office Mixed Use
*   Institutional

### Description

This Character Area is intended to improve the function and aesthetic appeal of commercial corridors in the County and promote the redevelopment of commercial corridors in decline. Today, these areas predominantly consist of strip-style shopping centers, and are often characterized by high levels of vehicular traffic, surface parking, large parcel sizes, and a general lack of pedestrian and bicycle connectivity. Because development is oriented along a corridor rather than a larger development core, floor-area-ratios should be moderate, with a maximum density of 30 dwelling units per acre and a maximum height of 3 stories.

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

### Land Use Compatibility

Transition zones and height planes should focus the most intense development away from adjacent lower density development. When adjacent to single-family areas, development should complement those uses in height and density.

### Buffers

Require the incorporation of enhanced vegetated buffers between non-residential uses and adjacent single-family areas.

### Development

Where appropriate, new development should be built closer to the street, on underutilized parking lots, and create new internal streets and smaller blocks. Create compact, walkable, mixed-use districts to reduce automobile dependency for short trips and increase access to basic services.

### Streetscapes & The Public Realm

Improve the pedestrian environment and community character with consistent sidewalks, signage, lighting, landscaping, billboard controls, and other design features where possible.

### Multimodal Connectivity

Provide safe and attractive facilities for pedestrians and bicyclists, including sidewalks, multi-use paths, cycle tracks, bike lanes and bicycle parking, that link community amenities and transit.

### Parking and Access

Create access management standards, encourage shared parking, and locate parking to the rear or side of buildings, screened from view

### Existing Residential

Some locations also include naturally occurring affordable housing. This housing should be preserved or improved, or replaced at the same level of affordability.

### Regulatory Standards

Develop Architectural Standards to upgrade the appearance of existing older commercial buildings with facade improvements.

### Small Area Plans

Small Area Plans (SAPs) allow policy makers and the community to guide development, policies, and investments at a much finer level of detail than can be provided in the overall comprehensive plan. For areas with an approved SAP, additional density may be allowed.

<!-- page 44 -->
# TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOODS

<<FIGURE>>

*   RC - Regional Center
*   TC - Town Center
*   NC - Neighborhood Center
*   CRC - Commercial Redevelopment Corridor
*   TN - Traditional Neighborhood
*   SUB - Suburban
*   IND - Industrial
*   LIND - Light Industrial
*   INS - Institutional
*   COS - Conservation Open Space

<!-- page 45 -->
### Identifying Features
*   Traditional Single Family Homes
*   Apartments
*   Assisted Living
*   Neighborhood Retail
*   Institutional
*   Townhomes
*   Cottages
*   Conservation Villages and Hamlets

### Description
The intent of the Traditional Neighborhoods Character Area is to preserve the style and appeal of older traditional neighborhood communities. These areas primarily consist of residential areas in older parts of the community that were typically developed prior to WWII. The characteristics include higher pedestrian orientation, sidewalks and more grid-like street patterns. They have on-street parking, small, regular lots, and buildings closer to the front property line. Many of these areas have a predominance of alleys and neighborhood-scale commercial scattered throughout.

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

### Land Use Compatibility
Permit cottage court developments, accessory housing units, new well-designed, small-scale infill multi-family residences and other innovative housing types to increase housing choice, income diversity, and limited neighborhood density.

### Buffers
In areas adjacent to Activity Centers, require the transition from higher to lower densities to occur within Activity Center.

### Development
Create community and neighborhood focal points through the use of existing commercial areas or public parks, or by locating new parks or public squares, schools, community centers, or well-designed small commercial centers at suitable locations within walking distance of residences. Create compact, walkable, mixed-use districts to reduce automobile dependency for short trips and increase access to basic services.

### Streetscapes & The Public Realm
Create an enhanced sense-of-place by using design principles that promote good streetscapes and a strong public realm.

### Multimodal Connectivity
Enhance connectivity by providing pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, high levels of street connectivity, multiple site access points, and connections between adjacent subdivisions, properties, and retail/commercial development.

### Parking and Access
Where appropriate, require new streets to connect to adjacent street networks or developments and minimize or prohibit cul-de-sacs.

### Regulatory Standards
Encourage compatible architecture styles that maintain or compliment neighborhood character and enforce residential infill development regulations in to preserve and stabilize existing neighborhoods.

<!-- page 46 -->
# SUBURBAN

<<FIGURE>>

*   RC - Regional Center
*   TC - Town Center
*   NC - Neighborhood Center
*   CRC - Commercial Redevelopment Corridor
*   TN - Traditional Neighborhood
*   SUB - Suburban
*   IND - Industrial
*   LIND - Light Industrial
*   INS - Institutional
*   COS - Conservation Open Space

<!-- page 47 -->
### Identifying Features
* Detached Single-Family
* Townhomes
* Retail
* Institutional
* Assisted Living Facilities
* Parks and Related
* Health Care
* Civic
* Cottages
* Conservation Villages and Hamlets

### Description
The intent of the Suburban Character Area is to recognize those areas of the county that have developed in traditional suburban land use patterns while encouraging new development to have increased connectivity and accessibility. These areas include those developed (built out) and those under development pressures. These areas are characterized by low pedestrian orientation, limited transit access, scattered civic buildings and curvilinear street patterns. Future development should provide better pedestrian and community connectivity and be designed in a way that preserves and enhances existing greenspace. The proposed density for areas of this type is up to 8 dwelling units per acre.

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

### Land Use Compatibility
Permit small scale infill such as cottage court development, accessory housing units, small-scale infill and other innovative housing types to increase housing choice and income diversity without significantly altering established neighborhood development patterns.

### Buffers
In areas adjacent to Activity Centers, require the transition from higher to lower densities to occur within Activity Center

### Development
Create community and neighborhood focal points through the use of existing commercial areas or public parks, or by locating new parks or public squares, schools, community centers, or well-designed small commercial centers at suitable locations within walking distance of residences.

### Mixed-Use and Non-Residential
Allow limited non-residential development, such small mixed-use developments outside of existing, stable single-family neighborhoods, particularly in locations with high levels of pedestrian connectivity, to meet the needs of surrounding residents.

### Streetscapes & The Public Realm
Create an enhanced sense-of-place by using design principles that promote good streetscapes and a strong public realm.

### Multimodal Connectivity
Enhance connectivity by providing pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, high levels of street connectivity, multiple site access points, and connections between adjacent subdivisions, properties, and retail/commercial development.

### Parking and Access
Where appropriate, require new streets to connect to adjacent street networks or developments and minimize or prohibit cul-de-sacs.

### Regulatory Standards
Encourage compatible architecture styles that maintain or compliment neighborhood character and enforce residential infill development regulations in to preserve and stabilize existing neighborhoods.

### Conservation Areas
New development should be designed to preserve existing undeveloped greenspace, especially in areas identified on the “Additional Areas for Consideration” map. Potential development strategies include clustered development, conservation communities, or conservation villages and hamlets.

<!-- page 48 -->
# INDUSTRIAL

<<FIGURE>>

RC - Regional Center
TC - Town Center
NC - Neighborhood Center
CRC - Commercial Redevelopment Corridor
TN - Traditional Neighborhood
SUB - Suburban
IND - Industrial
LIND - Light Industrial
INS - Institutional
COS - Conservation Open Space

<!-- page 49 -->
### Identifying Features
* Manufacturing
* Warehouse Distribution
* Wholesale-Trade
* Automotive
* Entertainment

### Description
The intent of the Industrial Character Area is to identify areas that are appropriate for more intense industrial and industrial related uses. The location of these uses shall be such as to protect residential and commercial areas from potential disturbances generated by industrial land uses. These areas consist of land used in higher intensity manufacturing, assembly, processing activities where noise, vibration and air pollution or other nuisance characteristics are not contained on-site.

<<FIGURE>>
<<FIGURE>>
<<FIGURE>>

### Land Use Compatibility
Protect existing and undeveloped land zoned as industrial from intrusion by conflicting land uses. Limit conflict between Industrial and other uses by preventing the encroachment of industrial uses into established residential areas outside of identified industrial areas, and prohibiting the introduction of new residential development within industrial areas.

### Buffers
Incorporate landscaping, vegetated buffers and other site design elements to soften or shield views of buildings and parking lots and mitigate potential impacts from industrial areas.

### Infrastructure
Provide appropriate infrastructure support for industrial development in designated industrial areas, and retrofit existing or planned industrial areas with adequate water, sewer, stormwater, and transportation infrastructure for all component uses at build-out

### Development
Locate industrial centers in areas with good access to interstates, truck routes, and direct industrial development to existing industrial districts, especially sites with limited negative environmental impacts.

### Streetscapes & The Public Realm
Improve safety and community character by providing consistent lighting and landscaping, particularly street trees, along public right-of-way

### Parking and Access
Provide access controls and management standards in compliance with the DeKalb County Transportation Plan. Designate truck routes to reduce noise, pollutants and traffic congestion in residential areas.

### Small Area Plans (SAPS)
Conduct small area plans and freight cluster studies to better define industrial areas and address transitions and traffic impacts.

### Regulatory Standards
Designate specific areas for industrial development through the use of zoning and other land use tools. Create and implement zoning and development regulations for industrial uses.

<!-- page 50 -->
02 - LAND USE

# LIGHT INDUSTRIAL

<<FIGURE>>

| | |
|---|---|
| | RC - Regional Center |
| | TC - Town Center |
| | NC - Neighborhood Center |
| | CRC - Commercial Redevelopment Corridor |
| | TN - Traditional Neighborhood |
| | SUB - Suburban |
| | IND - Industrial |
| | LIND - Light Industrial |
| | INS - Institutional |
| | COS - Conservation Open Space |

<!-- page 51 -->
### Identifying Features

* Warehouse Distribution
* Wholesale-Trade
* Automotive
* Entertainment

### Description

The intent of the Light Industrial Character Area is identity areas appropriate for industrial type uses. The location of these areas shall preserve the appeal and appearance of residential and commercial areas from the prospective intrusion of light industrial land uses. These areas consist of areas used in low intensity manufacturing, including wholesale trade, and distribution activities that do not generate excessive noise, vibration, air pollution or other nuisance characteristics.

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

### Land Use Compatibility

Allow light industrial uses such as breweries, maker space, set design and fabrication and other similar uses in commercial areas, and encourage Light Industrial development where it can serve as a buffer between Industrial areas and commercial or residential areas.

### Buffers

Incorporate landscaping, vegetated buffers and other site design elements to soften or shield views of buildings and parking lots and mitigate potential impacts from industrial areas.

### Infrastructure

Provide appropriate infrastructure support for industrial development in designated industrial areas, and retrofit existing or planned industrial areas with adequate water, sewer, stormwater, and transportation infrastructure for all component uses at build-out

### Development

Locate industrial centers in areas with good access to interstates, truck routes, and direct industrial development to existing industrial districts, especially sites with limited negative environmental impacts.

### Mixed-Use and Non-Residential

Allow for the integration of appropriate light industrial uses, such as breweries, maker spaces, or live/work, into new mixed use and re-purposed development

### Streetscapes & The Public Realm

Improve safety and community character by providing consistent lighting and landscaping, particularly street trees, along public right-of-way

### Parking and Access

Provide access controls and management standards in compliance with the DeKalb County Transportation Plan. Designate truck routes to reduce noise, pollutants and traffic congestion in residential areas.

### Small Area Plans (SAPS)

Conduct small area plans and freight cluster studies to better define industrial areas and address transitions and traffic impacts.

### Regulatory Standards

Designate specific areas for industrial development through the use of zoning and other land use tools. Create and implement zoning and development regulations for industrial uses.

<!-- page 52 -->
# INSTITUTIONAL

<<FIGURE>>

* RC - Regional Center
* TC - Town Center
* NC - Neighborhood Center
* CRC - Commercial Redevelopment Corridor
* TN - Traditional Neighborhood
* SUB - Suburban
* IND - Industrial
* LIND - Light Industrial
* INS - Institutional
* COS - Conservation Open Space

<!-- page 53 -->
### Identifying Features

*   Universities, schools
*   Public Facilities
*   Government Offices
*   Libraries
*   Courthouses

### Description

The intent of the Institutional Character Area is to designate specific areas that provide institutional services. These areas consist of large areas used for religious, civic, educational and governmental purposes. Those smaller areas with similar purposes have been integrated into the rural, suburban and traditional neighborhood character areas as secondary uses and are considered residential support uses.

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

### Land Use Compatibility

Ensure that institutional developments include appropriate transitions to nearby lower density residential areas.

### Infrastructure

Locate new institutional developments in areas with direct access to existing infrastructure

### Development

Provide opportunities for the development of institutional uses within the County.

### Mixed-Use and Non-Residential

Integrate institutional uses into compact, mixed-use districts where possible to integrate with the surrounding community, increase access, and reduce automobile dependency for short trips.

### Streetscapes & The Public Realm

Ensure that institutional investments contribute to the public realm by incorporating good placemaking and streetscaping elements, such as public spaces, street furniture, and multimodal accessibility to adjacent areas and transit facilities.

### Multimodal Connectivity

Provide transportation alternatives to reduce automobile dependency including access to biking, pedestrian, and transit infrastructure.

### Parking and Access

Create and implement driveway controls and access management standards.

### Public Greenspaces & Parks

Consider integrating and combining public open spaces with institutional uses, such as public plazas in front of public buildings

### Partnerships

Coordinate and combine institutional uses where possible to promote partnerships between agencies and institutions

<!-- page 54 -->
# CONSERVATION OPEN SPACE

<<FIGURE>>

RC - Regional Center
TC - Town Center
NC - Neighborhood Center
CRC - Commercial Redevelopment Corridor
TN - Traditional Neighborhood
SUB - Suburban
IND - Industrial
LIND - Light Industrial
INS - Institutional
COS - Conservation Open Space

<!-- page 55 -->
### Identifying Features
*   Passive Parks
*   Nature Trails
*   Floodplains
*   Wetlands
*   Watersheds
*   Golf Courses
*   Athletic Fields
*   Amphitheaters

### Description
The intent of the Conservation and Open Space Character Area is to preserve areas in the county with significant natural and ecological features, as well as environmentally sensitive recreational facilities for public enjoyment. These areas consist of undeveloped natural lands, environmentally sensitive and conservation areas that are not suitable for development. It also includes land used for active recreational purposes that provide for a wide range of activities with some land designated for cultural and historic preservation.

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

### Land Use Compatibility
Design, implement and enforce land use and zoning tools that preserve conservation lands, green space, and water resources. Limit land uses within and near established preservation areas to compatible activities.

### Buffers
Consider using conservation areas and open spaces as buffers between incompatible land uses, such as industrial and residential areas

### Infrastructure
Inventory the amount and quality of remaining, undeveloped green spaces within the County. Identify areas such as unused or excess right-of-way and redevelopment areas to be used for greenspace. Consider using greenspace as passive infrastructure, such such using parks to store stormwater overflow

### Development
Require that usable, functional greenspace and open space is set aside for all major developments. Promote the development of communities that feature greenspace and neighborhood parks. Identify strategic greenspace acquisition and utilize innovative partnerships or financing tools for conservation and greenspace preservation.

### Streetscapes & The Public Realm
Provide wayfinding/markers and signage along trail routes, as well as appropriate pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, such as lighting, benches, and bike racks.

### Multimodal Connectivity
Increase the amount, quality, connectivity and accessibility of greenspace. This may include areas with trails and greenways or natural areas only. Create a network of safe and pleasant trails and greenways.

### Public Greenspaces & Parks
Promote conservation and greenspace areas as passive use and recreation destinations, and preserve open space, natural and critical environmental areas throughout the County.

### Regulatory Standards
Utilize environmental statutes to protect conservation and green space areas, and protect environmentally sensitive areas including wetlands, floodplains, water supply watersheds, and other water sources.

### Partnerships
Coordinate with nongovernmental agencies such as foundations, land trusts, land banks, and other entities to acquire and protect land, and provide a framework for community and voluntary groups to participate in green space acquisition and management. Adopt/Implement the Comprehensive Transportation Plan pedestrian greenway projects, and coordinate environmental protection programs and statutes with the appropriate agencies.

<!-- page 56 -->
02 - LAND USE

# ADDITIONAL AREAS FOR CONSIDERATION

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 57 -->
### Additional Areas for Consideration

DeKalb County is fortunate to have numerous areas with unique natural features. Most notable are Stone Mountain, Arabia Mountain and the natural outcroppings in the Lithonia area. However, DeKalb also has many natural features less known such as the South River, Nancy Creek, Snapfinger Creek, Peachtree Creek and a significant tree canopy. Development proposals in these areas should consider the natural features to ensure that there is a balance between the environment and economic development. The Additional Areas for Consideration map identifies areas within which the County should evaluate development proposals for consistency with all environmental, tree protection, stormwater run-off, and water quality related policies to ensure that steps are taken to allow development in an eco-friendly manner. These areas include the South River Forest and corridor both inside and outside Interstate 285, labeled A and B, and the Eastern Conservation Area, labeled C.

The South River Forest area presents several opportunities to develop in a smart and sustainable way, promote economic development, and work to restore, enhance or preserve natural areas along the South River. This area has already experienced development, including residential, commercial, industrial and public facilities. There have been several recent development proposals and planning efforts that highlight the opportunity for a coordinated approach.

The Eastern Conservation Area is in the extreme eastern area of DeKalb County and is one of the last areas within DeKalb County with large parcels of undeveloped land. This area presents a unique opportunity for the County to evaluate the preservation of the remaining, dwindling greenspace, some of which includes former agriculture and farmland. The area also includes industrial uses and quarries, thus careful consideration and coordination is needed in this area. One strategy that may be explored includes encouraging conservation community development or clustered development, to allow for the conservation of undeveloped areas. This approach aims to set aside some of the land as greenspace while allowing development to be clustered.

The DeKalb Village Conservation Community Strategy, included in the appendix of this document provides additional guidance on conservation village and hamlet development.

<<FIGURE>>
Google Maps

<<FIGURE>>
Rails to Trails Conservancy

<<FIGURE>>
Google Maps

<<FIGURE>>
Google Maps

<!-- page 58 -->
# LAND USE QUICK REFERENCE GUIDE

## CHARACTER AREAS AND PERMITTED ZONING DISTRICTS

| Regional Center | Town Center | Neighborhood Center | Commercial Redevelopment Corridor | Traditional Neighborhood | Suburban | Industrial | Light Industrial | Institutional |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| MR-1 | RSM | R-60 | RSM | R-60 | RE | M | M | R-100 |
| MR-2 | MR-1 | RSM | MR-1 | RNC | RLG | M-2 | M-2 | R-85 |
| HR-1 | MR-2 | MR-1 | MR-2 | RSM | R-100 | OD | OD | R-75 |
| HR-2 | HR-1 | MR-2 | MU-1 | MR-1 | R-85 | C-2 | C-2 | R-60 |
| HR-3 | HR-2 | MU-1 | MU-2 | MU-1 | R-75 | | OI | RSM |
| MU-1 | MU-1 | MU-2 | MU-3 | MU-2 | R-60 | | | MR-1 |
| MU-2 | MU-2 | MU-3 | NS | NS | RNC | | | MR-2 |
| MU-3 | MU-3 | NS | C-1 | C-1 | MHP | | | MU-1 |
| MU-4 | MU-4 | C-1 | C-2 | OIT | RSM | | | MU-2 |
| MU-5 | MU-5 | OI | OI | | MU-1 | | | MU-3 |
| OI | OI | OIT | OD | | NS | | | OI |
| OIT | OIT | | OIT | | C1 | | | OIT |
| C-1 | C-1 | | | | OIT | | | |
| C-2 | C-2 | | | | OI | | | |

## DEKALB COUNTY LAND USE MAP CHANGES, 2007 -2022

| Initial Designation | COS | RR | SUB | TN | NC | TC | RC | OP | LIND | IND | CRC | HC | INS | Amendments From |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **Conservation / Open Space (COS)** | | | 1 | | | | | | | | | | | **1** |
| **Rural Residential (RR)** | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| **Suburban (SUB)** | | | | 1 | 3 | 8 | | | 1 | 1 | 8 | | 2 | **24** |
| **Traditional Neighborhood (TN)** | | | | | | 1 | | | | | | | | **1** |
| **Neighborhood Center (NC)** | | | | | | 1 | | | | | | | | |
| **Town Center (TC)** | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| **Regional Center (RC)** | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| **Office Park (OP)** | | | | | | 1 | | | | | | | | **1** |
| **Light Industrial (LI)** | | | | | | | | 1 | | | | | | **1** |
| **Industrial (IND)** | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| **Commercial Redevelopment Corridor (CRC)** | | | 2 | | | | | | | | | | | **2** |
| **Highway Corridor (HC)** | | | | | | | | | 1 | | | | | **1** |
| **Institutional (INS)** | | | | | 1 | | | | | | | | | **1** |
| **Amendments To** | **-** | **-** | **3** | **1** | **4** | **11** | **-** | **1** | **2** | **1** | **8** | **-** | **2** | **34** |

<!-- page 59 -->
# CHAPTER 03
## POLICY SPOTLIGHTS

<!-- page 60 -->
### POLICY SPOTLIGHT
# ARTS & CULTURE

<<FIGURE>>

#### Key Takeaways

* Designate arts and culture staff
* Create arts and culture organization
* Develop arts and culture master plan
* Additional investment in disadvantaged areas

## FRAMING THE ISSUE

Arts and culture are celebrated and exhibited in numerous areas throughout DeKalb County. The County is home to a diverse collection of organizations, festivals, and institutions, including the Porter Sanford III Performing Arts & Community Center, Callanwolde Foundation, Fernbank Museum of Natural History, Fernbank Museum of Science, the DeKalb Symphony Orchestra, Essential Theatre, Dance 101, Decatur Book Festival, Michael C. Carlos Museum, We Love BuHi, and the Instituto de Mexico. Additionally, located in DeKalb are three K-12 public schools offering an arts-based curriculum, DeKalb Elementary School of the Arts, DeKalb School of the Arts, and the Museum School, and prestigious higher education institutions such as Emory University and Oglethorpe University offering a focus or concentration in arts and culture studies as well as venues.

As a place of deep history, there are 56 districts, buildings, or sites in the County on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) representing a diversity of architectural and historical resources. These historical resources provide valuable opportunities to uphold past events and accomplishments that contribute to DeKalb's unique cultural environment today.

Although the County itself does not have an Arts and Culture Plan in place, several cities in DeKalb have developed Arts and Culture and/or public art master plans of their own. This includes Avondale Estates, Brookhaven, Chamblee, Clarkston, Decatur, Doraville, Dunwoody, Pine Lake and Tucker.

### Focus Areas
Based on discussions with key arts and culture stakeholders, the following focus areas have been identified.

* Facilities – There is a lack of a range of event space, limited artist working space, and limited museum and gallery space for permanent and temporary displays.
* Support - DeKalb County does not have an organization, department, or staff focused on arts, beyond the DeKalb Entertainment Commission, which is focused on supporting film production.
* Planning - Stakeholders noted the need for Arts and Culture planning to be elevated and treated like other priorities like parks, trails, or sidewalks.
* Equity - While there are significant concentrations of arts and cultural venues in central west DeKalb, there is a need for more venues in other parts of the County.

<!-- page 61 -->
### Examples from the Region

#### Fulton County
In 1979, the Fulton County Board of Commissioners established a 15-member Fulton County Arts Council. The Council works with the Fulton County Department of Arts & Culture to assist the Commission in the development of public policy support for the arts industry, makes recommendations to the Commission on funding the arts, and oversees the development and implementation of programs. A five-year Fulton County Cultural Action Plan (2021-2026) was recently adopted to shape the strategic direction of arts planning and programming in the County.

#### Gwinnett County
ArtWorks! is Gwinnett's unifying arts organization led by a five-member Board of Directors and a nineteen-member community board (named the "Board of Doers"), which is made up of arts, corporate, and public sector representatives. Gwinnett is currently developing a creative economy master plan for the County. This master plan will help provide vision, goals, priorities, and strategic direction for the arts in Gwinnett, with a strong focus on fostering and supporting creative economic sectors.

#### Clayton County
Arts Clayton is a non-profit that focuses on public-private partnerships to enrich lives in Clayton County through the arts. Since its inception, Arts Clayton has focused on three areas of service which remain the goals of its mission today: support arts education for students in schools at all levels, provide venues and exhibit opportunities for Georgia artists, and promote the arts in community development as a means of strengthening the economic vitality and improving the quality of life.

### RECOMMENDATIONS
The following recommendations represent potential opportunities for DeKalb County to consider in supporting Arts and Culture. These recommendations have emerged through existing conditions analysis, peer example review, and stakeholder and public involvement:

#### Organizational Structure

##### Staffing
Designate a point person within DeKalb County Government to assist with arts and culture related coordination such as permitting, creating a central database and event calendar; and assisting with cross-promotion of organizations and events.

##### Arts Council
Create an arts council to advise the Board of Commissioners on arts-related policy and investments.

##### Arts Organization
Create a public-private Arts and Culture umbrella organization to implement the Arts and Culture initiatives and offer small grants to DeKalb County based artists and organizations.

#### Studies and Plans

##### Strategic Planning
Develop an Arts and Culture Master Plan to set a vision and strategically plan for future initiatives.

##### Housing
Perform an assessment to determine affordable housing stock for artists as well as affordable workspace. Based on the findings of the assessment.

##### Transportation:
Include access to arts and culture destinations in multi-modal transportation planning to ensure a variety of alternative and safe avenues for access to these destinations from all parts of the County.

##### Historic Preservation
Conduct a Countywide historic resource inventory to identify National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) eligible sites, pursue NRHP designation, and adopt local policies to protect these resources.

##### Equity
In disadvantaged communities or areas with limited resources, pursue opportunities to add arts and cultural facilities, and/or provide incentives for developers to incorporate artist space in their projects.

Leverage the cultural diversity of the County to hold unique events such as night markets, lantern festivals and cultural food truck festivals to enhance, educate, and celebrate local culture.

<!-- page 62 -->
# 03 - POLICY SPOTLIGHTS

## POLICY SPOTLIGHT
# BROADBAND

<<FIGURE>>

**Table 1** and **Figure 4** are a comparative look at broadband access by speed in the Atlanta Metropolitan Area counties. The Atlanta Metropolitan Area is the most densely populated region in the state and is home to many of the state’s largest employer’s headquarters.

The state of Georgia anticipates continued growth and will continue to attract employers and invest in infrastructure and institutions that aid in the development of start-up businesses. This will include expanding higher speed Broadband.

## FRAMING THE ISSUE

Georgia Senate Bill 402 was enacted in 2018. And from the enactment of this legislation the Georgia Broadband Deployment Initiative (GBDI) was formed. The GDBI coordinates with five (5) state agencies: Georgia Department of Community Affairs, Georgia Department of Transportation, Georgia Department of Economic Development, Georgia Technology Authority, and the State Properties Commission. Additionally, the GBDI also works with a Stakeholders Advisory Council comprised of private sector telecom and cable companies, utility cooperative representatives, and local government officials. The ultimate objective of this effort is serving unserved Georgians.

A primary focus of the State Broadband Plan is to identify, evaluate and recommend options which can be implemented by governments and providers.

### Georgia
According to BroadbandNow, a consumer advocacy website that compiles broadband access data and pricing, Georgia ranks 12th nationally in broadband access.

* **94.1%** of Georgians have access to wired broadband 25 mbps or higher.
* **90.8%** of Georgians have access to wired broadband 100 mbps or higher
* **40.8%** of Georgians have access to 1 gigabit broadband

### DeKalb County
According to Broadband Now’ numbers, DeKalb County’s access percentages are as follows:

* **99.4%** have access to broadband 25 mbps or higher.
* **99.4%** have access to broadband 100 mbps or higher.
* **69.3%** have access to 1 gigabit broadband.

| Percentage of Citizens with Access to Broadband | | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| | **Speeds** | | |
| | **25+ Mbps** | **100+ Mbps** | **1 GbitRoute 186** |
| **Georgia** | 94.1 | 90.8 | 40.8 |
| **DeKalb** | **99.4** | **99.4** | **69.3** |
| **Fulton** | 98.8 | 98.6 | 54 |
| **Gwinnett** | 99.5 | 99.5 | 68.7 |
| **Clayton** | 99.5 | 99.3 | 39.2 |
| **Henry** | 99.9 | 99.9 | 42.6 |
| **Rockdale** | 99.3 | 99.3 | 22.4 |

**Table 1 – Percentage of Citizens with Access to broadband**

<!-- page 63 -->
# BROADBAND COVERAGE BY SPEED IN GEORGIA

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

The Georgia Broadband Deployment Initiative has used the Census Block Level to identify Broadband service levels. The analysis of service levels in DeKalb County has identified 8,182 Census Blocks that are designated Unserved Locations.

Because Broadband has become essential to business, education, healthcare, agriculture, and overall quality of life, DeKalb County will continue to work to see the 8,182 Census Blocks currently designated as Unserved Locations, significantly reduced, if not eliminated.

To achieve this, DeKalb County Government will need to coordinate with city governments within DeKalb County, DeKalb County School System, DeKalb County Board of Health, Decide DeKalb Development Authority, and state and regional partners to strengthen and expand this vital service.

### DeKalb County Underserved Census Blocks

Served & Unserved Areas in Georgia on a fixed, terrestrial broadband definition of 25 Mbps down and 3 Mbps up and where the broadband service is available to all consumers (residential and business). A Census Block is unserved if 20% or greater locations do not have access to the broadband definition.

<!-- page 64 -->
03 - POLICY SPOTLIGHTS

# POLICY SPOTLIGHT
# ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

<<FIGURE>>

### Key Takeaways

*   Healthcare and Life Sciences
*   Corporate Operations and Business Services
*   Advanced Manufacturing
*   Logistics and Distribution

## FRAMING THE ISSUE

In 2014, DeKalb County oversaw the creation of a Strategic Economic Development Plan which provided an overview of DeKalb County's business climate, economic development strengths and weaknesses, and a strategy for achieving economic development goals. One of the key recommendations of that report was the creation of Decide DeKalb.

In 2019, Decide DeKalb commissioned a five-year update to this report to provide a fresh look at the current business climate of DeKalb County. The update was intended to deliver an updated analysis of economic development activity in the county, to establish a revised set of goals for economic development, to identify target industries, and to create a list of action items that the County government can take to meet the economic development challenges that DeKalb County faces.

### Socioeconomic Analysis
DeKalb County is one of the most diverse counties in Georgia, with a significant increase in Hispanic/Latino residents over the last five years. This represents one of the biggest economic development assets the county has. Despite this, overall population growth has slowed compared to neighboring counties, with a growth rate of only 4.6 percent from 2010 to 2016. During this same period, Fulton County experienced a growth rate of 8.3 percent and Gwinnett County experienced a growth rate of 8.6 percent.

The current employment outlook across the county has room for improvement. In general, jobs do not match the level of education across the county. Many residents hold a bachelor's degree, commuting out of the county to work at higher-paying jobs, while less-educated workers commute into the county to fill lower-paying jobs. Wages in the county have risen at the same rate as Metro Atlanta as a whole, but at 2.5 percent the median household income continues to lag behind the statewide average growth rate of 3.4 percent. Additionally, job creation has been slow, with DeKalb's job growth less than half that of surrounding counties.

### Real Estate Market Analysis
Like the rest of Metro Atlanta, housing prices and rents have increased in DeKalb. Despite this increase, the county remains a relatively affordable option for residents who want to live close to central Atlanta. However, new housing has been created at a slower pace in DeKalb County than the rest of Metro Atlanta. Protection of this valuable asset will require the creation of new mixed-use development and a variety of housing options.

Examples of multi-family and office development can be seen clustered near Perimeter Mall and many of the county's MARTA stations. These clusters act as anchors for new mixed-

<!-- page 65 -->
use development and serve as a blueprint for
further transit-oriented development in the county.
Furthermore, despite its proximity to central Atlanta,
DeKalb remains a largely low-density, suburban-
style community. This means that infill development
offers the best opportunity for new development.

Much of the industrial inventory in DeKalb is
aging, which limits the ability to grow the lucrative
manufacturing, distribution, and logistics industries.
These industries currently make up a large sector in
DeKalb County’s economy. However, new inventory
will be needed to continue to attract higher-paying
advanced manufacturing jobs, as well as jobs in the
rapidly growing distribution industry.

### Target Industry Analysis

DeKalb County excels at many of the factors that
attract businesses, including access to major
highways, availability of skilled labor, and a high
quality of life. Additionally, the county’s relatively low
cost of real estate while remaining close to central
Atlanta is a significant asset.

Based on the county’s strengths, weaknesses, and
economic trends, the SEDP identified four target
industries:

* Healthcare and Life Sciences
* Corporate Operations and Business Services
* Advanced Manufacturing
* Logistics and Distribution

These represent the anchor industries at which
the county has a comparative advantage over
other locations. These four industries should be the
primary focus of economic development efforts.

Additionally, the SEDP identified Film and
Entertainment Production as an “emerging
industry” that DeKalb County may wish to cultivate
by providing more resources.

<<FIGURE>>

**Source: Decide DeKalb**

## RECOMMENDATIONS

The five-year update to the Strategic Economic
Development Plan provides an excellent blueprint
for economic development efforts in DeKalb
County. The County should first review the plan
to determine which components are still relevant,
which may need to be updated based on the
Unified Plan and recent market changes. In addition
to the items presented in the report, the County
should encourage better coordination between
the Department of Planning & Sustainability and
Decide DeKalb, specifically on land use policies,
activity centers, priority areas and employment
centers. Industrial development as well as targeted
economic development in disadvantaged areas
and areas of disinvestment are additional priority
areas of coordination. Finally, it is imperative that the
County continue its partnership with Decide DeKalb
to provide the best opportunity to implement these
recommended actions and position DeKalb County
for sustained economic development well into the
future.

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 66 -->
# POLICY SPOTLIGHT
## HEALTH & WELLNESS

<<FIGURE>>

### Key Takeaways

* Numerous organizations operate and provide resources throughout the county
* Various communities in DeKalb face barriers to health education and program delivery
* Develop a health resource map and esignate a County Helath and Wellness point- person to coordinate planning and resources

## FRAMING THE ISSUE

The DeKalb Board of Public Health sponsors many health and wellness related programs including those focused on access to healthy foods and active living, and many in collaboration with other organizations. This includes a mobile farmers market, Fresh On Dek, partnerships with faith-based organizations to provide access to facilities for physical activity for residents; Park Prescription Day with different activities within DeKalb County parks, and mobile vaccination sites. Additionally, the Board of Health provides preventative health initiatives; car seat safety initiatives, pedestrian safety campaign; mental health community support and education; and substance abuse counseling.

Over the last decade, a number of active living plans were developed by DeKalb County and the DeKalb County Board of Health in an effort to support better health outcomes for DeKalb residents and reduce the risk of chronic diseases such as diabetes, high blood pressure, cardiovascular disease, and other health related issues. Plans were created for areas such as Belvedere, Covington Highway, Gresham Road, Indian Creek MARTA Station, Medline LCI area and Panola Road/Salem Road. The plans included recommendations promoting accessibility to fresh food, pedestrian connections, cycling infrastructure, civic space, parks, and trails to support physical activity.

There are many organizations that operate within DeKalb County working to improve the health and wellness of citizens. Roots Down is partnering with the DeKalb County Library system on the Edible Libraries campaign to grow gardens starting at six libraries as an initial pilot program in addition to productive urban landscaping at a few area schools. Concrete Jungle, a local non-profit, provides foraging, farming, and support for food access by transforming overlooked and underutilized fruit trees and land into a healthy source for communities in need.

Other organizations such as the United Way provide programs such as the Strong Learners Panel in DeKalb, a business roundtable on early learning and the MORE Program focusing on infant and maternal health. Emory also takes a strong lead on providing health information to the public by utilizing social media influencers and community partners to communicate accurate information; organization of a South DeKalb Health Summit, in collaboration with DeKalb Board of Health; and partnering with DeKalb County government on vaccine events. The Center for Pan Asian Community Services, Inc. (CPACS) offers access to food; health and vaccine fairs; COVID-19, HIV, and Tuberculosis (TB) testing; annual physicals; Affordable Care Act (ACA) enrollment; the Victim Service Program, a safe shelter for women and children of the immigrant community; alcoholism prevention for young adults; and transportation assistance to employers outside the County.

<!-- page 67 -->
### Focus Areas

Based on discussions with key health and wellness stakeholders, the following potential focus areas have been identified.

* **Children’s Health** - The Child Well-Being Index and associated map are tools developed to assess the health of a community. Of the 500,000 children in the metro Atlanta region on the low end of the index, approximately ¼ reside in DeKalb County.
* **Education and Communications** - Health literacy is the ability to obtain, read, understand, and use healthcare information to make appropriate health decisions and follow instructions for treatment. Some communities have barriers to health education and program delivery including language and technology.
* **Partnerships** - Often health and wellness organizations are unaware what other providers are offering in the community, and the burden is on the individual client to research. There is a need for a structure to link individuals to the resources, and organizations to other organizations working in DeKalb.
* **Equity** - Key focus areas identified related to equity include the decreasing inventory of affordable housing, especially near job centers, reliable transportation to and from jobs or services, especially for communities in south DeKalb, and the availability of or access to fresh food in some areas of the County.

### Examples from the Region

The following examples highlight two successful organizations and initiatives that support citizens’ Health and Wellness.

#### Gwinnett County
The Gwinnett Coalition of Health and Human Services is a robust collaboration of private, public, and nonprofit groups and is the lead organization for Gwinnett County community development. The Coalition hosts programs like Healthcare Roundtables, Resilient Gwinnett, Gwinnett Cares and Gwinnett Veteran Resource Center.

#### City of Atlanta
The non-profit, Open Hand Atlanta, has been in operation since 1988, and is one of the most collaborative nonprofit organizations in the United States working with over 100 public and private partners. Its mission is to eliminate disability and untimely death due to nutrition-sensitive chronic disease and it works towards this mission through “Food is Medicine” and evidence-based education programs.

# RECOMMENDATIONS

The following recommendations represent potential opportunities for the County to consider in supporting Health and Wellness. These recommendations have emerged through existing conditions analysis, peer example review, and stakeholder and public involvement:

### Organizational Structure
* Designate a Health and Wellness point person within DeKalb County Government to assist with dissemination of health and wellness related information and coordination.
* Participate in public-private Health and Wellness focused programs & organizations to leverage funding and collaborate on public education and marketing.
* Host a Health and Wellness focused roundtable with community partners to promote information sharing, coalition building, and development of a structured network of resources.
* Establish a Child Care and Early Education Initiative to provide scholarships for high quality childcare and early education for low- and middle-income families.

### Planning and Programming
#### Housing
Perform an assessment to determine affordable housing stock in DeKalb County and consider health and wellness resources and demographics.

#### Transportation
Include access to parks, trails and recreational facilities in multi-modal transportation planning.

Develop a Local Road Safety Plan to foster better health outcomes on roadways in disadvantaged communities and where accident rates are higher.

#### Strategic Planning
Develop a Health and Wellness Resource Map and Guide to inventory available facilities for active living such as parks, trails, and recreation centers and organizations that provide health and wellness services and programming.

#### Equity
Prioritize adding or renovating amenities such as parks, recreation centers, sidewalks, and trails in underserved areas of the County.

Co-host health fairs and other events in underserved areas promoting active living. Potential partners includes “Streets Alive!,” PATH Foundation, CPACS, and Friends of Refugees.

<!-- page 68 -->
03 - POLICY SPOTLIGHTS

## POLICY SPOTLIGHT
# HOUSING

<<FIGURE>>

### Key Takeaways

* DeKalb County Should Take a Leadership Role on Affordable Housing
* Provide a strategic vision and direction for affordable housing
* Mobilize additional resources for affordable housing in DeKalb County

## FRAMING THE ISSUE

The following is a summary of some of the key housing issues facing DeKalb. These were identified in both data collection and community outreach.

Historically, construction activity has focused on single-family detached and larger multi-family structures. These patterns do not match the needs of households in DeKalb, including lower-maintenance ownership options and lower-density rentals that may be more suited to families. The lack of varying housing types results in individuals staying in homes they do not prefer or need, entering homes that do not fit their stage of life or lifestyle or looking for housing outside of DeKalb. A greater variety of housing products should provide options for households' needs at every stage of life.

### Older and aging housing stock
Half of the county’s housing stock is estimated to be over 40 years old, and 23% was built during the post-war boom years of the 1950s and 1960s. While most of this housing stock is structurally sound, larger ticket maintenance items are a concern. A large number of the smaller homes built in the 50s and 60s are also renter- occupied. These units are often referred to as naturally occurring affordable housing. Continual reinvestment in this stock of housing will be important as well as maintaining the affordability of these units.

### Demand for middle-income housing
Over the past two decades, much of the new construction market has focused on units that are affordable to households making less than 80% of the area median income (AMI) or over 120% of AMI. The need for these units continues, but the gap for the middle-income ranges has only grown. Capital or incentives for these projects are often harder to find and returns on investments are lower.

### Preservation of existing affordable rentals
Nationally, large numbers of units in the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) programs have initiated the process to leave the program. At the same time, many locations have experienced a decline in the construction of new LIHTC units. Strategies will need to address the loss of these units either through preservation or construction of new units.

## RECOMMENDATIONS

A housing market is a complex and ever-changing landscape of countless variables including economic factors guiding production, rehabilitation, and demand. Social factors also influence housing preferences, as does the willingness of renters and buyers to adapt to new products. This fluidity can seem daunting, but all the more important to establish strategies around DeKalb County’s issues. The following section summarizes strategies the County and community partners should consider. This should start with updating the more detailed Housing Study that was completed in 2018 and from that develop a more in-depth strategic housing plan for the county.

<!-- page 69 -->
### Housing Partnership
The County, nor any one local jurisdiction, will be able to address all of the county's housing needs, it will take public-private partnerships. A consolidated and strategic approach to housing partnerships should be established. This should be thought of in the same vein as any other economic development initiative.

### Create Housing Champions
There are currently a number of departments, organizations, and agencies working on housing issues, but a unifying voice is missing.

**Establish a Housing Officer** - This individual should bring together partners and keep the issues around housing at the forefront. This role should not be purely focused on housing for the lowest incomes but should champion the broader needs for both the lowest and moderate-income households.

**Establish a Housing Advisory Committee** - The Committee should include a mixture of individuals with a wide range of experience within the housing industry. The committee members should also be champions for greater variety and affordability in the market. This may include tackling the NIMBY voices push against new product types.

**Track Housing data** - The only way to truly understand if progress is being made is to establish and track key metrics. One of the first tasks of the committee should be to identify what metrics should be tracked. Much of this may be based on the data collected in the updated housing study.

### Preserve and Expand the Number of Affordable Housing Units
Currently the County has a large stock of affordable housing. This includes both units that a part of specific programs to ensure their affordability and a large stock of older housing units that are naturally affordable.

#### Preserve Existing Affordable Rental Units
Units built under the Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) program are not permanently affordable units and rents are not restricted on these units once their time in the program is complete. Efforts should be made to keep these units affordable.

**Preserve Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing** - Older units often are naturally more affordable due to the cost of land, building materials, and labor at the time of construction. In extremely active markets, inflation can quickly price many middle- to lower-income households out of the market. Preservation of these units through programs like purchase-rehab-resale programs can preserve affordability.

**Workforce Housing Ordinance** - The 2018 housing study proposed the development and implementation of a workforce housing ordinance, which is currently under development. These ordinances can be crafted in a number of ways, but ultimately require a number of affordable units or payment-in-lieu to support the development of affordable units at another site.

### Secure Gap Financing
While the demand for housing units affordable to households making less than 120% of the Area Median Income (AMI) may be high, the ability of the private market to finance these units is difficult due to the limited profit margins.

**Development of a Housing Development or Trust Fund** - There are many different ways to organize a local funding pool, including a housing trust fund, lending consortium, or an economic development fund targeted to housing. These funds are the ideal instruments to:

**Leverage the Land Bank** - The Land Bank can provide an important relief valve in the cost of housing development. The cost of land is traditionally 20% or more of the final sale price of a home and lowering this cost fills a significant gap in the financing of more affordable housing. However, to do this the scope and purpose of the land bank will need to be better defined.

**Leverage other Sources** - There are a number of other sources and opportunities for funding. One of these being CBDG funds, however, those funds have to focus on lower-income households and do not address the gap in more moderate-income housing.

Establish a local funding pool, including a housing trust fund, lending consortium, or an economic development fund targeted to housing. These funds are the ideal instruments to:

**Leverage the Land Bank** - The Land Bank can provide an important relief valve in the cost of housing development. The cost of land is traditionally 20% or more of the final sale price of a home and lowering this cost fills a significant gap in the financing of more affordable housing. However, to do this the scope and purpose of the land bank will need to be better defined.

**Leverage other Sources** - There are a number of other sources and opportunities for funding. One of these being CBDG funds, however, those funds will have to focus on lower-income households and not address the gap in more moderate-income housing.

<!-- page 70 -->
# 03 - POLICY SPOTLIGHTS

# POLICY SPOTLIGHT
# RETAIL

<<FIGURE>>

### Key Takeaways

* Support mixed-use development and redevelopment around the mall properties
* Consider public private partnerships
* Repurpose parking lots of underutilized shopping centers
* Create an organization focused on Memorial Drive

## FRAMING THE ISSUE

The County’s retail sector was identified as one of the key issue areas related to future growth and development. Of particular interest are the struggling retail corridors and nodes that commonly have high vacancies and observed disinvestment. Utilizing available retail data, existing retail conditions and trends were analyzed in DeKalb County. From this analysis, the top ten percent of properties that have the largest concentrations of vacant retail space were identified and mapped.

Three primary concentrations of retail space with high vacancy exist within DeKalb County. The first is the existing indoor mall properties across the County, which together account for over 600,000 square feet of vacant retail space. The second concentration is a stretch of vacant retail spaces along Buford Highway, punctuated by 117,000 of available space within a former department store in the City of Doraville. The third concentration is a swath of vacant retail space roughly following Memorial Drive from the Gallery at South DeKalb near Interstate 20, then northwest towards the City of Stone Mountain.

<<FIGURE>>

Areas with higher amounts of vacant retail space are identified with larger dots.

<!-- page 71 -->
### Existing Indoor Malls within DeKalb County
DeKalb County is home to several large indoor malls, including:

*   Northlake Mall
*   North DeKalb Mall
*   Mall at Stonecrest
*   Gallery at South DeKalb

The loss of retail and high volume of vacant space at each mall is not necessarily a cause for concern regarding local market performance on its own, as this is consistent with a nationwide trend shifting away from traditional indoor malls. Reinvestment or redevelopment plans are already in the works for some of these mall properties. In 2019, Emory University announced plans to lease over 220,000 square feet of space in Northlake Mall as office and administrative space.

North DeKalb Mall was recently sold with an aim to redevelop the property into a mixed-use development. Additionally, some former retail spaces at the Mall at Stonecrest have been repurposed including one anchor location being converted into an entertainment center and aquarium.

The Gallery at South DeKalb may require the most attention of any of the four malls. The property has experienced recent closings of many anchor stores with no plans for new tenants or redevelopment on the horizon, emblematic of a larger trend within the adjacent Memorial Drive corridor. However, the Gallery at South DeKalb was recently sold to a new mall operator with the intention of securing new tenants and reviving the property.

### Buford Highway Corridor
Another area with a concentration of high vacancy retail properties is along Buford Highway. This trend warrants further attention, however, the vacancies present along Buford Highway are generally smaller in scale and tend to be limited to individual shops rather than entire shopping centers. Additionally, the area is recognized across the region for its cultural and culinary offerings.

### Memorial Drive
The most crucial segment for further action is near the Memorial Drive corridor, stretching from the area around the Gallery at South DeKalb to Stone Mountain. This swath accounts for roughly half of the top ten percent of properties with the highest vacancies in DeKalb County.

Additionally, although the data identified vacant space across the county, it did not clearly indicate underutilized properties that may not currently provide the high volume of retail for which they were designed. Many properties are designed around large anchor stores which are currently unoccupied. As a result, most of the tenants are small businesses that, while successful, do not need the vast amounts of retail space and surface parking that the property includes. Additionally, several spaces are now occupied by DeKalb County government offices. All of these uses provide important services for the community but could perhaps do so in a more efficient use of space. Finally, there are numerous ethnic and international businesses along the corridor that would benefit from an increased focus on celebrating the unique offerings and making the area a regional destination. Many of these issues, as well as opportunities for development along Memorial Drive, were highlighted in the Memorial Drive Revitalization Corridor Plan in 2019.

## RECOMMENDATIONS
Overall, there are several opportunities to address areas of concern within DeKalb County. Some recommended actions include the following:

*   Conduct a deeper analysis of the existing retail market, specifically in the three focus areas
*   Support mixed-use development and redevelopment, particularly within and around the mall properties
*   Update Livable Centers Initiative studies or other small area plans within these focus areas
*   Streamline approval and permitting process for redevelopment or investment within these areas
*   Repurpose underutilized parking into public spaces, residential or mixed-use development
*   Relocate county offices from struggling retail centers to more centralized areas.
*   Create an organization focused on Memorial Drive to celebrate and promote the diversity of the corridor, similar to We Love BuHi.
*   Reduce the amount of existing retail space through coordination with public and private partners

<!-- page 72 -->
03 - POLICY SPOTLIGHTS

# POLICY SPOTLIGHT
# SUSTAINABILITY

<<FIGURE>>

*The Green Communities Program is a voluntary sustainability certification program that helps local governments reduce their environmental impact through actionable measures. The program fosters a greener, healthier and more livable region by providing a framework for cities and counties on their sustainability journeys. ARC strives to assist local governments in decreasing operational carbon emissions through building portfolio efficiency and clean energy opportunities.*

## FRAMING THE ISSUE
DeKalb County’s pledge to Sustainability begins internally within County operations. Currently, DeKalb County focuses sustainability resources on programs and activities at County facilities. Examples of current County Sustainability programs/activities at County facilities include:

* ARC Green Communities Program Participation
* Conservation Education Programs
* Community Rain Gardens
* Invasive Species Removal
* Generation of Compressed Natural Gas from County Landfills
* Electric Vehicle Charging Stations
* Office Programs
    * Various recycling programs
    * Reduction of Paper Use
    * Expansion of Digital Investment
* Motion Activated Lights

### ARC Green Communities Program
The ARC Green Communities Program is a voluntary sustainability certification program which supports local governments with guidance and activities to enhance sustainability within Metro Atlanta communities. Aspirations for the ARC Green Communities Program include:

* Reduction of energy and water use within government operations, buildings, and fleets.
* Providing curbside recycling to residents and businesses.
* Providing public education and examples of new and emerging sustainability practices.

### Initiation of DeKalb Green Committee
DeKalb’s commitment to expanding the County’s Sustainability programs includes the establishment of a DeKalb Green Committee. Comprised of DeKalb County personnel, this Committee will include County and Department leadership and will be responsible for developing sustainability policies, while also monitoring the implementation of the County’s sustainability programs. The Committee would conduct regularly scheduled meetings, conducting meetings on a quarterly basis.

<!-- page 73 -->
### Sustainability Coordinator
In the Department of Planning and Sustainability, DeKalb County has added a full-time staff position of Sustainability Coordinator. This position leads the management and coordination of sustainability programs and activities within DeKalb County, including coordination across County Departments on their sustainability activities, the monitoring of sustainability programs, and reporting of sustainability activities. In addition, the Sustainability Coordinator leads County’s tracking and reporting for the ARC Green Communities Program.

## RECOMMENDATIONS

### Comprehensive Sustainability Plan for the County
The County currently lacks a holistic strategy for sustainability. Development of DeKalb County’s first Sustainability Plan would establish a unified vision and goals, examine the current sustainability programs and activities, and identify potential partners. A set of recommendations that address short- and long-term needs for enhancing sustainability with County operations and in the community should be included.

### Public Communication and Education Programs
Create a sustainability education program that provides on existing programs and identifies ways for the community to be involved. This would include the communication of upcoming programs scheduled at County facilities, County websites and social media.

### Enhanced Reporting of County Sustainability Achievements
Currently, DeKalb County reports the sustainability achievements for County Departments internally, with limited, coordinated communication to the community. The County should assess the development of a Sustainability Dashboard that could County progress and achievements related to sustainability.

<<FIGURE>>

### Establish Department Sustainability “Leaders”
To ensure sustainability is a county-wide effort, leaders should be identified from each County Department. These designated leaders will be the sustainability point of contact for that Department and would be responsible for coordination and reporting of their Department’s sustainability activities and progress. These leaders may also serve on the Green Committee.

### Maintain ARC Green Communities Certification
The ARC Green Communities program provides a checklist or guidebook for initiating sustainability programs and measuring program progress. The initial participation of the ARC Green Community Program serves the County with initial strategic programs and the foundational tracking of sustainability programs throughout the County. Once the County achieves “recertification” as a Green Community, annual or semi-annual reporting and performance monitoring should be established to maintain certification. The Green Committee may serve as the monitoring and reporting body for this task, providing updates and recommended actions to County leadership and staff.

<!-- page 74 -->
# POLICY SPOTLIGHT
# TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT

<<FIGURE>>

### Key Takeaways

* Encourage the development of station area plans
* Update plans and policies after upcoming transit projects and plans are complete
* Study and gather input on funding and priorities

## FRAMING THE ISSUE

Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) typically incorporates a mixture of uses, including residential, retail, and office uses within a compact area. The intention of TODs is to create dense, walkable areas that are supportive of multimodal transportation options, specifically the use of transit and less dedicated parking, in the areas of high-capacity transit stations.
A typical TOD district focuses strategic growth areas near transit, primarily between one-quarter to one-half mile radius from the transit station. The development density of a TOD should intensify closer to the center of the radius.

#### Equitable Transit-Oriented Development
The establishment of equitable TOD policies enables government agencies to set TOD standards that ensure high-quality development, while mitigating the displacement of current residents and businesses in these areas. New TODs and transit corridors provide opportunities for entrepreneurs and employers by improving accessibility to multiple mobility options in the area and providing a setting for prospects such as locating workforce development and start-up business training.

#### Existing Stations
Currently, unincorporated DeKalb County is home to two MARTA heavy rail stations, Kensington and Indian Creek. Two previous comprehensive development plans for the Kensington MARTA Station and its surrounding areas were completed in 2002 and 2012. An update plan for the Kensington MARTA Station area was initiated in 2021. A planned study for the Indian Creek MARTA Station area is planned to begin in 2022 and will study TOD opportunities surrounding the station.

## DeKalb County Transit Master Plan
In the DeKalb County Transit Master Plan, four potential funding scenarios were developed to guide the advancement and expansion of high-capacity transit in DeKalb County. These four scenarios included the Existing MARTA Penny Scenario; Half-Penny Scenario; Full-Penny Scenario; and the Previously Adopted Scenario.

#### Existing MARTA Penny Scenario
The Existing MARTA Penny Scenario assumes a continuation of the one-penny MARTA sales tax with no additional funding. The revenue generated in this scenario would support the maintenance, sustaining capital, and operations of the existing system without any additional transit expansion. The impacted transit corridors in the Existing MARTA Penny Scenario are included in Table 1.

| Corridor | | Project Limits |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| High Capacity Buses | I-20 East/Rainbow Drive | Route 186 |
| | Memorial Drive | Route 121 |

**Table 1 – Existing MARTA Penny Scenario – Transit Corridors**

<!-- page 75 -->
<<FIGURE>>

Source: DeKalb County Transit Master Plan, 2019

<!-- page 76 -->
# 03 - POLICY SPOTLIGHTS

### Half-Penny Scenario

The Half-Penny Scenario presumes the extension of the one-penny MARTA tax and includes an additional half-penny sales in DeKalb County for transit under HB 930. The funding generated in this scenario supports maintenance, sustaining capital, and operations of the existing system combined with potential transit system expansion including 15 projects – one Light-Rail Transit (LRT); five Bus Rapid Transit (BRT), including leveraging the planned I-285 managed lanes for the utilization of BRT in DeKalb County and I-20; nine Arterial Rapid Transit (ART), and 139 project miles. The impacted transit corridors in the Half-Penny Scenario are included in Table 2.

<<FIGURE>>

Source: DeKalb County Transit Master Plan, 2019

| | Corridor | Project Limits |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **LRT** | Clifton Corridor LRT (Segment 1) | Emory/CDC to Clairmont Road at North Decatur Rd |
| **BRT** | I-20 East BRT – Segment 1 | Downtown Atlanta to Wesley Chapel Road |
| | I-20 East BRT – Segment 2 | Wesley Chapel Road to Stonecrest Mall |
| | I-285 Top End BRT | Dunwoody Station to Northlake Mall |
| | I-285 East Wall BRT | Northlake Mall to GSU/Perimeter College |
| | Buford Highway BRT | Doraville Station to Lindbergh Station |
| **ART** | Memorial Drive ART – Segment 1 | Five Points to Kensington Station |
| | Memorial Drive ART – Segment 2 | Kensington Station to Goldsmith P&R |
| | Candler Road ART | Avondale Station to South DeKalb Mall |
| | Clairmont Road ART | Decatur Station to Chamblee Station |
| | North Druid Hills ART | Emory/CDC to Brookhaven Station |
| | Lawrenceville Highway ART | Decatur Station to Downtown Tucker |
| | LaVista Road ART | Lindbergh Station to Downtown Tucker |
| | Clifton Corridor ART | Avondale Station to Clairmont Road |
| | | Brookhaven Station to Medical Center Station |

**Table 2 – Half-Penny Scenario – Transit Corridors**

<!-- page 77 -->
### Full-Penny Scenario

The Full-Penny Scenario reflects the extension of the one-penny MARTA tax and the passage of an additional full-penny sales tax in DeKalb County for transit under HB 930. The funding generated in this scenario supports maintenance, sustaining capital, and operations of the existing system along with potential transit system expansion including 17 projects – four Light-Rail Transit (LRT); five Bus Rapid Transit (BRT), including leveraging the planned I-285 managed lanes for the utilization of BRT in DeKalb County; eight Arterial Rapid Transit (ART), and 180 project miles. The impacted transit corridors in the Full-Penny Scenario are included in Table 3.

<<FIGURE>>

| | Corridor | Project Limits |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **LRT** | Clifton Corridor LRT (Segment 1) | Emory/CDC to Clairmont Road at North Decatur Rd |
| | Clifton Corridor LRT (Segment 2) | Clairmont Rd at North Decatur Rd to Avondale Station |
| | Candler Road LRT | Avondale Station to South DeKalb Mall |
| | LRT to Wesley Chapel Road | South DeKalb Mall to Wesley Chapel Road |
| **BRT** | I-20 East BRT – Segment 1 | Downtown Atlanta to South DeKalb Mall |
| | I-20 East BRT – Segment 2 | Wesley Chapel Road to Stonecrest Mall |
| | I-285 Top End BRT | Dunwoody Station to Northlake Mall |
| | I-285 East Wall BRT | Northlake Mall to GSU/Perimeter College |
| | Buford Highway BRT | Doraville Station to Lindbergh Station |
| **ART** | Memorial Drive ART – Segment 1 | Five Points to Kensington Station |
| | Memorial Drive ART – Segment 2 | Kensington Station to Goldsmith P&R |
| | Clairmont Road ART | Decatur Station to Chamblee Station |
| | North Druid Hills ART | Emory/CDC to Brookhaven Station |
| | Lawrenceville Highway ART | Decatur Station to Downtown Tucker |
| | LaVista Road ART | Lindbergh Station to Downtown Tucker |
| | Johnson Ferry Road ART | Brookhaven Station to Medical Center Station |
| | Hairston Road ART | SR 155 (Flat Shoals Parkway) to Downtown Tucker |

**Table 2 – Full-Penny Scenario – Transit Corridors**

<!-- page 78 -->
# 03 - POLICY SPOTLIGHTS

### Previously Adopted Scenario

The Previously Adopted Scenario implies continuing the one-penny MARTA tax in addition to an unidentified additional funding source that can generate more revenue than that generated by the full-penny sales tax scenario in DeKalb County for transit under HB 930. The funding generated in this scenario supports maintenance, sustaining capital, and operations of the existing system in addition to expanding the transit system with three projects – one Heavy-Rail Transit (HRT); one Light-Rail Transit (LRT); one Bus Rapid Transit (BRT), and 37 project miles. The impacted transit corridors in the Previously Adopted Scenario are included in Table 4.

### Funding

The Existing MARTA Tax is a one-penny sales tax under the MARTA Act levied in DeKalb County. The funding maintains operations of the current system and funds state of good repair and sustaining capital projects.

The HB 930 Sales Tax enables DeKalb County to levee up to a one-penny in the form of an additional sales tax funding for transit over a 30-year period, provided the County remains under the State limit for county sales tax. This funding source would require passage by DeKalb voters. Two funding scenarios were conceived in the DeKalb County Transit Plan utilizing this resource, a half-penny and one-penny sales tax, with a potential to generate $1.85 billion and $3.65 billion in sales tax revenue.

Additional study and engagement are necessary to reduce the number of potential funding and implementation plans and formalize both the funding source and amount. Progress is anticipated in this regard in 2023 as there is potential to place a transit referendum on the general election ballot in 2024, along with several other metro Atlanta counties.

### Next Steps

Regardless of the transit plan that is eventually chosen for public review, the County should encourage the development of station area plans and transit-oriented development strategies at all potential high-capacity transit stations. Transit oriented development and the benefits that it provides in terms of concentrations of employment, education, and housing; enhanced accessibility and walkability; and greater equity are appropriate for all forms of high-capacity transit (heavy rail, light rail, and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)).

<<FIGURE>>

**Source: DeKalb County Transit Master Plan, 2019**

| | Corridor | Project Limits |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **HRT** | I-20 East HRT Extension | Indian Creek Station to Stonecrest Mall |
| **LRT** | Clifton Corridor LRT | Emory/CDC to Avondale Station |
| **BRT** | I-20 East BRT in Exclusive ROW | Wesley Chapel Road to Five Points Station |

**Table 4 – Previously Adopted Scenario – Transit Corridors**

<!-- page 79 -->
# CHAPTER 04
# COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

<!-- page 80 -->
# COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

<<FIGURE>>

### 2014 CTP Goals

*   Improve mobility for all people
*   Enhance quality of life
*   Improve economic vitality
*   Focus on implementation

# EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The DeKalb County 2014 Transportation Plan is about improving the lives of local residents and creating an environment for businesses and institutions to thrive. Competition from across the United States and even from other countries requires the Atlanta region and its counties to provide facilities and opportunities to attract new talent and financial capital. Traffic congestion and a lack of transportation alternatives can no longer be offset by offering low housing costs, a pleasant climate, and a friendly business atmosphere. DeKalb County requires a transportation system that enables its many assets to continue to flourish. To this end, the DeKalb County 2014 Transportation Plan represents a coordinated strategy intended to improve how people, goods, and services move throughout and within the community.

The strategies identified in the Plan will have the desired outcome of improving the quality of life for existing and future residents and offering enhanced economic vitality. The Plan was intentionally designed to emphasize implementation by seeking to align public policy, funding, and partnerships that promote positive influences on the transportation system. To continue to meet the diverse needs of the County, the transportation system must keep evolving. Adopting a prioritized list of projects and policies will enable the County to take action and maintain a transportation system that positions the County to compete economically and offer residents a high quality of life.

A primary component of the County’s Transportation Plan is the list of regionally significant projects commonly supported by County representatives. This list of transportation projects can be used to provide input for the regional transportation planning process where additional funding is available. These identified projects should form the basis of future funding requests submitted to the Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC) and the Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) during the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) update cycles.

The document provides an overview of the planning process, the resulting recommendations, and the necessary actions for ensuring ongoing implementation. Preceding this report is an additional technical document called the Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Report (published June 2013), which provides a thorough overview of the existing transportation network and provides an assessment of current and future transportation deficiencies.

Because of the strong interest expressed by policy makers, stakeholders, and the public concerning safe and efficient

<!-- page 81 -->
travel for alternative modes, including for bicyclists, pedestrians, and transit users, a Complete Streets Policy has been developed as a standalone formal policy document included in the Appendix of this Plan. Although this is not a document that should be added to the Code of Ordinances (because it is only intended for guidance), the Complete Streets Policy has been separated distinctly from the Plan text to reflect the emphasis placed on multimodal accessibility.

# PROJECT VISION AND GOALS

### Vision Statement

The DeKalb County 2014 Transportation Plan is intended to improve mobility for all people, enhance quality of life, facilitate economic vitality, and focus on implementation.

**Goal 1: Improve mobility for all people**

**Goal 2: Enhance quality of life**

**Goal 3: Improve economic vitality**

**Goal 4: Focus on implementation**

# COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE

The DeKalb County 2050 Comprehensive Transportation Plan is currently being updated. Once complete, it will be adopted as part of the DeKalb 2050 Unified Plan. Initial priority areas for the DeKalb 2050 Comprehensive Transportation Plan have been identified as follows.

* Provide Transportation Options through Connectivity across Modes - Improve travel for all users by increasing connections across roadway, transit, bicycle, and pedestrian modes.
* Promote Equity - Prioritize improvements that increase transportation access to all parts of the County, especially communities where lack of transportation options creates substantial barriers.
* Improve Safety - Provide for safe travel by users across all modes of transportation.
* Enable Healthy Communities and Improve Quality of Life - Leverage transportation infrastructure to encourage an active lifestyle and overall improved quality of life.
* Respect/Improve DeKalb County's Character - Implement transportation projects that improve mobility while taking into consideration local community context.
* Increase Access to Jobs and Education - Prioritize transportation investments that allow workers and students to more easily access these key destinations.
* Better Accommodate the Movement of Goods - Implement transportation projects that improve freight in the County either by truck or by rail.
* Improve Maintenance - Ensure the long-term care for existing infrastructure including paving roads and repairing bridges and signal systems.
* Increase Funding for Improvements - Pursue new local revenue sources that will allow the County to implement additional transportation projects.
* Encourage Economic Development - Leverage transportation projects that help to encourage revitalization and new development throughout the County.
* Practice Fiscal Responsibility in Transportation Investments - Prioritize transportation projects that can be implemented in a reasonable timeframe and provide a strong return on investment.

<!-- page 82 -->
THIS PAGE LEFT
INTENTIONALLY BLANK

<!-- page 83 -->
# CHAPTER 05
## SMALL AREA PLANS

<!-- page 84 -->
05 - SMALL AREA PLANS

# DEKALB COUNTY
# SMALL AREA PLANS (SAPs)

Small Area Plans (SAPs) cover a smaller area than a comprehensive plan, and are intended to address specific land use and development issues at a finer level of detail. These plans support the general vision, policies and goals of the community, but allow for a greater degree of detail in guiding development. They may have their own sets of specific policies to shape development, and can include elements such as design guidelines, standards for transitions in development intensities and uses, additional standards for mixed use, investments in infrastructure, connectivity, and greater opportunities for input and control from local residents and businesses. SAPs can take a variety of forms, such as Livable Center Initiatives (LCIs), Master Active Living Plans (MALPs), Corridor Plans, or TOD plans, and are the primary tool by which the county intends to shape development in Activity Centers and along Commercial Redevelopment Corridors. The County intends to work towards implementing SAPs in all Activity Centers, and those that have been completed to date are as follows:

| | |
| :--- | :--- |
| ▶ **Briarcliff Clairmont Road Plan** | ▶ **Memorial Drive Revitalization Corridor Plan** |
| | |
| ▶ **Candler Flat Shoals Activity Center** | ▶ **Medline Activity Center** |
| | |
| ▶ **Glenwood Columbia Plan** | ▶ **North Druid Hills Activity Center** |
| | |
| ▶ **Kensington Activity Center** | ▶ **Northlake-Tucker Activity Center** |
| | |
| ▶ **MARTA I-20 East TOD Plan** | ▶ **Wesley Chapel Activity Center** |
| | |
| ▶ **Master Active Living Plans (MALPs)** | |

<!-- page 85 -->
# BRIARCLIFF CLAIRMONT ROAD PLAN (2021)

The Briarcliff- Clairmont Activity Center is a gateway to unincorporated DeKalb County at the intersection of I-85 and Clairmont Road - a major north-south corridor through DeKalb County. The Briarcliff-Clairmont Activity Center is surrounded by growing pockets of activity and redevelopment.

### Design Guidelines

| Sub –Area | Proposed Density | Proposed Height |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| Core Mixed-Use | 70 Units/acre 90 Units/acre with density bonuses | Up to 8 stories |
| Multi-family Residential | 24 units/acre | Up to 4 stories, 6 with bonuses |
| Residential/ Commercial | 24 units/acre | 1-3 stories subject to zoning classification |
| Commercial | N/A | 1-3 stories subject to zoning classification |

Figure 2 - Table of Subareas Proposed Density and Height

<<FIGURE>>

Figure 1 - Briarcliff Clairmont Activity Center and SUbareas

<<FIGURE>>

Figure 3 - Potential Development Concept

The overall vision for the Briarcliff-Clairmont Activity Center is for an integrated, walkable community that serves as the neighborhood activity center for the surrounding neighborhoods. This includes higher density, mixed-use development within the core surrounded by appropriately scaled development that steps down in height as it nears existing single-family neighborhoods. Mixed-use and commercial developments should be focused along the frontages of Clairmont Road and Briarcliff Road or interior public spaces or streets, with minimal curb cuts and interparcel connectivity where reasonable. Appropriate transitions, buffers, and transitional height planes should buffer commercial and mixed-use development from existing single-family homes. The revised Briarcliff-Clairmont Road Small Area Plan includes additional detail and guidance from the Comprehensive Plan specific to the area’s character and location. The Activity Center is organized into four subareas, each with recommended densities, maximum heights, and related policies as outlined below.

<!-- page 86 -->
# 05 - SMALL AREA PLANS

## CANDLER ROAD FLAT SHOALS LCI (2007)

The Candler Road Activity Center derives from the Candler/Flat Shoals Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Plan. The core of the study is the South DeKalb Mall. Some of the goals of the plan: Encourage diversity of mixed income neighborhoods, employment, and recreational choices. Provide access to a wide range of travel modes, including transit, walking and biking. Develop an outreach process that promotes involvement of all stakeholders. Land Use recommendations from the study are being used as policy guidelines in the comprehensive plan.

<<FIGURE>>

Figure 4 - Future Land Use Map

<<FIGURE>>

Figure 5 - Example Development

<<FIGURE>>

Figure 6 - Example Development

### Candler Road Flat Shoals Parkway LCI Sub-Area Policy Guidelines

| | |
| :--- | :--- |
| **Town Center Core** | Use: Compact high density mixed use Density Max: 60 dwelling units/acre Building Heights: 4 -6 Stories 80% Commercial/ Office; 20% Residential |
| **Town Center Edge** | Use: Compact high density mixed use Density Max: 45 dwelling units/acre Building Height: 3 -5 Stories 70% Commercial/ Office; 30% Residential |
| **Residential High (Neighborhood Center)** | Use: High density consistent w/ zoning Density Max: 24 dwelling units/acre Building Heights: 1 -3 Stories 80% Residential / 20% Open Space |
| **Residential Mixed (Traditional Neighborhood)** | Use: Town -homes and Single Family Density Max: 12 dwelling units/acre Building Heights: 1 -2 Stories 20% Commercial; 80% Residential |
| **Residential Low (Suburban)** | Use: Single Family Residential Density Max: 8 dwelling units/acre Building Height: 1 -2 Stories 80% Commercial/ Office; 20% Residential |
| **Light Industrial** | Use: Warehouses, Storage, Distribution Density - 60 dwelling units/acre Stories - 4 -6 80% Commercial/ Office; 20% Residential |
| **Commercial Mixed** | Use: Compact high density mixed use Density - 60 dwelling units/acre Stories - 4 -6 80% Commercial/ Office; 20% Residential |
| **Office Mixed** | Use: Office, medical Density Max - 30 dwelling units/acre Building Height - 1 -2 Stories 70% Commercial/ Office; 30% Residential |
| **Institutional** | Use: Civic and educational, large -scale medical and religious. |
| **Parks/Recreational** | Use: Parks, athletic fields and recreation centers. No residential or commercial. |
| **Conservation/Open Space** | This category identifies streams, buffers, flood plan & other protected, natural features. |

Figure 7 - Future Land Use Table

<!-- page 87 -->
# GLENWOOD COLUMBIA PLAN

In partnership with the Atlanta Regional Commission, the DeKalb County Department of Planning & Sustainability has conducted a planning process to identify capital investment and policy changes that can support a more livable, pedestrian friendly environment at the intersection of Glenwood Road and Columbia Drive. This location has been identified as a Commercial Redevelopment Corridor (CRC) in the DeKalb County Comprehensive Plan, indicating a need for improved function and aesthetic appeal. The study area’s current state is a result of disinvestment through the 1990s which led to income decline and lack of maintenance.

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

### Townhome Residential
As an additional residential offering, Townhomes can be placed on the edges of the study area, providing low intensity development directly abutting single family homes while keeping consistent with walkable development patterns.

### 1-2 Story Mixed Use
Continuing outwardly, 1- to 2-story mixed-use buildings will create a natural transition zone to what is currently single-family residential in the surrounding neighborhoods. Building programs would continue similarly, only at a smaller scale:

* Ground level Restaurants
* Retail
* Entertainment Options
* 2nd Story Office
* Healthcare
* Condos/Apartments

### 1-3 Story Mixed Use
Striking a balance between optimal use of land and a physical scale that compliments the community is a challenge within itself. Land use policies in place encourage 1-3 stories in a Neighborhood Center Character Area. This analysis and the accompanying engagement efforts point to encouraging three-story mixed-use at the core of the study area, programming in the following way:

* Ground level Restaurants
* Retail
* Entertainment Options
* 2nd and 3rd Stories Office
* Healthcare
* Condos/Apartments

<!-- page 88 -->
# 05 - SMALL AREA PLANS

## KENSINGTON LCI & UPDATE (2002, 2003, 2012)
DeKalb County conducted an LCI study for this area and the surrounding area in 2002. The plan has established a long-term vision for the study area by promoting pedestrian-friendly, mixed-use development, enhancing connectivity, ensuring multiple transportation options, and supporting economic growth and a high quality of life.

Since the plan was completed in 2003, some of the action plan items have been completed, such as the Juvenile Justice Center. There are also several action items which turned out to be irrelevant due to changing situations or obstacles that could not be overcome. The purpose of this study is to prepare a comprehensive development plan for the Kensington MARTA Station and the adjacent county-owned property with sufficient specificity and strategies for further implementation of the original LCI plan created in 2002. The redevelopment sites will address both land use and transportation issues to support development that will support a multi-modal environment and optimize utilization at the existing MARTA station.

In 2012, a follow up study was completed for the county-owned land and adjacent parcels. This study identified additional development concepts and public improvements for the area.

<<FIGURE>>

Figure 11 - Kensington Activity Center and Subareas

| Sub-Areas (w/Future Land Use Compatibility) | Preferred Uses | Density (dwelling units/acre) | Preferred Building Height |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| A Single Family Preservation (Suburban) | Single Family Residential, Trails | 8 | 2 Stories Maximum |
| B. DeKalb County Government Center (Institutional) | Office, Retail, Restaurants, Civic, Amphitheaters | N/A | 10 Stories Maximum 5 Stories Minimum |
| C. Regional Employment Center (Office Professional) | Office, Restaurants, Retail | | 30 Stories Maximum 10 Stories Minimum |
| D. Multi-family Redevelopment (Town Center) | Multi-family Residential, Recreation, Parks | 60 (core) 45 (Intermediate) 24 (Outer) | 3-5 Stories |
| E. Open Space Enhancements (Conservation/Open Space) | Parks, Trails, Recreation | N/A | N/A |
| F. Kensington MARTA Station (Regional Center) | Office, Residential mix with Retail & Office Restaurants, Pocket Parks | 45 | 5 Stories |
| G. Mixed Use Redevelopment (Town Center) | Office, Residential, Retail, Restaurants, Pocket Parks | 60 45 | Up to 5 Stories |

Figure 12 - Subareas Table

<!-- page 89 -->
<<FIGURE>>

Figure 13 - Phasing Map from 2012 Study

### Future Land Use

This activity center functions as a Regional Center character consisting as a focal point for several neighborhoods with a concentration of activities such as general retail, commercial, professional office, higher-density housing, and appropriate public and open space uses easily accessible by pedestrians. **The primary land uses include: townhomes, condominiums, apartments, health care facilities, retail and commercial, office institutional, entertainment and cultural facilities, park and recreational facilities, and public and civic facilities at a density of up to 120 dwelling units per acre.** 1. Preserve single family residential; 2. Consolidate DeKalb County facilities on existing site and establish a Government Center; 3. Develop a regional Employment Center on the Roberds site; 4. Anticipate long-term redevelopment of aging multi-family housing stock; 5. Preserve and expand greenspace; 6. Redevelop the Kensington MARTA Station area as a mixed-use community; and 7. Develop mixed-use along Memorial Drive and Covington Highway to create a 24-hour community.

### Transportation and Circulation

1. Create an internal street grid to serve the Government Center;
2. Improve pedestrian and car access from Mountain Drive to and within the proposed employment center;
3. Develop a transit plaza linking the station to Mountain Drive and creating a centralized pedestrian friendly space within the Kensington Station area;
4. Improve transit service through the creation of a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system, functioning with a dedicated right of way off Memorial Drive through the proposed government center;
5. Provide signal prioritization improvements for a BRT system on Memorial Drive.
6. Develop a greenway system from Avondale Middle School through the Kensington station to Avondale Dunaire Park.

Figure 14 - 2012 Study Elements

### Kensington LCI Concept Plan

There are numerous recommendations stated in the study, several of which include concept plans. The overall LCI Study Area Concept Plan is a compilation of future land use patterns and transportation and circulation improvements designed to create a more pedestrian-friendly and transit-oriented environment in and around the study area. The plan incorporates seven (7) land use initiatives and six (6) transportation and circulation improvements. There are also several individual concept plans for the study area. These are as follows:

* Government Center Plan
* Employment Center
* Kensington MARTA Station Plan

<!-- page 90 -->
# 05 - SMALL AREA PLANS

## MARTA I-20 EAST TOD PLAN

The Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA), in conjunction with DeKalb County and the City of Atlanta, and in cooperation with the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), initiated the I-20 East Transit Initiative to identify transportation and environmental impacts associated with the development of high-capacity transit service from downtown Atlanta to the Mall at Stonecrest in southeastern DeKalb County. The project is intended to improve east-west mobility and accessibility to jobs and housing by providing a high-capacity transit alternative in the I-20 East Corridor. In addition, the project will provide opportunities for economic development and support revitalization efforts as planning partners in the corridor including the City of Atlanta and DeKalb County prepare for anticipated future growth.

<<FIGURE>>

Figure 15 - Indian Creek Station Concept

<<FIGURE>>

Figure 16 - Covington Highway Station Concept

<<FIGURE>>

The Plan consists of these community station area visions and implementation recommendations for achieving them.

<<FIGURE>>

Figure 17

<!-- page 91 -->
<<FIGURE>>

**Figure 18 - Panola Road Station Concept**

<<FIGURE>>

**Figure 19 - Additional Panola Road Station Concept**

<!-- page 92 -->
# 05 - SMALL AREA PLANS

## MASTER ACTIVE LIVING PLANS (MALPS) (2013)

Chronic diseases are among the most common and costly of all health problems in the United States, but they also are among the most preventable.

Lack of physical activity and poor nutrition, two modifiable risk factors for obesity, and tobacco use are responsible for much of the illness, suffering, and death related to chronic diseases.[^p92-1] To help address these health issues, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) created Communities Putting Prevention to Work (CPPW), which is led by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Through these programs, DeKalb County, Georgia is tackling public health threats throughout its region by creating a Master Active Living Plan (MALP). The integration of physical activity and other healthy behaviors into the daily routines of DeKalb County residents is the focus of this study. By planning communities with a deliberate focus on health, the health and quality-of-life of their residents can be improved. The proposed MALP’s are as follows:

*   Indian Creek MARTA Station
*   Panola Road/Salem Road
*   Belvedere Study Area
*   Covington Highway Corridor

<<FIGURE>>

Figure 20 - Indian Creek MARTA Station Concept

<<FIGURE>>

Figure 21 - Covington Highway Concept

[^p92-1]: text

<!-- page 93 -->
# MEMORIAL DRIVE REVITALIZATION CORRIDOR PLAN

With a focus on four strategic areas along the corridor, the expressed vision for the corridor encourages redevelopment to start in these areas: 1. Gateway West: A regional center at the I-285 interchange 2. Global City: A community that reflects the diversity of the corridor 3. Hambrick Village: A neighborhood serving commercial node 4. Gateway East: With easy access to Stone Mountain Freeway, this area represents unique opportunities to bring craft-oriented employment to the corridor.

<<FIGURE>>
Figure 22 - Future Land Use

<<FIGURE>>
Figure 23 - Development Intensity

<<FIGURE>>
Figure 24 - Community Facilities, Schools, Institutions along Corridor

<<FIGURE>>
Figure 25 - Memorial Drive Character Areas

<!-- page 94 -->
# 05 - SMALL AREA PLANS

## GATEWAY WEST

<<FIGURE>>
Figure 26 - Gateway West Character Area

<<FIGURE>>
The illustrative redevelopment plan above includes various features including green and public spaces and a tighter urban network of buildings and streets to reflect the vision for the area. This image also implies how the exiting building fabric can be honored through incremental development.

Figure 28 - Gateway West Concept

## HAMBRICK VILLAGE

<<FIGURE>>
Figure 30 -Hambrick Village Character Area

<<FIGURE>>
Figure 32 - Hambrick Village Concept

## GLOBAL CITY

<<FIGURE>>
Figure 27 - Global City Character Area

<<FIGURE>>
The illustrative redevelopment plan above includes various features to re-orient the area into a less suburban oriented place including eliminating setbacks and placing parking in the rear and developing opportunities for pocket parks and other greenspace features. The long term centerpiece of this area would be the conversion of part of North Indian Creek Drive into a plaza space.

Figure 29 - Global City Concept

## GATEWAY EAST

<<FIGURE>>
Figure 31 - Gateway West Character Area

<<FIGURE>>
This illustrative plan view of potential redevelopment emphasizes restoring a grid pattern in the area.

Figure 33 - Gateway West Concept

<!-- page 95 -->
### MEDLINE LCI (2014)
The Medline study area totals 520 acres in unincorporated DeKalb County, framed by four major intersecting corridors: Church Street, Scott Boulevard/ Lawrenceville Highway, North Decatur Road and DeKalb Industrial Way. General boundaries are defined by Jordan Lane to the north, Medlock Road to the west, Remington Lane to the south and DeKalb Industrial Way to the east. The DeKalb Medical Center, Patel Plaza and Suburban Plaza are all popular destinations located within the study area. The study area is approximately two miles north of Downtown Decatur, 10 miles from downtown Atlanta and just 2 miles west of the I-285 interchange. The Medline LCI area is characterized by major regional corridors flanked by commercial and vacant properties. Over 30 acres of the land along these corridors is vacant, greyfield parcels. The corridors provide ease of access for automobiles but are lacking in pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, making the area unhealthy and difficult to traverse without a car.

<<FIGURE>>

Figure 34 - Visionary Master Plan

<<FIGURE>>

Figure 35 - Character Areas Map

<!-- page 96 -->
# 05 - SMALL AREA PLANS

<<FIGURE>>

Figure 36 - Example Illustration of Healthy Street Development

<<FIGURE>>

Figure 37 - Proposed Location of Medical Technical College

<<FIGURE>>

Figure 38 - Proposed Location of Community Garden within Mixed-Use Development

<<FIGURE>>

Figure 39 - Proposed Location of a Hindu Temple

<!-- page 97 -->
### NORTH DRUID HILLS LCI & UPDATES (2010, 2021)

The North Druid Hills Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) study was commissioned by DeKalb County and the office of Commissioner Jeff Rader in conjunction with the Atlanta Regional Commission. The Briarcliff Node portion of the overall LCI was updated in 2021. The intent of the study is to improve the quality of life in the North Druid Hills Road Corridor and create a unique identity for the area by linking transportation improvements and land use recommendations. The LCI study was managed by DeKalb County. A Core Team of area stakeholders was formed to provide guidance and input during the course of study. Institutions, land owners, developers, and neighborhood associations with interests in the North Druid Hills LCI study area comprised the membership of the Core Team. In addition to the stakeholder group, public input opportunities including a design workshop, survey, comment forms, and study website were provided throughout the process, with a total of four public meetings held.

<<FIGURE>>

Figure 40 - LCI Study Area Map

<<FIGURE>>

Figure 41 - Briarcliff Node Character Areas

<!-- page 98 -->
# 05 - SMALL AREA PLANS

<<FIGURE>>

Figure 42: Mason Mill Park Node

<<FIGURE>>

Figure 44: Toco Hill Node

<<FIGURE>>

Figure 43: Interstate 85 Node

<<FIGURE>>

Figure 45: Residential Corridor

<!-- page 99 -->
### WESLEY CHAPEL LCI (2011)

The Wesley Chapel Activity Center derives from the Wesley Chapel Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study. The core of the study is the nexus of Interstate 20 and Wesley Chapel Road. Some of the goals of the plan: Encourage diversity of mixed income neighborhoods, employment, and recreational choices. Provide access to a wide range of travel modes, including transit, walking and biking. Develop an outreach process that promotes involvement of all stakeholders. Land Use recommendations from the study are being used as policy guidelines in the comprehensive plan.

**I. Lifelong Communities** – ensuring that design captures the needs of young, old, and everyone in between by promoting multimodal access, diverse housing options, and desirable community spaces

**II. Multimodal Transportation Investments** - Provide improvements for vehicle , pedestrian, and other ways of getting around.

III. Green Communities Standards – reducing energy consumption through more efficient building design and land use choices, and pursuing new opportunities for energy production.

**IV. Public Private Partnerships** – Encourage collaboration between public and private partnerships.

<<FIGURE>>

**Figure 46 - LCI Master Plan**

<<FIGURE>>

**Figure 47 - LCI Concept Plan**

<!-- page 100 -->
# 06 - REPORT OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS

<!-- page 101 -->
# CHAPTER 06
# REPORT OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS

<!-- page 102 -->
# 06 - REPORT OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS

### REPORT OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS - ROADS AND DRAINAGE

| NUMBER | PROJECT/ACTIVITY | STATUS | STATUS EXPLANATION |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| 01 | Develop, adopt, and fund an annual curb installation and maintenance plan and schedule for regular maintenance of sidewalks, curbs, and crosswalks. For Historic Districts and sites use materials as recommended by the Historic Preservation Commission. | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 02 | Prepare a 15-year plan to upgrade, maintain, and repair corrugated metal drainage pipe and catch basins | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 03 | Create a 15-year Bridge Renewal Fund to maintain and repair bridges suffering from rust, erosion, lead paint, and age such as those at Flat Shoals near Candler Road and Clifton Church, and the bridge where Montreal Road crosses Stone Mountain Freeway. | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 04 | Maintain, mill, patch, and resurface county roadways rated above 32. | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 05 | SPLOST resurfacing plan. Continue road resurfacing using SPLOST funds. | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 06 | Currently using SPLOST funds to install new sidewalk | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 07 | Bridge Maintenance utilizing SPLOST funds. continue existing maintenance plan | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |

<!-- page 103 -->
# REPORT OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS - TRANSPORTATION

| NUMBER | PROJECT/ACTIVITY | STATUS | STATUS EXPLANATION |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| 01 | 2014 Transportation projects. Three tiers of unincorporated DeKalb County projects were created. Please refer to list of projects in the recommendations report located in the Transportation plan. www.dekalbtransportationplan2014.com | Completed | |
| 02 | Develop a study/plan on how to adapt our current and planned transportation system to ensure the resilience of our communities despite changes in our weather due to climate change in the future. | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 03 | North Druid Hills Bridge Replacement (scoping phase) (CTP PI # 4016) | Underway | |
| 04 | SR 42 (Moreland Avenue) Scoping Study. Include a study @ Bailey Road with intersection improvements and signalization. (CTP PI # 6025). | Underway | |
| 05 | Covington Trails & Kensington MARTA Station Road Diet Scoping Study (CTP PI # 6031). | Underway | |
| 06 | SR 8 (Lawrenceville Highway) Pedestrian and Bicycle Alternatives Study (CTP PI # 2950) | Underway | |
| 07 | South River Trail – Phase V – From South River Trail—Phase 1 to Waldrop Road—ROW Phase (CTP PI # 6031) (GDOT 0009029) | Underway | |
| 08 | South River Trail – Phase V – Construction Phase (CTP PI # 6031) (GDOT 0009029) | Underway | |
| 09 | South River Multiuse Trail – Scoping Phase (CTP PI # 0503A) | Underway | |
| 10 | Clifton Corridor Bicycle and Pedestrian Study (CTP PI # 5094) | Underway | |
| 11 | As part of the Comprehensive Transportation Plan, establish a sidewalk priority plan for DeKalb County | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |

<!-- page 104 -->
# 06 - REPORT OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS

### REPORT OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS - WATERSHED MANAGEMENT

| NUMBER | PROJECT/ACTIVITY | STATUS | STATUS EXPLANATION |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| 01 | Water Meter Upgrade and Replacement Program | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 02 | Paint and repair tanks at Columbia, Whites Mill and Dunwoody | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 03 | Water Replacement, Service Renewals and Cul de Sac Contracts | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 04 | CD Program Managers - WIFIA | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 05 | CIP Program Managers, Hydraulic Modeling & Master Planning - WIFIA | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 06 | Program Managers, Hydraulic Modeling & Master Planning - Non-WIFIA | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 07 | CIP Staffing, Rent and Overheads | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 08 | Design Services for Contracts where not already included | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 09 | CM Services for Contracts where not already included | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 10 | Easement Research and Easement Purchase not in Budget | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 11 | Scott Blvd Water Replacement Phase II | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |

<!-- page 105 -->
# REPORT OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS - WATERSERD MANAGEMENT

| NUMBER | PROJECT/ACTIVITY | STATUS | STATUS EXPLANATION |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| 12 | Scott Blvd. Phase III - 30 in Main Replacement | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 13 | Glendale Water - 36 in Main Replacement (remainder) | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 14 | Scott Candler Clear Well Redundancy | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 15 | Scott Candler Primary Electrical Feed Redundancy | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 16 | Scott Candler Studies and SCADA | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 17 | Manhole Raising Contract (1 Year Base - 2 Renewals) | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 18 | Relocation Roadway Projects - Undefined 2015 - Excl. Briarcliff below | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 19 | Emergency Rehab Contracts #2 | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 20 | CD PASARP Rehab Packages - WIFIA Compliant | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 21 | City of Atlanta – RM Clayton/UV System Replacement | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 22 | Upgrade of 3 Lower Crooked Creek Stations | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |

<!-- page 106 -->
# 06 - REPORT OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS

## REPORT OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS - WATERSHED MANAGEMENT

| NUMBER | PROJECT/ACTIVITY | STATUS | STATUS EXPLANATION |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| 23 | City of Atlanta WW Services Clean Water Atlanta CIP | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 24 | Snapfinger WWTP Expansion Construction PH 2 | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 25 | Snapfinger WWTP Expansion PH3A ($50M*1.2=$60.0) | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 26 | Gwinnett County Redirect ($25MM *1.15 total = $28.75 MM prior to 2024) | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 27 | Fire Hydrant Repair Replacement Annual Contracts | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 28 | Annuals - WIFIA Compliant | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 29 | Avondale Water Main - 30 in Replacement | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 30 | Reindeer (top 10) | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 31 | Miriam/Ousley | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 32 | Donaldson Drive (mid) | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 33 | Trunk sewer capacity improvement projects – multiple contracts | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |

<!-- page 107 -->
### REPORT OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS - WATERSHED MANAGEMENT

| NUMBER | PROJECT/ACTIVITY | STATUS | STATUS EXPLANATION |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| 34 | Avondale Elevated Storage Tank Replacement | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 35 | Claremont Elevated Storage Tank Replacement | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 36 | West Tucker Ground Storage Tank and Pump Station | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 37 | Whites Mill Ground Storage Tank and Pump Station Replacement | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 38 | New 2025 - 60” Transmission Loop - Phase A Design | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 39 | New 2025 - Northlake 60-inch Transmission Main - Phase A - Design | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 40 | New 2030 - 60” Transmission Loop - Phase B Design | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 41 | New 2030 - N. Shallowford 30-inch Transmission Main -Design | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 42 | Sewer Tanks - Shoal Creek Confluence | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 43 | Sewer Tanks - Snapfinger Creek | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 44 | OSARP Rehabilitation projects – design and commence rehab | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |

<!-- page 108 -->
# 06 - REPORT OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS

| REPORT OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS - WATERSHED MANAGEMENT | | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **NUMBER** | **PROJECT/ACTIVITY** | **STATUS** | **STATUS EXPLANATION** |
| 45 | Valve Location, Exercise, Repair and Replacement Annual Program | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 46 | Consent Decree Assessment – various contracts | Underway | |
| 47 | Consent Decree Program Management Services | Underway | |

<!-- page 109 -->
# REPORT OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS - FIRE AND RESCUE

| NUMBER | PROJECT/ACTIVITY | STATUS | STATUS EXPLANATION |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| 01 | Fire Station Replacement Program: several fire stations will have reached beyond their lifespan regarding effectiveness, living standards and structural integrity. | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 02 | Public Safety Training Center: The training center is limited in space, facilities and equipment to adequately serve the needs of the department. | Underway | |
| 03 | Complete the implementation of DeKalb Fire Service's five-year Capital Improvement Program that began June 1996. Station #3, Clarendon Avenue, is scheduled for replacement. Six stations require major renovations/remodeling. Develop and implement a revised plan to include CIP's for fire stations, apparatus and existing facility renovations. | Underway | |
| 04 | Determine the need for additional fire stations | Underway | |
| 05 | Update and revise Mutual/Automatic Aid agreements with all neighboring jurisdictions. | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |

<!-- page 110 -->
# 06 - REPORT OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS

### REPORT OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

| NUMBER | PROJECT/ACTIVITY | STATUS | STATUS EXPLANATION |
| :---: | --- | --- | --- |
| 01 | Utilize HOME and CDBG funds to develop new affordable single-family housing by partnering with local CHDOs, the DeKalb Housing Authority, or other private developers. | Underway | |
| 02 | Utilize NSP funds to purchase and rehabilitate foreclosure homes within targeted neighborhood to stabilize community. | Underway | |
| 03 | Utilize CDBG funds to contract with an agency that will undertake emergency repairs, minor home repairs, installation of safety equipment, and heavy property maintenance to 50 elderly heads of households. | Underway | |
| 04 | Utilize the CDBG program’s Section 108 Loan Program to facilitate major industrial development projects that will create jobs for low- and moderate-income workers. | Underway | |
| 05 | Enforce the housing code for apartment structures which are substandard and use the police power to upgrade and comply with the building code. | Underway | |
| 06 | Develop resident associations and Neighborhood Watch Programs in apartment complexes and public housing which meet regularly with the police to determine problems and develop solutions. | Underway | |
| 07 | Coordinate with the State Dept. of Education, DSS, to ensure there is a plan in place to serve children with disabilities and special needs. | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 08 | Provide CDBG funds to address the problems of foreclosure/predatory lending. | Underway | |

<!-- page 111 -->
# REPORT OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

| NUMBER | PROJECT/ACTIVITY | STATUS | STATUS EXPLANATION |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| 09 | Utilize CDBG funds to support youth related summer recreational, self-esteem, enrichment programs and activities to be administered and implemented by the County for approximately 300 County income-eligible youth. | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 10 | Provide CDBG funds to encourage services for small business micro-enterprise training and entrepreneur development. | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 11 | Provide CDBG funds for a Small Business Revolving Loan Fund Program to lend funds from $10,000-$35,000 for business in DeKalb County. For every $35,000 in funds loaded (1) full-time equivalent job must be created. | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 12 | Produce a comprehensive countywide Housing Plan, with recommended policy guidelines. | Underway | |
| 13 | A new Central Senior Center and South Senior Center were recently constructed. CDBG dollars paid for the design and engineering for Fire Station No. 7. SPLOST funds will pay for construction of the new Fire Station No. 7. | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 14 | Community Development Department has a rolling application process for HOME loans for the development of affordable units, affordable rental units and multifamily housing. Community Development will continue accepting and underwriting applications through 2022. | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 15 | Community Development provides funds for Community Development Housing Organizations to promote to acquire and rehabilitate single family structures. These rehabilitated single-family structures will then be sold to low- and mod-income eligible families - CDBG. | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |

<!-- page 112 -->
# 06 - REPORT OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS

### REPORT OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

| NUMBER | PROJECT/ACTIVITY | STATUS | STATUS EXPLANATION |
| :---: | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| 16 | Construction of new Tobie Grant Recreation Center. | Completed | |
| 17 | Construction of the new East DeKalb Senior and Community Center at Bruce Street. | Not Started | Delayed due to changes in priorities or funding |
| 18 | Construction of a Community and Senior Center in District 4 and 7 to fill the gap identified in the Senior Center Feasibility Study. | Not Started | Delayed due to changes in priorities or funding |
| 19 | Identify county-owned surplus and/or tax delinquent properties for redevelopment opportunities according to policies set forth in Comprehensive Plan Text. Prior to marketing these properties, provide bi-annual reports to Board of Commissioners during a work session. | Not Started | Delayed due to changes in priorities or funding |

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 113 -->
# REPORT OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS - PLANNING AND SUSTAINABILITY

| NUMBER | PROJECT/ACTIVITY | STATUS | STATUS EXPLANATION |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| 01 | Impact Fees – Secure funds to Initiate a study to evaluate the feasibility for Impact Fees in DeKalb County. | Underway |  |
| 02 | LCI Update - Candler Road LCI | Not Started | Delayed due to changes in priorities or funding |
| 03 | Land Use Amendments - Establish core intensities for all activity center character areas. | Underway |  |
| 04 | Land Use Amendment - North Druid Hills LCI | Completed |  |
| 05 | Intergovernmental - DeKalb will coordinate with existing cities on developing amenable annexation plans. | Underway |  |
| 06 | Departmental Coordination - Establish regular staff-level meetings with the following departments to share data, new plans/policies and new projects: Decide DeKalb, Community Development, Watershed, Transportation/Public Works, and Parks & Recreation | Underway |  |
| 07 | Land Use Policy / Departmental Coordination - Work with the Watershed Department to investigate sewer issues that could impact future land use/development decisions and determine any needed land use policy changes. | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 08 | Land Use Policy / Departmental Coordination - Work with the Watershed Department to investigate stormwater run-off issues in neighborhoods where complaints have increased due to new development. Determine if any land use policy changes are needed. | Underway |  |

<!-- page 114 -->
# 06 - REPORT OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS

### REPORT OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS - PLANNING AND SUSTAINABILITY

| NUMBER | PROJECT/ACTIVITY | STATUS | STATUS EXPLANATION |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| 09 | Economic Development / Departmental Coordination - Work with Decide DeKalb to explore new programs/policies to redevelop, rehab or re-use declining commercial corridors. | Underway | |
| 10 | Land Use Policy/ Departmental Coordination - Work with Decide DeKalb, Community Development and the Multi-family Task Force members to explore new programs/ policies to redevelop or rehab declining/ troubled multi-family developments. | Underway | |
| 11 | Environmental Planning - Work towards preparing a Climate Resiliency Plan for the County. | Underway | |
| 12 | Demographics Projections - Coordinate with ARC research group in the reassessment of forecasting demographics. | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 13 | Land Use Policy - Utilize findings from #17 as well as outside research to explore ways to inform county citizens of the need for multi-family housing and propose polices to assure that multi-family developments can have a positive impact within existing neighborhoods. | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 14 | 2050 Unified Plan - Undergo a major update to the comprehensive plan and transportation plans. This project will combine both The Comprehensive Plan and Comprehensive Transportation Plan into one document. | Completed | |
| 15 | Glenwood Columbia Plan - The purpose is to prepare a plan that provides education and a toolkit for the business community to build a consensus on how to strengthen economic development in the area. | Completed | |
| 16 | DeKalb Green Sustainability Program Description: Program to promote and support habits or activities that ensure the long-term viability and success social, economic, and environmental well-being of DeKalb County. | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |

<!-- page 115 -->
# REPORT OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS - PLANNING AND SUSTAINABILITY

| NUMBER | PROJECT/ACTIVITY | STATUS | STATUS EXPLANATION |
| :---: | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| 17 | GA Department of Community Affairs Mandate that DeKalb County update the Comprehensive Plan every 5 and 10 years. | Completed | |
| 18 | Neighborhood Registry Dashboard and App Description: Create an online source for DeKalb County neighborhoods to see profiles of demographics and current planning and transportation projects in their neighborhood. | Not Started | Delayed due to changes in priorities or funding |
| 19 | DeKalb County Zoning Code Update Description: Update DeKalb County Ordinance, Chapter 27 Zoning | Not Started | Delayed due to changes in priorities or funding |
| 20 | Memorial Drive Gateway project | Not Started | Delayed due to changes in priorities or funding |
| 21 | Memorial Drive Re-Branding project | Not Started | Delayed due to changes in priorities or funding |
| 22 | Sustainability Zoning Audit - Staff will identify improvements needed to unsure that environmental, equity, and economic needs are balanced in our zoning code. | Not Started | Delayed due to changes in priorities or funding |
| 23 | Intergovernmental - DeKalb Elected Officials will work with GA legislative representatives (liaisons) to develop policy to regulate the process of annexations and incorporations. | Underway | |
| 24 | Develop a strategic plan for Transit-oriented Development in the I-20 East Corridor | Completed | |
| 25 | Create a central location to gather contact information on civic groups and for them to get informed. | Completed | |
| 26 | Update or Create new MALP | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |

<!-- page 116 -->
# REPORT OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS - CODE ENFORCEMENT

| NUMBER | PROJECT/ACTIVITY | STATUS | STATUS EXPLANATION |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| 01 | Code Enforcement will take a block-by-block strategic approach in delivering its inspection and enforcement services throughout the county. In addition to normal code enforcement activities, special operation teams will be deployed to conduct sweeps within commercial zones as identified in the Economic Development Strategic Plan. The commercial zone targeted sweeps will occur along commercial corridor and intersections utilizing a multi-departmental approach to blight reduction. | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 02 | With a focus on prevention, a comprehensive educational strategy is part of the Code Enforcement approach to blight reduction. An effective educational outreach campaign will raise awareness of property maintenance standards. The campaign will include grassroots community outreach, technology access, and community resources. | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 03 | Code Enforcement will coordinate with the Office of Neighborhood Empowerment to conduct capacity building training within impacted by blight. Capacity building training will help to empower residents to maintain and enhance neighborhoods to sustain a safe and aesthetically attractive environment. Code Enforcement will partner with Keep DeKalb Beautiful to focus cleanup efforts along commercial zones and to create more synergy through partnerships with neighborhood groups, businesses, and not-for-profit agencies. | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 04 | To qualify for abatement/demolition, properties must be structurally unsound, vacant and unsecured, have high weeds and grass, and/or have open storage of trash and debris. The properties are inspected and adjudicated resulting in a court order allowing the county to abate the nuisance. | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |

<!-- page 117 -->
# REPORT OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS - CODE ENFORCEMENT

| NUMBER | PROJECT/ACTIVITY | STATUS | STATUS EXPLANATION |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| 05 | A multi-agency collaborative effort targeting hotels and motels with the highest levels of crime, and health, life safety and building violations. The project includes coordinated sweeps, policy changes, and relocation of extended stay residents. | Underway | |
| 06 | Coordinated sweeps of apartment complexes in the unincorporated area of DeKalb County are collaborative efforts that often include Code Enforcement, Police, Fire, and the Health Department. These efforts should focus on the exterior of apartment complexes with specialized emphasis on housing conditions and the quality of life of the residents in multi-family dwellings. | Underway | |
| 07 | Continued effort to hold owners of foreclosed and vacant property(s) responsible for maintenance and security of the properties. Property owners are required to register the property with the county, pay a fee of $100 or face fines up to $1000. | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |

<!-- page 118 -->
# 06 - REPORT OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS

### REPORT OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS - POLICE

| NUMBER | PROJECT/ACTIVITY | STATUS | STATUS EXPLANATION |
| :---: | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| 1 | Construct Property Room | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 2 | Construct Special Operations facility and hangar | Underway | |
| 3 | Build new Training Academy | Underway | |
| 4 | Implement Emergency Police Dispatch (EPD) software through International Academies of Emergency Dispatch (IAED): Emergency Police Dispatch (EPD) software through International Academies of Emergency Dispatch (IAED) are protocols that ensure every dispatcher, day in day out, asks consistent questions. For every call, regardless of the situation, the public and first responders in the field can rely on dispatchers gathering and distributing reliable information. | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 5 | College to Cop Program: This program will provide college students interested in a career in law enforcement an internship with DeKalb County Police as a career option. The program will focus on students ages 18 to 22. | Not Started | Delayed due to changes in priorities or funding |
| 6 | Career Exploration Program: This program will provide middle and high school students with an internship with the DeKalb County Police Department to expose them to the culture, values, and traditions of the police profession, along with helping to build better relationships and trust with law enforcement. | Not Started | Delayed due to changes in priorities or funding |

<!-- page 119 -->
# REPORT OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS - PARKS AND RECREATION

| NUMBER | PROJECT/ACTIVITY | STATUS | STATUS EXPLANATION |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| 01 | Implement the DeKalb Community Greenspace Plan which in part seeks to develop a partnership to acquire and preserve flood plain areas which are suitable for park, recreational, and greenway use. | Underway | |
| 02 | Continue to restore open areas of parks along Ponce de Leon in accordance with historic landscape preservation guidelines. Establish parks and open space standards based on equity of access, optimal level of service and cost effectiveness, and a positive and inviting image. | Underway | |
| 03 | Refine the county's greenway program, continue to apply for grant(s) from the Georgia Greenspace Trust Fund and complete all necessary steps to qualify for a grant. Ensure that all grants are properly spent in support of the county's greenway program. | Underway | |
| 04 | Develop 80 miles of greenways as connections to nature for people (8 miles per year). | Underway | |
| 05 | Acquire 200 acres of open space per year to provide for active and passive parks, multi-dimensional recreation facilities, and trails. | Underway | |
| 06 | Develop a program to rebuild and maintain the Decatur-Stone Mountain bicycle trail as part of countywide bicycle trail plan. Provide park-like areas as rest and exercise stops | Underway | |
| 07 | Implement a Capital Improvements Plan to construct new facilities and rehabilitate existing parks. | Completed | |
| 08 | Using creative financing, create four new community parks that provide a balance of active and passive spaces | Underway | |
| 09 | Project #1: Rainbow Park Amphitheater– An Amphitheater will be construction at Rainbow park for outdoor concerts | Completed | |
| 10 | Project #2: Tobie Grant Recreation Center– A new recreation center will be constructed at Tobie Grant Park | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |

<!-- page 120 -->
# 06 - REPORT OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS

### REPORT OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS - PARKS AND RECREATION

| NUMBER | PROJECT/ACTIVITY | STATUS | STATUS EXPLANATION |
| :---: | --- | --- | --- |
| 11 | Project #3: Hairston Community Center– A new community center will be constructed at Hairston | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 12 | Project #4: NH Scott Pool– Renovation of pool at NH Scott Park | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 13 | Project #5: Glen Emerald Park– The lake and dam at Glen Emerald Park will be renovated | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 14 | Project #6: Ellenwood Park– Phase I construction of a playground and parking area | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 15 | Project #9: Pleasantdale Park– Addition of concession building and renovation of soccer fields | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 16 | Project #10: Bransby Park – Phase I for an addition of a greenhouse, community garden, general store and renovations to the pool at the Bransby. | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 17 | Implement a Capital Improvement Plan to construct new facilities and rehabilitate existing parks | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 18 | Project #12: Mystery Valley– Bunker Renovations and clubhouse renovations | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 19 | Project #13: Sugar Creek – Bunker Renovations and Bridge Improvements | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 20 | Project #14: Little Creek Horse Park Project/ activity – Renovations to the community building | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 21 | Project #15: Playground replacements– Outdated playgrounds will be replaced at the following parks: WD Thomson, Shoal Creek I, II, III, Oakcreek, Pleasantdale, Washington, Medlock, Emmie Smith, Emory Grove, Princeton, Cedar, Bruce Street, County Line, and Tobie Grant 2. | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |

<!-- page 121 -->
### REPORT OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS - PARKS AND RECREATION

| NUMBER | PROJECT/ACTIVITY | STATUS | STATUS EXPLANATION |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| 22 | The 2001 and 2006 Bond Funds have either been spent or allocated for projects. We now have SPLOST funding to rehabilitate Roofs, shelters, athletic fields, golf and tennis, pools and other projects. | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 23 | Project # 16: Building Improvements/ Renovations– Outdated structures and buildings will be renovated at the following parks: NH Scott, Emmie Smith, Exchange, Lou Walker, Glen Emerald, County Line, Truelove, Emory Grove, Wade Walker, Washington, Exchange, Shoal Creek II, Lithonia, Stoneview, Cedar Park 2. | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 24 | Project #17: Athletic Field Renovations– Athletic Field renovations will be performed at the following parks: Truelove, Gresham, Exchange, Redan, Shoal Creek I, Midway, Wade Walker, Rock Chapel and Hamilton 2. | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 25 | Tennis Court Renovations: – Tennis Courts will be replaced or repaired at the following locations: DeKalb Tennis Center, Midway, WD Thomson, County Line, Shoal Creek II, Glen Emerald, and Emory Grove 2 | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 26 | Lithonia Pool renovations – Renovations to the pool and poolhouse at Lithonia Park 2. | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 27 | Update and expand a minimum of five special facilities to generate revenue and provide destination parks. | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 28 | Acquire land for future park and community facility development in accordance with the Parks and Recreation Strategic Plan. | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 29 | Project #7: DeKalb Tennis Center– Construction of a new tennis facility at Mason Mill Park. | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |

<!-- page 122 -->
# 06 - REPORT OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS

### REPORT OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

| NUMBER | PROJECT/ACTIVITY | STATUS | STATUS EXPLANATION |
| :---: | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| 01 | Develop and maintain close contacts with the network of economic development organizations active in DeKalb County and provide quarterly reports to the Board of Commissioners. | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 02 | Implement a Capital Improvements Plan to construct new facilities and rehabilitate existing parks | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 03 | Continue to strengthen working relationships with the DeKalb Workforce Center and DeKalb Employer Committee to assist with developing strategies that address businesses' employment needs. | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 04 | Use economic development/real estate groups (DeKalb County Staff, Georgia Industry, Trade & Tourism, Georgia Power, the Chambers of Commerce, Atlanta Gas & Light Company, major commercial and industrial real estate firms, financial institutions, etc.) to improve economic conditions in the county. | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 05 | Train staff and members of TEAM DEKALB in successful techniques for marketing DeKalb County to new and existing businesses; report this to Board of Commissioners during work session. | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | Decide DeKalb recently completed a Strategic Economic Development Plan which does not contemplate these activities |
| 06 | Prepare a feasibility study for the redevelopment and reuse of the Mercer University area according to the Comprehensive Plan text & map. | Completed | Mercer University completed a strategic plan for the property it owns. |
| 07 | Convene an annual developer's day session designed to market targeted areas of the County in order to promote business development in commercial, industrial, and underserved retail markets. | Underway | |

<!-- page 123 -->
# REPORT OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

| NUMBER | PROJECT/ACTIVITY | STATUS | STATUS EXPLANATION |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| 08 | Proposed Economic Development Organization (EDO) is comprised of the DeKalb County CEO, Economic Development Department, DeKalb Chamber of Commerce, Development Authority of DeKalb County and corporate partners. This partnership will recommend an economic development strategic plan to local officials and administrators. | Completed | |
| 09 | Develop promotional materials for marketing declining/blighted areas of the county that have strong economic potential but are currently underutilized with unoccupied buildings. | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 10 | Publish a regular E-Newsletter for citizens and businesses providing informative economic development information. | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 11 | Exchange economic development marketing information with the DeKalb Chamber of Commerce and the DeKalb Convention & Visitors Bureau. | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 12 | Participate in Industry Associations for high tech and high wage industries to promote business growth in DeKalb County. | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 13 | Promote the growth of small business in DeKalb County by providing information to help businesses have access to capital, identify public and private resources, opportunities for networking, so businesses can aid one another. | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 14 | Market DeKalb County as a preferred business location for international firms to generate private job creation and investment, with special emphasis on China. | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |
| 15 | Emphasize business promotion among the higher paying industry groups that can take advantage of DeKalb County labor force and employee accessibility from other counties, such as Transportation, Communications and Utilities; Wholesale Trade; Finance, and Insurance. | Not Applicable/ Discontinued | No longer a priority/ reassigned to other efforts or departments |

<!-- page 124 -->
(blank page)

<!-- page 125 -->
# CHAPTER 07

# COMMUNITY WORK PROGRAM

<!-- page 126 -->
# KEY UPCOMING ACTION ITEMS

The Community Work Program identifies key activities DeKalb County will undertake during the next five years to address the Issues and Opportunities of the 2050 Comprehensive Development Plan. The table below includes a project name or description, the timeframe when the activity will be accomplished, the responsible party or department, estimated cost, and potential funding sources. These activities were identified through input and outreach to the community, stakeholders, elected or appointed officials and DeKalb County staff.

### COMMUNITY WORK PROGRAM - PLANNING AND SUSTAINABILITY

| NUMBER | PROJECT/ACTIVITY | RESPONSIBLE PARTY (DEPARTMENT) |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| 01 | Neighborhood Registry Dashboard and App Description: Create an online source for DeKalb County neighborhoods to see profiles of demographics and current planning and transportation projects in their neighborhood. | Planning and Sustainability |
| 02 | DeKalb County Zoning Code Update Description: Update DeKalb County Ordinance, Chapter 27 Zoning | Planning and Sustainability |
| 03 | Memorial Drive Gateway project | Planning and Sustainability |
| 04 | Memorial Drive Re-Branding project | Planning and Sustainability |
| 05 | Environmental Planning - Work towards preparing a Climate Resiliency Plan for the County. | Planning and Sustainability |
| 06 | Economic Development / Departmental Coordination - Work with Decide DeKalb to explore new programs/policies to redevelop, rehab or re-use declining commercial corridors. | Planning and Sustainability |
| 07 | Land Use Policy/ Departmental Coordination - Work with Decide DeKalb, Community Development and the Multi-family Task Force members to explore new programs/policies to redevelop or rehab declining/troubled multi-family developments. | Planning and Sustainability |

<!-- page 127 -->
| COMMUNITY WORK PROGRAM - PLANNING AND SUSTAINABILITY | | | | | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **YEARS OF IMPLEMENTATION** | | | | | **ESTIMATED COSTS** | **FUNDING SOURCE(S)** |
| **2023** | **2024** | **2025** | **2026** | **2027** | | |
| X | X | X | | | Staff Time | DeKalb County |
| X | X | X | X | X | $300,000 | DeKalb County |
| X | X | X | | | $50,000 | DeKalb County |
| X | X | | | | Staff Time | DeKalb County |
| X | | | | | Staff Time | DeKalb County |
| X | X | X | X | X | Staff Time | DeKalb County |
| X | X | X | X | X | Staff Time | DeKalb County |

<!-- page 128 -->
### COMMUNITY WORK PROGRAM - PLANNING AND SUSTAINABILITY

| NUMBER | PROJECT/ACTIVITY | RESPONSIBLE PARTY (DEPARTMENT) |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| 08 | Departmental Coordination - Establish regular staff-level meetings with the following departments to share data, new plans/policies and new projects: Decide DeKalb, Community Development, Watershed, Transportation/Public Works, and Parks & Recreation | Planning and Sustainability |
| 09 | Land Use Policy / Departmental Coordination - Work with the Watershed Department to investigate stormwater run-off issues in neighborhoods where complaints have increased due to new development. Determine if any land use policy changes are needed. | Planning and Sustainability |
| 10 | Impact Fees – Secure funds to Initiate a study to evaluate the feasibility for Impact Fees in DeKalb County. | Planning and Sustainability |
| 11 | LCI Update - Candler Road LCI | Planning and Sustainability |
| 12 | Land Use Amendments – Establish core intensities for all activity center character areas. | Planning and Sustainability |
| 14 | Intergovernmental - DeKalb Elected Officials will work with GA legislative representatives (liaisons) to develop policy to regulate the process of annexations and incorporations. | Planning and Sustainability |
| 15 | Intergovernmental - DeKalb will coordinate with existing cities on developing amenable annexation plans. | Planning and Sustainability |
| 16 | Sustainability Zoning Audit - Staff will identify improvements needed to unsure that environmental, equity, and economic needs are balanced in our zoning code. | Planning and Sustainability |
| 17 | Creation of Visionary Plans in Select Communities | Planning and Sustainability |

<!-- page 129 -->
| COMMUNITY WORK PROGRAM - PLANNING AND SUSTAINABILITY | | | | | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **YEARS OF IMPLEMENTATION** | | | | | **ESTIMATED COSTS** | **FUNDING SOURCE(S)** |
| **2023** | **2024** | **2025** | **2026** | **2027** | | |
| X | X | X | X | X | Staff Time | DeKalb County |
| X | X | X | X | X | Staff Time | DeKalb County |
| X | | | | | Staff Time | DeKalb County |
| | X | X | X | | $250,000 | ARC LCI, DeKalb County |
| X | X | X | X | | Staff Time | DeKalb County |
| X | X | X | | | Staff Time | DeKalb County |
| X | X | X | | | Staff Time | DeKalb County |
| X | X | X | | | Staff Time | DeKalb County |
| | X | X | X | X | $100,000 (per study) | ARC LCI, DeKalb County/ DeKalb Board of Health |

<!-- page 130 -->
# COMMUNITY WORK PROGRAM - PLANNING AND SUSTAINABILITY

| NUMBER | PROJECT/ACTIVITY | RESPONSIBLE PARTY (DEPARTMENT) |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| 18 | Arts and Culture Master Plan | Planning and Sustainability |
| 20 | Achieve ARC Green Communities recertification and maintenance | Planning and Sustainability |
| 21 | Historic resource inventory/survey (District, age, style, etc.) | Planning and Sustainability |
| 22 | Presidential Parkway/Mercer Study | Planning and Sustainability |
| 23 | Update MARTA I-20 east TOD study after LPA is revised | Planning and Sustainability |
| 24 | Updated Kensington Station LCI | Planning and Sustainability |
| 25 | Consider staff and department recommendations in future budget, department, or staff planning | Planning and Sustainability |
| 26 | Consider findings and recommendations of recent convention center feasibility study in relevant studies and small area plans | Planning and Sustainability |

<!-- page 131 -->
| COMMUNITY WORK PROGRAM - PLANNING AND SUSTAINABILITY | | | | | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **YEARS OF IMPLEMENTATION** | | | | | **ESTIMATED COSTS** | **FUNDING SOURCE(S)** |
| **2023** | **2024** | **2025** | **2026** | **2027** | | |
| | X | X | X | | $250,000 | DeKalb County/ARC |
| X | X | X | X | X | Staff Time | DeKalb County |
| | X | X | X | | $100,000 | DeKalb County/ARC LCI/ARC CDAP |
| X | X | X | | | $75,000 | ARC LCI/DeKalb County |
| | X | X | X | | $500,000 | MARTA/ARC/FTA |
| | | X | X | X | $300,000 | ARC LCI/DeKalb County |
| X | X | | | | Staff Time | DeKalb County |
| X | X | | | | Staff Time | DeKalb County |

<!-- page 132 -->
# 07 - COMMUNITY WORK PROGRAM

| COMMUNITY WORK PROGRAM - PLANNING AND SUSTAINABILITY | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **NUMBER** | **PROJECT/ACTIVITY** | **RESPONSIBLE PARTY (DEPARTMENT)** |
| 27 | Update DeKalb County Sign Ordinance | Planning and Sustainability |
| 28 | Intergovernmental – Coordinate with the DeKalb County School District on planning for land use, transportation, and other improvements, as well as the construction of new schools or reuse of excess DCSD properties. | Planning and Sustainability |
| 29 | At least annually, review and if needed, update the FLUM based on new or updated LCIs, small area plans, Freight Cluster studies or other studies. | Planning and Sustainability |
| 30 | Create new zoning district to allow appropriate light industrial uses in Activity Centers and Commercial Redevelopment Corridors. Appropriate uses in this new category may include breweries and makerspaces. | Planning and Sustainability |
| 31 | Explore potential future land use categories to address planned high capacity transit and housing related needs within DeKalb County. | Planning and Sustainability |
| 32 | Complete the DeKalb Village Conservation Community Strategy, continue exploring opportunities to implement Village Conservation Community development, and identify necessary policy changes to support Village Conservation Communities. | Planning and Sustainability |
| 33 | Intergovernmental Coordination – Identify opportunities to coordinate with cities, including but not limited to planning initiatives near city/ county boundaries. | Planning and Sustainability |

<!-- page 133 -->
| COMMUNITY WORK PROGRAM - PLANNING AND SUSTAINABILITY | | | | | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **YEARS OF IMPLEMENTATION** | | | | | **ESTIMATED COSTS** | **FUNDING SOURCE(S)** |
| **2023** | **2024** | **2025** | **2026** | **2027** | | |
| | | X | X | X | $75,000 | DeKalb County |
| X | X | X | X | X | Staff Time | DeKalb County |
| X | X | X | X | X | Staff Time | DeKalb County |
| | X | X | X | | $50,000 / Staff Time | DeKalb County |
| X | X | | | | Staff Time | DeKalb County |
| X | X | X | | | $50,000 / Staff Time | DeKalb County |
| X | X | X | X | X | Staff Time | DeKalb County |

<!-- page 134 -->
# 07 - COMMUNITY WORK PROGRAM

### COMMUNITY WORK PROGRAM - TRANSPORTATION

| NUMBER | PROJECT/ACTIVITY | RESPONSIBLE PARTY (DEPARTMENT) |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| 01 | North Druid Hills Bridge Replacement (scoping phase) (CTP PI # 4016) | Transportation/ Planning |
| 02 | SR 42 (Moreland Avenue) Scoping Study. Include a study @ Bailey Road with intersection improvements and signalization. (CTP PI # 6025). | Transportation/ Planning |
| 03 | Covington Trails & Kensington MARTA Station Road Diet Scoping Study (CTP PI # 6031). | Transportation/ Planning |
| 04 | SR 8 (Lawrenceville Highway) Pedestrian and Bicycle Alternatives Study (CTP PI # 2950) | Transportation/ Planning |
| 05 | South River Trail – Phase V – From South River Trail—Phase 1 to Waldrop Road—ROW Phase (CTP PI # 6031) (GDOT 0009029) | Transportation/ Planning |
| 06 | South River Trail – Phase V – Construction Phase (CTP PI # 6031) (GDOT 0009029) | Transportation/ Planning |
| 07 | South River Multiuse Trail – Scoping Phase (CTP PI # 0503A) | Transportation/ Planning |
| 08 | Clifton Corridor Bicycle and Pedestrian Study (CTP PI # 5094) | Transportation/ Planning |
| 09 | Countywide Trails Master Plan | Transportation/ Planning |

<!-- page 135 -->
| COMMUNITY WORK PROGRAM - TRANSPORTATION | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **YEARS OF IMPLEMENTATION** | **ESTIMATED COSTS** | **FUNDING SOURCE(S)** |
| **2023** | **2024** | **2025** | **2026** | **2027** | | |
| X | X | X | X | X | $4,000,000 | Surface Transportation Block Grant program |
| X | X | X | | | $200,000 | Surface Transportation Block Grant program |
| X | X | | | | $100,000 | Surface Transportation Block Grant program |
| X | X | X | | | $150,000 | STP Urban Local |
| X | X | X | | | $550,000 | TAP Urban Local |
| X | X | X | X | X | $1,400,000 | TAP Urban Local |
| X | X | X | X | X | $65,000 | TAP Urban Local |
| X | X | X | X | X | $125,000 | TAP Urban Local |
| X | X | X | | | $250,000 | DeKalb County/ARC/GDOT |

<!-- page 136 -->
# 07 - COMMUNITY WORK PROGRAM

| COMMUNITY WORK PROGRAM - WATERSHED MANAGEMENT | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **NUMBER** | **PROJECT/ACTIVITY** | **RESPONSIBLE PARTY (DEPARTMENT)** |
| 01 | Consent Decree Assessment – various contracts | DWM |
| 02 | Consent Decree Program Management Services | DWM |

| COMMUNITY WORK PROGRAM - POLICE | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **NUMBER** | **PROJECT/ACTIVITY** | **RESPONSIBLE PARTY (DEPARTMENT)** |
| 01 | Construct Special Operations facility and hangar | Police Department |
| 02 | Build new Training Academy | Police Department |
| 03 | College to Cop Program: This program will provide college students interested in a career in law enforcement an internship with DeKalb County Police as a career option. The program will focus on students ages 18 to 22. | Police Department |
| 04 | Career Exploration Program: This program will provide middle and high school students with an internship with the DeKalb County Police Department to expose them to the culture, values, and traditions of the police profession, along with helping to build better relationships and trust with law enforcement. | Police Department |

<!-- page 137 -->
### COMMUNITY WORK PROGRAM - WATERSHED MANAGEMENT

| YEARS OF IMPLEMENTATION | | | | | ESTIMATED COSTS | FUNDING SOURCE(S) |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **2023** | **2024** | **2025** | **2026** | **2027** | | |
| X | | | | | $76,400,000 | Multiple sources – bonds and R&E |
| X | X | X | | | $9,800,000 | Multiple sources – WIFIA, bonds and R&E |

### COMMUNITY WORK PROGRAM - POLICE

| YEARS OF IMPLEMENTATION | | | | | ESTIMATED COSTS | FUNDING SOURCE(S) |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **2023** | **2024** | **2025** | **2026** | **2027** | | |
| X | X | X | | | $3,500,000 | General /CIP/Forfeiture |
| X | X | X | X | X | $25,000,000 | General /CIP/Forfeiture |
| X | X | X | X | X | $34,560 | Police Budgeted funds |
| X | X | X | X | X | $1,920 | Police Budgeted Funds |

<!-- page 138 -->
07 - COMMUNITY WORK PROGRAM

### COMMUNITY WORK PROGRAM - FIRE AND RESCUE

| NUMBER | PROJECT/ACTIVITY | RESPONSIBLE PARTY (DEPARTMENT) |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| 01 | Public Safety Training Center: The training center is limited in space, facilities and equipment to adequately serve the needs of the department. | Fire Station |
| 02 | Complete the implementation of DeKalb Fire Service’s five-year Capital Improvement Program that began June 1996. Station #3, Clarendon Avenue, is scheduled for replacement. Six stations require major renovations/remodeling. Develop and implement a revised plan to include CIP's for fire stations, apparatus and existing facility renovations. | Fire Station |
| 03 | Determine the need for additional fire stations | Fire Station |

### COMMUNITY WORK PROGRAM - CODE ENFORCEMENT

| NUMBER | PROJECT/ACTIVITY | RESPONSIBLE PARTY (DEPARTMENT) |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| 01 | A multi-agency collaborative effort targeting hotels and motels with the highest levels of crime, and health, life safety and building violations. The project includes coordinated sweeps, policy changes, and relocation of extended stay residents. | Code Enforcement |
| 02 | Coordinated sweeps of apartment complexes in the unincorporated area of DeKalb County are collaborative efforts that often include Code Enforcement, Police, Fire, and the Health Department. These Efforts should focus on the exterior of apartment complexes with specialized emphasis on housing conditions and the quality of life of the residents in multi-family dwellings. | Code Enforcement |

<!-- page 139 -->
### COMMUNITY WORK PROGRAM - FIRE AND RESCUE

| YEARS OF IMPLEMENTATION | | | | | ESTIMATED COSTS | FUNDING SOURCE(S) |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **2023** | **2024** | **2025** | **2026** | **2027** | | |
| X | X | X | X | X | $150,000,000 | SPLOST |
| X | X | X | X | X | $2,300,000 | SPLOST |
| X | X | X | X | | $90,000 | SPLOST |

### COMMUNITY WORK PROGRAM - CODE ENFORCEMENT

| YEARS OF IMPLEMENTATION | | | | | ESTIMATED COSTS | FUNDING SOURCE(S) |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **2023** | **2024** | **2025** | **2026** | **2027** | | |
| X | X | X | X | X | $32,000/yr | General Fund (Tax Revenue) |
| X | X | X | X | | $300,000/yr | General Fund (Tax Revenue) |

<!-- page 140 -->
# 07 - COMMUNITY WORK PROGRAM

| COMMUNITY WORK PROGRAM - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **NUMBER** | **PROJECT/ACTIVITY** | **RESPONSIBLE PARTY (DEPARTMENT)** |
| 01 | Construction of new Tobie Grant Recreation Center. | Community Development |
| 02 | Construction of the new East Dekalb Senior and Community Center at Bruce Street. | Community Development |
| 03 | Construction of a Community and Senior Center in District 4 and 7 to fill the gap identified in the Senior Center Feasibility Study. | Community Development |
| 04 | Identify county-owned surplus and/or tax delinquent properties for redevelopment opportunities according to policies set forth in Comprehensive Plan Text. Prior to marketing these properties, provide bi-annual reports to Board of Commissioners during a work session. | Community Development |
| 05 | Utilize the CDBG program’s Section 108 Loan Program to facilitate major industrial development projects that will create jobs for low- and moderate-income workers. | Community Development |
| 06 | Enforce the housing code for apartment structures which are substandard and use the police power to upgrade and comply with the building code. | Community Development |
| 07 | Develop resident associations and Neighborhood Watch Programs in apartment complexes and public housing which meet regularly with the police to determine problems and develop solutions. | Community Development |
| 08 | Produce a comprehensive countywide Housing Plan, with recommended policy guidelines. | Community Development |

<!-- page 141 -->
| COMMUNITY WORK PROGRAM - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **YEARS OF IMPLEMENTATION** | | | | | **ESTIMATED COSTS** | **FUNDING SOURCE(S)** |
| **2023** | **2024** | **2025** | **2026** | **2027** | | |
| X | | | | | $9,112,043 | CDBG General Fund |
| X | | | | | $5,498,994 | CDBG General Fund |
| X | | | | | $7,700,000 | CDBG Section 108 Loan to be repaid with General Funds |
| X | X | X | X | | $300,000 | Home |
| X | X | X | X | | $1,000,000 | CDBG Funds |
| X | X | X | | | $275,000 | NSP Funds |
| X | X | X | | | $100,000 | CDBG Funds |
| X | X | | | | Staff | DeKalb County |

<!-- page 142 -->
# 07 - COMMUNITY WORK PROGRAM

### COMMUNITY WORK PROGRAM - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

| NUMBER | PROJECT/ACTIVITY | RESPONSIBLE PARTY (DEPARTMENT) |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| 09 | Utilize HOME and CDBG funds to develop new affordable single-family housing by partnering with local CHDOs, the DeKalb Housing Authority, or other private developers. | Community Development |
| 10 | Utilize NSP funds to purchase and rehabilitee foreclosure homes within targeted neighborhood to stabilize community. | Community Development |
| 11 | Utilize CDBG funds to contract with an agency that will undertake emergency repairs, minor home repairs, installation of safety equipment, and heavy property maintenance to 50 elderly heads of households. | Community Development |
| 12 | Provide CDBG funds to address the problems of foreclosure/predatory lending. | Community Development |

### COMMUNITY WORK PROGRAM - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

| NUMBER | PROJECT/ACTIVITY | RESPONSIBLE PARTY (DEPARTMENT) |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| 01 | Promote the growth of small business in DeKalb County by providing information to help businesses have access to capital, identify public and private resources, opportunities for networking, so businesses can aid one another. | Economic Development |
| 02 | Convene an annual developer’s day session designed to market targeted areas of the County in order to promote business development in commercial, industrial, and underserved retail markets. | Economic Development |
| 03 | Update Strategic Economic Development Plan | Decide DeKalb |
| 04 | Conduct retail analysis to determine current space and future demand, and identify strategies for attracting retail and services to underserved areas of the County. | Planning and Sustainability<br><br>Decide DeKalb |

<!-- page 143 -->
| COMMUNITY WORK PROGRAM - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT |
| :--- |
| **YEARS OF IMPLEMENTATION** | **ESTIMATED COSTS** | **FUNDING SOURCE(S)** |
| **2023** | **2024** | **2025** | **2026** | **2027** | | |
| | X | X | | | $250,000 | HOME and CDBG Funds |
| | X | X | | | $250,000 | NSP Funds |
| | X | X | X | | $300,000 | CDBG Funds |
| | X | X | X | | $200,000 | CDBG Funds |

| COMMUNITY WORK PROGRAM - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT |
| :--- |
| **YEARS OF IMPLEMENTATION** | **ESTIMATED COSTS** | **FUNDING SOURCE(S)** |
| **2023** | **2024** | **2025** | **2026** | **2027** | | |
| X | X | X | X | | $15,000 | Annual Budget |
| X | X | X | X | X | $10,000 | Annual Budget |
| | X | X | X | X | $150,000 | Decide DeKalb/EDA |
| | X | X | | | $65,000 | Annual Budget/Decide DeKalb |

<!-- page 144 -->
# 07 - COMMUNITY WORK PROGRAM

## COMMUNITY WORK PROGRAM - PARKS AND RECREATION

| NUMBER | PROJECT/ACTIVITY | RESPONSIBLE PARTY (DEPARTMENT) |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| 01 | Implement the DeKalb Community Greenspace Plan which in part seeks to develop a partnership to acquire and preserve flood plain areas which are suitable for park, recreational, and greenway use. | Parks and Recreation |
| 02 | Continue to restore open areas of parks along Ponce de Leon in accordance with historic landscape preservation guidelines. Establish parks and open space standards based on equity of access, optimal level of service and cost effectiveness, and a positive and inviting image. | Parks and Recreation |
| 03 | Refine the county’s greenway program, continue to apply for grant(s) from the Georgia Greenspace Trust Fund and complete all necessary steps to qualify for a grant. Ensure that all grants are properly spent in support of the county’s greenway program. | Parks and Recreation |
| 04 | Develop 80 miles of greenways as connections to nature for people (8 miles per year). | Parks and Recreation |
| 05 | Acquire 200 acres of open space per year to provide for active and passive parks, multi-dimensional recreation facilities, and trails. | Parks and Recreation |
| 06 | Develop a program to rebuild and maintain the Decatur-Stone Mountain bicycle trail as part of countywide bicycle trail plan. Provide park-like areas as rest and exercise stops | Parks and Recreation |
| 07 | Using creative financing, create four new community parks that provide a balance of active and passive spaces. | Parks and Recreation |

<!-- page 145 -->
| COMMUNITY WORK PROGRAM - PARKS AND RECREATION | | | | | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **YEARS OF IMPLEMENTATION** | | | | | **ESTIMATED COSTS** | **FUNDING SOURCE(S)** |
| **2023** | **2024** | **2025** | **2026** | **2027** | | |
| X | X | X | | | 1,000,000 | SPLOST |
| X | X | X | X | | 2,500,000 | SPLOST |
| X | X | X | X | X | 1,500,000 | SPLOST |
| X | X | X | X | X | 500,000 | SPLOST |
| X | X | X | X | X | 6,900,000 | SPLOST |
| X | X | X | X | X | 1,000,000 | SPLOST |
| X | X | X | X | | 7,800,000 | Park Bond |

<!-- page 146 -->
THIS PAGE LEFT
INTENTIONALLY BLANK

<!-- page 147 -->
# CHAPTER 08
## STAKEHOLDER & PUBLIC OUTREACH

<!-- page 148 -->
# STAKEHOLDER AND PUBLIC OUTREACH OVERVIEW

Rooted in robust and meaningful engagement, the DeKalb 2050 Unified speaks for the broad spectrum of stakeholders who live, work, and play in the County. For this process and the County’s decision-making framework to be successful, it was critical that every part of DeKalb’s diverse community is heard. To this end, the key objectives to educate, consult and collaborate with the community were established to ensure meaningful involvement of all stakeholders:

* Educate and involve the general public throughout the process.
* Public outreach tools were utilized to educate, listen to, and learn from the public throughout the planning process. The goal was to ensure that all stakeholders interested in and affected by the plan have an opportunity to be educated, ask questions, and provide input.
* Consult with staff, representatives, and agency partners to gather a broad range of ideas. This process relies upon the knowledge and experience of key municipal staff and agency partners serving the community. Individuals were recognized who interacted with and plan for DeKalb’s stakeholders were a key source of information and insight throughout the process.
* Collaborate with stakeholders for issue identification and the creation of solutions. This process provided an opportunity for DeKalb’s stakeholders to voice their needs, desires and opinions. Coordination with residents, business owners, and other members of the community provided invaluable perspective to the process that lead to solutions-based planning and implementation strategies.

These objectives guided the development of the outreach program and selection and timing of outreach activities. The timeline in Figure 1, highlights the opportunities for engagement planned throughout all phases of the project.

## PROJECT TIMELINE

<<FIGURE>>

**Figure 1**

<!-- page 149 -->
The Vision, Goals, Needs, and Opportunities Phase focuses on understanding the future community vision and sets the direction and tone for the remainder of the study. It also includes a robust understanding of current conditions and needs both today and in the future. The Transportation Nexus Phase builds upon the existing conditions and needs assessment to bring the transportation and land use elements together. The Recommendations Phase commences once needs have been determined. At that point, possible project and policy recommendations can be identified. The recommendations then are prioritized after evaluation against a set of metrics built on the goals from early in the plan. During the final phase, Documentations, Review, and Adoption, the final reports will be provided to the CEO and Board of Commissioners for review and adoption.

# OUTREACH STRATEGIES
A combination of digital and in-person engagement tools were employed for Phase I and Phase II outreach. This allowed for broad engagement among targeted groups and the general public and promoted inclusion. Additionally, as restrictions related to COVID-19 have set limitations on public gatherings, creative and innovative public engagement strategies as alternatives to in-person meetings were a necessity

## TARGETED STAKEHOLDER OUTREACH
Targeted stakeholder outreach allows for focused discussions to occur among entities with common interests and backgrounds. Four types of stakeholder groups were engaged during Phase I and Phase II: Standing Committees/Leadership, Transportation and Land Use Committees, Stakeholder Group Meetings, and Focus Groups.

Collectively, these groups are guiding the planning process by actively engaging at key points, championing the Unified Plan in the community by identifying and advertising public involvement opportunities and attending meetings and events; and reviewing documents and providing feedback on recommendations.

<<FIGURE>>

| STANDING COMMITTEES/LEADERSHIP | COMMITTEES | | STAKEHOLDER GROUPS (2+ MEETINGS) | FOCUS GROUPS (1 MEETING) |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| CEO/Board of Commissioners | **Transportation Committee** | **Land Use Committee** | Advocacy and Environmental | Housing |
| Planning Commission[^p149-1] | Atlanta Regional Commission (relevant departments) | Atlanta Regional Commission (relevant departments) | Civic/Business Associations | Arts and Culture |
| Community Councils[^p149-1] | ATL/SRTA/Xpress | Community Improvement Districts | Higher Education and Medical | Public Safety |
| Public Works & Infrastructure Committee[^p149-1] | Commissioner Appointees | Commissioner Appointees | Transit (follow-up from Transit Master Plan) | Multicultural/ BIPOC Groups |
| Planning, Economic Development, and Community Services Committee[^p149-1] | Community Improvement Districts / Transportation Management Assoc. | Department of Community Affairs | Freight (as needed) | Bike/Pedestrian/Trails |
| City Leaders | Cities and DeKalb Municipal Assoc. | DeKalb School System | | Resiliency/Sustainability |
| | DeKalb School System | Decide DeKalb/ Economic Development | | Retail |
| | Decide DeKalb/ Economic Development | MARTA | | Health and Wellness |
| | Georgia Department of Transportation | DeKalb County (relevant departments) | | |
| | MARTA | | | |
| | DeKalb County (relevant departments) | | | |

Figure 2

[^p149-1]: Includes Board of Commissioner Committees

<!-- page 150 -->
# 08 - STAKEHOLDER & PUBLIC OUTREACH

### County Leadership
Involving elected officials and community leadership is critical to the development and implementation of the Unified Plan’s recommendations. These stakeholders were engaged multiple times during Phase I and Phase II outreach.

Transportation and Land Use Committees (Stakeholder Committee)
Separate Transportation and Land Use committees have been established to focus on the two primary parts of the Unified Plan. Joint meetings with breakouts for each primary topic area were held in May 2021 and May 2022.

### Stakeholder Group Meetings
These topically focused meetings include discussions among key stakeholder groups. During Phase I and Phase II discussions were hosted with the Advocacy & Environmental, Civic & Business Association, and Higher Ed & Medical stakeholder groups.

### Focus Groups
Focus groups provided an opportunity for the planning team to meet with a small group of community members to talk about a specific topic area in more detail. These small, personalized engagement opportunities also assisted in reaching traditionally underrepresented populations. A total of eight focus group categories were targeted. During Phase I, sessions were hosted with the Bike/Ped, Development Community, Housing/Housing Affordability, Black Leaders, and NAACP Focus Groups. During Phase II, sessions were hosted with the Multicultural/BIPOC Groups, Public Safety, Health and Wellness, Arts/Culture, and Sustainability groups.

## GENERAL PUBLIC OUTREACH
In addition to meetings with targeted groups, general public outreach was conducted during both Phase I and II. The combination of in-person, socially distanced events and virtual meetings provided a wide array of opportunities to engage with the public.

### Intercepts
Intercepts are casual, pop-up style engagements that meet stakeholders where they are – at parks, riding transit, or shopping to name a few. In Phase I, seven (7) intercepts were staged in May and June 2021 throughout the County at Arabia Mountain, The Mall at Stonecrest, the Dunwoody Farmers Market at Brook Run Park, Doraville MARTA Transit Station, Indian Creek MARTA Transit Station, Kensington MARTA Transit Station, and the District 3 Fitness Day at Exchange Park. In Phase II, five (5) intercepts were staged in May 2022 at Tucker Days on Main Street Tucker, Good Neighbor Day at DeKalb Peachtree Airport, Gresham Park Baseball at Gresham Park, Wade Walker Park, and The Mall at Stonecrest.

### Public Meetings
Public meetings provide an opportunity for more in depth engagement and additional time for the public to offer feedback. A series of three (3) virtual public meetings were held in May 2021 to officially kick off the Unified Plan, followed by five (5) virtual community charrettes held in September 2021 to gather input on potential development and transportation priorities for specific areas within the County. Three (3) virtual public meetings were held in May 2022 to gather input on draft recommendations. Meetings were webinar style in nature and began with a presentation about the project overview, schedule, ongoing engagement, and the relevant land use or transportation update for each particular meeting. There were live polling opportunities and attendees were encouraged to use the chat function to direct questions to the panelists. The remainder of the time was used for virtual breakout rooms or open discussion with an opportunity to converse with meeting facilitators about Land Use or Transportation. Lastly, there were two (2) required Public Hearings. The first public hearing took place during Board of Commissioners meeting, held on April 27, 2021, via via Zoom and was available for live stream on DCTV’s webpage and DCTVChannel23.TV. The

<!-- page 151 -->
second public hearing was held during the Board of Commissioners meeting held on July 12, 2022. The third public hearing was held during the Board of Commissioners meeting held on August 09, 2022. The fourth public hearing was held during the Board of Commissioners meeting held on September 13, 2022.

### Online Survey
Online surveys provide opportunities for people to engage and provide feedback from the comfort of their home and on their own schedule. Two online surveys were launched in May of 2021 and 2022 and distributed to study area stakeholders via intercept events, virtual meetings, County Commissioner and DeKalb Relay newsletter email campaigns, and social media. A total of 1217 survey responses were received.

### Website and Social Media
Online engagement provides a convenient way to engage with the public and to share information. The project website included project information, updates, and key engagement opportunities in addition to reports, meeting materials, and related links. DeKalb County Twitter and Facebook platforms were also leveraged to reach local residents and stakeholders. Content focused on increasing website traffic, promoting the virtual public meetings, and encouraging participation in the online surveys.

### Collateral
Project promotion began at the onset of the planning process with the development of an informational factsheet. The document discussed what is encompassed in a Unified Plan, why DeKalb is creating one, the planning horizon and timeline, and how the public can remain involved. The factsheet was made available in English, Spanish, Chinese, Korean, Nepali, Burmese, and Hindi.

<<FIGURE>>

**Project Website Home Page**

<!-- page 152 -->
# 08 - STAKEHOLDER & PUBLIC OUTREACH

## PHASE I: OUTREACH

Input received during Phase I engagement informed future phases of work including the Transportation Nexus which will bring the transportation and land use elements together and Recommendations. Table 1[^p152-1], ordered by date, summarizes all of the engagement that occurred in Phase I. Additional public hearings were held in August and September.

| Outreach Technique | Date | Event Location | Audience Reached |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| Transportation & Land Use Committee | 5/5/2021 | Virtual | Local, regional and state planning partners; economic development organizations; Commissioner appointees. |
| Intercept Surveys | 5/8/2021<br>5/21/2021<br>5/22/2021<br>5/26/2021<br>6/2/2021<br>6/2/2021<br>6/12/2021 | Arabia Mountain National Heritage Area<br>The Mall at Stonecrest; Dunwoody Farmer's Market<br>Doraville MARTA Transit Station<br>Indian Creek MARTA Transit Station<br>Kensington MARTA Transit Station<br>District 3 Fitness Day at Exchange Park | All interested members of the public and stakeholders. |
| County-wide Public Meetings | 5/17/2021<br>5/19/2021<br>5/20/2021 | Virtual | All interested members of the public and stakeholders. |
| Stakeholder Meetings | 6/29/2021<br>7/19/2021<br>7/20/2021<br>7/29/2021<br>8/17/2021 | Virtual | Advocacy & Environmental Stakeholders Group Civic & Business Association Higher Ed & Medical Association Community Council Public Safety |
| Focus Groups | 7/12/2021<br>8/5/2021<br>8/11/2021<br>8/25/2021<br>9/08/2021 | Virtual | NAACP<br>Black Leaders in DeKalb<br>Bicycle/Pedestrian<br>Housing<br>Developer |
| Community Charrettes | 9/16/2021<br>9/16/2021<br>9/23/2021<br>9/27/2021<br>9/28/2021 | Virtual | All interested members of the public and stakeholders. |
| Public Hearings | 4/27/2021 | Virtual | All interested members of the public and commissioners |

**Table 1**

<!-- page 153 -->
# PHASE II: OUTREACH

Input received during Phase II engagement informed the findings and recommendations phases of work, including policy recommendations, future land use revisions, and priority transportation projects. Table 2, ordered by date, summarizes all of the engagement that occurred in Phase II.

| Outreach Technique | Date | Event Location | Audience Reached |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| Stakeholder Meetings | 9/30/21<br>10/28/21<br>4/26/2022<br>4/27/2022<br>4/27/2022<br>08/05/2022<br>08/08/2022<br>08/09/2022<br>08/10/2022<br>08/16/2022<br>08/17/2022<br>09/01/2022 | Virtual | MARTA<br>MMIP GDOT<br>Community Council<br>ED/Medical<br>Civic and Business |
| Focus Groups | 11/9/2021<br>11/10/2021<br>11/13/2021<br>11/13/2021<br>1/27/2022<br>12/8/2021<br>12/14/2021<br>12/16/2021<br>1/27/2022<br>2/16/2022 | Virtual | Multicultural/BIPOC Groups<br>Korean Focus Group Meeting<br>Bhutanese Focus Group Meeting<br>African Diaspora Community Focus Group Meeting<br>Burmese Focus Group Meeting<br>Hispanic Focus Group Meeting<br>Public Safety<br>Health and Wellness<br>Arts/Culture<br>Sustainability |
| Transportation & Land Use Committee | 4/20/2022 | Virtual | Local, regional and state planning partners; economic development organizations; Commissioner appointees. |
| Community Intercepts | 5/7/2022<br>5/14/2022<br>5/15/2022<br>5/21/2022<br>5/22/2022 | Tucker Days at Main Street Tucker;<br>Good Neighbor Day at DeKalb Peachtree Airport;<br>Gresham Park Baseball at Gresham Park;<br>The Mall at Stonecrest | All interested members of the public and stakeholders. |
| County-wide Virtual Public Meetings | 5/11/2022<br>5/12/2022<br>5/14/2022 | Virtual | All interested members of the public and stakeholders. |
| Public Hearings | 07/12/2022<br>08/9/2022<br>09/13/2022 | Virtual | All interested members of the public and stakeholders. |

**Table 2**

<!-- page 154 -->
THIS PAGE LEFT
INTENTIONALLY BLANK

<!-- page 155 -->
# APPENDIX A

# DOCUMENTATION OF
# COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT
# ACTIVITIES

<!-- page 156 -->
# APPENDIX A

# Public Hearing #1 – April 27, 2021

<<FIGURE>>

**DeKalb County Government**
Manuel J. Maloof Center
1300 Commerce Drive
Decatur, Georgia 30030

**Agenda - Final**

**Board of Commissioners**

**Commissioner Steve Bradshaw, Presiding Officer, District 4**
**Comm. Lorraine Cochran-Johnson, Deputy Presiding Officer, District 7**

**Commissioner Robert Patrick, District 1**
**Commissioner Jeff Rader, District 2**
**Commissioner Larry Johnson, District 3**
**Commissioner Steve Bradshaw, District 4**
**Commissioner Mereda Davis Johnson, District 5**
**Commissioner Edward “Ted” Terry, Super District 6**
**Commissioner Lorraine Cochran-Johnson, Super District 7**

Tuesday, April 27, 2021 | 9:00 AM | Manuel J. Maloof Auditorium

*This meeting will be conducted via teleconference (Zoom). Simultaneous public access to the meeting will be available (1) via live stream on DCTV’s webpage, and (2) on DCTVChannel23.TV. Public Comment may be submitted by sending an email no longer than one page to PublicComment@dekalbcountyga.gov which must be received between 9:00 a.m. and 10:00 a.m. on the day of the meeting. Only those emails received during the allotted time may be read aloud and broadcast. Emails received outside of the allotted time will be included in the Public Comments record for the next meeting after the receipt of those emails. The body of your email must include your first and last name, followed by your address. By submitting an email at any time for public comment, you agree to have your name, address, and email broadcast on the teleconference (Zoom) and entered in the record/minutes. Abusive, profane or derogatory language will not be permitted. The Public Comment segment will not exceed 30 minutes and individual emails will be read by the Clerk for no more than 3 minutes each. The County reserves the right, at the County’s sole discretion, to (1) add your email to the record/minutes without reading any of it into the broadcast or (2) add your email to the record/minutes and read all or a portion of your email into the broadcast*

### A. INSPIRATIONAL

Dr. Jamal Harrison Bryant, Pastor
New Birth Missionary Baptist Church

**PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE**

Commissioner Mereda Davis Johnson
District 5

| | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| [2021-2446](https://) | Commission District(s): All Districts (County-wide) | |
| | Public Hearing to accept the public process for the 2050 Unified Plan. | |
| | (4/20/21 Committee of the Whole: accepted to BOC agenda - Public Hearing) | |
| [2021-2520](https://) | Commission District(s): All | |
| | Small Box Discount Store Moratorium Extension | |
| | (4/20/21 Committee of the Whole: accepted to BOC agenda - Public Hearing) | |

### E. APPEALS

NONE

### F. APPOINTMENTS

**Chief Executive Office**

| | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| [2021-2443](https://) | Commission District(s): All | |
| | Appoint the CEO’s nominee, Clara Burks, to the DeKalb County Recreation, Parks and Cultural Affairs Citizen Advisory Board. | |
| | (4/6/21 Committee of the Whole: accepted to BOC agenda - Appointment) | |
| | (4/13/21 PECS-Planning, Economic Development & Community Services Committee: recommended for approval to the Board of Commissioners) | |
| | (4/13/21 Board of Commissioners: deferred to the next meeting to the Board of Commissioners) | |

**ITEMS FOR RECORDING IN THE MINUTES**

**Board of Commissioners - District 2**

| | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| [2021-2483](https://) | Commission District(s): District 2 | |
| | Recording the Appointment of Jim Smith to the District 2 Community Council | |
| | (4/20/21 Committee of the Whole: accepted to BOC agenda - Appointment) | |

# Public Hearing #2 – July 12, 2022

<<FIGURE>>

**DeKalb County Government**
Manuel J. Maloof Center
1300 Commerce Drive
Decatur, Georgia 30030

**Agenda**

**Board of Commissioners**

**Comm. Robert Patrick, Presiding Officer, District 1**
**Comm. Mereda Davis Johnson, Deputy Presiding Officer, District 5**

**Commissioner Robert Patrick, District 1**
**Commissioner Jeff Rader, District 2**
**Commissioner Larry Johnson, District 3**
**Commissioner Steve Bradshaw, District 4**
**Commissioner Mereda Davis Johnson, District 5**
**Commissioner Edward “Ted” Terry, Super District 6**
**Commissioner Lorraine Cochran-Johnson, Super District 7**

Tuesday, July 12, 2022 | 9:00 AM | Manuel J. Maloof Auditorium

*This meeting will be conducted via teleconference (Zoom). Simultaneous public access to the meeting will be available (1) via live stream on DCTV’s webpage, and (2) on DCTVChannel23.TV. Public Comment may be submitted by sending an email no longer than one page to PublicComment@dekalbcountyga.gov which must be received between 9:00 a.m. and 10:00 a.m. on the day of the meeting. Only those emails received during the allotted time may be read aloud and broadcast. Emails received outside of the allotted time will be included in the Public Comments record for the next meeting after the receipt of those emails. The body of your email must include your first and last name, followed by your address. By submitting an email at any time for public comment, you agree to have your name, address, and email broadcast on the teleconference (Zoom) and entered in the record/minutes. Abusive, profane or derogatory language will not be permitted. The Public Comment segment will not exceed 30 minutes and individual emails will be read by the Clerk for no more than 3 minutes each. The County reserves the right, at the County’s sole discretion, to (1) add your email to the record/minutes without reading any of it into the broadcast or (2) add your email to the record/minutes and read all or a portion of your email into the broadcast.*

### A. INSPIRATIONAL

Chaplain Micah Lemon
DeKalb County Fire Rescue

**PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE**

Commissioner Larry Johnson
District 3

### F. APPOINTMENTS

**Board of Commissioners**

| | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| [2022-1111](https://) | Commission District(s): All Commission Districts | |
| | Appointment to the Oversight Committee of the Office of the Independent Internal Audit - [[[CANDIDATE]]]. | |
| | (1/18/22 Committee of the Whole: accepted to BOC agenda - Appointment) | |
| | (1/25/22 Board of Commissioners: tabled) | |
| | (1/25/22 Board of Commissioners: taken off table) | |
| | (1/25/22 Board of Commissioners: deferred for 30 days to the Board of Commissioners) | |
| | (2/22/22 Board of Commissioners: deferred 60 days to the Board of Commissioners) | |
| | (4/26/22 Board of Commissioners: deferred for 45 days to the Board of Commissioners) | |
| | (6/14/22 Board of Commissioners: deferred to the next meeting to the Board of Commissioners) | |
| | (6/28/22 Board of Commissioners: deferred to the next meeting to the Board of Commissioners) | |

**Ethics Board**

| | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| [2022-1695](https://) | Commission District(s): All | |
| | Appointment of the new Ethics Officer Elisa Murphy | |
| | (6/7/22 OPS-County Operations Committee: deferred to the Board of Commissioners) | |
| | (6/7/22 Committee of the Whole: Accepted to the BOC agenda - Appointment to the OPS-County Operations Committee) | |
| | (6/14/22 Board of Commissioners: deferred to the next meeting to the Board of Commissioners) | |
| | (6/28/22 Board of Commissioners: deferred to the next meeting to the Board of Commissioners) | |

### G. CONSENT AGENDA

<!-- page 157 -->
Public Hearing #1 Notice Advertisement – April 27, 2021

**Board of Commissioners Meeting Date – Tuesday, ++April 27, 2021 10:00 AM++**
This meeting will be held via Zoom and simultaneous broadcast available via live stream on DCTV's webpage, and on DCTVChannel23.TV.
Join from PC, Mac, Linux, iOS or Android: https://dekalbcountyga.zoom.us/j/7753778046
Or Telephone:
USA 8882709936 (US Toll Free)
Conference code: 217687
Meeting participant’s or caller’s phone numbers may be displayed to the public viewing or participating in the online meeting.
Citizens may also email documents for inclusion into the official record by submitting such materials by 9:00 am on the date of the public hearing. Email the DeKalb County Board of Commissioners at PublicHearing@dekalbcountyga.gov
**File ID# 2021-2446**
Application of the Director of Planning & Sustainability to hold a public hearing for the DeKalb County 2050 Unified Plan Update, to initiate the public process and development of the plan.

<!-- page 158 -->
# APPENDIX A

# Public Hearing #3 – August 09, 2022

<<FIGURE>>

### DeKalb County Government
**Agenda - Final**
**Board of Commissioners**

**Comm. Robert Patrick, Presiding Officer, District 1**
**Comm. Mereda Davis Johnson, Deputy Presiding Officer, District 5**

**Commissioner Robert Patrick, District 1**
**Commissioner Jeff Rader, District 2**
**Commissioner Larry Johnson, District 3**
**Commissioner Steve Bradshaw, District 4**
**Commissioner Mereda Davis Johnson, District 5**
**Commissioner Edward “Ted” Terry, Super District 6**
**Commissioner Lorraine Cochran-Johnson, Super District 7**

| Tuesday, August 9, 2022 | 9:00 AM | Manuel J. Maloof Auditorium |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |

*This meeting will be conducted via teleconference (Zoom). Simultaneous public access to the meeting will be available (1) via live stream on DCTV’s webpage, and (2) on DCTVChannel23.TV. Public Comment may be submitted by sending an email no longer than one page to PublicComment@dekalbcountyga.gov which must be received between 9:00 a.m. and 10:00 a.m. on the day of the meeting. Only those emails received during the allotted time may be read aloud and broadcast. Emails received outside of the allotted time will be included in the Public Comments record for the next meeting after the receipt of those emails. The body of your email must include your first and last name, followed by your address. By submitting an email at any time for public comment, you agree to have your name, address, and email broadcast on the teleconference (Zoom) and entered in the record/minutes. Abusive, profane or derogatory language will not be permitted. The Public Comment segment will not exceed 30 minutes and individual emails will be read by the Clerk for no more than 3 minutes each. The County reserves the right, at the County’s sole discretion, to (1) add your email to the record/minutes without reading any of it into the broadcast or (2) add your email to the record/minutes and read all or a portion of your email into the broadcast.*

#### A. INSPIRATIONAL
Pastor Troy Bush
Rehoboth Baptist Church

**PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE**
Commissioner Mereda Davis Johnson
District 5

# Public Hearing #4 – September 13, 2022

<<FIGURE>>

### DeKalb County Government
**Agenda**
**Board of Commissioners**

**Comm. Robert Patrick, Presiding Officer, District 1**
**Comm. Mereda Davis Johnson, Deputy Presiding Officer, District 5**

**Commissioner Robert Patrick, District 1**
**Commissioner Jeff Rader, District 2**
**Commissioner Larry Johnson, District 3**
**Commissioner Steve Bradshaw, District 4**
**Commissioner Mereda Davis Johnson, District 5**
**Commissioner Edward “Ted” Terry, Super District 6**
**Commissioner Lorraine Cochran-Johnson, Super District 7**

| Tuesday, July 12, 2022 | 9:00 AM | Manuel J. Maloof Auditorium |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |

*This meeting will be conducted via teleconference (Zoom). Simultaneous public access to the meeting will be available (1) via live stream on DCTV’s webpage, and (2) on DCTVChannel23.TV. Public Comment may be submitted by sending an email no longer than one page to PublicComment@dekalbcountyga.gov which must be received between 9:00 a.m. and 10:00 a.m. on the day of the meeting. Only those emails received during the allotted time may be read aloud and broadcast. Emails received outside of the allotted time will be included in the Public Comments record for the next meeting after the receipt of those emails. The body of your email must include your first and last name, followed by your address. By submitting an email at any time for public comment, you agree to have your name, address, and email broadcast on the teleconference (Zoom) and entered in the record/minutes. Abusive, profane or derogatory language will not be permitted. The Public Comment segment will not exceed 30 minutes and individual emails will be read by the Clerk for no more than 3 minutes each. The County reserves the right, at the County’s sole discretion, to (1) add your email to the record/minutes without reading any of it into the broadcast or (2) add your email to the record/minutes and read all or a portion of your email into the broadcast.*

#### A. INSPIRATIONAL
Chaplain Micah Lemon
DeKalb County Fire Rescue

**PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE**
Commissioner Larry Johnson
District 3

**Planning & Sustainability**

[2022-1179](https://) Commission District(s): Commission District 03 Super District 06
Application of Clark Property and Porch & Square for a Land Use Plan amendment for properties at 1058 and 1078 Moreland Avenue from TN (Traditional Neighborhood) to CRC (Commercial Redevelopment Corridor), at 1078 Moreland Avenue.
(3/3/22 Planning Commission: deferred for a full cycle to the Board of Commissioners - Zoning Meeting)
(3/24/22 Board of Commissioners - Zoning Meeting: deferred for two full cycles to the Board of Commissioners - Zoning Meeting)
(7/12/22 Planning Commission: approval per staff recommendation to the Board of Commissioners - Zoning Meeting)
(7/28/22 Board of Commissioners - Zoning Meeting: deferred to the next meeting to the Board of Commissioners)

[2022-1731](https://) Commission District(s): Commission District 03 Super District 06
Application of Clark Property and Porch & Square to rezone from RSM (Small Lot Residential Mix) (conditional) to MR-2 (Medium Density Residential-2) at 1058 and 1078 Moreland Avenue.
(7/12/22 Planning Commission: approved with conditions per staff recommendation to the Board of Commissioners - Zoning Meeting)
(7/28/22 Board of Commissioners - Zoning Meeting: deferred to the next meeting to the Board of Commissioners)

#### E. APPEALS
NONE

#### F. APPOINTMENTS
**Chief Executive Office**

[2022-1939](https://) Commission District(s): All
Appointment to the DeKalb County Historic Preservation Commission - Dr. Pamela Scully
(7/19/22 Committee of the Whole: Accepted to the BOC agenda - Appointment to the PECS-Planning, Economic Development & Community Services Committee)

(8/2/22 Committee of the Whole: accepted to BOC agenda - Public Hearing)
(8/9/22 Board of Commissioners: deferred for 30 days to the Board of Commissioners)

#### E. APPEALS
NONE

#### F. APPOINTMENTS
**Chief Executive Office**

[2022-2088](https://) Commission District(s): All
Appointment of Cynthia Dunn to the DeKalb County Public Library Board of Trustees
(9/6/22 Committee of the Whole: Accepted to the BOC agenda - Appointment to the PECS-Planning, Economic Development & Community Services Committee)

[2022-2129](https://) Commission District(s): All
Appointment of Bettye Davis to the DeKalb County Public Library Board of Trustees
(9/6/22 Committee of the Whole: Accepted to the BOC agenda - Appointment to the PECS-Planning, Economic Development & Community Services Committee)

**ITEMS FOR RECORDING IN THE MINUTES**
**Board of Commissioners - District 1**

[2022-2020](https://) Commission District(s): District 1
Recording of the Appointment of Will Childs to the Airport Advisory Board
(8/2/22 Committee of the Whole: accepted to BOC agenda - Appointment)
(8/9/22 Board of Commissioners: deferred to the next meeting to the Board of Commissioners)
(8/23/22 Board of Commissioners: deferred to the next meeting to the Board of Commissioners)

<!-- page 159 -->
### Public Hearing #3 Notice Advertisement – August 09, 2022

**Legal Notice**

**7/13/2022**

Notice is hereby given that the DeKalb County Board of Commissioners will hold an online public hearing for the following application(s)on the following date:

**Board of Commissioners Meeting Date – Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 10:00 AM**

This meeting will be held via Zoom and simultaneous broadcast available via live stream on DCTV’s webpage, and on DCTVChannel23.TV.

Join from PC, Mac, Linux, iOS or Android: https://dekalbcountyga.zoom.us/j/7753778046

Or Telephone: USA 8882709936 (US Toll Free)
Conference code: 217687

Meeting participant’s or caller’s phone numbers may be displayed to the public viewing or participating in the online meeting. Citizens may also email documents for inclusion into the official record by submitting such materials by 9:00 am on the date of the public hearing.

Email the DeKalb County Board of Commissioners at PublicHearing@dekalbcountyga.gov

**Z-22-1245331** &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; **2021-3522** &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; **Commission District 04 Super District 07**
**18-039-03-027, 18-039-03-029, 18-039-03-038, 18-039-03-039, 18-039-03-040,**
**18-039-03-041, 18-039-03-044, 18-039-03-110, 18-039-03-112**
**4994 ROCKBRIDGE RD, STONE MOUNTAIN, GA 30083**

Application of Kyle Williams to rezone properties from R-100 (Residential Medium Lot) to R-60 (Residential Small Lot-60) District to allow the construction of single family detached residences. The property is located on the north side of Rockbridge Road, the east terminus of Pepperwood Drive, and the east terminus of Hickory Hills drive, approximately 595 feet west of Sheppard Road at 4946, 4960, 4962, 4964, 4972, 4994, 4998, 5046 Rockbridge Road and 4953 Pepperwood Drive in Stone Mountain, Georgia. The property has approximately 978 feet of frontage along Rockbridge Road, 140 feet of frontage along Pepperwood Drive, and 60 feet of frontage along Hickory Hills Drive and contains 40 acres.

***

**File ID# 2022-1821** &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; **All Districts**

Application of the Director of Planning & Sustainability to consider approving a resolution to authorize the transmittal of the 2050 Comprehensive Plan Update to the Georgia Department of Community Affairs and the Atlanta Regional Commission as required by state law.

**PLEASE RUN THIS AD ONE (1) TIME, NO LATER THAN THURSDAY, JULY 21, 2022.**

<!-- page 160 -->
# APPENDIX A

## Transportation and Land Use Committee (Stakeholder Committee) Meeting – May 5, 2021

| Microsoft Teams Meeting Report - Attendees | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **Full Name** | **User Action** | **Timestamp** |
| +1 404-292-9465 | Joined before | 5/5/2021, 2:28:31 PM |
| Austin Shelton | Joined before | 5/5/2021, 2:28:31 PM |
| Hines, C. Hunter | Joined before | 5/5/2021, 2:28:31 PM |
| Jen Price | Joined before | 5/5/2021, 2:28:31 PM |
| Joannes, Chris | Joined before | 5/5/2021, 2:28:31 PM |
| Lawrence Kaiser | Joined before | 5/5/2021, 2:28:31 PM |
| Mayor Jonathan Elmore, A | Joined before | 5/5/2021, 2:28:31 PM |
| Pastore, Cristina | Joined before | 5/5/2021, 2:28:31 PM |
| Shawanna Qawiy | Joined before | 5/5/2021, 2:28:31 PM |
| Tuley, Jon | Joined | 5/5/2021, 2:28:31 PM |
| Geierman, Joseph L. | Joined | 5/5/2021, 2:28:38 PM |
| Rachel Staley | Joined | 5/5/2021, 2:28:47 PM |
| Michael Hightower | Joined | 5/5/2021, 2:28:48 PM |
| Smith, Sylvia | Joined | 5/5/2021, 2:28:54 PM |
| Lynn Deutsch (Guest) | Joined | 5/5/2021, 2:29:04 PM |
| Sunny Anderson | Joined | 5/5/2021, 2:29:50 PM |
| Cain Williamson | Joined | 5/5/2021, 2:29:53 PM |
| Meyer, Eric A. | Joined | 5/5/2021, 2:29:57 PM |
| Brewer, Brian N. | Joined | 5/5/2021, 2:30:10 PM |
| McLoyd, Johnathan G | Joined | 5/5/2021, 2:30:30 PM |
| Pelton, David | Joined | 5/5/2021, 2:30:37 PM |
| Bosman, Eric | Joined | 5/5/2021, 2:30:43 PM |
| Braun, Jonathan | Joined | 5/5/2021, 2:31:06 PM |
| Corrao, Laurel B. | Joined | 5/5/2021, 2:31:13 PM |
| Stephens, Preston L. | Joined | 5/5/2021, 2:31:14 PM |
| Davis Fox (Guest) | Joined | 5/5/2021, 2:31:26 PM |
| David Haynes | Joined | 5/5/2021, 2:31:27 PM |
| Stigler, Osaze | Joined | 5/5/2021, 2:31:27 PM |
| Webster, Jonathan | Joined | 5/5/2021, 2:31:34 PM |
| Alison Clark (Guest) | Joined | 5/5/2021, 2:31:41 PM |
| Daniel Studdard | Joined | 5/5/2021, 2:31:51 PM |
| Mitchell, Winston | Joined | 5/5/2021, 2:31:53 PM |
| Aileen Daney | Joined | 5/5/2021, 2:32:00 PM |
| Hudson, Cedric | Joined | 5/5/2021, 2:33:17 PM |
| Chuck Ellis (Guest) | Joined | 5/5/2021, 2:34:00 PM |
| Peart, Shelley | Joined | 5/5/2021, 2:34:05 PM |
| Keeter, Patrece | Joined | 5/5/2021, 2:34:09 PM |
| Diez, Laura E. | Joined | 5/5/2021, 2:34:40 PM |
| Brooks, Alesia D. | Joined | 5/5/2021, 2:34:56 PM |
| Alhadeff, Heather | Joined | 5/5/2021, 2:35:09 PM |
| Hobbs, James | Joined | 5/5/2021, 2:35:15 PM |
| Samyukth Shenbaga | Joined | 5/5/2021, 2:35:26 PM |
| David Haynes | Joined | 5/5/2021, 2:35:58 PM |
| Faith Allen | Joined | 5/5/2021, 2:36:50 PM |
| Patti Garrett (Guest) | Joined | 5/5/2021, 2:37:29 PM |
| Mayor John Ernst (Guest) | Joined | 5/5/2021, 2:37:42 PM |
| Lemke, Richard (Rick) W. | Joined | 5/5/2021, 2:38:20 PM |
| Davis, G. Leah | Joined | 5/5/2021, 2:41:10 PM |
| Sidney Douse | Joined | 5/5/2021, 2:43:52 PM |
| Williams, Donald | Joined | 5/5/2021, 2:48:29 PM |
| Dorian DeBarr | Joined | 5/5/2021, 2:50:52 PM |
| Cox, Billy J.. | Joined | 5/5/2021, 2:51:46 PM |
| McCoy, Demetrius | Joined | 5/5/2021, 3:00:11 PM |
| Barnes, Korey | Joined | 5/5/2021, 3:05:19 PM |
| RWallace (Guest) | Joined | 5/5/2021, 3:13:08 PM |
| Larry Kaiser (Guest) | Joined | 5/5/2021, 3:45:18 PM |
| Rachel Staley | Joined | 5/5/2021, 4:01:06 PM |
| SaVaughn Irons | Joined | 5/5/2021, 4:01:10 PM |

DeKalb County
Transportation and Land Use Committee
May 5, 2021

<<FIGURE>>

# DEKALB
## 2050 UNIFIED PLAN

<!-- page 161 -->
# Countywide Virtual Public Meetings (3) – May 17-20, 2021

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

| Attendee Report | | | | | | | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **Report Generated:** | **5/21/2021 13:03** | | | | | | | |
| **Topic** | **Webinar ID** | **Actual Start Time** | **Actual Duration (minutes)** | **# Registered** | **# Cancelled** | **Unique Viewers** | **Total Users** | **Max Concurrent Views** |
| DeKalb Unified Plan Virtual Meeting | 985 5832 4483 | 5/17/2021 17:29 | 111 | 28 | 8 | 27 | 58 | 25 |
| **Host Details** | | | | | | | | |
| **Attended** | **User Name (Original Name)** | **Email** | **Join Time** | **Leave Time** | **Time in Session (minutes)** | **Country/Region Name** | | |
| Yes | Cole Smith (Cole.Smith@kimley-horn.com) | Cole.Smith@kimley-horn.com | 5/17/2021 17:29 | 5/17/2021 19:20 | 111 | United States | | |
| **Panelist Details** | | | | | | | | |
| **Attended** | **User Name (Original Name)** | **Email** | **Join Time** | **Leave Time** | **Time in Session (minutes)** | **Country/Region Name** | | |
| Yes | Michelle Alexander | malexander@tcfatl.com | 5/17/2021 17:42 | 5/17/2021 19:08 | 86 | United States | | |
| Yes | Ed Caddell | ed.caddell@sycamoreconsulting.net | 5/17/2021 17:51 | 5/17/2021 19:06 | 75 | United States | | |
| Yes | Michael Hightower | mhightower@tcfatl.com | 5/17/2021 17:40 | 5/17/2021 19:14 | 95 | United States | | |
| Yes | Chris Joannes | chris.joannes@kimley-horn.com | 5/17/2021 17:31 | 5/17/2021 19:08 | 98 | United States | | |
| Yes | Robert L. Patrick | rlpatrick@dekalbcountyga.gov | 5/17/2021 17:30 | 5/17/2021 19:08 | 98 | United States | | |
| Yes | Eric Bosman | eric.bosman@kimley-horn.com | 5/17/2021 17:50 | 5/17/2021 19:07 | 78 | United States | | |
| Yes | Jonathan Webster | jrwebster@vhb.com | 5/17/2021 17:45 | 5/17/2021 19:08 | 83 | United States | | |
| Yes | Winston Mitchell | winston.mitchell@kimley-horn.com | 5/17/2021 17:31 | 5/17/2021 19:07 | 96 | United States | | |
| Yes | Laurel Ganza | lboanza@dekalbcountyga.gov | 5/17/2021 17:30 | 5/17/2021 19:07 | 97 | United States | | |
| Yes | Jeff Rader | jrader@dekalbcountyga.gov | 5/17/2021 17:30 | 5/17/2021 19:06 | 96 | United States | | |
| Yes | Tracy McClure | tmcclure@tcfatl.com | 5/17/2021 17:30 | 5/17/2021 19:09 | 99 | United States | | |
| Yes | Tracy McClure | tmcclure@tcfatl.com | 5/17/2021 19:09 | 5/17/2021 19:11 | 3 | United States | | |
| Yes | Tracy McClure | tmcclure@tcfatl.com | 5/17/2021 19:11 | 5/17/2021 19:12 | 1 | United States | | |
| Yes | Tracy McClure | tmcclure@tcfatl.com | 5/17/2021 19:12 | 5/17/2021 19:12 | 1 | United States | | |
| Yes | Tracy McClure | tmcclure@tcfatl.com | 5/17/2021 19:12 | 5/17/2021 19:13 | 1 | United States | | |
| Yes | Brian Brewer | BNBrewer@dekalbcountyga.gov | 5/17/2021 17:32 | 5/17/2021 19:06 | 95 | United States | | |
| Yes | Cristina Pastore | cristina.pastore@kimley-horn.com | 5/17/2021 17:32 | 5/17/2021 19:06 | 95 | United States | | |
| Yes | Sylvia Smith | sasmith@dekalbcountyga.gov | 5/17/2021 17:28 | 5/17/2021 19:09 | 99 | United States | | |
| Yes | Andrew Baker | aabaker@dekalbcountyga.gov | 5/17/2021 17:31 | 5/17/2021 19:07 | 96 | United States | | |
| Yes | Tu Nguyen (Tu.Nguyen@kimley-horn.com) | Tu.Nguyen@kimley-horn.com | 5/17/2021 17:32 | 5/17/2021 18:59 | 87 | United States | | |
| Yes | Rashard Wise | rrwise@dekalbcountyga.gov | 5/17/2021 17:31 | 5/17/2021 18:06 | 35 | United States | | |
| Yes | Rashard Wise | rrwise@dekalbcountyga.gov | 5/17/2021 18:06 | 5/17/2021 19:06 | 61 | United States | | |
| Yes | Cedric Hudson | chudson@dekalbcountyga.gov | 5/17/2021 17:34 | 5/17/2021 19:08 | 94 | United States | | |
| Yes | Cedric Hudson | chudson@dekalbcountyga.gov | 5/17/2021 19:12 | 5/17/2021 19:15 | 4 | United States | | |
| Yes | Jon Tuley | jon.tuley@kimley-horn.com | 5/17/2021 17:35 | 5/17/2021 19:06 | 92 | United States | | |
| Yes | Jon Tuley | jon.tuley@kimley-horn.com | 5/17/2021 19:07 | 5/17/2021 19:08 | 2 | United States | | |
| Yes | Rachel Staley | rstaley@tcfatl.com | 5/17/2021 17:36 | 5/17/2021 19:07 | 91 | United States | | |
| **Attendee Details** | | | | | | | | |
| **Attended** | **User Name (Original Name)** | **First Name** | **Last Name** | **Email** | **Registration Time** | **Approval Status** | **Join Time** | **Leave Time** | **Time in Session (minu)** | **Country/Region Name** | **Team** |
| Yes | Betsy Eggers | Betsy | Eggers | betsy@peachtreecreek.org | 5/17/2021 18:08 | approved | 5/17/2021 18:08 | 5/17/2021 19:05 | 58 | United States | |
| Yes | christian | christian | | christian_ortega@mac.com | 5/17/2021 18:10 | approved | 5/17/2021 18:10 | 5/17/2021 18:54 | 44 | United States | |
| Yes | Corey Thomas | Corey | Thomas | hoakingsmill@gmail.com | 5/17/2021 18:03 | approved | 5/17/2021 18:03 | 5/17/2021 19:06 | 64 | United States | |
| Yes | Courtney George | Courtney | George | cgeorge@andpi.org | 5/17/2021 17:59 | approved | 5/17/2021 17:59 | 5/17/2021 19:06 | 67 | United States | |
| Yes | Davis Fox | Davis | Fox | davisfox@gmail.com | 5/17/2021 18:09 | approved | 5/17/2021 18:09 | 5/17/2021 19:00 | 51 | United States | |
| Yes | Dorian DeBarr | Dorian | DeBarr | ddebarr@decidedekalb.com | 5/17/2021 18:31 | approved | 5/17/2021 18:31 | 5/17/2021 19:05 | 35 | United States | |
| Yes | Eric | Eric | | er.bardest@gmail.com | 5/17/2021 18:07 | approved | 5/17/2021 18:07 | 5/17/2021 19:06 | 60 | United States | |
| Yes | Eric | Eric | | er.bardest@gmail.com | | | 5/17/2021 19:06 | 5/17/2021 19:06 | 1 | United States | |
| Yes | ERIC MEYER | ERIC | MEYER | eameyer@dekalbcountyga.gov | 5/17/2021 18:00 | approved | 5/17/2021 18:00 | 5/17/2021 19:06 | 67 | United States | Team |
| Yes | Eric Scott | Eric | Scott | eric.scott@dekalbhealth.net | 5/17/2021 17:58 | approved | 5/17/2021 17:59 | 5/17/2021 19:06 | 67 | United States | |
| Yes | Gary Sparrow | Gary | Sparrow | garysparrow01@gmail.com | 5/17/2021 18:01 | approved | 5/17/2021 18:01 | 5/17/2021 19:05 | 65 | United States | |
| Yes | Health Education Advocacy and Learning(H | Health | Education Advocacy and Learning, Inc. | howard@healcollaborative.org | 5/17/2021 18:46 | approved | 5/17/2021 18:46 | 5/17/2021 19:06 | 20 | United States | |
| Yes | Joe Hughes | Joe | Hughes | dekalbcityplan@skydoc.net | 5/17/2021 17:01 | approved | 5/17/2021 17:59 | 5/17/2021 19:06 | 67 | United States | |
| No | Joe Hughes | Joe | Hughes | dekalbcityplan@skydoc.net | 5/17/2021 17:51 | approved | | | | | |
| Yes | Joseph Santoro | Joseph | Santoro | js@councilforqualitygrowth.org | 5/17/2021 18:03 | approved | 5/17/2021 18:03 | 5/17/2021 18:04 | 1 | United States | |
| Yes | Joseph Santoro | Joseph | Santoro | js@councilforqualitygrowth.org | | | 5/17/2021 19:16 | 5/17/2021 19:18 | 2 | United States | |
| Yes | Karla EACA LUZ | Karla | EACA LUZ | karla.causey@gmail.com | 5/17/2021 17:48 | approved | 5/17/2021 17:59 | 5/17/2021 19:06 | 68 | United States | |
| Yes | Lance Lance.Hammond@metrobrokers.com | Lance | Lance.Hammond@metrobrokers.com | lance.hammond64@gmail.com | 5/17/2021 18:07 | approved | 5/17/2021 18:07 | 5/17/2021 19:20 | 74 | United States | |
| Yes | Leslie | Leslie | | bishopj@kidsheart.com | 5/17/2021 17:59 | approved | 5/17/2021 17:59 | 5/17/2021 18:59 | 60 | United States | |
| Yes | Linda Luther | Linda | Luther | summerbeachdays@hotmail.com | 5/17/2021 13:03 | approved | 5/17/2021 17:59 | 5/17/2021 19:20 | 81 | United States | |
| Yes | Marilyn | Marilyn | | marilyngee14@att.net | 5/17/2021 18:13 | approved | 5/17/2021 18:13 | 5/17/2021 18:19 | 7 | United States | |
| Yes | Marilyn | Marilyn | | marilyngee14@att.net | | | 5/17/2021 18:18 | 5/17/2021 19:08 | 50 | United States | |
| Yes | Matt Leatherman | Matt | Leatherman | grammynix@gmail.com | 5/17/2021 18:25 | approved | 5/17/2021 18:25 | 5/17/2021 18:31 | 6 | United States | |
| Yes | Regenia Roberts | Regenia | Roberts | regeniaroberts@bellsouth.net | 5/17/2021 18:01 | approved | 5/17/2021 18:01 | 5/17/2021 19:07 | 66 | United States | |
| Yes | Rigel Cable | Rigel | Cable | rigel@rigelconsulting.co | 5/17/2021 17:57 | approved | 5/17/2021 17:59 | 5/17/2021 19:06 | 67 | United States | |
| Yes | RM | RM | | rmadison1972@yahoo.com | 5/17/2021 18:08 | approved | 5/17/2021 18:08 | 5/17/2021 19:06 | 59 | United States | |
| Yes | Rod Frierson | Rod | Frierson | hhcarnai@yahoo.com | 5/17/2021 18:01 | approved | 5/17/2021 18:01 | 5/17/2021 19:09 | 69 | United States | |
| Yes | susanekking | susanekking | | sueking283@gmail.com | 5/17/2021 17:51 | approved | 5/17/2021 17:59 | 5/17/2021 19:05 | 67 | United States | |
| Yes | Victoria Webb | Victoria | Webb | vic@furiousdreams.com | 5/17/2021 18:02 | approved | 5/17/2021 18:02 | 5/17/2021 19:05 | 64 | United States | |
| Yes | William M. Toliver | William | M. Toliver | wmtoliver@comcast.net | 5/17/2021 18:15 | approved | 5/17/2021 18:15 | 5/17/2021 19:06 | 51 | United States | |
| Yes | Yvette | Yvette | | ypayo@dekalbcountyga.gov | 5/17/2021 18:25 | approved | 5/17/2021 18:25 | 5/17/2021 19:14 | 50 | United States | Team |

<!-- page 162 -->
# APPENDIX A

# Countywide Virtual Public Meetings (3) – May 17-20, 2021

| Attendee Report | | | | | | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| Report Generated: | 5/21/2021 13:02 | | | | | | |
| Topic | Webinar ID | Actual Start Time | Actual Duration (minutes) | # Registered | # Cancelled | Unique Viewers | Total Users | Max Concurrent Views |
| DeKalb Unified Plan Virtual Meeting | 944 2482 5135 | 5/20/2021 17:25 | 108 | 27 | 0 | 26 | 55 | 26 |

| Host Details | | | | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| Attended | User Name (Original Name) | Email | Join Time | Leave Time | Time in Session (minutes) | Country/Region Name |
| Yes | Cole Smith (cole.smith@kimley-horn.com) | Cole.Smith@kimley-horn.com | 5/20/2021 17:25 | 5/20/2021 19:13 | 108 | United States |

| Panelist Details | | | | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| Attended | User Name (Original Name) | Email | Join Time | Leave Time | Time in Session (minutes) | Country/Region Name |
| Yes | G. Leah Davis | GLDavis@dekalbcountyga.gov | 5/20/2021 17:30 | 5/20/2021 18:54 | 84 | United States |
| Yes | Larry Johnson | larryjohnson@dekalbcountyga.gov | 5/20/2021 18:03 | 5/20/2021 18:07 | 4 | United States |
| Yes | Andrew Baker | abaker@dekalbcountyga.gov | 5/20/2021 17:59 | 5/20/2021 19:04 | 65 | United States |
| Yes | Sylvia Smith | sasmith@dekalbcountyga.gov | 5/20/2021 17:30 | 5/20/2021 19:07 | 98 | United States |
| Yes | Rachel Staley | rstaley@tcfatl.com | 5/20/2021 17:35 | 5/20/2021 19:07 | 93 | United States |
| Yes | Winston Mitchell (winston.mitchell@kimley-horn.com | winston.mitchell@kimley-horn.com | 5/20/2021 17:31 | 5/20/2021 19:07 | 96 | United States |
| Yes | Michael Hightower | mhightower@tcfatl.com | 5/20/2021 17:50 | 5/20/2021 19:07 | 78 | United States |
| Yes | Cedric Hudson | chudson@dekalbcountyga.gov | 5/20/2021 17:35 | 5/20/2021 19:07 | 92 | United States |
| Yes | Kristine Hansen-Dederick | hansen-dederick@sycamoreconsulting.n | 5/20/2021 17:46 | 5/20/2021 19:08 | 82 | United States |
| Yes | Tracy McClure | tmcclure@tcfatl.com | 5/20/2021 17:35 | 5/20/2021 17:56 | 22 | United States |
| Yes | Tracy McClure | tmcclure@tcfatl.com | 5/20/2021 18:02 | 5/20/2021 19:07 | 66 | United States |
| Yes | Michelle Alexander | malexander@tcfatl.com | 5/20/2021 17:34 | 5/20/2021 19:08 | 95 | United States |
| Yes | Tu Nguyen | tu.nguyen@kimley-horn.com | 5/20/2021 17:31 | 5/20/2021 19:08 | 97 | United States |
| Yes | Chris Joannes | chris.joannes@kimley-horn.com | 5/20/2021 17:30 | 5/20/2021 19:07 | 97 | United States |
| Yes | Brian Brewer | BnBrewer@dekalbcountyga.gov | 5/20/2021 17:36 | 5/20/2021 19:08 | 93 | United States |
| Yes | RASHAD WISE | rlwise@dekalbcountyga.gov | 5/20/2021 17:31 | 5/20/2021 19:08 | 98 | United States |
| Yes | Eric Bosman | eric.bosman@kimley-horn.com | 5/20/2021 17:35 | 5/20/2021 19:07 | 92 | United States |
| Yes | Cristina Pastore | cristina.pastore@kimley-horn.com | 5/20/2021 17:38 | 5/20/2021 19:07 | 90 | United States |
| Yes | Grady Smith | GSmith@VHB.com | 5/20/2021 17:37 | 5/20/2021 19:07 | 91 | United States |

| Attendee Details | | | | | | | | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| Attended | User Name (Original Name) | First Name | Last Name | Email | Registration Time | Approval Status | Join Time | Leave Time | Time in | Country/Region Name | Team/Pub |
| Yes | Adele Clements | Adele | Clements | macleme@emory.edu | 5/20/2021 17:56 | approved | 5/20/2021 17:59 | 5/20/2021 17:59 | 1 | United States | |
| Yes | Adele Clements | Adele | Clements | macleme@emory.edu | | | 5/20/2021 17:59 | 5/20/2021 19:09 | 70 | United States | |
| Yes | Bernice Tutt | Bernice | Tutt | bernicetutt@comcast.net | 5/20/2021 18:16 | approved | 5/20/2021 18:16 | 5/20/2021 19:07 | 51 | United States | |
| Yes | Bruce MacGregor | Bruce | MacGregor | brucemac@earthlink.net | 5/20/2021 18:27 | approved | 5/20/2021 18:27 | 5/20/2021 19:07 | 41 | United States | |
| Yes | Chris Hester | Chris | Hester | chrishester@caringworksinc.or | 5/20/2021 17:58 | approved | 5/20/2021 17:58 | 5/20/2021 19:08 | 70 | United States | |
| No | Corey Thomas | Corey | Thomas | hoomspir@gmail.com | 5/19/2021 14:48 | approved | | | | | |
| Yes | CS | CS | | csanders181@gmail.com | 5/20/2021 17:50 | approved | 5/20/2021 18:00 | 5/20/2021 18:36 | 37 | United States | |
| Yes | D. Louis Gruver Jr | D. | Louis Gruver, Jr | d.louisgruverjr@yahoo.com | 5/20/2021 18:13 | approved | 5/20/2021 18:13 | 5/20/2021 19:07 | 55 | United States | |
| Yes | Dawn Rivera | Dawn | Rivera | eaca.drivera@gmail.com | 5/20/2021 17:59 | approved | 5/20/2021 17:59 | 5/20/2021 19:08 | 69 | United States | |
| Yes | Donna Priest-Brown | Donna | Priest-Brown | dpriestbrown@bellsouth.net | 5/20/2021 17:59 | approved | 5/20/2021 17:59 | 5/20/2021 19:03 | 64 | United States | |
| Yes | Erin Brooks | Erin | Brooks | erinlouisebrooks@gmail.com | 5/20/2021 17:58 | approved | 5/20/2021 17:59 | 5/20/2021 19:04 | 65 | United States | |
| Yes | Femi | Femi | | femi49@gmail.com | 5/20/2021 17:54 | approved | 5/20/2021 18:05 | 5/20/2021 19:08 | 63 | United States | |
| Yes | Howard Miner | Howard | Miner | jmases2625@gmail.com | 5/20/2021 18:34 | approved | 5/20/2021 18:34 | 5/20/2021 19:08 | 34 | United States | |
| Yes | Jaesan Bell | Jaesan | Bell | jbell@dekalbcountyga.gov | 5/20/2021 18:41 | approved | 5/20/2021 18:41 | 5/20/2021 18:51 | 11 | United States | |
| Yes | Kaelin Priger | Kaelin | Priger | kaelin.priger@gmail.com | 5/20/2021 18:00 | approved | 5/20/2021 18:00 | 5/20/2021 19:02 | 62 | United States | |
| Yes | LASHUN ATWATERS | LASHUN | ATWATERS | lwatwaters@dekalbcountyga.gov | 5/20/2021 17:57 | approved | 5/20/2021 17:59 | 5/20/2021 19:11 | 72 | United States | Team |
| Yes | Lila givens | Lila | givens | Lila.givens@gmail.com | 5/20/2021 18:01 | approved | 5/20/2021 18:01 | 5/20/2021 18:29 | 28 | United States | |
| Yes | Lila givens | Lila | givens | Lila.givens@gmail.com | | | 5/20/2021 18:29 | 5/20/2021 18:30 | 2 | United States | |
| Yes | Lila givens | Lila | givens | Lila.givens@gmail.com | | | 5/20/2021 18:30 | 5/20/2021 18:59 | 30 | United States | |
| Yes | LINDA SHARP | LINDA | SHARP | ishsharp1459@att.net | 5/20/2021 17:54 | approved | 5/20/2021 17:59 | 5/20/2021 18:46 | 47 | United States | |
| Yes | maria fernandez | maria | (she/her) | maria.fernandez@ymail.com | | | 5/20/2021 18:42 | 5/20/2021 19:07 | 25 | United States | |
| Yes | maria fernandez | maria | (she/her) | maria.fernandez@ymail.com | 5/20/2021 17:49 | approved | 5/20/2021 18:05 | 5/20/2021 18:11 | 7 | United States | |
| Yes | maria fernandez | maria | (she/her) | maria.fernandez@ymail.com | | | 5/20/2021 18:12 | 5/20/2021 18:25 | 14 | United States | |
| Yes | maria fernandez | maria | (she/her) | maria.fernandez@ymail.com | | | 5/20/2021 18:26 | 5/20/2021 18:40 | 15 | United States | |
| Yes | maria fernandez | maria | (she/her) | maria.fernandez@ymail.com | | | 5/20/2021 18:40 | 5/20/2021 18:42 | 3 | United States | |
| Yes | Rhys S | Rhys | S | rlsaraceni@yahoo.com | 5/20/2021 17:56 | approved | 5/20/2021 17:59 | 5/20/2021 19:07 | 68 | United States | |
| Yes | Rosemary Hunter Armour | Rosemary | Hunter Armour | rharmour@dekalbcountyga.gov | 5/20/2021 17:55 | approved | 5/20/2021 18:02 | 5/20/2021 19:07 | 66 | United States | Team |
| Yes | Sabior | Sabior | | sabior@earthlink.net | 5/20/2021 17:55 | approved | 5/20/2021 18:01 | 5/20/2021 18:21 | 21 | United States | |
| Yes | Sabior | Sabior | | sabior@earthlink.net | | | 5/20/2021 18:21 | 5/20/2021 19:08 | 48 | United States | |
| Yes | Sarah K. Spencer | Sarah | K. Spencer | president@eaca.net | 5/20/2021 18:00 | approved | 5/20/2021 18:00 | 5/20/2021 19:08 | 69 | United States | |
| Yes | Scott Reid | Scott | Reid | scott.m.reid@gmail.com | 5/20/2021 18:05 | approved | 5/20/2021 18:05 | 5/20/2021 19:07 | 62 | United States | |
| Yes | Shannon Rilley | Shannon | Rilley | shanril@gmail.com | 5/20/2021 18:02 | approved | 5/20/2021 18:02 | 5/20/2021 19:07 | 66 | United States | |
| Yes | Susan | Susan | Fraysse | slfra@bellsouth.net | 5/20/2021 17:42 | approved | 5/20/2021 17:59 | 5/20/2021 18:04 | 5 | United States | |
| Yes | Susan Fraysse | Susan | Fraysse | slfra@bellsouth.net | | | 5/20/2021 18:01 | 5/20/2021 19:07 | 67 | United States | |
| Yes | Wayne Powell | Wayne | Powell | pdk-powell@comcast.net | 5/20/2021 17:57 | approved | 5/20/2021 17:59 | 5/20/2021 19:07 | 69 | United States | |
| Yes | Yvonne Curtis | Yvonne | Curtis | ydcga@bellsouth.net | 5/20/2021 18:02 | approved | 5/20/2021 18:02 | 5/20/2021 19:13 | 71 | United States | |

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 163 -->
### Stakeholder and Focus Group Meetings – June 29-September 8, 2021

### CIVIC & BUSINESS ASSOCIATION

<<FIGURE>>

| Meeting Summary | |
| :--- | :--- |
| **Total Number of Participants** | **38** |
| **Meeting Start Time** | **7/20/2021, 5:20:03 PM** |
| **Meeting End Time** | **7/20/2021, 7:32:29 PM** |
| | |
| **Full Name** | **Join Time** |
| Keeter, Patrece | 7/20/2021, 5:20:03 PM |
| Pastore, Cristina | 7/20/2021, 5:20:12 PM |
| Conn, Brett (Intern) | 7/20/2021, 5:24:15 PM |
| Brewer, Brian N. | 7/20/2021, 5:25:49 PM |
| Tuley, Jon | 7/20/2021, 5:26:13 PM |
| Sunny Anderson | 7/20/2021, 5:28:59 PM |
| Honey Van De Kreke (Guest) | 7/20/2021, 5:29:30 PM |
| Pearson, Daine X | 7/20/2021, 5:29:40 PM |
| Shelbia Jackson | 7/20/2021, 5:29:53 PM |
| Randi Mason | 7/20/2021, 5:29:54 PM |
| Eric Schwartz | 7/20/2021, 5:30:03 PM |
| Malaika (Guest) | 7/20/2021, 5:30:07 PM |
| Smith, Sylvia | 7/20/2021, 5:30:20 PM |
| Kelly Stocks EABA | 7/20/2021, 5:30:21 PM |
| Lawrence Kaiser | 7/20/2021, 5:30:21 PM |
| Christopher Sanders (Guest) | 7/20/2021, 5:30:29 PM |
| Jennifer Ohme (Guest) | 7/20/2021, 5:30:31 PM |
| Van Biesel - DHCA (Guest) | 7/20/2021, 5:30:50 PM |
| Shavonne Reed | 7/20/2021, 5:30:53 PM |
| Victoria Webb (Guest) | 7/20/2021, 5:30:54 PM |
| Ted Rhinehart | 7/20/2021, 5:31:07 PM |
| Braun, Jonathan | 7/20/2021, 5:31:11 PM |
| Embry Hills Civic Assoc-Vicki Hood (Guest) | 7/20/2021, 5:31:12 PM |
| Jana Johnson (Guest) | 7/20/2021, 5:31:19 PM |
| Jennifer Ohme (Guest) | 7/20/2021, 5:31:47 PM |
| Matthew Lee | 7/20/2021, 5:32:16 PM |
| Frankie Atwater (Guest) DeKalb Chamber of Commerce | 7/20/2021, 5:32:17 PM |
| 14043074272 | 7/20/2021, 5:33:45 PM |
| Angela Threadgill | 7/20/2021, 5:37:13 PM |
| Mike St Louis (Guest) | 7/20/2021, 5:37:30 PM |
| Victoria Webb (Guest) | 7/20/2021, 5:37:33 PM |
| 14044846248 | 7/20/2021, 5:38:47 PM |
| Embry Hills Civic Assoc-Vicki Hood (Guest) | 7/20/2021, 5:40:31 PM |
| Jen Hagler | 7/20/2021, 5:43:57 PM |
| Baker, Andrew | 7/20/2021, 5:45:33 PM |
| Terry, Ted | 7/20/2021, 5:45:39 PM |
| Terry, Ted | 7/20/2021, 6:02:36 PM |
| Washington, Larry | 7/20/2021, 5:48:18 PM |
| Michael St. Louis | 7/20/2021, 5:54:14 PM |

<!-- page 164 -->
# APPENDIX A

### Bicycle/Pedestrian Focus Group

<<FIGURE>>

### Developer Round Table Attendees

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 165 -->
# African Diaspora Focus Group Meeting

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 166 -->
# APPENDIX A

### Bhutanese Community Focus Group Meeting

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 167 -->
### Burmese Community Focus Group Meeting

<<FIGURE>>

### Korean Community Focus Group Meeting

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 168 -->
# APPENDIX A

# Community Council Meeting

<<FIGURE>>

# Community Charrettes – September 15-28, 2021

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 169 -->
# Community Charrettes – September 15-28, 2021

| Zoom Meeting Report | |
| :--- | :--- |
| **Name (Original Name)** | **Join Time** |
| Jon Tuley | 9/15/2021 17:53 |
| Luis Taboada | 9/15/2021 17:53 |
| Cristina Pastore | 9/15/2021 17:53 |
| Grady Smith | 9/15/2021 17:53 |
| Sylvia Smith | 9/15/2021 17:53 |
| Brian Brewer | 9/15/2021 17:53 |
| Brett Conn | 9/15/2021 17:53 |
| Laurel Corrao | 9/15/2021 17:53 |
| JULIANA PIERRE | 9/15/2021 17:53 |
| Eric Bosman | 9/15/2021 17:53 |
| Winston Mitchell | 9/15/2021 17:53 |
| Q&A (Brett Conn - KH) (Brett Conn) | 9/15/2021 17:53 |
| Larry Washington | 9/15/2021 17:53 |
| Cristina Pastore | 9/15/2021 17:53 |
| Eric Bosman | 9/15/2021 17:53 |
| Jen Price | 9/15/2021 17:53 |
| Luis Taboada | 9/15/2021 17:53 |
| Winston Mitchell | 9/15/2021 17:53 |
| Sylvia Smith | 9/15/2021 17:53 |
| Katrina Highsmith | 9/15/2021 17:53 |
| Michael Hightower | 9/15/2021 17:54 |
| Karla Causey | 9/15/2021 17:54 |
| Patrece Keeter | 9/15/2021 17:54 |
| Osaze Stigler | 9/15/2021 17:54 |
| Mereda Johnson | 9/15/2021 17:54 |
| Andrew Baker | 9/15/2021 17:54 |
| Patrece Keeter | 9/15/2021 17:55 |
| Michael Hightower | 9/15/2021 17:55 |
| Mereda Johnson | 9/15/2021 17:55 |
| Osaze Stigler | 9/15/2021 17:55 |
| Katrina Highsmith | 9/15/2021 17:55 |
| Jen Price | 9/15/2021 17:55 |
| Grady Smith | 9/15/2021 17:55 |
| Laurel Corrao | 9/15/2021 17:55 |
| Larry Washington | 9/15/2021 17:55 |
| Andrew Baker | 9/15/2021 17:55 |
| Brian Brewer | 9/15/2021 17:55 |
| Amy Haase | 9/15/2021 17:55 |
| Adam Ivory | 9/15/2021 17:55 |
| Kelly Jordan | 9/15/2021 17:56 |
| Patrece Keeter | 9/15/2021 17:56 |
| Patrece Keeter | 9/15/2021 17:57 |
| Amy Haase | 9/15/2021 17:57 |
| Adam Ivory | 9/15/2021 17:57 |
| Marcus Hodge | 9/15/2021 17:58 |
| Patrece Keeter | 9/15/2021 17:59 |
| Alison Clark | 9/15/2021 17:59 |
| Patrece Keeter | 9/15/2021 17:59 |
| Dennis Quinn | 9/15/2021 18:00 |
| jen hagler | 9/15/2021 18:01 |
| C Hudson | 9/15/2021 18:03 |
| C Hudson | 9/15/2021 18:04 |
| Karla Lightfoot Causey EACA (Karla Causey) | 9/15/2021 18:05 |
| Dennis Quinn | 9/15/2021 18:05 |
| Kelly Jordan | 9/15/2021 18:05 |
| jen hagler | 9/15/2021 18:05 |
| Marcus Hodge | 9/15/2021 18:05 |
| JULIANA PIERRE | 9/15/2021 18:05 |
| Carolyn Jones | 9/15/2021 18:08 |
| Carolyn Jones | 9/15/2021 18:08 |
| Sidney Douse III | 9/15/2021 18:09 |
| Sidney Douse III | 9/15/2021 18:09 |
| Pat Culp | 9/15/2021 18:12 |
| 16786349067 | 9/15/2021 18:12 |
| Pat Culp | 9/15/2021 18:12 |
| Grady Smith | 9/15/2021 18:14 |
| Grady Smith | 9/15/2021 18:14 |
| Scott Welker | 9/15/2021 18:16 |
| Marc Bolden | 9/15/2021 18:16 |
| Marc Bolden | 9/15/2021 18:16 |
| Scott Welker | 9/15/2021 18:16 |
| Scott Welker | 9/15/2021 18:22 |
| Scott Welker | 9/15/2021 18:59 |
| Scott Welker | 9/15/2021 19:12 |
| Scott Welker | 9/15/2021 19:12 |
| James Colvin | 9/15/2021 19:17 |
| James Colvin | 9/15/2021 19:17 |
| Andrew Baker | 9/15/2021 19:18 |
| Andrew Baker | 9/15/2021 19:19 |
| Patrece Keeter | 9/15/2021 19:19 |

Community Charrette 2 – 6:00 PM September 16, 2021

**DeKalb County District 3 – Southwest DeKalb**

**Attendees (23):** Edward Caddell, Deborah Wilson, Dorothy Kirby, Eric Schwartz, Harry Holley Sr., Jacqueline Humphrey, Joscelyn O'Neil, Karla Causey, LaShun Atwaters, Lawrence Kaiser, Lemuel Horton, Marcus Dorsey, Michael Alatalo, Pat Culp, Rosemary Hicks, Ayaz Ali, Brittney Newton, Christopher Sanders, Sybil Bolivar, Toya Washington, Wayne Powell, Zandro Zaragoza, Unknown #

**County Staff (6):** Larry Johnson (Commissioner), Sylvia Smith, Brian Brewer, Larry Washington, Laurel Corrao, Patrece Keeter

**KH Staff (6):** Winston Mitchell, Jon Tuley, Cristina Pastore, Eric Bosman, Brett Conn, Osaze Stigler

**Additional Consultants (5):** Amy Haase, Jonathan Webster, Katrina Highsmith, Michael Hightower, Rachel Staley, Nick Stephens,

### Breakout Group Discussions

After the presentation, attendees were placed into smaller breakout groups to maximize the collection of input received from the community. Each group was asked about the issues and opportunities pertaining to Land Use and Development, Transportation, and Economic and Community development in the area. The questions asked included:

* What types of new development are appropriate and/or needed in this part of the county?
* What are the biggest challenges related to mobility in this part of the county?
* What are the biggest challenges related to pedestrian/bicycle and/or transit connectivity in this part of the county?
* What should the future of industrial development be in unincorporated DeKalb?
* What other jobs, services, or amenities are currently missing and what is needed to bring those to the area?
* Are there any issues related to health and wellness that need to be addressed in this part of the county, and if so, what are they?

There were also questions asked pertaining to the district activity center as follows:

* What types of housing are appropriate in this activity center?
* What is needed to improve transportation and connectivity?
* Are the types of development here aligned with what you want to see in the future?
* What is needed for greenspace and Civic Space?
* Where should the housing types transition within and outside the activity center?
* What is working in this activity center? What is not working?
* What types of new development are needed or will be needed in this activity center?
* What is needed to improve bike/ped connectivity and safety?

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 170 -->
# APPENDIX A

# Community Charrettes – September 15-28, 2021

Community Charrette 3 – 6:00 PM September 23, 2021

**DeKalb County District 4 – East Central DeKalb**

**Attendees (13):** Carlotta Rozzi, Chandra Blanks, Ella Gray, Jana Johnson, Joe Jean Borowski, Joe Arrington, Lance Hammonds, Larry Coles, Sonya Bradley, Ted Rhinehart, Alesia Brooks, Carlos Perez, Kristine Hansen-Dederick,

**County Staff (5):** Brian Brewer, Sylvia Smith, Laurel Corrao, Patrece Keeter, Larry Washington

**KH Staff (6):** Jon Tuley, Cristina Pastore, Eric Bosman, Osaze Stigler, Brett Conn, Winston Mitchell

**Additional Consultants (5):** Katrina Highsmith, Rachel Staley, Adam Ivory, Jonathan Webster, Jen Price

## Breakout Group Discussions

After the presentation, attendees were placed into smaller breakout groups to maximize the collection of input received from the community. Each group was asked about the issues and opportunities pertaining to Land Use and Development, Transportation, and Economic and Community development in the area. The questions asked included:

* What types of new development are appropriate and/or needed in this part of the county?
* What are the biggest challenges related to mobility in this part of the county?
* What are the biggest challenges related to pedestrian/bicycle and/or transit connectivity in this part of the county?
* What should the future of industrial development be in unincorporated DeKalb?
* What other jobs, services, or amenities are currently missing and what is needed to bring those to the area?
* Are there any issues related to health and wellness that need to be addressed in this part of the county, and if so, what are they?

There were also questions asked pertaining to the district activity center as follows:

* What types of housing are appropriate in this activity center?
* What is needed to improve transportation and connectivity?
* Are the types of development here aligned with what you want to see in the future?
* What is needed for greenspace and Civic Space?
* Where should the housing types transition within and outside the activity center?
* What is working in this activity center? What is not working?
* What types of new development are needed or will be needed in this activity center?
* What is needed to improve bike/ped connectivity and safety?

Charrette 3
Breakout Room 2

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 171 -->
# Community Charrettes – September 15-28, 2021

<<FIGURE>>

## Charrrette 4
## Breakout Room 2

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 172 -->
# APPENDIX A

### Community Charrettes – September 15-28, 2021

| Zoom Meeting Report | |
| :--- | :--- |
| **Name (Original Name)** | **Join Time** |
| **Jon Tuley** | **9/27/2021 17:42** |
| **Winston Mitchell** | **9/27/2021 17:42** |
| **Brett Conn** | **9/27/2021 17:43** |
| **Adam Ivory** | **9/27/2021 17:43** |
| **Andrew Baker** | **9/27/2021 17:43** |
| **Luis Taboada** | **9/27/2021 17:43** |
| **Sylvia Smith** | **9/27/2021 17:44** |
| **14046809148** | **9/27/2021 17:44** |
| **Patrece Keeter** | **9/27/2021 17:44** |
| **Cristina Pastore** | **9/27/2021 17:44** |
| **Laurel Corrao** | **9/27/2021 17:46** |
| **Rachel Staley** | **9/27/2021 17:47** |
| **Jonathan Webster** | **9/27/2021 17:47** |
| **Brian Brewer** | **9/27/2021 17:50** |
| **Sara Fountain** | **9/27/2021 17:51** |
| **Katrina Highsmith** | **9/27/2021 17:54** |
| **Osaze Stigler** | **9/27/2021 17:55** |
| **Barbara Vargas** | **9/27/2021 17:55** |
| **Nick Stephens** | **9/27/2021 17:56** |
| **Ted Daniel** | **9/27/2021 17:58** |
| **VICTOR WILLS** | **9/27/2021 17:58** |
| **Carolyn Law** | **9/27/2021 17:59** |
| **Mary Hinkel** | **9/27/2021 17:59** |
| **Eric Meyer** | **9/27/2021 18:00** |
| **Clarice Belcher** | **9/27/2021 18:00** |
| **Adam Manchester** | **9/27/2021 18:00** |
| **James Burge** | **9/27/2021 18:01** |
| **Jack Kittle** | **9/27/2021 18:01** |
| **Aileen de la Torre** | **9/27/2021 18:01** |
| **Jenny Lee** | **9/27/2021 18:02** |
| **Victoria Webb** | **9/27/2021 18:02** |
| **Gunter Sharp** | **9/27/2021 18:03** |
| **Bob Brewer** | **9/27/2021 18:03** |
| **Kathie Gannon** | **9/27/2021 18:03** |
| **Bernice Washington** | **9/27/2021 18:04** |
| **Eric Bosman** | **9/27/2021 18:05** |
| **Richard Alembik** | **9/27/2021 18:05** |
| **Gail Harris** | **9/27/2021 18:06** |
| **Eric B** | **9/27/2021 18:07** |
| **Cedric Hudson** | **9/27/2021 18:07** |
| **Costa Panos** | **9/27/2021 18:07** |
| **JEFF RADER** | **9/27/2021 18:08** |
| **jen hagler** | **9/27/2021 18:08** |
| **Larry Washington** | **9/27/2021 18:13** |
| **Kelly Jordan** | **9/27/2021 18:15** |
| **Terry Brantley** | **9/27/2021 18:17** |
| **Michael Heaphy** | **9/27/2021 18:18** |
| **12516890513** | **9/27/2021 18:21** |
| **Maurice White** | **9/27/2021 18:22** |
| **Joe Arrington** | **9/27/2021 18:29** |
| **Ed Caddell** | **9/27/2021 18:38** |
| **Q&A - Brett Conn (KH)** | **9/27/2021 18:38** |
| **Chris Hester** | **9/27/2021 18:54** |
| **Debbie Miller** | **9/27/2021 19:09** |

| Zoom Meeting Report | |
| :--- | :--- |
| **Name (Original Name)** | **Join Time** |
| **Aileen de la Torre** | **9/28/2021 18:02** |
| **Andrew Baker** | **9/28/2021 17:58** |
| **Brett Conn** | **9/28/2021 17:46** |
| **Brian Brewer** | **9/28/2021 17:44** |
| **Carlos Perez** | **9/28/2021 17:44** |
| **Chris Handley** | **9/28/2021 18:45** |
| **Chris Hester** | **9/28/2021 17:57** |
| **CHudson** | **9/28/2021 18:36** |
| **Cindy Dennis** | **9/28/2021 18:00** |
| **Costa Panos** | **9/28/2021 18:10** |
| **Cristina Pastore** | **9/28/2021 17:52** |
| **Doris Mukangu** | **9/28/2021 18:05** |
| **Edgard Lequerique** | **9/28/2021 18:08** |
| **Edward Caddell** | **9/28/2021 17:57** |
| **Eric Bosman** | **9/28/2021 17:48** |
| **James Mahony** | **9/28/2021 18:07** |
| **Jeffiri Epps** | **9/28/2021 17:43** |
| **jen hagler** | **9/28/2021 18:02** |
| **John Ford** | **9/28/2021 17:54** |
| **Jon Tuley** | **9/28/2021 17:42** |
| **Jonathan Webster** | **9/28/2021 17:48** |
| **Katrina Highsmith** | **9/28/2021 17:53** |
| **Larry Washington** | **9/28/2021 17:59** |
| **Laurel Corrao** | **9/28/2021 17:43** |
| **Lauren Kiefer** | **9/28/2021 18:04** |
| **Martha Gross** | **9/28/2021 17:59** |
| **Michael Boyce** | **9/28/2021 17:57** |
| **Michael Godin** | **9/28/2021 18:31** |
| **Michael Hightower** | **9/28/2021 18:03** |
| **Nick Stephens** | **9/28/2021 17:52** |
| **OJI ONWUDEGU** | **9/28/2021 18:06** |
| **Osaze Stigler** | **9/28/2021 17:51** |
| **Patrece Keeter** | **9/28/2021 17:54** |
| **Q&A - Brett Conn (KH)** | **9/28/2021 18:30** |
| **Rachel Staley** | **9/28/2021 17:50** |
| **Rhys Saraceni** | **9/28/2021 17:59** |
| **Robert Patrick** | **9/28/2021 17:47** |
| **Serina Shyu** | **9/28/2021 18:01** |
| **Susan Fraysse** | **9/28/2021 18:03** |
| **Sylvia Smith** | **9/28/2021 17:47** |
| **Van Biesel** | **9/28/2021 18:01** |
| **Vinona Lei** | **9/28/2021 18:57** |
| **Winston Mitchell** | **9/28/2021 17:47** |

<!-- page 173 -->
# Community Charrettes – September 15-28, 2021

<<FIGURE>>

zoom_0

<<FIGURE>>

### Charrrette 5
### Breakout Room 2

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 174 -->
# APPENDIX A

# Transportation and Land Use Committee (Stakeholder Committee) Meeting – April 20, 2022

Draft Recommendations
Transportation and Land Use Committee Meeting
April 20, 2022

<<FIGURE>>

| 1. Summary | |
| :--- | :--- |
| Attended participants | 60 |
| Start time | 4/20/22, 1:22:11 PM |
| End time | 4/20/22, 4:02:18 PM |
| Meeting duration | 2h 40m 6s |
| Average attendance time | 1h 15m 15s |

| 2. Participants | |
| :--- | :--- |
| Name | First join |
| Lewis, Jerry A. | 4/20/22, 1:24:35 PM |
| Marcel Jackson | 4/20/22, 1:25:20 PM |
| Mitchell, Winston | 4/20/22, 1:25:38 PM |
| John Gurbai | 4/20/22, 1:25:43 PM |
| Bosman, Eric | 4/20/22, 1:26:24 PM |
| Brewer, Brian N. | 4/20/22, 1:26:28 PM |
| Lawrence Kaiser | 4/20/22, 1:26:33 PM |
| Tom Roberts | 4/20/22, 1:26:53 PM |
| Byron Rushing | 4/20/22, 1:27:06 PM |
| Cara Scharer | 4/20/22, 1:27:48 PM |
| Pastore, Cristina | 4/20/22, 1:27:55 PM |
| Hudson, Cedric | 4/20/22, 1:28:02 PM |
| Cain Williamson | 4/20/22, 1:28:06 PM |
| Aileen Daney | 4/20/22, 1:28:18 PM |
| Keeter, Patrece | 4/20/22, 1:28:31 PM |
| David Junger | 4/20/22, 1:28:39 PM |
| Conn, Brett | 4/20/22, 1:28:51 PM |
| Andrew Long | 4/20/22, 1:29:10 PM |
| Micah Seibel | 4/20/22, 1:29:11 PM |
| Washington, Larry | 4/20/22, 1:30:04 PM |
| Smith, Sylvia | 4/20/22, 1:30:08 PM |
| Matthew Lee | 4/20/22, 1:30:16 PM |
| Weiss, Megan J | 4/20/22, 1:30:20 PM |
| Ken Hildebrandt | 4/20/22, 1:30:26 PM |
| Taboada, Luis | 4/20/22, 1:30:28 PM |
| Forte, Monique B. | 4/20/22, 1:30:30 PM |
| Sidney Douse | 4/20/22, 1:30:31 PM |
| Hayes, David E. | 4/20/22, 1:30:31 PM |
| Daniel Studdard | 4/20/22, 1:30:39 PM |
| Davis, G. Leah | 4/20/22, 1:31:14 PM |
| Kristin Moretz | 4/20/22, 1:31:16 PM |
| Ryan Sellers | 4/20/22, 1:31:28 PM |
| Christopher Sanders (Guest) | 4/20/22, 1:31:35 PM |
| Katie Perumbeti | 4/20/22, 1:31:57 PM |
| Patti Garrett (Guest) | 4/20/22, 1:32:13 PM |
| Floyd, Greg | 4/20/22, 1:32:27 PM |
| Hari Karikaran | 4/20/22, 1:33:00 PM |
| Choi, Jessica | 4/20/22, 1:33:01 PM |
| Alison Clark | 4/20/22, 1:33:07 PM |
| Johnson, Anna A | 4/20/22, 1:33:20 PM |
| Richard McLeod | 4/20/22, 1:34:04 PM |
| Davis Fox (Guest) | 4/20/22, 1:34:13 PM |
| Ellis, Chuck | 4/20/22, 1:34:39 PM |
| Dorian DeBarr | 4/20/22, 1:35:21 PM |
| Angela Threadgill | 4/20/22, 1:36:04 PM |
| Morgan, Jason | 4/20/22, 1:37:35 PM |
| Michael Smith | 4/20/22, 1:37:59 PM |
| Aileen de la Torre | 4/20/22, 1:40:06 PM |
| Mayor John Ernst (Guest) | 4/20/22, 1:41:54 PM |
| Evans, Mario A. | 4/20/22, 1:42:16 PM |
| Alison Clark (Guest) | 4/20/22, 1:42:17 PM |
| Barnes, Korey | 4/20/22, 1:42:33 PM |
| Pelton, David | 4/20/22, 1:42:35 PM |
| Linda Abaray | 4/20/22, 1:44:28 PM |
| Alison Clark (Guest) | 4/20/22, 1:48:04 PM |
| Emory (Guest) | 4/20/22, 1:52:41 PM |
| Manquitrice Mangham | 4/20/22, 1:53:52 PM |
| Michelle Beesten-Alexander | 4/20/22, 2:00:03 PM |
| Alison Clark | 4/20/22, 2:05:37 PM |
| McCoy, Demetrius | 4/20/22, 2:21:01 PM |

| 1. Summary | |
| :--- | :--- |
| Attended participants | 60 |
| Start time | 4/20/22, 1:22:11 PM |
| End time | 4/20/22, 4:02:18 PM |
| Meeting duration | 2h 40m 6s |
| Average attendance time | 1h 15m 15s |

| 2. Participants | |
| :--- | :--- |
| Name | First join |
| Lewis, Jerry A. | 4/20/22, 1:24:35 PM |
| Marcel Jackson | 4/20/22, 1:25:20 PM |
| Mitchell, Winston | 4/20/22, 1:25:38 PM |
| John Gurbai | 4/20/22, 1:25:43 PM |
| Bosman, Eric | 4/20/22, 1:26:24 PM |
| Brewer, Brian N. | 4/20/22, 1:26:28 PM |
| Lawrence Kaiser | 4/20/22, 1:26:33 PM |
| Tom Roberts | 4/20/22, 1:26:53 PM |
| Byron Rushing | 4/20/22, 1:27:06 PM |
| Cara Scharer | 4/20/22, 1:27:48 PM |
| Pastore, Cristina | 4/20/22, 1:27:55 PM |
| Hudson, Cedric | 4/20/22, 1:28:02 PM |
| Cain Williamson | 4/20/22, 1:28:06 PM |
| Aileen Daney | 4/20/22, 1:28:18 PM |
| Keeter, Patrece | 4/20/22, 1:28:31 PM |
| David Junger | 4/20/22, 1:28:39 PM |
| Conn, Brett | 4/20/22, 1:28:51 PM |
| Andrew Long | 4/20/22, 1:29:10 PM |
| Micah Seibel | 4/20/22, 1:29:11 PM |
| Washington, Larry | 4/20/22, 1:30:04 PM |
| Smith, Sylvia | 4/20/22, 1:30:08 PM |
| Matthew Lee | 4/20/22, 1:30:16 PM |
| Weiss, Megan J | 4/20/22, 1:30:20 PM |
| Ken Hildebrandt | 4/20/22, 1:30:26 PM |
| Taboada, Luis | 4/20/22, 1:30:28 PM |
| Forte, Monique B. | 4/20/22, 1:30:30 PM |
| Sidney Douse | 4/20/22, 1:30:31 PM |
| Hayes, David E. | 4/20/22, 1:30:31 PM |
| Daniel Studdard | 4/20/22, 1:30:39 PM |
| Davis, G. Leah | 4/20/22, 1:31:14 PM |
| Kristin Moretz | 4/20/22, 1:31:16 PM |
| Ryan Sellers | 4/20/22, 1:31:28 PM |
| Christopher Sanders (Guest) | 4/20/22, 1:31:35 PM |
| Katie Perumbeti | 4/20/22, 1:31:57 PM |
| Patti Garrett (Guest) | 4/20/22, 1:32:13 PM |
| Floyd, Greg | 4/20/22, 1:32:27 PM |
| Hari Karikaran | 4/20/22, 1:33:00 PM |
| Choi, Jessica | 4/20/22, 1:33:01 PM |
| Alison Clark | 4/20/22, 1:33:07 PM |
| Johnson, Anna A | 4/20/22, 1:33:20 PM |
| Richard McLeod | 4/20/22, 1:34:04 PM |
| Davis Fox (Guest) | 4/20/22, 1:34:13 PM |
| Ellis, Chuck | 4/20/22, 1:34:39 PM |
| Dorian DeBarr | 4/20/22, 1:35:21 PM |
| Angela Threadgill | 4/20/22, 1:36:04 PM |
| Morgan, Jason | 4/20/22, 1:37:35 PM |
| Michael Smith | 4/20/22, 1:37:59 PM |
| Aileen de la Torre | 4/20/22, 1:40:06 PM |
| Mayor John Ernst (Guest) | 4/20/22, 1:41:54 PM |
| Evans, Mario A. | 4/20/22, 1:42:16 PM |
| Alison Clark (Guest) | 4/20/22, 1:42:17 PM |
| Barnes, Korey | 4/20/22, 1:42:33 PM |
| Pelton, David | 4/20/22, 1:42:35 PM |
| Linda Abaray | 4/20/22, 1:44:28 PM |
| Alison Clark (Guest) | 4/20/22, 1:48:04 PM |
| Emory (Guest) | 4/20/22, 1:52:41 PM |
| Manquitrice Mangham | 4/20/22, 1:53:52 PM |
| Michelle Beesten-Alexander | 4/20/22, 2:00:03 PM |
| Alison Clark | 4/20/22, 2:05:37 PM |
| McCoy, Demetrius | 4/20/22, 2:21:01 PM |

<!-- page 175 -->
# Countywide Virtual Public Meetings – May 11-14, 2022

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

| Zoom Meeting Report | |
| :--- | :--- |
| **Name (Original Name)** | **Join Time** |
| Angelita Streeter | 5/11/2022 12:31 |
| Brett Conn | 5/11/2022 12:31 |
| Brian Brewer | 5/11/2022 12:28 |
| Carey Maike Caudle-Rozhavsky | 5/11/2022 13:26 |
| Ced Hudson | 5/11/2022 12:50 |
| Chris Handley | 5/11/2022 12:59 |
| Cristina Pastore | 5/11/2022 12:34 |
| DCTV BROADCAST (Mekel Blackwell) | 5/11/2022 12:35 |
| Eric Schieb | 5/11/2022 12:57 |
| Janea Dix | 5/11/2022 13:17 |
| Jennifer Rockhill | 5/11/2022 13:00 |
| Jessica Choi | 5/11/2022 12:43 |
| John Kittle | 5/11/2022 12:58 |
| Jon Tuley | 5/11/2022 12:27 |
| Jonathan Webster | 5/11/2022 12:40 |
| Kristin Moretz | 5/11/2022 12:58 |
| Kristine Hansen-Dederick | 5/11/2022 12:33 |
| Larry Washington | 5/11/2022 12:27 |
| Luis Taboada | 5/11/2022 12:34 |
| Mekel Blackwell | 5/11/2022 12:34 |
| Patrece Keeter | 5/11/2022 12:33 |
| Q&A_Winston (winston mitchell) | 5/11/2022 12:35 |
| Sylvia Smith | 5/11/2022 12:36 |
| winston mitchell | 5/11/2022 12:34 |
| Zandro Zaragoza | 5/11/2022 13:35 |

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 176 -->
# APPENDIX A

## Countywide Virtual Public Meetings – May 11-14, 2022

<<FIGURE>>

| Zoom Meeting Report | |
| :--- | :--- |
| **Name (Original Name)** | **Join Time** |
| Aileen de la Torre | 5/12/2022 18:00 |
| Brian Brewer | 5/12/2022 17:29 |
| Brittany Brison | 5/12/2022 17:33 |
| Cedric Hudson | 5/12/2022 17:36 |
| Chameka Small | 5/12/2022 18:06 |
| Christopher Hendrix | 5/12/2022 18:00 |
| Cristina Pastore | 5/12/2022 17:33 |
| DCTV (william rembert) | 5/12/2022 17:44 |
| Eric Barden | 5/12/2022 18:32 |
| Eric Bosman | 5/12/2022 17:51 |
| Gary Rhymer | 5/12/2022 18:51 |
| Grady Smith | 5/12/2022 17:32 |
| Jon Tuley | 5/12/2022 17:25 |
| Luis Taboada | 5/12/2022 17:36 |
| Patrece Keeter | 5/12/2022 17:32 |
| Paul Leonhardt | 5/12/2022 18:02 |
| Q&A - Winston (winston mitchell) | 5/12/2022 17:48 |
| Sandy Johnson | 5/12/2022 17:31 |
| Sharon Grant | 5/12/2022 17:57 |
| Sharon Steele | 5/12/2022 18:02 |
| Shelby Hall | 5/12/2022 18:01 |
| Sylvia Smith | 5/12/2022 17:29 |
| william rembert | 5/12/2022 17:31 |
| winston mitchell | 5/12/2022 17:30 |

| Zoom Meeting Report | |
| :--- | :--- |
| **Name (Original Name)** | **Join Time** |
| Andrew Baker | 5/14/2022 10:32 |
| Brian Brewer | 5/14/2022 10:29 |
| Caleb Stubbs | 5/14/2022 10:52 |
| Cedric Hudson | 5/14/2022 10:33 |
| Cristina Pastore | 5/14/2022 10:34 |
| Dr. Bola Tilghman | 5/14/2022 10:57 |
| Eric Bosman | 5/14/2022 10:45 |
| John Doxey | 5/14/2022 11:47 |
| Jon Tuley | 5/14/2022 10:28 |
| Jonathan Webster | 5/14/2022 10:39 |
| Katrina Highsmith | 5/14/2022 10:44 |
| Lance Hammonds | 5/14/2022 11:11 |
| Luis Taboada | 5/14/2022 10:34 |
| Michael Hightower | 5/14/2022 10:52 |
| Nichelle Wilson | 5/14/2022 10:40 |
| Patrece Keeter | 5/14/2022 10:33 |
| Preeti Jaggi | 5/14/2022 11:01 |
| Q&A Winston (winston mitchell) | 5/14/2022 10:37 |
| Rep Viola Davis (Viola Davis) | 5/14/2022 11:50 |
| Sylvia Smith | 5/14/2022 10:35 |
| T. Tony Osinaiya | 5/14/2022 11:26 |
| winston mitchell | 5/14/2022 10:36 |
| Zandro Zaragoza | 5/14/2022 11:24 |

<!-- page 177 -->
# Super District Virtual Town Hall – June 1, 2022

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

Draft Recommendations
Super District Town Hall
June 1, 2022

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 178 -->
# APPENDIX A

# DeKalb 2050 Unified Plan - Survey Round 1

## DEKALB 2050 UNIFIED PLAN

### Public Engagement Survey

#### DeKalb Today and Tomorrow

**Your DeKalb County Today**
Consider the DeKalb County that you see today. What is a word or short phrase to describe it?
0/50
________________________________________________________________________________

**Your DeKalb County in the Future**
Consider your vision for DeKalb County in the next 30 years. What is a word or short phrase to describe it?
0/50
________________________________________________________________________________

The Unified Plan has identified 11 priorities specifically about transportation in DeKalb County. For more info on the Transportation Priorities, click here.

**Rank Transportation Priorities**
Please rank the top three DeKalb County transportation priorities that are most important to you.

| Move items here. |
| :--- |
| Provide Transportation Options through Connectivity across Modes | + |
| Promote Equity | + |
| Improve Safety | + |
| Enable Healthy Communities and Improve Quality of Life | + |
| Respect and Improve DeKalb County's Character | + |
| Increase Access to Jobs and Education | + |
| Better Accommodate Movement of Goods | + |
| Improve Maintenance | + |
| Increase Funding for Improvements | + |
| Encourage Economic Development | + |
| Practice Fiscal Responsibility in Transportation Investments | + |

**Other Transportation Priorities**
Did we miss a Transportation Priority? Please type it in the box below.
________________________________________________________________________________

#### Issues and Opportunities Activity

Regarding land use elements, the Unified Plan has identified nine overarching issues and opportunities for DeKalb County. For more info on the Issues and Opportunities in DeKalb, click here.

**Rank Issues and Opportunites**
Please rank the top three DeKalb County issues and opportunities that are most important to you.

| Move items here. |
| :--- |
| Intergovernmental Coordination | + |
| Natural Resources and Sustainability | + |
| Arts, Culture, and Historic Resources | + |
| Land Use Development Patterns | + |
| Equity | + |
| Housing | + |
| Economic Development | + |
| Transportation | + |
| Community Health, Wellness, and Safety | + |

**Other Issues and Opportunities**
Did we miss an Issue or Opportunity? Please type it in the box below.
________________________________________________________________________________

#### Where Good Things are Happening Activity

Using the map for reference, please select the Activity Centers where you think good things are happening. Then tell us where you would like to see more good things happen in DeKalb.

<<FIGURE>>

Click map to enlarge (map will open in a new tab).

<!-- page 179 -->
# DeKalb 2050 Unified Plan - Survey Round 1

**Where are good things happening?**

Please select the Activity Centers where you think good things are happening in DeKalb. (Select up to 5 options)

*   ☐ A - LaVista Rd & Briarcliff Rd
*   ☐ B - Briarcliff & N Druid Hills
*   ☐ C - Clairmont & Briarcliff Rd
*   ☐ D - Shallowford Rd & I-285
*   ☐ E - I-285 & Chamblee Tucker Rd
*   ☐ F - Toco Hills
*   ☐ G - Oak Grove
*   ☐ H - Lawrenceville Hwy & McLendon Dr
*   ☐ I - Northlake Mall
*   ☐ J - Emory Village
*   ☐ K - Clifton Community
*   ☐ L - N Decatur Rd & Scott Blvd
*   ☐ M - North DeKalb Mall
*   ☐ N - N Decatur Rd & Decatur Industrial Way
*   ☐ O - Memorial Dr & Wilkinson Dr
*   ☐ P - East Lake Village
*   ☐ Q - Memorial Dr & Columbia Dr
*   ☐ R - Kensington MARTA Station
*   ☐ V - I-20 & Wesley Chapel Rd
*   ☐ W - Bouldercrest & I-285
*   ☐ X - Flat Shoals Pkwy & Clifton Rd
*   ☐ Y - Moreland Ave & Cedar Grove
*   ☐ Z - Cedar Grove
*   ☐ AA - GSU/Georgia Piedmont
*   ☐ AB - Village Square/Value Mall
*   ☐ AC - Hairston Rd & Central Dr
*   ☐ AD - Hairston Rd & Rockbridge Rd
*   ☐ AE - Panola & Rockbridge Rd
*   ☐ AF - Deshon & Rockbridge Rd
*   ☐ AG - Redan & Hairston Rd
*   ☐ AH - Panola & Redan Rd
*   ☐ AI - Redan Rd
*   ☐ AJ - Swift Creek
*   ☐ AK - Covington Hwy & Panola Rd
*   ☐ AL - Panola & Young Rd
*   ☐ AM - Covington Hwy & DeKalb Medical Way
*   ☐ AN - MARTA I-20 TOD Plan
*   ☐ AO - Flat Shoals Pkwy & Wesley Chapel Rd
*   ☐ Other (describe)

*   ☐ S - Redan Rd & Indian Creek Dr
*   ☐ T - I-20 & Gresham Rd
*   ☐ U - I-20 & Candler Rd
*   ☐ V - I-20 & Wesley Chapel Rd
*   ☐ W - Bouldercrest & I-285
*   ☐ X - Flat Shoals Pkwy & Clifton Rd
*   ☐ Y - Moreland Ave & Cedar Grove
*   ☐ Z - Cedar Grove
*   ☐ AA - GSU/Georgia Piedmont
*   ☐ AB - Village Square/Value Mall
*   ☐ AC - Hairston Rd & Central Dr
*   ☐ AD - Hairston Rd & Rockbridge Rd
*   ☐ AE - Panola & Rockbridge Rd
*   ☐ AF - Deshon & Rockbridge Rd
*   ☐ AG - Redan & Hairston Rd
*   ☐ AH - Panola & Redan Rd
*   ☐ AI - Redan Rd
*   ☐ AJ - Swift Creek
*   ☐ AK - Covington Hwy & Panola Rd
*   ☐ AL - Panola & Young Rd
*   ☐ AM - Covington Hwy & DeKalb Medical Way
*   ☐ AN - MARTA I-20 TOD Plan
*   ☐ AO - Flat Shoals Pkwy & Wesley Chapel Rd
*   ☐ Other (describe)

## About You (Optional)

We are interested to learn more about you! Please provide the following information so we know more about our survey respondents. **Thanks!**

### What is your age?

*   ○ 17 years old or younger
*   ○ 18 to 24
*   ○ 25 to 29
*   ○ 30 to 34
*   ○ 35 to 39
*   ○ 40 to 44
*   ○ 45 to 49
*   ○ 50 to 54
*   ○ 55 to 59
*   ○ 60 to 64
*   ○ 65 to 74
*   ○ 75 years and older
*   ○ Prefer not to answer

<!-- page 180 -->
# APPENDIX A

# DeKalb 2050 Unified Plan - Survey Round 1

## About You (Optional)

We are interested to learn more about you! Please provide the following information so we know more about our survey respondents. **Thanks!**

**What is your age?**

| | |
| :--- | :--- |
| ○ | 17 years old or younger |
| ○ | 18 to 24 |
| ○ | 25 to 29 |
| ○ | 30 to 34 |
| ○ | 35 to 39 |
| ○ | 40 to 44 |
| ○ | 45 to 49 |
| ○ | 50 to 54 |
| ○ | 55 to 59 |
| ○ | 60 to 64 |
| ○ | 65 to 74 |
| ○ | 75 years and older |
| ○ | Prefer not to answer |

**Which race or ethnicity best describes you?**
(select one or more)

| | |
| :--- | :--- |
| ☐ | Black or African American |
| ☐ | White |
| ☐ | Hispanic or Latinx |
| ☐ | Asian or Pacific Islander |
| ☐ | Multiple |
| ☐ | Native American |
| ☐ | Other |
| ☐ | Prefer not to answer |

**Is your primary language spoken at home English?**

| | |
| :--- | :--- |
| ○ | Yes |
| ○ | No |
| ○ | A mix |
| ○ | Prefer not to answer |

**What is you total annual household income?**

| | |
| :--- | :--- |
| ○ | under $20,000 |
| ○ | $20,000 to $34,999 |
| ○ | $35,000 to $49,999 |
| ○ | $50,000 to $64,999 |
| ○ | $65,000 to $79,999 |
| ○ | $80,000 to $99,999 |
| ○ | $100,000 to $149,999 |
| ○ | $150,000 to $199,999 |
| ○ | $200,000 to $249,999 |
| ○ | $250,000 or more |
| ○ | Prefer not to answer |

**What is your employment status?**

| | |
| :--- | :--- |
| ○ | Full-Time |
| ○ | Part-Time |
| ○ | Student |
| ○ | Stay-at-Home |
| ○ | Retired |
| ○ | Unemployed |
| ○ | Prefer not to answer |

**What is your relation to DeKalb County?**

| | |
| :--- | :--- |
| ○ | I live in the County |
| ○ | I work in the County |
| ○ | I live and work in the County |
| ○ | Other |

**What is your home ZIP code?**
5 digits

0/5
| |
| :--- |
| |

**What is your work or school ZIP code?**
5 digits

0/5
| |
| :--- |
| |

<!-- page 181 -->
# DeKalb 2050 Unified Plan - Survey Round 1

**How do you get your information?**

*   [ ] Television or Radio
*   [ ] Newspaper or Magazine
*   [ ] Email Lists
*   [ ] Social Media
*   [ ] Word of Mouth
*   [ ] Other

**Email**

cristina.pastore@kimley-horn.com

*   [ ] Agree to terms and conditions *

[Submit]

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 182 -->
# APPENDIX A

# DeKalb 2050 Unified Plan - Survey Round 2

Tuesday, June 14, 2022

DeKalb 2050 Unified Plan
Survey

### INTRODUCTION
**WELCOME TO THE DEKALB 2050 UNIFIED PLAN SURVEY!**
Welcome to the Recommendations survey for the DeKalb 2050 Unified Plan – your input is critical to the success of the plan! The survey includes three sets of questions:
* **Transportation** – roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian projects as well as transportation and transit policies (approximately 10-15 minutes)
* **Land Use/Quality of Life** – changes to future land use and activity centers, other topics that affect quality of life (approximately 10-15 minutes)
* **About You** – optional questions that help us to understand more about our survey participants (approximately 3-5 minutes)

You can choose to answer questions about transportation only, land use/quality of life only, or both. "About You" questions are optional.

**Which survey questions would you like to answer?** | Both sets of questions
--- | ---

### TRANSPORTATION
**GENERAL TRANSPORTATION**
Today, DeKalb County has a local source of funding that helps to pay for important transportation improvements. This source is called a countywide SPLOST (special purpose local option sales tax). The Unified Plan assumed that the SPLOST program continues for the coming years to fund future transportation projects. The current SPLOST monies generally do not pay for transit improvements. DeKalb County residents pay a one percent sales tax to MARTA to fund existing system operations and small-scale transit improvements.

Current SPLOST funding for transportation can be used in multiple ways:
* **Asset management** – repaving roads, repairing bridges and signal systems
* **Technology** – investing in new technologies like smart corridors and connected/autonomous vehicle projects
* **Roadway capacity** – adding more travel lanes on roads to help relieve congestion
* **Roadway operations** – improving intersections by adding turn lanes, signals, or roundabouts; improving signal timing; implementing safety improvements; etc.
* **Sidewalks** – building new sidewalks, filling in sidewalk gaps, fixing falling sidewalks
* **Trails** – building new off-road trails or sidepaths that can be used by cyclists and pedestrians for longer distances

**Please click and drag to rank your top three priorities for funding in order: (Note - you may rank all the priorities, but for this survey, only your top three will be considered)** | 1: Roadway operations
--- | ---
 | 2: Roadway capacity
 | 3: Asset management
 | 4: Sidewalks
 | 5: Trails
 | 6: Technology
 | 7: Other – please explain

**The map shows the combination of roadway and trail projects currently identified for the first 12 years of the plan. Please note that sidewalks are included in a separate funding set-aside not shown here. Based on the projects shown, please provide your thoughts on the balance of projects. Would you like to see:** | More Roadway Projects
--- | ---

<<FIGURE>>

**SURFACE TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS (ROADWAY, BICYCLE, PEDESTRIAN)**
The 2050 DeKalb Unified Plan includes specific project recommendations for three primary categories of projects:
* **Roadway corridor projects** - includes adding new lanes, adding medians, or improving multiple intersections along a road
* **Intersection improvements** - includes individual intersection improvements and safety enhancements at a singular location
* **Multiuse trails or sidepaths** - can be used by cyclists and pedestrians

**The map below represents some of the roadway corridor projects of interest to DeKalb County. Of the 16 roadway corridor projects, please check up to 4 that you think the County should prioritize.** | B - Wesley Chapel Road Capacity Improvement from Boring Road to Flat Shoals Parkway
--- | ---
 | D - Covington Highway Operational Improvements from Glenwood Road to Young Road
 | K - Redan Road Capacity Improvement from Elder Lane to S Hairston Road
 | M - SR 12/US 278 Operational Improvement from Dekalb Medical Parkway to Gregstone Court

<<FIGURE>>

**The map below represents some of the intersection projects of interest to DeKalb County. Of the 14 intersection projects, please check up to 4 that you think the County should prioritize.** | H - N Clarendon Avenue at Rockbridge Road
--- | ---
 | Intersection Improvement
 | I - S Deshon Road at Alford Road Intersection Improvement
 | J - S Deshon Road at Rogers Lake Road Intersection Improvement
 | L - Panola Road at Stone Mountain Lithonia Road Rail Crossing Improvement

<<FIGURE>>

**The map below represents some of the trail projects of interest to DeKalb County. Of the 16 trail projects, please check up to 4 that you think the County should prioritize.** | A - Farmers Market Trail from South Peachtree Creek Trail to Stone Mountain Trail in Avondale Estates
--- | ---
 | E - DeKalb Industrial Way Greenway from Lawrenceville Highway to Jefferson Square Court
 | K - Indian Creek MARTA Station Trails from S Indian Creek Drive to Snapfinger Trail PATH

<<FIGURE>>

**Want to review the projects in more detail?**
If you'd like to review the transportation projects in further detail, you can comment on our two interactive maps using the following link [DeKalb 2050 Unified Plan Projects]. The tabs at the top will allow you to provide any additional feedback on projects in Unincorporated DeKalb County and share your thoughts on projects in the cities.

**TRANSIT**
The Unified Plan also is considering possible transit improvements. The following questions focus specifically on some of the types of potential transit improvements being considered.

<<FIGURE>>

**Regarding future transit investments in DeKalb County, what is your preference?** | Make large investments in a few priority corridors
--- | ---

**Which transportation corridors should be prioritized for major transit investments? Please click and drag to rank your top 4 corridors in order of transit priority:** | 1: Covington Highway
--- | ---
 | 2: I-285 Corridor
 | 3: I-20 East Corridor
 | 4: Memorial Drive
 | 5: Candler Road
 | 6: Buford Highway
 | 7: Clifton Corridor
 | 8: LaVista Road
 | 9: None – I do not want any major transit investments in DeKalb County
 | 10: Other

**NEW SALES TAX OPPORTUNITIES**
DeKalb County can consider implementing a new sales tax for transportation and transit. Up to one percent (1%) can be considered for surface transportation projects (roadway, bicycle, pedestrian, trail) or up to one percent (1%) can be considered for transit projects. A combination of taxes also could be considered where some funds go to surface transportation projects and other funds go to transit. Currently, most of DeKalb County has an 8% sales tax. If you pay $1.08 for a cup of coffee today, your cup of coffee would cost $1.09 after a 1% sales tax addition.
DeKalb County is still weighing all the options, and no decisions have been made about new local funding opportunities. The questions below gauge your interest in a new sales tax and how much you would be willing to support by type.

**Would you support a new surface transportation sales tax (to fund roadway, bicycle, pedestrian, trail projects) of up to one (1) percent?** | No
--- | ---

**Would you support a new transit sales tax of up to one (1) percent?** | No
--- | ---

**LAND USE AND QUALITY OF LIFE**
**FUTURE LAND USE RECOMMENDATIONS**
Please select whether you agree/disagree with the following recommendations. There will be an opportunity to provide additional feedback about your choices at the end of the end of the Future Land

<!-- page 183 -->
# DeKalb 2050 Unified Plan - Survey Round 2

Use and Policies section.
The County's Future Land Use Map (FLUM) establishes a vision to guide the physical development of the community. This document is used to make decisions and develop policies that have long-term impacts regarding what land uses are appropriate and how the community will grow. One of the key features of DeKalb County’s FLUM is the identification of activity centers throughout the County, which are intended to serve as focus areas for activity and development.

Activity Center Criteria – an area should be considered eligible as an Activity Center if the area is:
*   Located at or near the intersection of a major road or interstate or near a MARTA transit station
*   Contains a variety of land uses (retail/shopping, residential, office, etc.)
*   Has experienced recent development activity that is of higher intensity than the surrounding area
*   Large enough to allow for transitions in development intensity between the activity center and surrounding areas (particularly single-family neighborhoods)

**To what degree do you agree that these criteria should be used to identify activity centers throughout DeKalb County?** | Strongly Agree
---|---

Use of Small Area Plans – Small Area Plans help guide how activity centers should develop in a greater level of detail. These community-based plans also help address specific issues identified by the community.

**To what degree do you agree that Small Area Plans should be used in this way to address these issues?** | Strongly Agree
---|---

New Residential Character Area - Residential areas throughout DeKalb are diverse and unique. The current Future Land Use Map, however, considers the majority of DeKalb as only one character area - "Suburban." To better reflect the diversity of development and character, a new character area is proposed for the more intown and older residential areas. This new category will encourage better connectivity and address infill development opportunities. The map shows where the new character area will be located in DeKalb County.

<<FIGURE>>

**To what degree do you agree or disagree with the creation of this new character area?** | Strongly Agree
---|---

**New Residential Character Area – Help us name this new character area! From the options below, let us know which name best fits this new character area focused on connectivity and infill development opportunities.** | Established Residential
---|---

Additional Comments/Concerns

**Please use the comment box below to address any land use and development issues or priorities not mentioned here, or that you would like to see greater emphasis. We also encourage you to share why you agreed or disagreed with any of the Future Land Use recommendations above.**

Cap Rental and investor properties in Southeast DeKalb to 15%!

### PRIORITY POLICY AREAS
Economic development and housing are key policy areas addressed in a community’s Comprehensive Plan and were identified as priorities by DeKalb County stakeholders.

#### ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Focus on Economic development in DeKalb County by taking steps that include:
*   Coordinating with Decide DeKalb, which is the Development Authority of DeKalb County
*   Coordinating Land Use policy to better support business recruitment and retention
*   Placing greater emphasis on economic development in underserved and marginalized communities
*   Supporting additional workforce development efforts

**Please click and drag to rank the action items in order of priority from 1-4 (where 1 is the highest priority).** | 1: Emphasize economic development in underserved and marginalized communities
---|---
 | 2: Support business recruitment and retention
 | 3: Coordinate with Decide DeKalb
 | 4: Support workforce development efforts

#### HOUSING
Focus on policies to increase housing affordability and provide a diverse mix of housing types by taking steps that include:
*   Developing a County housing strategy focused on the preservation of existing affordable housing, the creation of new affordable units, and partnerships with both private and non-profit entities
*   Establishing a staff position focused specifically on housing affordability
*   Creating a new housing affordability advisory committee
*   Preserving existing supply of workforce and affordable housing
*   Identifying opportunities to partner with private and non-profit organizations to provide workforce and affordable housing

**Please click and drag to rank the action items in order of priority from 1-5 (where 1 is the highest priority).** | 1: Develop a County housing strategy
---|---
 | 2: Establish a housing affordability staff position
 | 3: Create a new housing affordability advisory committee
 | 4: Preserve existing supply of workforce and affordable housing
 | 5: Identify opportunities for public-private partnerships

Additional Comments/Concerns

### ADDITIONAL POLICY AREAS
The DeKalb Unified Plan will address a variety of issues across the County, but we would like your feedback on how the County should consider prioritizing them. Included below is a list of additional policy areas and associated action items:
*   **Sustainability** – Develop a countywide sustainability plan with goals and benchmarks to promote more sustainable practices and development in DeKalb. Pursue ARC Green Communities certification.
*   **Arts, Culture, and Historic Resources** – Create a comprehensive plan for DeKalb’s artistic, cultural, and historic resources and establish a staff position to assist and support implementation and coordination.
*   **Health and Wellness** – Identify focus areas in the County with the greatest needs including areas with food insecurity and low access to healthy food. Support education and workforce efforts such as Learn4Life and internships/apprenticeships to support underserved populations and help DeKalb residents train for and find sustainable employment.
*   **Retail Improvements** – Focus on struggling or dilapidated retail districts. Adopt and implement the Memorial Drive Study. Enhance Memorial Drive through efforts similar to We Love BuHi. Develop strategies for struggling malls including public-private partnerships.
*   **Public Safety** – Focus on improving public safety by increasing coordination between County Departments, DeKalb Police and DeKalb Fire and Rescue. Make additional investment in roadway and pedestrian lighting and sidewalks in areas with higher incidences of crime, higher pedestrian activity, and higher incidents of pedestrian crashes. Focus on code enforcement efforts to combat illegal dumping, especially in underserved areas of the County.

**Please click and drag to rank the following policy areas and associated action items from 1 being most important to least important, with 1 being most important and 5 being least important.** | 1: Public Safety | 2: Retail Improvements
---|---|---
 | 3: Sustainability | 
 | 4: Arts, Culture, and Historic Resource | 
 | 5: Health and Wellness | 

Additional Comments/Concerns

### ABOUT YOU (OPTIONAL)
We are interested to learn more about you! Please provide the following information so we know more about our survey respondents! If you choose to skip ahead, scroll to the bottom of the page and click 'Next'.

**What is your relation to DeKalb County?** | I live in the County
---|---
**What is your home ZIP code?** | 30058
**What is your work or school ZIP code?** | 30083
**Do you live in a city or Unincorporated DeKalb County? If you live in a city, which one?** | Unincorporated DeKalb
**What is your age?** | 55 to 59 years old
**What is your employment status?** | Full-Time
**What is your total annual household income?** | $65,000 to $79,999
**How would you describe yourself?** | Hispanic/Latino

#### WHAT ARE WE MISSING?
**Please add any final thoughts, comments, or concerns in the text box below.**
Addressing the BLIGHT! 2016 SPLOST funds have not been used to properly pave roads in Southeast DeKalb! The Roads are atrocious ! Reinstate Police Patrols!

#### THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME TO TAKE THE DEKALB 2050 UNIFIED PLAN SURVEY!
Your input will help to shape and guide the future of DeKalb County’s transportation and land use decisions.
**Need more information?**
Visit www.dekalb2050unifiedplan.com or email us at 2050unifiedplan@dekalbcountyga.gov
**Want to review the projects in more detail?**
If you'd like to review the transportation projects in further detail, you can comment on our two interactive maps using the following link [DeKalb 2050 Unified Plan]. The tabs at the top will allow you to provide any additional feedback on projects in Unincorporated DeKalb County and share your thoughts on projects in the cities.

<!-- page 184 -->
THIS PAGE LEFT 
INTENTIONALLY BLANK

<!-- page 185 -->
# APPENDIX B

# DEKALB COUNTY VILLAGE CONSERVATION COMMUNITY STRATEGY

<!-- page 186 -->
THIS PAGE LEFT
INTENTIONALLY BLANK

<!-- page 187 -->
VILLAGE HABITAT DESIGN Farmer D Kimley»Horn

# DEKALB COUNTY

## VILLAGE CONSERVATION COMMUNITY PROGRAM

### PHASE 1 JULY 2022

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 188 -->
<<FIGURE>>

# GROWING COMMUNITIES

### DEKALB COUNTY

<!-- page 189 -->
# Tables of Contents

### PART I - OVERVIEW
Introduction
Definition, Foundational Components & Principles
Historic origins
Development & community Incentives
Ownership & Management of the Green Space
Atlanta regional examples

### PART II- PRINCIPLES
Principles - explanation and application

### PART III - LAND USE POLICY
Land use
Development components
Zoning District Strategy
Zoning Considerations

### PART IV - MAPPING PHASE I
Overview
Natural Anchors
Urban Agriculture
Mapping Analysis Framework
Mapping Analysis Conclusion
Candidate Site Opportunities

### PART V - POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
Unified Plan policy recommendations

### PART VI - IMPLEMENTATION
Process
Partnerships
Education

### APPENDIX

***

*Plans and diagrams are designed for conceptual purposes only. Images included within are for educational purposes only. All sampled copyrighted work (imagery) is under the protection of Section 107 of the Copyright Act.*

<!-- page 190 -->
<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 191 -->
<<FIGURE>>

# PART I - OVERVIEW

<!-- page 192 -->
# Introduction

## Village Conservation Community

Few undeveloped green spaces (forests and farms) remain in DeKalb County due to the fast rate of suburban growth from the 1950’s to present. The remaining green spaces are precious and a new development approach is needed; a gold standard of conservation development called Village Conservation Community (VCC). VCC can shift the current development pattern to one that preserves the majority of Dekalb County’s remaining forests and urban agriculture lands. These preserved lands could be used as anchors to create new investment opportunities to develop walkable communities that enhance the quality of life, health and economic resilience for Dekalb County residents.

The VCC model draws its inspiration from historic forest and farm based towns and villages where residents were more connected to the land as well as to each other. Compact development, such as villages and hamlets are the most efficient form of land use, far outperforming sub-divisions and ultimately support a more successful and resilient local economy.

The benefits of the VCC can be reaped by residents and visitors alike by offering a variety of agriculture and nature based programs that support the local economy and community.

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 193 -->
Two current Dekalb County development trends create serious challenges to the preservation of the forests and urban ag land opportunities and the creation of walkable oriented development.
1. The continued use of suburban district, auto centric larger lot development
2. Up-zoning of the last remaining larger undeveloped properties (largely in lower income neighborhoods) from suburban district to full site high density residential district with no significant requirements for conservation or substantive pedestrian priority development.

Village Conservation Community provides a solution to these current development trends. Solutions include:
*   Converting suburban districts to Village Conservation Communities (VCC) precluding suburban district mass grading, preserving the majority of the green space, creating walkable destinations centered around forest and urban ag preservation for new residents and the surrounding community while creating commensurate investment opportunities in the form of conservation village and hamlet development.
*   Ensuring that no up-zoning occurs (mass gifting of development rights) from suburban districts to high density residential without commensurate preservation of forests and urban ag opportunities and enhanced pedestrian priority planning.

In order to enable a substantive shift from Suburban districts to Village Conservation Community focused land use it will be important to:
*   Develop a conservation and community based valuation of the remaining undeveloped lands of Dekalb County (5 acre parcels and larger)
*   Develop a conservation and community based parcel prioritization
*   Develop land use/zoning changes to enable Village Conservation Community Applications
*   Initiate conservation and community development partnerships
*   Develop educational programs to raise awareness and understanding of the value of creating clustered conservation village and hamlet developments in order to preserve the majority of the few last remaining undeveloped green spaces

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 194 -->
# DEFINITION, FOUNDATIONAL COMPONENTS AND PRINCIPLES

### DEFINITION
A Village Conservation Community (VCC) is one or more “conservation village or hamlet clusters” connected or surrounded by preserved lands that meet the VCC conservation metrics and provide an opportunity for developing walkable communities connecting residents to preserved woodlands and urban agriculture.

<<FIGURE>>

### FOUNDATIONAL COMPONENTS
Village Conservation Community development consists of two foundational components: the “conservation village or hamlet” and the “pedestrian connectivity” to the proposed and surrounding community.

#### 1. Conservation Village or Hamlet
The conservation village or hamlet is the first of two development components of the VCC which enables the preservation of the majority of the buildable portion of the site

Village Conservation Community takes the underlying zoning density (yield density), adds an incentivizing development bonus and clusters the development at a density allowing preservation based on the VCC conservation metric.

### Scale

<<FIGURE>>

| Hamlet | Neighborhood Cluster | Village |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |

<!-- page 195 -->
It is the land preservation **“gold standard”** because the village or hamlet density enables significantly smaller “conservation lots”, clustered in a way that maximizes the preservation of green space, while designing the majority of units to front onto the preserved green space.

The scale of the Conservation Village or Hamlet ranges from a 4-20 home hamlet cluster to a small village or neighborhood cluster of 20-100 homes up to a major village of hundreds to one thousand or more units.

The larger conservation villages are most useful for protecting the last large green spaces in the county, instead of fragmenting them into multiple developments. The small conservation villages and hamlets are useful for protecting smaller, infill green spaces.

The success of integrating conservation villages and hamlets into the existing suburban landscape rests largely on incorporating the following into each VCC development:

*   Substantive Preservation: the substantive preservation of remnant forests, passive recreation areas and potential urban ag lands based on the VCC preservation metrics.
*   Pedestrian Access to preserved green spaces: pedestrian and bicycle access of these preserved lands to surrounding neighbors (not in the VCC development)
*   Transitional Buffers: well designed transitional buffers to the adjoining lower density suburban district
*   Density Gradients: well designed density gradient ensuring that the higher density areas of the village are farther away from the adjacent lower density neighborhood.
*   Reduced Automobile Impact: reducing automobile impact from what could conventionally be developed through better use of community transit, enhanced pedestrian and bike connectivity and increased day to day functional walking destinations.

Attention to these five aspects will foster support in the initial development/conservation phase, help create more healthy connected communities for the long term while creating a pro-growth approach to developing conservation villages and hamlets.

<<FIGURE>>

| Traditional | Suburban | Rural |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| *A range between 50% to 60% open space, with the rest developed* | *A range between 60% to 80% open space, with the rest developed* | *A range between 80% and 90% open space, with the rest developed* |

<!-- page 196 -->
### 2. Pedestrian Connectivity

Pedestrian Connectivity is the second foundational component and refers to walkability both within the conservation village and hamlet as well as to the surrounding community. Typically a 1/4 - 1/2 mile radius (5-10 min walk), from the preserved lands into the surrounding community defines the pedestrian shed. The intent within that pedestrian shed is to create walkable access to preserved green space as well as to a diversity of functional daily destinations appropriate to the underlying zoning district in order to reduce traffic trips and to increase community interaction through a series of walking based exchanges. Longer multi-use trails can connect to the conservation villages and hamlets as well enabling access to the larger natural corridors.

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 197 -->
# Principles

The following **9 principles** set the foundation for the VCC planning approach:

*<u>1. Conservation of riparian corridors, urban forests, and urban agriculture lands</u>*: based on the character of the project context the following minimum VCC conservation metrics are applied to the buildable area of the site. 50% preservation in traditional neighborhood area, 60% preservation in suburban area and 80% preservation in rural pocket area

*<u>2. Restoration and Stewardship of Conserved Lands</u>*: Manage riparian corridors, urban forests, grasslands, urban ag lands and ecological landscapes using ecologically friendly practices that promote bio-diversity and healthy communities

*<u>3. Pedestrian Priority Development</u>*: prioritize pedestrian/bike/shuttle/transit access and functional walkable day to day destinations to reduce car dependency

*<u>4. Community Building & Gathering Spaces</u>*: build community and create gathering spaces; starts with persons interested in community and conservation, facilitated through pedestrian priority design and completed through the development of gathering spaces connected to the preserved green space

*<u>5. Neighborhood Based Workplaces</u>*: Integrate zoning-appropriate neighborhood based workplaces to reduce commuter patterns and neighborhood day time absenteeism, increase youth learning opportunities, community security and vitality of the neighborhood.

*<u>6. Mixed Income Housing</u>*: create mixed income housing opportunities around shared values for land conservation and community to include the following housing categories: on site land caretaker/urban agriculture housing, missing middle/work force housing and upper middle to higher income housing

*<u>7. Intergenerational Community</u>*: Integrate full intergenerational age groups; seniors need to be able to live in communities where they can age in place, not need a car and be able to move to smaller units where they are surrounded by community and nature. Youth need the benefit of seniors as mentors in their lives and families need help with children and caring for seniors; it takes a village.

*<u>8. Sustainability, Health & Resiliency</u>*: increase sustainability, health and resilience of neighborhoods through connection to nature and urban agriculture, active living opportunities (walk/bike), food & energy resilience and general creation of an intergenerational supportive neighborhood

*<u>9. Neighborhood Based Education</u>*: education linked to the neighborhood and the preserved land accessible within a 1/2 - 1 mile walking/bike diameter; focused particularly on local youth supported by local schools and other community resources; this place-based education provides opportunities such as internships, work/study programs, after school programs and summer school programs.

<!-- page 198 -->
# HISTORIC ORIGINS

Origins of the VCC are based on historic, walkable woodland and agrarian-based villages and hamlets connected to the land, nature, farms and gardens with integrated workplaces and a culture of community and local mentorship and interdependency.

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 199 -->
### HISTORIC HAMLET

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

### HISTORIC SMALL VILLAGE

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

### HISTORIC LARGER VILLAGE

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 200 -->
# DEVELOPMENT AND COMMUNITY INCENTIVES

### DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES
Key development incentives afforded by Village Conservation Community include:
* Home buyers are increasingly looking for smaller lots with less maintenance, better views onto preserved land and more adjacent walkable access to substantive green spaces (gardens and woodlands)
* Creating development incentives such as unit bonuses and expediting development processes can benefit developers and municipalities that are looking for ways to incentivize the preservation of the last remaining forests and open spaces without spending more tax dollars to purchase undeveloped properties
* Conservation village and hamlet development is inherently more efficient to develop due to its reduced infrastructure requirements
* Significant marketing incentives are created when the development product aligns with market trends and the desires and future quality growth planning of municipalities

### COMMUNITY INCENTIVES
Key community incentives afforded by Village Conservation Community include:
* Preservation of forest canopy and increase buffers to streams and waterways for long term watershed resilience
* Increase of health and wellness through opportunities to create urban agriculture for fresh food access (reduction of food deserts), and increased active living through pedestrian and bicycle priority design and general health and wellness programs
* Neighborhood trail connectivity between surrounding neighborhood and VCC preserved areas (woodlands and gardens)
* Adopted zoning conditions and design guidelines for management of green spaces and development of conservation villages and hamlets to ensure long term maintained high value developments
* Expand education and employment opportunities through the integration of zoning compatible work places/ services and neighborhood based educational opportunities connected to the preserved forests and urban ag lands
* Expand youth leisure activities through the reconnection of youth to nature and urban agriculture
* Create community wide economic branding opportunities, reinforcing the growth of walkable urban centers connected by expanded multi-use trail systems to eco and ag tourism and passive recreation opportunities

<!-- page 201 -->
# OWNERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT OF THE GREEN SPACE

There are two primary models of ownership and management of the open space.

<u>Model 1</u>
HOA of the conservation village or hamlet retains ownership and management of the open space such as East Lake Commons below with residents enjoying their 5 acre farm - Gaia Farm

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<u>Model 2</u> The green space is subdivided off from the conservation village or hamlet and is conveyed to a non-profit entity to own and manage. Examples of non-profit entities include a conservation group, a community land trust, an agricultural non-profit or a municipality.

Sherrydale Conservation Community, a proposed conservation community in Dekalb County is zoned in a way that allows the 3.5 acre proposed green space to be subdivided from the 1.5 acre proposed conservation hamlet cluster. Located adjacent to Peachcrest Elementary and the Salvation Army Boys and Girls Club outdoor classrooms and stream cleanup are being planned by the school and community. (https://www.sherrydalecommunitylandtrust.org)

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

**LEGEND**
**A. -6 Solar DU's & 3 ADU's**
- 20ft private driveway & reduction of front yard setbacks to facilitate steep grades and pedestrian scale
- scale driveway: pavor shoulders
- fire Tee at end of driveway
- preserve large tree at street entry
**B. Community Pavilion, Garden and Forest Garden at the End of Cobb Branch Drive - for homeowners, guests and nearby neighbors**
**C. Forest Corridor Restoration with Trail System**
**D. Outdoor Classroom and Forest Garden at entry from Sherrydale Ln**
- Potential for nearby grade school outings for nature based education and activities

Note: Vihta Vesta Conservation Development Concept Diagram is conceptual and subject to design development and engineering for assessment of feasibility

<!-- page 202 -->
# DEKALB LOCAL AND REGIONAL VCC EXAMPLES

The following are examples of VCC communities in traditional, suburban or rural character areas that have been constructed, are under construction or are in initial implementation phases in the DeKalb County and surrounding region (within 100 miles):

### PROJECT: EAST LAKE COMMONS
Location: DeKalb County
Character: traditional character; 20 acres; 60% preservation
Description: first mentoring farm and VCC development in DeKalb County

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 203 -->
### PROJECT: PENDERGRAST FARM

Location: Dekalb County
Character: suburban character; 8.7-acres; 60% preserve buildable / 70% Total
Description: access to neighbors within walking distance

<<FIGURE>>

**HOMES AND AMENITIES**

1600 SF - 3000 SF HOMES WITH GARAGE OPTION AND PRIVATE COURTYARD WITH A COMMON BACK YARD CONSISTING OF APPROX. 5 ACRES OF WOODLANDS AND FARM AND A STREAM AND WITHIN BIKING DISTANCE OF COMMERCIAL SERVICES

**AMENITIES**
* 1/2 MILE NATURAL TRAIL SYSTEM
* COMMON HOUSE
* POOL
* 1 TO 1.5 ACRE FARM-GARDENS/ORCHARD/VINEYARD & WOODLAND GARDEN/SMALL ANIMALS
* GARDENER/CARETAKER RESIDENCE WITH FARM SUBSCRIPTION (CSA) FOR HOUSEHOLDS AND CLOSE BY NEIGHBORS
* 5-ACRE WOODLAND
* CONSERVATION EASEMENT PROTECTING FARM AND WOODLANDS IN PERPETUITY

**GENERAL SCOPE**
* 1288 BRIARCLIFF RD DEKALB COUNTY GA
* 8.7 ACRES
* CHARACTER AREA (SUBURBAN)
* EXIST ZONING R100
* PROPOSED RE-ZONING RSM SITE PLAN SPECIFIC
* CONSERVATION COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: 20 MARKET RATE DWELLING UNITS AND AN AFFORDABLE GARDENER CARETAKER DWELLING UNIT
* CONSERVATION AREA MIN. 60% OF BUILDABLE AREA - TOTAL 72% WITH CONS. EASEMENT
* DEV. AREA MAX. 40% OF BUILDABLE AREA
* PEDESTRIAN PRIORITY UNITS FRONT TO PED. PATH/GREEN REAR TO ALLEY GARAGE WITH SEVERAL UNITS FRONTING PRIVATE DRIVE/WOONERF (SLOW SPEED INTEGRATED WALK/DRIVE)

VILLAGE HABITAT DESIGN
grahmsey@villagehabitat.com

### PENDERGRAST HISTORIC FARM
SITE PLAN CONCEPT 3/27/19

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 204 -->
### PROJECT: SHERRYDALE CONSERVATION COMMUNITY

Location: DeKalb County

Character: in-town character; 5.14-acres; - 50% preserve buildable area/75% total

Description: mixed income cluster development - subdivide off preserved area and form community land trust/ Emory partner stream revitalization/adjacent Peachcrest School stream labs/Boys and Girls Club activities

<<FIGURE>>

**LEGEND**

**A. -6 Solar DU's & 3 ADU's**
- 20ft private driveway & reduction of front yard setbacks to facilitate steep grades and pedestrian scale
- scale driveway: pavor shoulders
- fire Tee at end of driveway
- preserve large tree at street entry

**B. Community Pavilion, Garden and Forest Garden at the End of Cobb Branch Drive - for homeowners, guests and nearby neighbors**

**C. Forest Corridor Restoration with Trail System**

**D. Outdoor Classroom and Forest Garden at entry from Sherrydale Ln**
- Potential for nearby grade school outings for nature based education and activities

Note: Vihta Vasta Conservation Development Concept Diagram is conceptual and subject to design development and engineering for assessment of feasibility

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 205 -->
### PROJECT: CITY OF CHATTAHOOCHEE HILLS

Description: case study for creating economic viability for village/hamlet density development combined with conservation

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 206 -->
**PROJECT: HONEYWOOD FARMS**

Location: Barnesville – 1 hr south of Atlanta; A Green Belt” based Village Conservation Community 1-2miles outside of Barnesville Ga.

Character: rural character -1000 acres - 90% preserve/10% farm conservation village

Description: farm incubator & equity/workforce housing; food products, ranch/farm, value added products and store/restaurant established; Village and hamlets in planning phase

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 207 -->
<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 208 -->
<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 209 -->
<<FIGURE>>

# PART II - VCC PRINCIPLES

<!-- page 210 -->
# 1. CONSERVATION OF RIPARIAN CORRIDORS, FORESTS, AND URBAN AGRICULTURE LANDS

Based on the character of the project context the following VCC conservation metrics are applied to the buildable area of the site. 50% preservation in traditional neighborhood area, 60% preservation in suburban area and 80% preservation in rural pocket area.

The most valuable land that can be preserved is land in walking proximity to existing residences and businesses in the county with the potential for connection to wildlife corridors. In a suburban context, those green space parcels may vary from 1 to 20 acres or more depending on the extent of the suburban growth. For the purpose of this assessment, the smallest parcel size considered is 5 acres.

The two aspects of VCC that enable it to become the gold standard for conservation of land are:
*   Higher density conservation village and hamlet clusters (village conservation lots) enable increased preservation of land
*   The Preservation criteria based solely on the buildable area of the site (not the entire site) so as not to include areas already required to be preserved by ordinances.

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

| | | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| • Conservation | • Mixed Housing Types | • Preserved Woodlands | • Clustered Buildings & Minimal Roads |
| • Pedestrian Priority | • Healthy & Resiliency | • Variety of Housing Types | • Residential & Commercial Buildings |
| • Integrated Work Places | | • Active Living & Food Production | |

### Conservation Metrics
Conservation metrics (ratios of preserved and built lands) are based on the following three county character areas - Traditional, Suburban and Rural Pocket. The character areas are derived from the existing development character as well as the character of the green spaces remaining. The actual conservation metrics are derived from the underlying zoning, though in several cases we recommend adjusting the future land use map and underlying zoning to adapt to the green space character. For instance, in the Suburban Pocket and Rural Pocket areas, larger vestiges of undeveloped lands remain which may require a change in underlying zoning to increase the amount of land preserved with the clustered conservation village and hamlet approach to conservation community.

<!-- page 211 -->
<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

**Traditional**
*A range between 50% to 60% open space, with the rest developed*

**Suburban**
*A range between 60% to 80% open space, with the rest developed*

**Rural**
*A range between 80% and 90% open space, with the rest developed*

### Conservation Metrics Table

| Character Area | Underlying Density | Conservation of Buildable Area | Village Conservation Community Development Scope |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **Traditional Transitional**<br>Traditional/historic pre-suburban neighborhoods that are more walkable | 6000 - 10,000 sf lots<br>R60-R75 | 50% - 60% | 1200-2500 sf lots, townhouses & 2-8plex |
| **Suburban & Suburban Pocket**<br>Suburban Pocket areas are suburban character areas with larger pockets of green space - these greenspace pockets are prioritized and with conservation partnerships can be enhanced to 80% preservation | 12,000 sf lots - 1/2 acre lots<br>R85 lots - RLG | 60-80 % | 1200-5000 sf lots, townhouses & 2-4plex |
| **Rural Pocket**<br>Rural pocket, unlike rural, is a mix of suburban with large rural character pockets - | 12,000 sf lots - 1 acre<br>R85 - estate lots | 80 - 90 % | 1200-10,000sf lots, townhouses & 2-4plex with 8plex in larger villages |

<!-- page 212 -->
## 2. RESTORATION AND STEWARDSHIP OF CONSERVED LANDS

Manage natural habitats (riparian corridors, urban forests and grasslands), urban ag lands and ecological landscapes to promote bio-diversity and healthy communities.

Stewarding these conserved lands plays a crucial part in the health and resiliency of communities within DeKalb County

### Riparian corridors - streams wetlands and expanded buffers
DeKalb county's riparian corridors are critical to storm water management as climate patterns change, water quality enhancement and creating wildlife habitat corridors and sanctuaries linked by trails.
VCC development permits for substantive expansion of riparian buffers to meet these goals.

### Urban Forests
DeKalb County has historic forests dominated by deciduous forests (oak-hickory) mixed forests (oak-hickory-pine), and pine plantations. Deciduous forests were more dominant in the northern part of the County while the southern part of the County saw a wider mix of pine dominated forests (Loblolly-Shortleaf) and pine plantations.

With the increases in urban and suburban land cover across the County, it is common for the fragmented forests still intact to lack the health and diversity they once had. Since most of the forests in the County have largely regenerated following several rounds of timbering and cultivation, they have seen the addition of more opportunistic hardwoods, like Sweetgum and Poplar. The midstory of these forests have also lost significant diversity with the introduction of Chinese Privet that in most cases has overtaken the midstory of the County's forests.

Many of the critical functions of forests in DeKalb County have been diminished, including terrestrial and aquatic habitat biodiversity, water quality/stormwater management, stream health, carbon sequestration, noise mitigation, air quality and recreation. These functions have diminished in response to a variety of factors, including fragmentation, invasive species intrusion, and stormwater point source discharges.

VCC planning and development creates an opportunity to restore health to DeKalb's forests that will serve a value that is vast and immeasurable.

### Grasslands
Grasslands can provide habitat for communities of birds and enhance passive recreational opportunities as well as provide storm water/land stability with meadows that function as storm water facilities.

### Urban Agriculture
DeKalb County was once the largest producer of milk in the south and was home to more dairies than any other county in the state. Today, just a handful of historic farms remain and are at risk of being supplanted by development.

<!-- page 213 -->
Using a Village Conservation Community approach, DeKalb County is poised to support the last urban agriculture opportunities and reap the benefits. VCC provides a tool for proactively planning to preserve the dwindling agricultural lands and support new urban farms and gardens. Urban agriculture can be integrated into the fabric of the county’s communities to promote environmental, economic and social benefits and reduce food deserts for residents of DeKalb.

Economically, urban agriculture can provide meaningful employment opportunities within communities. It boosts the local economy by cycling food dollars within the community and supporting local agriculture businesses. Urban agriculture can increase land value of vacant or underutilized urban lots and simultaneously reduce upkeep costs. The full spectrum of economic benefits go beyond the metrics of dollars spent in the community to include impacts such as increased home values, improved socioeconomic diversity and resilience of the local community and economy.

The social benefits include health and wellness metrics associated with increased physical activity, improved access to fresh, nutritious food, access to green space, human connection and opportunities for cultural identity celebration through food and agriculture. Trusting relationships can be built through urban agriculture and it has been shown to reduce crime in communities. Neighbors can share their learning experiences and younger generations are empowered with knowledge on growing food and healthy lifestyles.

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 214 -->
Ecological landscapes are created through improved environmentally friendly methods that help shift the industry from a fossil fuel and chemical dependency. These landscapes have many positive externalities: promote natural habitats such as pollinator gardens, facilitate water quality, improve biological quality of the soil and grow food for the community. These landscapes can be integrated into any existing landscape designs and implemented at little to no additional cost.

Ecological landscaping is designed for a variety of county applications including public lands and community spaces, commercial and institutional properties, and general setbacks and buffers. These landscapes encourage safe and environmentally friendly maintenance practices and will be pivotal in municipal landscape training focused on these ecological landscapes and continuing education for the industry to build green jobs in our communities.

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 215 -->
# 3. COMMUNITY BUILDING & GATHERING SPACES

Opportunities for building community start with a shared desire for community and are facilitated through pedestrian oriented design and completed through the development of opportunities for diverse daily community activities, exchanges and gathering spaces.

* Shared desire for community - in order to develop a VCC community it is important to draw in future residents with a desire for community and conservation/access to green space
* Pedestrian oriented design - good pedestrian design creates "spontaneous community encounters" like traditional small towns as people pass each other on foot in their daily lives
* Community activities and gathering spaces - connecting residences to work places, and to farms and nature creates ample opportunities for community activities and gathering spaces such as dining/cafe areas, event barn/pavilion, event greens, outdoor classrooms, trails, etc.

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 216 -->
# 4. PEDESTRIAN PRIORITY DEVELOPMENTS

Suburban sprawl promotes higher tax dollar automotive and pedestrian infrastructure costs. Walkway connections are longer and often not functional as they do not connect efficiently to daily destinations. Walkway connections often don’t get implemented in lower income neighborhoods and longer suburban roads cannot have sufficient mid block crossing, forcing low income residents to risk the lives of their families crossing busy fast roads. VCC as a pedestrian priority development focuses pedestrian development in a way that dramatically increases the efficiency of pedestrian connectivity while reducing the cost.

* **Prioritize pedestrian/bike/shuttle and transit access.** Make sure that the land use and zoning strategies fit with the street and building relationships
* **Create more functional walkable destinations;** expand zoning compatible uses and services to augment functional walkable destinations
* **Reduce impacts of parking;** Reduce need for parking through increase of community base transit and functional pedestrian destinations, and cluster parking and located parking closer to the entry of the site to reduce site fragmentation. Alternatives to parking include e-bikes, shuttles, lease on demand vehicles, community transit, and creating more walkable destinations.

### Pedestrian Priority Based Major & Minor Circulation Ways/Street Types
* **Complete Streets:** Streets connecting neighborhoods designed for safe access for all users - autos, pedestrians, bicyclists and public transit

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 217 -->
### Minor Circulation Way Street Types

The following 3 pedestrian oriented street/circulation types are recommended for “cluster development” to insure pedestrian priority within VCC developments. VCC zoning needs to allow these street types either through a planned development zoning or providing variances to an existing zoning district. The most efficient is the planned development rezoning tool with performance requirements and bonuses.

a.)Living Street Model
The Woonerf, also called a “Living Street”, consists of a street shared among pedestrians, bicyclists, and motor vehicles with pedestrians having priority over cars, and cars moving at the speed of pedestrians.

This street type requires reduced automotive circulation so in developments not within pedestrian access of most services will require cluster parking for 2nd vehicles and guests at the periphery of the living street or in intermittent lots along the street to maintain the pedestrian quality of the street.

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 218 -->
b.) Radburn Model
The Radburn model is intended to create pedestrian-friendly residential housing with all the homes facing on to a shared green space and pedestrian ways accessing local shops and schools and the backs of lots facing a service alley for vehicular access with some cluster parking at the edges of the common green spaces.

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

c.) Park and Walk Model
All parking is located at the periphery of the development and the interior of the development is reserved for pedestrian circulation with accommodations for emergency and fire access, as needed.

Examples
*   Historic: traditional agrarian villages
*   Contemporary: pocket neighborhood, cottage court, cohousing, ecovillage, etc.

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 219 -->
# 5. NEIGHBORHOOD BASED WORKPLACES

Integrate zoning-appropriate neighborhood based workplaces to reduce commuter patterns and neighborhood day time absenteeism, increase youth based ,mentoring and learning opportunities, community security and vitality.

Neighborhood based workplaces build community through economic and educational exchanges, increase walkability dramatically by promoting walkable based retail and services and help create local economic entrepreneurship and resilience. Each of the 3 mixed land use categories offer different workplace opportunities (Neighborhood residential, Neighborhood commercial and Inter Neighborhood mixed-use commercial/lite industrial ).

Workplace applications can range from home occupation and accessory commercial units to full mixed use commercial development.
Categories of workplaces include:
* Local agriculture production
* Urban forestry
* Artisan food and maker
* Local food retail
* Local food culinary
* Community services (service repair shops – bike/garage/wood and metal, etc.)
* Community care services (daycare, senior care, etc.)

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 220 -->
# 6. MIXED INCOME HOUSING

Create mixed income housing opportunities around shared values (value congruence) for land conservation (connecting to nature and urban agriculture) and community to insure a convivial community culture.

Combining different income levels into a community creates a more resilient community with a variety of skills and financial resources. The key to successfully bringing different income buyers together in a conservation village is to put together a marketing process that emphasizes value congruence and education around the value of conservation and community building aspects of the conservation village development to build a conservation and community oriented culture.

The following housing categories comprise a mixed income community
* on site land caretaker/urban ag housing
* entry level housing
* missing middle/work force housing
* upper middle and upper-income housing

### Missing Middle Housing

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 221 -->
### Traditional Missing Middle Housing

The traditional types of housing for entry to workforce housing historically consisted of 2,3 family housing and small apartment buildings (6-8 plex) and cottage courts. These have fallen into disrepute due to poor design and construction and poor management and over concentration/lack of mix of other housing types.

Success lies in mixing different densities of housing together, adjacent to preserved green space and with quality building, hardscape and landscape design and management guidelines.

Historic neighborhoods such as Virginia Highlands are a good example of interspersed higher density housing within the neighborhood.

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 222 -->
# 7. INTERGENERATIONAL COMMUNITY

Integrate full intergenerational age groups; seniors need to be able to live in communities where they can age in place, not need a car and be able to move to smaller units where they are surrounded by community and nature. Youth need the benefit of seniors as mentors in their lives and families need help with children, (it takes a village), and caring for their parents/seniors.

Intergenerational housing can take many forms. Successful models include designed communities where seniors choose between private apartments or, for those who desire more support and a family-like setting, fully assisted senior residences with medical care and care-taking staff. Older adult residents have access to social services and engagement opportunities, and families with children and young adults live alongside older adults.

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 223 -->
# 8. SUSTAINABILITY, HEALTH & RESILIENCY

Increase sustainability, health and resilience of neighborhood through
* connection to nature and urban agriculture
* active living opportunities (walk/bike)
* food security and fresh/nutritious foods
* energy self reliance such as solar collectors and charging stations
* watershed resilience including increased buffers/storm event holding capacity and water quality, and rainwater catchments
* supportive neighborhood with a focus on youth and the elderly: variety of neighborhood compliments to insure neighborhood viability and longevity including mixed income, intergenerational and other community compliments

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 224 -->
# 9. NEIGHBORHOOD BASED EDUCATION

The increased centralization of schools and small businesses out of neighborhoods decreases the ability for youth to be exposed to after school, weekend and summer educational opportunities. Neighborhood based education re-integrates these opportunities into the neighborhood and the preserved land accessible within a 1/4 mile to 1 mile walking/bike radius. With support from local schools and other community organizations, this neighborhood based education, focused particularly on local youth, provides opportunities such as internships, work/study programs, after school programs and summer school programs.

Program opportunities are based on the neighborhood community resources and the type of land preserved (forest or urban agricultural). Education themes include: biology, urban agriculture, urban forestry, watershed restoration, community and health care, culinary and local food training, green construction and energy applications.

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 225 -->
(blank page)

<!-- page 226 -->
<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 227 -->
<<FIGURE>>

# PART III - Land Use Policy

<!-- page 228 -->
# Land Use and Development Policy Considerations

There are several policy, regulation, and issue areas that are critical to understand from the outset about the VCC land use and development policy effort in DeKalb County.

### Intent
Due to the vast majority of DeKalb County having been suburbanized, there is a dire need to shift the future land use and policies to preserve the majority of the last remaining tree canopy and urban agriculture opportunities on undeveloped land in the county, while creating healthier walkable neighborhoods.

### Solution
The most effective way to accomplish this is to develop a new conservation and pedestrian oriented development model referred to here as the Village Conservation Community (VCC) approach. The mass grading of suburban development sites and wholesale up-zoning of suburban properties to higher residential density properties with no substantive conservation offsets should be halted and replaced with the VCC approach before all the remaining significant parcels of land are mass graded.

Village Conservation Community is a land use approach that promotes sustainable real estate growth while preserving the majority of the forest canopy and urban ag opportunities, promoting social equity and making the green space preservation the center point of walkability and healthy communities.

This is accomplished with conservation cluster development called “conservation villages and conservation hamlets”. They are called “villages” and “hamlets” because buildable areas are clustered, the majority of green space is preserved, and the walkable character differentiates them from adjacent suburban subdivisions and single car dependent uses. Compact development, such as villages and hamlets are the most efficient from of land use, far outperforming sub-divisions and ultimately support a more successful and resilient economy.

The land use model for Village Conservation Communities (VCC) is based on overlaying three land use/character areas in the county in order to develop a metric for the conservation village and hamlet application on the remaining undeveloped lands within the County. These 3 land use areas/character areas are listed below:
* **Traditional/transitional** - Traditional pre-suburban neighborhoods that are more walkable
* **Suburban** - Suburban character areas with larger pockets of green space - these green space pockets are prioritized and with conservation partnerships can be enhanced to 80% preservation
* **Rural Pocket** - Rural pocket, unlike true rural areas, is a mix of suburban development with large pockets of rural character and undeveloped land

<<FIGURE>>

| Traditional | Suburban | Rural |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |

<!-- page 229 -->
### Conservation Metrics

Conservation metrics (ratios of preserved lands to built lands) are based on the three county character areas Traditional, Suburban and Rural Pocket. The character areas are derived from the existing development character as well as the character of the remaining undeveloped green spaces. The actual conservation metrics are derived from the underlying zoning, though in several cases it is recommended that the future land use map and underlying zoning be adjusted to adapt to the green space character. For instance, in the Suburban Pocket and Rural Pocket areas, larger vestiges of undeveloped lands remain which may require a change in underlying zoning to increase the amount of land preserved with the clustered conservation village and hamlet approach to conservation community.

### Conservation Metrics Table

| Character Area | Underlying Density | Conservation of Buildable Area | Conservation Village Development Scope |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **Traditional Transitional** | 6000 - 10,000 sf lots<br>R60-R75 | 50% - 60% | 1200-2500 sf lots, townhouses & 2-8plex |
| **Suburban & Suburban Pocket** | 12,000 sf lots - 1/2 acre lots<br>R85 lots - RLG | 60-80 % | 1200-5000 sf lots, townhouses & 2-4plex |
| **Rural Pocket** | 15,000 sf lots - 1 acre lots<br>R100 - estate lots - RE | 80 - 90 % | 1200-10,000sf lots, townhouses & 2-4plex and up to 8plex in larger villages |

### Priority Properties to Preserve

The most valuable land that can be preserved is land in walking proximity to existing residences and businesses in the county with the potential for the following:

*   properties connected or in close proximity to riparian corridors and trails
*   properties in walking proximity to schools and churches, businesses and neighborhood amenities
*   best social equity opportunities
*   mature forest lands
*   best opportunities for urban agriculture

### VCC Land Use Scale Applications:

*   Majority Preservation of Single infill properties. Conservation tools include land trust/bank and “offset density conservation planning”.
*   Majority Preservation of multiple contiguous properties. Conservation tools include land trust/bank assemblage and “offset density conservation planning”.
*   Majority Preservation of multiple non-contiguous properties within the larger remaining green space areas. Conservation tools include land trust/bank assemblage, purchase of development rights, “PDR’s” and transfer of development rights, “TDR’s” where properties are not contiguous. This approach is particularly applicable in the last larger green space areas - suburban pocket and rural pocket areas.

<!-- page 230 -->
### Development Incentives

There are a variety of ways to incentivize VCC developments including:

*   Offering a unit bonus to the developer to ensure that the value of the VCC development is commensurate or exceeds the value of conventional development on a given property
*   Marketing incentives including media support for conservation and strong market for smaller lots and less maintenance in proximity to woodland trails and gardens
*   Less infrastructure/cost of services due to compact development
*   More expedient permitting processes as municipalities reinforce conservation & walkable development trends

### Land Use and Development Policy Summary - True Cost

The VCC land use approach takes into consideration the true cost of land development; the long-term effects of climate change, loss of biodiversity, impacts to social equity and community health (walkability and access to nature and fresh food), and the ability to age in place.

All of these factors have profound effect on the long-term quality of life in DeKalb County and need to be factored into the choice of land use policy.

Today, many of these aspects have been ignored for decades to the exclusion of short-term growth and development. VCC offers a rewarding opportunity for substantive real estate growth and substantive change in addressing long term sustainable growth policy issues.

## Zoning Applications and Districts

Zoning can be broken down into 3 primary types for VCC zoning district applications:

*   Neighborhood residential areas including, schools, religious and community centers (overlay over residentially zoned neighborhoods)
*   Neighborhood commercial/residential areas (overlay over residentially zoned neighborhoods that include neighborhood commercial areas)
*   Inter Neighborhood mixed-use commercial/lite industrial areas (areas with connective transportation capacity between neighborhoods)

### Development Components

The primary development components of the VCC zoning districts are the development cluster (conservation village and hamlet) and the preserved land area

### Zoning District Strategy

Village Conservation Community (VCC) zoning is built around planned development-based pedestrian and conservation cluster districts called conservation villages and hamlet districts. Each district is based on a particular scale, uses and pedestrian connectivity.

<!-- page 231 -->
<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

### Scale

The following is the scale for the conservation cluster districts:

*   <u>Conservation Hamlets</u> 4 to 20 units (4-8 small, 8-12 medium and 12-20 large) and can include ADU's based on underlying zoning yield plan capacity. The conservation hamlet is used primarily for smaller infill properties or small crossroad developments.
*   <u>Conservation Villages</u> 20 to 100 and up to a 1000 or more (20-100 small village, 100 to 1000 medium village and 1000 or more, large village) The conservation village is very versatile as it operates at many scales and ranges from residential to high level mixed use

### Uses

The following are the uses allowed within a pedestrian priority framework

<u>Housing Community (HC)</u>
Uses permitted include uses permitted under existing residential neighborhood districts (schools, churches, home occupations). In addition, additional local small-scale neighborhood uses may be added with no parking requirements provided they are designed with inner-neighborhood access only by walking/bicycling/carts. These uses include urban garden/farm retail/value added product uses.

<u>Mixed Use (MU)</u>
Local neighborhood based scaled mixed uses ranging in scale from neighborhood mixed use to inter-neighborhood mixed use businesses (between neighborhoods on inter-neighborhood transportation corridors).

<!-- page 232 -->
## Zoning Districts
The following are the proposed VCC zoning districts. They are based on a planned development application (to allow the necessary design flexibility for pedestrian priority village and hamlet design) and defined by scale and allowable uses. These VCC zoning districts comply with the conservation metrics and development bonus incentives.

* **Conservation Village Housing Community (CVHC)** for medium to larger inner neighborhood residential VCC applications
* **Conservation Village Mixed Use (CVMU)** for medium to larger applications at the edge and between neighborhoods
* **Conservation Hamlet Housing Community (CHHC)** for smaller inner neighborhood VCC applications
* **Conservation Hamlet Mixed Use (CHMU)** for smaller crossroads mixed use VCC hamlet applications

## Zoning Considerations
The following zoning considerations are key to the success of VCC developments

* Pedestrian connectivity/access between the VCC development and the surrounding neighborhood (access to trails and urban gardens)
* Adequate transitional buffers between the development cluster and surrounding existing neighborhoods
* The viability of incorporating pedestrian oriented design such as cottage court, pocket neighborhoods, living and complete streets
* Quality design & management guidelines to ensure that VCC developments will hold their value and increase the long-term value and quality of life of the neighborhood

### *Recommendations for Text Amendments, Site Specific & Zoning Conditions*
The following are the best practices that are key to the success of VCC and can be incorporated through text amendments, zoning condition or site-specific graphic descriptions:

* Inclusion of missing middle/work force housing density with adequate buffer and building type transition between these and any adjacent stable single-family neighborhoods
* Allow accessory dwelling units (ADUs) on small “conservation village lots” based on “yield plan” (underlying zoning lot size)
* Allow accessory commercial units were applicable (see Strong Towns and Portland Examples)
* Resolve and address short term rental (i.e., Air BnB) appropriateness within VCC development - in general these are discouraged unless adjacent to a commercial district.
* Protect preserved area with a conservation easement held by a land trust
* Consolidate car related impact and site infrastructure closer to the entry of the site to reduce fragmentation/ sprawl of the site
* Allow reductions of parking and maximum parking limits with shared parking strategies to balance the car access with pedestrian, bicycle, shuttle, or transit access
* Create intergenerational, youth and aging in place programs and opportunities
* Allow caretaker and urban agriculture-based housing in preserved areas

<!-- page 233 -->
*   Ensure housing access for caretaker housing, urban agriculture housing, missing middle/ work force housing on-site
*   Use home occupation and woodland/urban agriculture-based clubs to increase community vitality in residential districts
*   Develop cluster design building guidelines to ensure the quality and durability of the VCC development
*   Ownership and management guidelines of preserved green space

<<FIGURE>>

MAJORITY SITE
SCRAPED / GRADED

**SUBURBAN SUBDIVISION**
R100 YIELD PLAN

WOODLAND
URBAN FARM
WOODLAND

**CONSERVATION VILLAGE**
**30% DEVELOPED**
**70% PRESERVED**

COMMUNITY HOUSE

**VILLAGE CONSERVATION**
**COMMUNITY** 70% PRESERVE

LOWLAND
WOODLAND - RIPARIAN
STREAM PROTECTION

30% DEV. AREA

COMMUNITY GREEN

UPLAND WOODLAND

URBAN FARM

**CONSERVATION COMMUNITY PLAN**
WOODLAND/STREAM AND AG LAND PROTECTION

SAC
GUEST PKG

VEHICULAR ALLEY ACCESS TO HOMES

PEDESTRIAN SPACES AND CIRCULATION

COMMUNITY BUILDING

**CONSERVATION COMMUNITY PLAN**
VEHICULAR ACCESS, PEDESTRIAN AND COMMUNITY SPACES

# PENDERGRAST FARM - CONSERVATION COMMUNITY

VILLAGE HABITAT DESIGN
8/3/22

<!-- page 234 -->
<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 235 -->
<<FIGURE>>

# PART IV - MAPPING PHASE 1

<!-- page 236 -->
## OVERVIEW

In order to identify potential VCC candidate sites for high priority preservation of remaining key forest and urban ag opportunity areas a land assessment process has been undertaken prioritizing undeveloped parcels with specific qualities and opportunities. As a first step the team researched large undeveloped parcels, identified patterns or trends, and applied the VCC character areas conservation metrics to DeKalb County. This process starts with an overview of the last major natural habitat areas and potential urban ag areas left in DeKalb County and then proceeds to a general map analysis and parcel assessment framework.

## DEKALB COUNTY NATURAL ANCHORS

For natural anchor areas, the two obvious categories would be forestland and pasture or ag land. In the Panola Mountain and Stone Mountain areas, there are areas that have exposed granite outcrops that rise out of forested areas. The area around Mercer University is a big wetland area and mostly forested ( riparian / wetland areas) -Nancy Creek, South River, and the Yellow River form the major Riparian corridors areas and are mostly forested. The areas around Emory and Druid hills have natural forested areas and also and combine as a historic category.

Anchor areas 1-6

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 237 -->
<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 238 -->
# DEKALB COUNTY URBAN AGRICULTURE

Dekalb County was once the largest producer of milk in the south and was home to more dairies than any other county in the state. Today, just a handful of historic farms remain and are at risk of being supplanted by development.

### DEKALB COUNTY HISTORIC DAIRY FARM

<<FIGURE>>

**DeKalb was once the largest dairy producer in the state**

## DEKALB COUNTY HISTORICAL FARM MAP

Historical Farms

<<FIGURE>>
Lyons Farm, Historical Landmark

<<FIGURE>>
Vaughters Farm, Historical Landmark

<<FIGURE>>
Historic Donaldson-Bannister Farm, City Park

<<FIGURE>>

## AS OF 2017 CENSUS OF AGRICULTURE 4% OF LAND IN DEKALB COUNTY REMAINS IN FARMS

*Source:
USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service, 2017 Census of Agriculture. Complete data available at www.nass.usda.gov/AgCensus*

<!-- page 239 -->
**THE STATE OF THE STATES**
Agricultural Land Conversion Highlight Summary

# Georgia

**Farms Under Threat: The State of the States** mapped agricultural land conversion and evaluated state policy responses. The spatial analysis identified the extent, diversity, and quality of each state’s agricultural land—and where this land has been converted to both urban and highly developed (UHD) and low-density residential (LDR) land uses.

### AGRICULTURAL LAND CONVERSION 2001-2016

<<FIGURE>>

**Conversion of non-federal farmland to UHD and LDR land uses from 2001-2016. The threat to working farms and ranches is pervasive, often claiming the most productive, versatile, and resilient lands.**

| | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| ■ Conversion of agricultural land to UHD and LDR land uses | **Farmland\*** that is: <br> Above state median PVR\*\* ■ <br> Below state median PVR ■ | ■ Urban areas <br> □ Federal, forest, and other lands |

**RELATIVE CONVERSION THREAT**
# HIGH
Georgia scored among the top states for the conversion of agricultural land to urban and highly developed (UHD) and low-density residential (LDR) uses.

**RELATIVE POLICY RESPONSE**
# LOW
Georgia scored among the lowest states for policies and programs that protect agricultural land from development, promote farm viability, and facilitate the transfer of agricultural land.

**HOW IS THIS STATE DOING?**

<<FIGURE>>

Georgia is in a red box because its conversion threat is higher than its policy response, relative to other states. Learn more at [www.farmland.org/farmsunderthreat](http://www.farmland.org/farmsunderthreat)

\*Farmland is composed of cropland, pastureland, and woodland associated with farms.

\*\*Our productivity, versatility, and resiliency (PVR) index helps identify high-quality agricultural land (see page 2).

***

<<FIGURE>>

# DEKALB COUNTY
## High Conversion of Ag Land

*Source:*
*Freedgood, J., M. Hunter, J. Dempsey, A. Sorensen. 2020. Farms Under Threat: The State of the States. Washington, DC: American Farmland Trust. © American Farmland Trust 2020*

<!-- page 240 -->
# Ag Map

**COMMUNITY CENTERS, PARKS, PLACES OF WORKSHOP AND LIBRARIES**

### Churches Future Ag Opportunities
* All items

### Libraries
* All items

### Temples, Synagogues & Monasteries
* Kim Cang Monastery
* Wat Lao Buddha Phothisaram Inc
* Congregation Bet Haverim
* Congregation Beth Jacob
* Congregation Or VeShalom
* Spiritual Living Center of Atlanta

### Parks
* All items

Source:
Georgia Arc GIS
https://gagiohome-gagio.hub.arcgis.com/search

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 241 -->
<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 242 -->
# FARM AND CONSERVATION PROJECTS

Village Conservation Communities can be initiated by a developer to construct a conservation focused community or they can be non-profit driven with a mission to preserve the land. DeKalb County features successful examples of both with ample opportunities for more.

<<FIGURE>>

# DEKALB COUNTY
## Existing Conservation and Agriculture Projects

<!-- page 243 -->
### A
### E.M.B.A.R.C. YOUTH FARM
**40 ACRES**

Commissioner Lorraine Cochran-Johnson created E.M.B.A.R.C. Community Youth Farm with the mission to cultivate and nurture a community hub for youth to grow food, engage in entrepreneurship and sustain lasting skills that will enhance their quality of life and the health of DeKalb County.

<<FIGURE>>

### B
### EAST LAKE COMMONS, GAIA GARDENS
**5 ACRE URBAN FARM**
**12 ACRE FOREST PRESERVE**

A farm and village conservation community with a working community farm successfully preserving 60% of land area for woodland forest canopy.

<<FIGURE>>

### C
### LYONS FARM
**HISTORIC FARM**

One of the oldest homesteads in once-rural DeKalb County, the Lyon Farm stands today as a reminder of the area’s history and a glimpse into the agricultural lifestyle that once dominated the county. It also is key to the history of Flat Rock.

### D
### VAUGHTERS FARM
**HISTORIC FARM**

Within Panola Mountain State Park, this preserved landmark is home to the historic Vaughters Dairy Farm.

### E
### DONALDSON BANNISTER FARM
**HISTORIC FARM**

Apart of the Dunwoody Preservation Trust, the historic farm house has been renovated and the surrounding grounds are landscaped and open to the public as a park setting.

<!-- page 244 -->
# MAP ANALYSIS – FRAMEWORK

Utilizing existing data, the team conducted a high level analysis to identify undeveloped greenspace within unincorporated DeKalb County, applied VCC character areas to the County and identified potential focus areas and walkable clusters.
*   Character Areas: identify the green space relationships and general conservation metrics for the development character areas of the county. Character map areas include traditional/transitional, traditional/industrial, suburban, suburban pocket and rural pocket areas.
*   Focus Area: maps within each character area that identify green spaces (corridor and standalone green spaces) and their relationships to community services, schools, youth services and other community amenities.
*   Walkable Clusters: maps within each focus area that define the walkable scaled areas with green spaces and services, schools and amenities. Walkable areas consist of 1/2 mile diameter for functional walking and are typically defined within “super block” areas to ensure no major roads create impasses to ped/bike access. These 1/2 mile diameter walking areas can interconnect along corridors to create longer recreational walking trails and destinations

### Phase 1 Map Analysis Conclusions
In general, much of the County has already experienced growth with few remaining green spaces. Of the remaining green spaces, most is located in southern or eastern DeKalb County and most is zoned at suburban residential densities.

Based on existing zoning, development patterns and the character of the remaining green spaces, the three VCC character areas have been defined geographically. Those areas include Traditional/Transitional, Suburban, and Rural Pocket. An area designated as “Suburban Pocket” has been identified in the southern portion of the Suburban area. No truly rural areas remain within DeKalb County, but there are “pockets” of rural character in the eastern area of the County. Additionally, there are several existing industrial areas within the County that will need to be considered when identifying potential candidate sites.

There are few and scattered green space opportunities within the Traditional and Suburban character areas, therefore infill development and redevelopment should consider the VCC approach in these areas. There are many greenspace opportunities within the Suburban Pocket and Rural Pocket characters areas, providing a potentially unique opportunity for DeKalb County in these areas. In each character area, there are several potential focus areas and walkable clusters to be considered during the next phase of analysis.

<!-- page 245 -->
<<FIGURE>>

This map shows parcels sized 5 acres and above in unincorporated DeKalb County. The larger parcels and areas of more contiguous parcels are found mostly in the southwestern and eastern portions of the County.

<!-- page 246 -->
<<FIGURE>>

This map, based on the Atlanta Regional Commission’s LandPro data, shows possible, non-parcel specific undeveloped areas within DeKalb County. Larger areas of possible undeveloped land are located mostly in southern and eastern County.

<!-- page 247 -->
<<FIGURE>>

Combining the parcels 5 acres and above with possible undeveloped areas, this map shows potentially larger and undeveloped parcels within DeKalb County.

<!-- page 248 -->
<<FIGURE>>

After removing parcels 5 acres and above that are likely developed, this map shows only those larger parcels that may be undeveloped. Some public lands, public right-of-way, preserved areas, or landfills may still be included in this subset of parcels. Similar to the pattern seen in previous maps, larger undeveloped parcels and areas of contiguous parcels are found mostly in southwestern, southern, and eastern DeKalb County.

<!-- page 249 -->
<<FIGURE>>

Based on existing zoning, existing development patterns, the character of the remaining undeveloped greenspace, the three VCC character areas of Traditional, Suburban, and Rural Pocket have been applied to DeKalb County in this map. It should be noted that a subset of Suburban called "Suburban Pocket" has been identified as well in southern DeKalb. The amount and character of undeveloped greenspace in each character area is different and presents unique opportunities or challenges.

<!-- page 250 -->
<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

The Traditional/Transitional character area is located mostly inside I-285 and adjacent to the cities of Atlanta, Decatur, and Avondale Estates. The existing development in this area consists of mostly older, intown neighborhoods with more connectivity than the Suburban or Rural Pocket areas. A large majority of the area is zoned R-75 or higher. There are many major roadways and interstates, as well as existing transit service including rail and bus. The area includes some of the major employment areas as well as aging retail corridors. The Traditional character area is currently experiencing infill and redevelopment activity.

The Traditional/Transitional character area is located mostly inside I-285 and adjacent to the cities of Atlanta, Decatur, and Avondale Estates. The existing development in this area consists of mostly older, intown neighborhoods with more connectivity than the Suburban or Rural Pocket areas. A large majority of the area is zoned R-75 or higher. There are many major roadways and interstates, as well as existing transit service including rail and bus. The area includes some of the major employment areas as well as aging retail corridors. The Traditional character area is currently experiencing infill and redevelopment activity.

<!-- page 251 -->
<<FIGURE>>

Within each of the focus areas, there are several potential walkable clusters, indicated on the map above by the small red circles which are roughly ½ mile in diameter. Additionally, some of these focus areas and walkable clusters include or are adjacent to schools, community centers and other public facilities.

<!-- page 252 -->
<<FIGURE>>

The Suburban character area is located mostly outside I-285 and adjacent to the cities of Brookhaven, Chamblee, Clarkston, Doraville, Stone Mountain, and Tucker. The existing development in this area consists mostly of conventional single-family neighborhoods, retail centers and nodes, and aging retail corridors. The Suburban character area includes much of the residential areas within unincorporated DeKalb County. The majority of the area is zoned for larger lot residential. There are many major roadways and interstates in the western portion of this area. The area is experiencing limited infill and redevelopment, apart from areas adjacent to I-85 and I-285.

<<FIGURE>>

The Suburban character area has limited remaining undeveloped greenspace and limited areas of contiguous undeveloped greenspace. There are at least three areas that include multiple undeveloped parcels within close proximity. These are centered around Covington Highway, west of I-285, Redan, and an area southeast of Stone Mountain Park.

<!-- page 253 -->
<<FIGURE>>

Within the three Focus Areas, there are a few potential walkable clusters, indicated on the map above by the small red circles which are roughly 1/2 mile in diameter. Additionally, some of these focus areas and walkable clusters include or are adjacent to schools, community centers and other public facilities.

<!-- page 254 -->
<<FIGURE>>

The Suburban Pocket character area is located in southwestern DeKalb, mostly outside of I-285 with the City of Stonecrest to the east. The existing development in this area consists mostly of conventional single-family neighborhoods as well as retail centers and nodes. There is also a large industrial area in the western edge of this character area. The majority of the area is zoned for larger lot residential. There are few major roadways and interstates in the western portion of this area. The area is experiencing limited residential infill, mostly near the interstates.

<<FIGURE>>

The Suburban Pocket character area has more undeveloped greenspace than the Suburban character area, including some areas that are contiguous. There are at least four Focus Areas with undeveloped parcels in close proximity. These are mostly centered around the South River and its tributaries.

<!-- page 255 -->
<<FIGURE>>

Within the four Focus Areas, there are many potential walkable clusters, indicated on the map above by the small red circles which are roughly ½ mile in diameter. Additionally, some of these focus areas and walkable clusters include or are adjacent to schools, community centers and other public facilities.

<!-- page 256 -->
<<FIGURE>>

The Rural Pocket character area is located in the eastern edge of DeKalb County, north and east of the cities of Lithonia and Stonecrest. The existing development in this area includes low density residential, quarries, and a landfill, in addition to large undeveloped and forested areas. The majority of the area is zoned large lot residential with some industrially zoned locations. The area has experienced limited residential development as well as some industrial development closer to I-20 to the south.

<<FIGURE>>

The Rural Pocket character area includes the largest collection of undeveloped greenspace in unincorporated DeKalb, including many that are contiguous to one another. There are at least seven Focus Areas with many undeveloped parcels in close proximity. These are located in an area between I-20 to the south and the Gwinnett County line to the northeast.

<!-- page 257 -->
<<FIGURE>>

Within the seven Focus Areas, there are many potential walkable clusters, indicated on the map above by the small red circles which are roughly ½ mile in diameter. These focus areas and walkable clusters include few schools, community centers and other public facilities.

<!-- page 258 -->
<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 259 -->
<<FIGURE>>

# PART V -
## POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

<!-- page 260 -->
# Dekalb County Unified Plan policy recommendations

Several policy considerations have been identified during Phase I land use and mapping analysis. Additionally policy recommendations will be identified during subsequent phases of this study. Policy considerations at this stage include revisions or additions to the Comprehensive Plan, which is currently being updated as part of the DeKalb 2050 Unified Plan. These are listed below:

Community Goals (organized by issue area):
*Land Use*
* Diverse Housing and Development - Encourage more diverse housing and development types to meet the changing needs of residents and communities.

*Natural Resources and Sustainability*
* Sustainable Zoning - Implement zoning tools that preserve open space, natural resources and the environment.
* Sustainable and Conservation Development – Promote development that incorporates sustainable practices and conserves critical environmental areas.
* Private Partnerships - Partner with nongovernmental organizations to acquire and protect land.

*Community Health, Wellness and Safety*
* Food Access - Work with public, private and non-profit partners to address challenges related to access to healthy foods within some areas of DeKalb.
* Quality of Life - Improve quality of life by increasing the amount of sidewalks and trails that connect homes to regional trail networks, nearby businesses, schools, parks and other community services and amenities.
* Active Living - Create communities designed to encourage active living and healthy lifestyles.

*Transportation*
* Enable Healthy Communities and Improve Quality of Life - Leverage transportation infrastructure to encourage an active lifestyle and overall improved quality of life.

*Arts, Culture, and Historic*
* Preservation - Encourage the preservation and adaptive reuse of rural and historic structures or sites to promote a sense of place related to the heritage and rural character of communities.

<!-- page 261 -->
Several new policy spotlights have been created to highlight key priority policy areas within DeKalb. These include Economic Development, Retail, Housing, Sustainability and others that are relevant to VCC and conservation.

Additionally, some recommendations and initial zoning revision opportunities have been identified that include:
* Creation of a Countywide Trails Master Plan. The County is currently lacking a trails master plan and VCC analysis and locations could inform potential trail locations or destinations.
* The Future Land Use Map (FLUM)includes “Rural Residential” but there are little to no areas with that designation. The FLUM could include a “Rural Pocket” or “Rural Protection” area that encourages VCC and other conservation initiatives.
* There are few locations with zoning considered rural or conservation. Additional locations should be considered for these zoning categories.
* Rural or conservation zoning districts may need to be revised to truly represent and encourage rural development. For example, Residential Estate suggests 1 dwelling unit per acre which is denser than what most would consider rural. Typically, estate or rural zoning has a maximum density of 5 dwelling units per acre.

<!-- page 262 -->
<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 263 -->
<<FIGURE>>

# PART VI - IMPLEMENTATION

<!-- page 264 -->
The approach to implementing a strategic Village Conservation Community Plan for DeKalb County after the initial assessment is complete is to develop key partnerships with land owners, educational entities to emphasize the importance of the VCC, land trusts to help secure lands initially and VCC development partners both for the conservation villages and hamlet as well as the preserved areas.

These Partnerships can enhance the VCC outcome to increase conservation metrics , social equity and urban agriculture, economic resilience and many more community benefits. A rising movement is taking place in DeKalb County, Georgia. Momentum, funding, and inspired initiatives have sprung into action to address preservation, activation, access and education; with the goal of lasting positive change in the lives and landscapes of DeKalb county and beyond.

Previously dispersed efforts in the realms of education, land conservation, sustainability, equitable access to nature and healthy food, and ecological and edible landscapes have joined in collaborative partnership to support stewardship of the land and activate healthy communities. Through collaborative partnerships, the magnitude of impact is amplified. DeKalb is a potent local example of a much needed movement in counties across the nation.

<u>Conservation Partnerships</u>
Conservation partnerships can create an opportunity to exceed the minimum preservation required by the VCC metrics and facilitate restoration and education programs.
*   County Land Trust/Land Bank: to hold properties for a longer time; making sure it is adequately structured to hold many of the conservation parcels while waiting to activate connectivity and community development to the parcel
*   Non Profit Land trusts: Trust for Public Land, Conservation Fund, Southern Conservancy Trust,

<u>Social equity partnerships</u>
Working with nonprofit organizations with social equity missions to reinforce the VCC project in underserved neighborhoods.
*   Affordable housing: ANDP, Mercy Housing, churches with church land, etc.

<u>Urban Agricultural Partnerships</u>
Working with urban agricultural nonprofit organizations will increase food access. Urban gardens and farms become "anchors" for neighborhoods to increase health, economic resilience and community identity.
*   Food Well Alliance

<!-- page 265 -->
**EDUCATION AND MARKETING OUTREACH**

**<u>Groups</u>**
*   Education for elected officials
*   Education for staff
*   Education for general community buy-in
*   Education for community buy-in at the scale of land-based community to identify support groups at smaller focus areas scale (business/churches/schools scale area) – who are players: YMCA, Boys and Girls Clubs, etc.. business dev partners, etc.

**<u>Programs</u>**
*   Forest Restoration
*   Stream Restoration
*   Urban Ag Programs
*   Maker Programs
*   Health & Wellness Programs
*\*see Sherrydale CC programs*

**<u>Specific partners include:</u>**

**<u>Micro Life Institute</u>**
Promoting micro living through education, advocacy, research & demonstrations
https://www.microlifeinstitute.org

**<u>Georgia Organics</u>**
Our mission is to invest in organic farmers for the health of our communities and the land. We believe that farmers have the power to nurture and heal the land, people, and communities.
https://www.georgiaorganics.org

**<u>Roots Down</u>**
Building Productive Urban Landscapes is the foundation of our work. Our mission is for every person in the US to be within a 5-minute walk from fresh, nutritious food. We believe that virtually all urban spaces can be redesigned to incorporate edible landscaping and pollinator habitats. https://www.rootsdownga.com/about

**<u>Food Well Alliance</u>**
Food Well Alliance is a collaborative network of local leaders working together to build thriving community gardens and urban farms. Our mission is to provide resources and support to local growers to connect and build healthier communities. Our vision is for an equitable, local food ecosystem in which everyone can participate and benefit. We believe that community-driven agriculture is at the core of a strong urban food system and brings value to cities in metro Atlanta.
https://www.foodwellalliance.org/about-food-well-alliance

<!-- page 266 -->
### Children & Nature Network
The mission is to increase equitable access to nature so that children–and the natural world–can thrive. To increase equitable access to nature, we need to influence the big systems that impact children’s lives: city policies and programs; schools and early childhood programs; family access to safe, nearby green spaces and outdoor experiences; and youth development programs to inspire a new generation of diverse, nature-smart leaders. https://www.childrenandnature.org/about/

### West Atlanta Watershed Alliance
As an all-volunteer organization, WAWA has successfully preserved over 400 acres of green space from development in Southwest Atlanta. Through an MOU with the City of Atlanta Bureau of Parks, Recreation, and Cultural Affairs, WAWA now operates the Outdoor Activity Center (OAC), a 26-acre urban forest preserve and nature center. WAWA is also the steward of the nearby 135-acre Cascade Springs Nature Preserve and the 200-acre Lionel Hampton Beecher Park; all in Southwest Atlanta. https://www.wawa-online.org/

### Farmer D Consulting
Farmer D Consulting works alongside Village Habitat Design on land planning and community planning, prioritizing conservation and connectivity to agriculture and nature. Farmer D Consulting brings expertise in agriculture, design, land planning and activation to the mission of creating thriving communities, where farming, conservation and development bring food, nature and people together to create a healthier, more connected world. https://farmerd.com/#/

### Citizen Farmers
Citizen Farmers is a movement that inspires, educates and empowers people to grow healthy food, build thriving communities and give back to the Earth. Citizen farmers organization is growing a worldwide coalition of citizen farmers who are on a mission to grow healthy food, build thriving communities and give back to the earth. https://citizenfarmers.org/

### Citizen Farmer’s Academy
launched a successful youth education initiative including a local pilot after school program. The program is designed to teach youth all the aspects of farming through a unique experience of starting their own farm enterprise. By following the Citizen Farmers framework they experience the whole growing cycle of a season, reap the fruits of their labor, share the harvest with their families and community and learn valuable life lessons both practical and personal. Participants will develop a deeper understanding and appreciation for how soil, farming and food affect their own personal health as well as the health of the planet. https://citizenfarmers.org/academy

<!-- page 267 -->
page left blank, intentionally

<!-- page 268 -->
# Appendix

### DEFINITIONS

*As used in this Specific Plan the following terms shall have the following meanings:*

**Agricultural Tourism:** An accessory agricultural use, designed to attract visitors for the purpose of enjoyment, education, and/or active involvement in the activities or products of the farm or agricultural operation.

**Apiary:** A place where bees are kept; a collection of beehives.

**Aquaponics:** Any system that combines conventional aquaculture (raising aquatic animals such as snails, fish and shell fish) with hydroponics (cultivating plants in water without water) in a symbiotic environment.

**Bed and Breakfast:** See Inn.

**Bakery:** A place where bread, cakes, and other pastries are made and/or sold.
Biodynamics. A holistic, ecological, and ethical approach to farming, gardening, food, and nutrition.

**Brewery:** A place where beer is made for commercial sale.

**Micro-Brewery:** A brewery where beer production does not exceed 8,000 beer barrels or 248,000 gallons annually and a minimum of 25% of the total ingredient used in brewing are grown within San Diego County. Micro-breweries shall possess a current Type 23 Small Beer Manufacturing license issued by the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control.

**Café:** A small restaurant, less than 5,000 sq.ft. in size, that sells light meals and drinks

**Coffee House:** An establishment that sells primarily coffee but may also include ancillary sales of light meals and other drinks.

**Cottage Industry:** A home-based occupation or service carried on by a resident within the principle dwelling in return for compensation, provided such use, occupation or service is incidental and secondary to the principal use of the dwelling as a residence and is conducted in a manner not to give an outward appearance or manifest any characteristics of a business.

**Corner Market:** See small market.

**Cohousing:** A form of housing where a collection of private homes are clustered around a shared space such as a common kitchen, dining, or recreational space and where resources are shared amongst community members. Shared resources often include things like tools, toys, and more. Community members participate in shared activities such such as meals, maintenance, child care, and more to support the community. Sharing resources allow for a more sustainable lifestyle, greater affordability, and a community-centered lifestyle.

**Community Garden:** A single piece of land containing individual plots that are leased to households within the community. Residents are responsible for the care and maintenance of their plot and may choose from an approved list of the plants to grow. The garden can also be managed by a professional farm/garden manager to ensure compliance with the established rules and regulations regarding the types of plants permitted and maintenance requirements to ensure the garden remains attractive, healthy, and free of pests and disease.

Members of the community may participate in the planting and harvesting of crops under the direction of farm staff. Produce may be sold and/or donated through farm stands, a Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) Program; supply local school food programs and other non-profit organizations; or sold to local restaurants, grocers, specialty markets, or farmers markets.

**Craft Industry:** The creation of goods handmade by artisans or those skilled in a particular trade, which are operated independently and are not franchised. Materials and supplies are typically sourced locally or on-site to the greatest extent feasible. Craft industries can include food and non-food items such as jewelry, apparel, pottery, baskets, and similar goods.

**Creamery:** An establishment that manufactures milk or any product of milk.

**Distillery:** A place where alcohol (distilled spirit) is made by distillation from wine or other fermented fruit juice or plant juice or from a starchy material (as various grains) that has first been brewed.

**Distillation:** The process of separating the component or substances from a liquid mixture by selective evaporation and condensation, resulting in essentially complete separation (nearly pure components) or partial separation to increases the concentration of selected components of the mixture.

<!-- page 269 -->
**Micro-Distillery:** A distillery where distilled spirit production does not exceed 248,000 gallons annually and a minimum of 25% of the total ingredient used in the distillation process are grown within San Diego County. Micro-Distilleries shall have either a current Type 04 Distilled Spirits Manufacturer or Type 74 Craft Distiller's license issue by the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control.

**Delicatessen:** A store selling cold cuts, cheeses, and variety of salads and other prepared foods.

**Extended Stay Hotel:** See Hotel, Extended Stay.

**Farm:** A plot of land where food is grown for the consumption of an entire community and/or for commercial sale.

**Farm Incubator:** A program that involves leasing out sections of farmland to individuals who will participate in a collective, hands-on education about farming and associated business practices to prepare them in establishing and operating their own farm.

**Farm to Fork:** a direct relationship between the farm and consumer where foods is grown and consumed within a local context.

**Farm Stay:** Overnight accommodations for 20 or fewer guests on a working farm. Accommodations may be provided in a farmhouse; Converted farm buildings; tents, yurts, or similar structures; or campsites. Meals may be provided depending on how the farm is operated. Participation in chores may or may not be required but participation in the farm by guests is encouraged. Farms may offer classes in cheese making, spinning, gardening, cooking, animal keeping and more.

**Garden:** A plot of land where food is grown for personal consumption.

**Guest Room:** A room without cooking facilities rented to transient visitors for a period not to exceed 30 days.

**Greenhouse:** A structure with walls and roof made primarily of transparent materials, such as glass, in which plants requiring regulated climatic conditions are grown.

**Grocery:** A retail store that sells primarily food but may also sell other household items such as cleaning supplies, personal care items, and more.

**Habitable Story:** The portion of a building included between the upper surface of a floor and the upper surface of the floor or roof next above. It is measured as the vertical distance from top to top of two successive tiers of beams or finished floor surfaces and, for the topmost story, from the top of the floor finish to the top of the ceiling joists, or where there is not a ceiling, to the top of the roof rafters. Further, the space is designed for human occupancy and the space is equipped with means of egress and light and ventilation facilities.

**Horticulture:** A branch of agriculture that deals with the art, science, technology, and business of growing plants. It includes the cultivation of medicinal plants, fruits, vegetables, nuts, seeds, herbs, sprouts, mushrooms, algae, flowers, seaweeds and non-food crops such as grass and ornamental trees and plants.

**Hotel:** A facility with more than 20 guest rooms or guest suites within a conventional hotel building(s) or in detached units, which provides lodging and meals for temporary overnight occupants, in return for compensation. Such facility may provide additional commercial uses such as spas, a professional culinary academy, conference rooms and banquet-halls in conjunction with the facility. Cooking provisions, such as a stove, oven or grill, are prohibited in guest rooms, guest suites, adjoining patios, balconies and decks.

**Hotel, Extended Stay:** A facility with more than 20 guest rooms or guest suites within a conventional hotel building(s) or in detached units, which provides lodging for temporary overnight occupants, in return for compensation. Cooking provisions, such as a stove, oven or grill, are provided in some or all guest rooms and guest suites.

**Hydroponics:** A method of growing plants using mineral nutrient solutions, in water, without soil. Hydroponics is typically done indoors or in Greenhouses.

**Inn:** A dwelling unit or other facility with 20 or fewer guest rooms, which provides lodging and breakfast for temporary overnight occupants in return for compensation. Cooking provisions, such as a stove, oven or grill, are prohibited in the guest rooms, adjoining patios, balconies, and decks. May also be called a Bed and Breakfast.

**Incidental Commercial Use:** A commercial use that is directly related and secondary to the principal agricultural use located on the same parcel or project site.

**Net Area:** The portion of a site that can be built upon. The following are not included in the net area: public road rights-of-way, riparian areas, slopes greater than 3:1, conservation easements, waterways, bodies of water and flood ways.

**Non-profit Office Incubator:** A program that involves leasing out small office spaces with shared common facilities such as meeting rooms, office equipment, and more to provide small non-profits with affordable work space to start and grow non-profit ventures related to farming, food, nutrition, health, social justice, education, and sustainability.

<!-- page 270 -->
<<FIGURE>>

# Growing Communities

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 271 -->
(blank page)

<!-- page 272 -->
(blank page)

<!-- page 273 -->
# APPENDIX C

# PRESIDENTIAL PARKWAY REGIONAL CENTER SUPPLEMENTAL LAND USE AND ZONING RECOMMENDATIONS

<!-- page 274 -->
# Presidential Parkway Regional Center
## Supplemental Land Use Recommendations
### 2050 Unified Plan

<<FIGURE>>

### Future Land Use Category

| | |
| :--- | :--- |
| <<FIGURE>> | **Center Core** |
| <<FIGURE>> | **Outer Core** |
| <<FIGURE>> | **Institutional** |
| <<FIGURE>> | **Edge 1 (Bordering Residential)** |
| <<FIGURE>> | **Edge 2 (Residential)** |

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

**Map Prepared by:**
**Long Range Planning**
**DeKalb County Planning & Sustainability Department**

<!-- page 275 -->
# Presidential Parkway Regional Center
## Supplemental Land Use and Zoning Recommendations
### 2050 Unified Plan

# Land Use and Re-Zoning Guidance

The *Presidential Parkway Regional Center* is new to the *2050 Unified Plan*. This means that once the 2050 Plan is adopted, then DeKalb will complete a Small Area Plan (SAP) for the area. As this SAP will take more time to complete, some future land use planning framework is needed in the meantime to help set development expectations in that area. This document is intended offer that interim guidance.

### Area A - Center Core
**Uses:** This is the central portion of the Regional Center and should become a mix of high intensity office, medical services, multi-family residential and retail uses. In a broad sense it should become a walkable employment center served by transit. Retail should be incorporated within mixed use buildings and developments. Single-use, stand-alone retail is discouraged. In addition, the area is suitable for research and development facilities and high-density senior facilities.

**Density:** No density limits in this area. This is consistent with the Regional Center character area of the comprehensive plan. High density senior buildings should be near medical offices and shopping districts. Senior residential towers are best suited in areas where they do not dominate the views of single-family homes or create proportions that are out of scale with adjacent single- family homes.

**Building Height:** New buildings within the Center Core should be a minimum of 8 stories tall. Taller buildings are permitted if useful open space is provided and if buffers are provided to avoid overshadowing adjacent single-family homes.

### Area B – Outer Core
**Uses:** This area should be a mix of lower- intensity office space, retail, and multi-family residential. Uses in these space should be flexible to meet the regional center’s needs, but generally taper off in intensity as you get further from the Center Core and closer to residential neighborhoods.

**Density:** A density up to 30 units per acre is allowed here, in line with *Commercial Redevelopment Corridor* character area in the 2050 Unified Plan.

**Building Height:** The permitted height of new buildings within the Outer Core is up to 8 stories tall.

### Area C - Institutional
**Uses:** This area encompasses the current Mercer University Campus. Development in this area will largely be left up to the discretion of the school.

**Density:** No density limit, as we need to allow the school flexibility to meet its own student housing needs.

<!-- page 276 -->
# Presidential Parkway Regional Center
## Supplemental Land Use and Zoning Recommendations
### 2050 Unified Plan

**Area C - Institutional**

**Uses:** This area encompasses the current Mercer University Campus. Development in this area will largely be left up to the discretion of the school.

**Density:** No density limit, as we need to allow the school flexibility to meet its own student housing needs.

**Building Height:** A maximum height of 8 stories should allow the institution to meet its needs without overshadowing adjacent neighborhoods. Parking decks should be largely hidden from the surrounding neighborhoods. Limited buffers may be required when single family homes are adjacent to new medium density development.

**Area D – Edge1 (Bordering Residential)**

**Uses:** Parcels in this area border existing single-family parcels, and as such should be used for smaller multi-family residential developments. Some lower-intensity commercial or mixed-use may be permitted if the uses do not disturb adjacent homes.

**Density:** A maximum density of 24 dwelling units per acre is preferred, as it should provide a transition zone into the existing residential area.

**Building Height:** A maximum of 4-stories is the preferred height.

**Area E – Edge 2 (Residential)**

**Uses:** These are existing multi-family residential parcels that should be continued to be used as such.

**Density:** A maximum density of 12 dwelling units per acre are preferred.

**Building Height:** A maximum of 3-stories is the preferred height of buildings in this area.

| Sub-Area Districts | Primary Land Use | Density (du/ac) | Stories (max) |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **A. Center** | Office<br>Mixed Use | n/a | n/a |
| **B. Outer Core** | Office<br>Industrial<br>Mixed Use | 30 | 8 Stories |
| **C. Institutional** | Higher Education | n/a | 8 Stories |
| **D. Edge 1** | Multi-family<br>Mixed Use | 24 | 4 Stories |
| **E. Edge 2** | Multi-family | 12 | 3 stories |

<!-- page 277 -->
(blank page)

<!-- page 278 -->
THIS PAGE LEFT 
INTENTIONALLY BLANK

<!-- page 279 -->
# APPENDIX D
## INTOWN SUBURBAN

<!-- page 280 -->
# Appendix D

## Proposed Future Land Use Character Area: Intown Suburban

During the DeKalb 2050 Unified Plan process, a new potential character area was considered, but not included on the final Future Land Use Map. Further exploration of this potential character area has been included within the Community Work Program. Below is policy guidance for consideration if and when this potential character area is revisited.

### Identifying Features

* Traditional Single Family Homes
* Apartments
* Assisted Living
* Neighborhood Retail
* Schools
* Institutional

### Description

The intent of the Intown Suburban Character Area is to preserve existing, stable neighborhoods, while allowing and encouraging additional, appropriate infill and housing diversity. These areas primarily consist of residential areas in older parts of the community that were typically developed from the 1950s to the 1970s. Intown Suburban areas have been developed with elements of both the Traditional Neighborhood and Suburban character areas. This area includes smaller lot sizes and more connectivity than Suburban areas. The proposed density for areas of this type is up to 8 dwelling units per acre, with potential to increase to 12 if qualifying conditions are met.

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

### Additional Density

Additional Density up to a total of 12 units per acre may be allowed if certain qualifying conditions are met, which can include:

| Location | Development Conditions |
| :--- | :--- |
| * Along major corridors or arterials | * Connectivity to Existing or planned trails and sidewalk networks |
| * Within 1/4 mile of an existing transit station or served directly by transit | * Potential inclusion of workforce housing as identified in county housing studies |
| * Located near existing sidewalk network or trail facilities | * Improved transit amenities in coordination with transit |

<!-- page 281 -->
# ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

### DeKalb County Elected Leadership
Michael Thurmond, CEO
Robert Patrick, District 1 Commissioner
Jeff Rader, District 2 Commissioner
Larry Johnson, District 3 Commissioner
Steve Bradshaw, District 4 Commissioner
Mereda Davis Johnson, District 5 Commissioner
Edward “Ted” Terry, Super District 6 Commissioner
Lorraine Cochran-Johnson, Super District 7 Commissioner

### Project Management Team
DeKalb County Department of Planning and Sustainability
DeKalb County Department of Public Works, Transportation Division
Atlanta Regional Commission

### Transportation and Land Use Stakeholder Committee/Partners
City of Atlanta; City of Avondale Estates; City of Brookhaven; City of Chamblee; City of Clarkston; City of Decatur; City of Doraville; City of Dunwoody; City of Lithonia; City of Pine Lake; City of Stone Mountain; City of Stonecrest; City of Tucker; Decide DeKalb; DeKalb Chamber of Commerce; DeKalb Chief Operating Officer’s Office; DeKalb County Department of Community Development; DeKalb County Department of Parks, Recreation, and Cultural Affairs; DeKalb County Department of Roads and Drainage; DeKalb County Department of Watershed Management; DeKalb County Department of Finance; DeKalb County Department of Geographic Information System; DeKalb Peachtree Airport; DeKalb County School District; Chamblee-Doraville Community Improvement District; East Metro Community Improvement District; Metro South Community Improvement District; Perimeter Community Improvement Districts; Tucker Northlake Community Improvement District; Tucker Summit Community Improvement District; Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT); Atlanta-Region Transit Link Authority (ATL); Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA)

### Consultant Team
Kimley-Horn
The Collaborative Firm (TCF)
Vanasse Hangen Brustlin (VHB)
RDG Planning & Design
Perez Planning + Design (PP+D)
Sycamore Consulting
Center for Pan Asian Community Services (CPACS)

---

## Circulation — 2050 Comprehensive Transportation Plan

- Source: https://dekalbcountyga.gov/sites/default/files/2025-12/2022_1115_DeKalb%202050%20Comprehensive%20Transportation%20Plan.pdf
- Pages: 210
- Covers: circulation

<!-- page 1 -->
DEKALB 2050 UNIFIED PLAN

# COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

<<FIGURE>>

NOVEMBER 2022

<!-- page 2 -->
(blank page)

<!-- page 3 -->
<<FIGURE>>

| Chief Executive Officer | **DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & SUSTAINABILITY** | Director |
| :--- | :---: | :--- |
| Michael Thurmond | | Andrew A. Baker, AICP |

November 14, 2022

To Members of the DeKalb County Community:

Often as planners, we ask ourselves the question: *does transportation investment pave the way for new growth and development, or does new development spur the need for additional transportation infrastructure?* While the connection between land use and transportation is often apparent; in reality, the answer to the question above is that both can come first or second. However, as planners, we must be open to a "balanced" approach. This document seeks to identify the land use growth pattern and align timely transportation improvements along with the identified growth pattern.

Recently, DeKalb County—in partnership with the Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC)—saw an opportunity to better coordinate and align its comprehensive transportation plan (CTP) with its comprehensive land use plan to create a more holistic and coordinated plan for the County’s future. I am excited to present to you the **DeKalb County 2050 Unified Plan**, which includes three documents:
* The Unified Plan Executive Summary
* The Comprehensive Land Use Plan
* The Comprehensive Transportation Plan

The ***comprehensive land use plan*** includes the traditional elements such as a revised future land use map with refined character areas (particularly activity centers and residential areas) as well as a Community Work Program. Other policy elements in the plan include:
(1) recommendations on housing and economic development, and
(2) guidance on sustainability, retail, broadband, transit-oriented development, health and wellness, and arts and culture.

The ***transportation element*** of the plan includes the traditional components of ARC’s CTP program including a funding and financial strategy for transportation investments. Also included are the following key elements:
(1) a financially feasible list of roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian projects for the first ten years of the plan,
(2) policy recommendations that supplement projects, and
(3) a short-range action plan to assist the County with moving forward to implementation.

Please note that while this plan discusses transportation, it does not go into detail on the preferred alignment and form of “transit”. At this time, there are several unknowns that need to be discussed and consensus built before the future of transit (light/heavy) can be adopted. Therefore, this document references the County’s Transit Master Plan, which serves as the guide for specific recommendations and open policy questions related to future funding, projects, and timing.

All effective planning processes must include a ***robust stakeholder and community engagement effort***. This is particularly true for a countywide effort that looks 30 years into the future. Our goal has been to provide a variety of opportunities for engagement:
(1) virtual public meetings throughout the pandemic,
(2) participation at County outdoor festivals or park events to safely meet people where they are,
(3) focus groups with a variety of stakeholders, and gatherings with the County’s diverse, multicultural, and English-learning communities.

In total, more than 80 meetings occurred from the start of the plan in Spring 2021 through its conclusion at the end of 2022. We appreciate the time invested by members of the community and our governing bodies to provide guidance and direction to the planning team. We look forward to the coming years and advancing the recommendations contained within the plan toward implementation.

Sincerely,

<<FIGURE>>

Andrew Baker, AICP
Director – DeKalb County Planning & Sustainability

<!-- page 4 -->
<<FIGURE>>

# DEKALB
## 2050 UNIFIED PLAN

<!-- page 5 -->
# TABLE OF CONTENTS

**CHAPTER 01** Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1

**CHAPTER 02** Priorities and Engagement........................................................................................ 7

**CHAPTER 03** Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Summary...................................15

**CHAPTER 04** Project Development and Evaluation ................................................................. 21

**CHAPTER 05** Transportation Funding and Financial Framework.......................................... 25

**CHAPTER 06** Surface Transportation Policy Recommendations...........................................31

**CHAPTER 07** Transit Recommendations........................................................................................ 61

**CHAPTER 08** Priority Projects for Unincorporated DeKalb County......................................... 71

**CHAPTER 09** Priority Projects for DeKalb Cities ......................................................................... 91

**CHAPTER 10** Five-Year Action Plan and Performance Monitoring......................................131

<!-- page 6 -->
# ACRONYM LIST

* American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO)
* Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT)
* Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC)
* Atlanta Transit Link Authority (ATL)
* ATL's Regional Transit Plan (ARTP)
* Arterial Rapid Transit (ART)
* Asset Management System (AMS)
* Automated Traffic Signal Performance Measures (ATSPM)
* Automated Vehicles (AV)
* Better Utilizing Investments to Leverage Development (BUILD) Grant
* Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL)
* Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC)
* Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)
* Capital Improvement Grants (CIGs)
* Central Atlanta Progress (CAP)
* Closed-Circuit Television (CCTV)
* Committee of the Whole (COW)
* Community Improvement District (CID)
* Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP)
* Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP)
* Connected Vehicle (CV)
* CSX Transportation (CSXT)
* DeKalb County Transit Master Plan (DTMP)
* DeKalb-Peachtree Airport (PDK)
* Electric Vehicle (EV)
* Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Report (ECNA)
* Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
* Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA)
* Federal Railroad Administration's (FRA)
* Federal Transit Administration (FTA)
* Flashing-Yellow Arrow (FYA)
* Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT)
* Georgia Commute Options (GCO)
* Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT)
* Geographic Information System (GIS)
* Heavy Rail Transit (HRT)
* Infrastructure For Rebuilding America (INFRA) Grant
* Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA)
* Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE)
* Intelligent Transportation System (ITS)
* Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE)
* Light Rail Transit (LRT)
* Lithonia Industrial Boulevard (LIB)
* Livable Centers Initiative (LCI)
* Local Maintenance Improvement Grants (LMIG)
* Metro South Community Improvement District (MSCID)
* Mid-America Freight Coalition (MAFC)
* National Complete Streets Coalition (NCSC)
* National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Formula Program (NEVI)
* National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)
* Norfolk Southern (NS)
* Notice of Funding Opportunities (NOFOs)
* Perimeter CIDs (PCIDs)
* Planning, Economic Development, and Community Services (PECS) Committee
* Public Works and Infrastructure (PWI)
* Regional Transportation Plan (RTP)
* Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity (RAISE)
* Roadside Units (RSUs)
* Safe Routes to School (SRTS)
* Safety, Mobility, Automated, Real-time Traffic Management (SMART)
* Signal Operations Program (SigOps)
* Special Purpose Local Option Sales Tax (SPLOST)
* Statewide Transportation Improvement Plan (STIP)
* State Road and Tollway Authority (SRTA)
* Tax Allocation Districts (TAD)
* Traffic Control Center (TCC)
* Transportation Demand Management (TDM)
* Traffic Responsive (TR)
* Transit Investment Corridors (TIC)
* Transit Oriented Development (TOD)
* Transit Signal Priority (TSP)
* Transportation Improvement Program (TIP)
* Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) Grant
* Transportation Management Associations (TMA)
* Transportation System Management and Operations (TSMO)
* Travel Demand Model (TDM)
* Truck Parking Information Management Systems (TPIMS)
* Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)

<!-- page 7 -->
# CHAPTER 01
## INTRODUCTION

<!-- page 8 -->
# CHAPTER 01: INTRODUCTION

<<FIGURE>>

The DeKalb 2050 Unified Plan combines two of the County’s long-range strategic documents into one:

* An update to the County’s 2014 Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP) that identifies priority transportation projects and policy recommendations

* A Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP) that establishes the framework for future growth and development

The DeKalb County CTP analyzes transportation priorities and needs to help facilitate County growth over the next 30 years, identifies key transportation projects in the short-term and long-term, and recommends key transportation policies that can be created to facilitate implementation. In combination with the CLUP, the CTP will help establish the framework for smart growth strategies in DeKalb County across many different contexts. As shown below, the CTP includes many types of roadway, bicycle/pedestrian, and transit elements as well as freight movements, smart corridors, and funding options.

## LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION

Located in the center of the Atlanta Region, DeKalb County is the fourth largest county in Georgia and is a dynamic home to more than 764,000 residents and more than 287,000 jobs. It is bordered by Fulton County to the north and west, Gwinnett County to the northeast, Rockdale County to the east, and Clayton and Henry Counties to the south. The City of Atlanta itself is split between Fulton and DeKalb Counties, with approximately ten percent of the city located on the DeKalb side. With this in mind, DeKalb is a long-established population and employment center for the Atlanta Region, home to thirteen incorporated cities alongside fourteen major employment centers, including the areas around Decatur, Emory University, North Druid Hills, Northlake, and Perimeter Center. It includes many high-density areas within and adjacent to the I-285 Perimeter, less dense suburban areas in Central and South DeKalb, and low-density rural and environmental preservation areas dotted mostly along its eastern flank. DeKalb’s population has grown steadily by about 1 percent each year, while its jobs have grown by about 1.3 percent each year since 2010. These growth trends are anticipated to continue in the same direction, though at gradually slower rates, over the next thirty years.

<!-- page 9 -->
COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 10 -->
01 – INTRODUCTION

## SCHEDULE

The CTP was developed over a period of eighteen months and includes four major phases:

| | 2021 | | | | | | | | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov |
| Project Tasks | | <<FIGURE>> | <<FIGURE>> | <<FIGURE>> | <<FIGURE>> | <<FIGURE>> | <<FIGURE>> | <<FIGURE>> | <<FIGURE>> |
| General Public Engagement | | <<FIGURE>> | <<FIGURE>> | <<FIGURE>> | <<FIGURE>> | <<FIGURE>> | <<FIGURE>> | <<FIGURE>> | <<FIGURE>> |

**Vision, Goals, Needs, and Opportunities:**
This phase established a baseline of understanding where the County’s transportation network is today and where it is envisioned to be over the next 30 years.

**Transportation Nexus:**
The next phase chronicled all of the feedback and findings received in the previous phase to inform a dynamic system of qualitative and quantitative themes. The themes were designed to evaluate how future projects should be prioritized and to discover how they interlink with each other.

<!-- page 11 -->
COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

### Legend:

= Online Survey    ..... Community Events    ///// Public Meetings    |||||||||| Focus Groups

| | 2022 | | | | | | | | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| Dec | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| <<FIGURE>> | | | | | | | | | | |
| Recommendations | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | Documentation, Review, and Adoption | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | <<FIGURE>> | | | | | | |

#### Recommendations:
With the Transportation Nexus established, this phase identified, evaluated, and prioritized a wide range of transportation investments, policies, and actions that will help the County achieve its future short-term and long-term transportation vision.

#### Documentation, Review, and Adoption:
The last phase documented the recommendations, feedback, and findings into the final CTP document for public digest and subsequent County adoption.

In every phase, extensive stakeholder and community engagement played a vital role in the visioning, development, and compilation of the CTP. A range of engagement exercises and venues were involved to ensure that broad and diverse swaths of the County were reached and engaged throughout the process, including dedicated public open houses, community event outreach, online surveys, and focus groups.

<!-- page 12 -->
# PLAN ORGANIZATION

The DeKalb 2050 Unified Plan is structured with ten chapters that document the technical methodology, results, and concurrent engagement efforts that went into the Plan. Below is a summary of what is included in each chapter.

### CHAPTER 2: PRIORITIES AND ENGAGEMENT
Chapter 2 describes the eleven transportation priorities that guide the DeKalb 2050 Unified Plan and documents the robust stakeholder and public engagement efforts conducted throughout its development.

### CHAPTER 3: EXISTING CONDITIONS AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT SUMMARY
Chapter 3 provides a summary of key themes and takeaways that were uncovered in the March 2022 Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment (ECNA) Report and development of the Transportation Nexus.

### CHAPTER 4: PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION
Chapter 4 discusses how the universe of projects was developed and the evaluation process used to assess each project for prioritization.

### CHAPTER 5: TRANSPORTATION FUNDING AND FINANCIAL FRAMEWORK
Chapter 5 recaps the funding mechanisms available at the local, state, and federal level to potentially leverage delivering the prioritized transportation projects.

### CHAPTER 6: SURFACE TRANSPORTATION POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
Chapter 6 documents the proposed strategic policy recommendations of the DeKalb 2050 Unified Plan and explains how targeted policies can help advance DeKalb County's transportation priorities.

### CHAPTER 7: TRANSIT RECOMMENDATIONS
Chapter 7 focuses on the 2019 DeKalb County Transit Master Plan recommendations and provides recommended next steps to advance that plan.

### CHAPTER 8: PRIORITY PROJECTS FOR UNINCORPORATED DEKALB COUNTY
Chapter 8 lists the County’s priority projects within the unincorporated areas (i.e., areas outside of city boundaries) based on project evaluation results and stakeholder and staff input.

### CHAPTER 9: PRIORITY PROJECTS FOR DEKALB CITIES
Chapter 9 similarly chronicles priority projects of the 13 DeKalb cities based on project evaluation results and stakeholder and staff input.

### CHAPTER 10: FIVE-YEAR ACTION PLAN AND PERFORMANCE MONITORING
Chapter 10 details a short-term action plan and approach to initiate the long-term 30-year Unified Plan.

### APPENDIX
The Appendix includes additional information regarding technology recommendations.

<!-- page 13 -->
# CHAPTER 02
## PRIORITIES AND ENGAGEMENT

<!-- page 14 -->
# CHAPTER 02: PRIORITIES AND ENGAGEMENT

<<FIGURE>>

The 11 transportation priorities (developed from the previous CTP and Transit Master Plan and vetted through key stakeholder input and public engagement efforts) impacted the direction of the Unified Plan at all stages of development. From identifying areas of analysis for the Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment (ECNA) Report to determining metrics for project evaluation and making final decisions regarding policy direction.

# TRANSPORTATION PRIORITIES

### 1) Provide Transportation Options through Connectivity across Modes
Improve travel for all users by increasing connections across roadway, transit, bicycle, and pedestrian modes.

### 2) Enable Healthy Communities and Improve Quality of Life
Leverage transportation infrastructure to encourage an active lifestyle and overall improved quality of life.

### 3) Improve Safety
Provide for safe travel by all users across all modes of travel.

### 4) Improve Maintenance
Ensure the long-term care for existing infrastructure, including paving roads and repairing bridges and signal systems.

### 5) Promote Equity
Prioritize improvements that increase transportation access to all parts of the County, especially in communities where a lack of transportation options create substantial barriers.

### 6) Increase Funding for Improvements
Pursue new local revenue sources that will allow the County to implement additional transportation projects.

<!-- page 15 -->
### 7) Increase Access to Jobs and Education
Prioritize transportation investments that allow workers and students to have easier access to these key destinations.

### 8) Encourage Economic Development
Leverage transportation projects that help to encourage revitalization and new development throughout the County.

### 9) Respect and Improve DeKalb County’s Character
Implement transportation projects that improve mobility while taking into consideration local character and context.

### 10) Practice Fiscal Responsibility in Transportation Investments
Prioritize transportation projects that can be implemented in a reasonable timeframe and provide a strong return on investment.

### 11) Better Accommodate Movement of Goods
Implement transportation projects that improve freight in the County either by truck or by rail.

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 16 -->
# STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT

| STANDING COMMITTEES/ LEADERSHIP |
| :--- |
| CEO/Board of Commissioners* |
| Planning Commission* |
| Community Councils* |
| Public Works and Infrastructure Committee* |
| Planning, Economic Development, and Community Services Committee* |
| City Leaders |

*Includes Board of Commissioners Committees

### Standing Committees/Leadership

DeKalb County Commissioners, various committees of the Commissioners, and city leaders provided the Unified Plan team with valuable insights into the issues and opportunities that are important to their communities. The team conducted multiple rounds of meetings with the Commissioners for input on draft project recommendations as well as policy direction for both transportation and land use topics.

| COMMITTEES | |
| :--- | :--- |
| **Transportation Committee** | **Land Use Committee** |
| Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC) (relevant departments) | ARC (relevant departments) |
| The ATL /State Road and Tollway Authority (SRTA)/Xpress | CIDs |
| Commissioner Appointees | Commissioner Appointees |
| Community Improvement Districts (CIDs)/ Transportation Management Association | Department of Community Affairs |
| Cities | DeKalb School System |
| DeKalb School System | Decide DeKalb/ Economic Development |
| Decide DeKalb/ Economic Development | MARTA |
| Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) | DeKalb County (relevant departments) |
| MARTA | |
| DeKalb County (relevant departments) | |

### Transportation and Land Use Committees

The DeKalb Unified Plan created two committees of key stakeholders. The Land Use Committee was primarily relevant for the Comprehensive Plan and the Transportation Committee included 82 stakeholders vital to the success of the CTP. In addition to appointees from each of the Commissioners, the Transportation Committee included leaders, planners, and decision-makers from the state, region, County, and cities. The stakeholders in the Transportation Committee helped guide the planning process by actively engaging with the plan at the envisioning and draft recommendation stages. The combined knowledge that this Committee offered helped ensure that the Unified Plan meets DeKalb County’s needs and priorities.

<!-- page 17 -->
| STAKEHOLDER GROUPS (2+ MEETINGS) |
| :--- |
| Advocacy and Environmental |
| Civic/Business Associations |
| Higher Education and Medical |
| Transit (early coordination efforts) |

### Stakeholder Groups

To supplement the Committees, smaller groups of stakeholders were organized to advise the plan in key policy areas. Stakeholder groups helped the project team better understand the specific interests of different groups and communities in DeKalb County, including the higher education and medical community and representatives from civic and business associations.

<<FIGURE>>

| FOCUS GROUPS (1 MEETING) |
| :--- |
| Housing |
| Arts and Culture |
| Public Safety |
| Multicultural/BIPOC Groups |
| Bike/Pedestrian/Trails |
| Resiliency/Sustainability |
| Retail |
| Health and Wellness |

### Focus Groups

Focus groups allowed the project team to meet with a small group of community members to talk about a specific topic area in more detail. Each focus group obtained feedback from a unique group representing different interests in the DeKalb County community. Focus groups were held for various policy areas as well as several multicultural and Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) groups in DeKalb County.

#### Multicultural/BIPOC Focus Groups include:

*   NAACP
*   Black leaders
*   Korean
*   Burmese
*   Bhutanese
*   Hispanic/Latino
*   African diaspora (by language)
    *   Tigrigna
    *   Dinka
    *   Amharic
    *   Somali
    *   Kiswahili

<!-- page 18 -->
# PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT

Public outreach is a key component in developing any successful transportation plan. The DeKalb County Unified Plan conducted two rounds of diverse public outreach efforts that included both online and in-person components. Engagement efforts were developed to be consistent across formats—public meetings and community intercepts asked some of the same questions as the online survey to gather the same types of information from different groups. The goal of these outreach efforts was to gather public input from across the County through direct engagement and the input of community proxies. Providing such a wide array of opportunities for public participation ensures that the Unified Plan reflects the values and priorities of DeKalb County as accurately as possible.

<<FIGURE>>

**13 community intercepts**

**to meet residents where they are at community events**

**12 public meetings:**

**6 virtual meetings**
**5 community charettes by district**
**1 super district commissioner town hall with over 100 attendees**

**2 rounds of online survey**
**with 1,515 participants**

<!-- page 19 -->
<<FIGURE>>

### Stakeholder Group Meetings
Eight virtual meetings were held with the five stakeholder groups between July 2021 and April 2022, as explained in the previous section.

### Focus Group Meetings
Nineteen virtual meetings were held with the focus groups between July 2021 and January 2022, as explained in the previous section.

### Commissioner Meetings
Twenty-six total meetings were held with DeKalb County Commissioners between April 2021 and April 2022. These meetings included one-on-one meetings with each Commissioner and their staff as well as committee meetings like the Committee of the Whole (COW), Public Works and Infrastructure (PWI) Committee, and Planning, Economic Development, and Community Services (PECS) Committee. The purpose of the first round of Commissioner meetings was to review the existing conditions, needs assessment, round one engagement efforts, and early project considerations. The purpose of the second round of Commissioner meetings was to discuss draft recommendations for projects and some policies.

### Community Council Meetings
Two community council meetings were held in August 2021 and April 2022. These meetings primarily discussed land use.

### Public Meetings
The 12 total public meetings hosted by the project team provided the greatest depth of information regarding the plan and offered the public the opportunity to provide feedback. The first round of public meetings included three virtual public meetings in May 2021 to discuss project overview, schedule, engagement efforts, existing conditions, and needs assessment. Attendees were also given the opportunity to provide input on transportation priorities, needs, and opportunities. Five community charettes (generally divided by district) were also held to discuss existing conditions and allow communities to provide input on issues and opportunities in their area. The second round of public meetings included three virtual public meetings in May 2022 and a Super District Commissioner town hall in June 2022 to discuss draft recommendations for projects and some policies. Every meeting gave DeKalb County residents the chance to meet the project team and provide input throughout the planning process. The feedback from the public meetings helped to guide the project team in identifying vision, priorities, and recommendations.

<<FIGURE>>

### Community Intercepts
In an effort to meet people where they are, 13 total community intercepts were held across two rounds. The intercepts were pop-up events at festivals, parks, MARTA stations, and other events intended to gather public input on transportation issues, opportunities, and priorities. The first round of intercepts included seven events between May and June 2021 where participants were asked to identify transportation issues, opportunities, and priorities. The second round of intercepts included six events in May 2022 where participants were asked to identify priority policy areas and projects and provide input on some draft plans.

<!-- page 20 -->
# 02 – PRIORITIES AND ENGAGEMENT

<<FIGURE>>

### Community Presentations
Whenever possible, the DeKalb 2050 Unified Plan team spoke with the community to spread the word about the plan. These presentations took place between August 2021 and April 2022 at events including police precinct community meetings, pastor leadership meetings, and community groups meetings. Community presentations generally provided an overview of the Plan and informed attendees of opportunities for public engagement.

### Online Survey
Two JotForm online surveys were conducted in tandem with both rounds of public engagement. The first round of the survey allowed respondents to provide input on the needs and vision of the project. The second round of the survey allowed respondents to provide input on specific project and policy recommendations. The second round of the survey also included an interactive map that allowed respondents to “like” and leave comments on specific projects. The first and second rounds of the survey and the interactive map generated a total of 1,515 participants. The online survey provided people with an easy way to engage with the Plan from the comfort of their home or office, ensuring that public engagement efforts reached as many users of the DeKalb County transportation system as possible.

### Project Website
For the duration of the Plan, the project website (dekalb2050unifiedplan.com) was maintained as a repository of relevant information. The website advertised upcoming engagement opportunities and shared links to the online surveys and interactive maps. It also hosted valuable information, including project documents, schedule, recordings of previous public meetings, and contact information.

### Social Media
The DeKalb 2050 Unified Plan leveraged DeKalb County’s social media presence on Facebook and Twitter to advertise the plan’s major events. Updates were posted on both platforms using the #ItsInDeKalb and #UnifiedDeKalb hashtags.

<!-- page 21 -->
# CHAPTER 03
## EXISTING CONDITIONS AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT SUMMARY

<!-- page 22 -->
# CHAPTER 03: EXISTING CONDITIONS AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT SUMMARY

## HIGH LEVEL SUMMARY OF EXISTING CONDITIONS AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT REPORT

The Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment (ECNA) Report analyzes and assesses the many interworking characteristics of DeKalb County, including demographics, economic development, land use patterns, environmental features, and transportation infrastructure to create an in-depth understanding of the County’s transportation needs and opportunities. In addition to the review of some 60 previous plans and programs documented in the Report, some key themes uncovered in the Report are highlighted here.

### PEOPLE

Understanding the people that make up DeKalb County is integral to a well-rounded CTP and includes both general population and specific demographic measures. Notable demographic measures documented, include Seniors, Race/Ethnicity, Limited English Proficiency, Persons with Disabilities, Zero-Vehicle Households, and Level of Educational Attainment. These measures are especially important in informing equitable transportation decisions as well as guiding targeted community outreach approaches. DeKalb’s diverse majority-minority population, robust population growth, and medium- to high-density present unique opportunities and challenges for its transportation future.

### PLACES

A central tenant of the DeKalb 2050 Unified Plan is that existing and future land use patterns across the County directly impact the need for transportation investments, and vice versa. How and when communities in DeKalb County have developed informs a deeper understanding of the overall character of each community and its need for transportation improvements. In addition, proximity to a range of public amenities (e.g., parks, grocery stores, and schools) directly correlates to residents’ quality-of-life. While DeKalb is highly developed, certain pockets, particularly in the south and east, have limited access to some of these amenities.

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 23 -->
COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

# SAFETY

Understanding historical crash data across the County plays a pivotal role in identifying transportation improvements that both mitigate areas with high crash rates and alleviate traffic congestion often caused by those crashes. While the highest crash densities in the county tended to occur on I-285 and other high-volume freeways, many hot spots were common on the County’s arterials, including Peachtree Industrial Boulevard, Buford Highway, Covington Highway, and North Druid Hills Road. Intersections with high crash rates were found at Henrico Road at West Side Place in South DeKalb and a heavy concentration of intersections along Peachtree Road and Peachtree Boulevard in the City of Chamblee.

# TRANSIT AND ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION

Transit, pedestrian, and bicycle infrastructure incentivize greater use of alternative modes of transportation as opposed to driving, alleviates traffic congestion on the County’s roads, and contributes to a greater quality-of-life. The lack of sidewalks within a mile of activity centers and lack of bicycle facilities within two miles of activity centers were found to significantly limit their use as alternatives to driving. Crashes involving bicycles and pedestrians most often occur in higher-density areas of the County, near bus stops, and at MARTA rail stations. Enhanced transportation investments must be leveraged to improve these alternative modes.

# CONGESTION

Capacity-based traffic congestion often limits a person’s mobility in DeKalb County whether they choose to drive or take transit. The ARC Travel Demand Model and other sources were used to identify corridors and intersections with high rates of congestion and delay. This congestion is almost always expected to increase along DeKalb’s roadways as traffic volumes grow over the next 30 years. Making strategic transportation investments is necessary on this front to combat traffic congestion, mitigate bottlenecks, and rethink the movement of people and goods to achieve efficiencies for both.

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 24 -->
# TRANSPORTATION NEXUS

The central goal of the DeKalb 2050 Unified Plan is to combine the transportation and land use visions for the County into a single unified, actionable plan. Transportation and land use elements have direct and intrinsically interlinked relationships with each other.

The Transportation Nexus (center of page) explores those interlinked relationships in detail. A product of substantial public and community engagement, the Transportation Nexus was developed to convey the top line issues that the project team gathered in parallel through the engagement and technical analysis processes, mapping them to better understand the themes and connections between them.

Based on these efforts, the project team uncovered a total of seven top line issues pertinent to DeKalb’s transportation and land use future:

**Housing:** Providing enough quality affordable housing and a variety of housing options to meet demands and needs of DeKalb County resident to slow down rises in housing prices

**Activity Centers:** Establishing and maintaining dynamic activity centers throughout the County tailored to residents’ needs and promoting higher population and/or jobs densities in these areas

**Economic Development:** Promoting and incentivizing new population and job opportunities and celebrating the County’s diversity as an asset

**Freight/Industrial:** Focusing on the County’s well-established freight and industrial sector and continuing to encourage further development opportunities for jobs and skillsets it can generate

**Roadway/Vehicular:** Investing in improvements to the County’s vast roadway network to mitigate congestion, contribute to efficiencies in the movement of both people and goods, achieve a state-of-good-repair, and enhance safety and mobility

**Transit:** Leveraging, expanding, and enhancing the County’s existing transit network in strategic ways to increase regional mobility, connect residents to jobs, and provide an equitable balance of transportation options

**Active Transportation:** Enhancing and expanding the County’s vast sidewalk and bicycle infrastructure to enhance quality-of-life, increase local connectivity, and promote the well-being of all County residents

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 25 -->
<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

Clustered around these top line issues are a series of word clouds that were uncovered as themes around each top line issue. These themes are rarely in isolation; rather, they are almost always shared elements. As illustrated, these themes often transcend multiple top line issues identified, shedding light on the underlying relationships that connect them. These relationships are represented by connecting arrows and as shown in the legend can be either complimentary connections or in some cases potentially conflicting connections.

On a higher level, four overarching guiding principles of Equity, Funding Availability, and Agency and Inter-Agency Coordination tended to transcend every issue, theme, and stakeholder conversation. They are shown prominently around the periphery of the Transportation Nexus. Balancing all of these guiding principles helps to anchor the decision-making of all transportation and land use investments as projects are evaluated and prioritized.

<!-- page 26 -->
(blank page)

<!-- page 27 -->
# CHAPTER 04
## PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION

<!-- page 28 -->
# CHAPTER 04: PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION

<<FIGURE>>

## INTRODUCTION

After hearing from the community and evaluating the County’s existing conditions and needs, the DeKalb 2050 Unified Plan team identified a Universe of Projects to assist with the development of a recommended project list. The Universe of Projects contains numerous projects for the County to consider that address transportation needs. If funding were unlimited, the County could theoretically implement the entire Universe of Projects; however, just like in a household budget, there is always a gap between needs and the funding available to implement the projects. Performance-based planning is essential to identifying the most impactful projects.

The Plan included a technical process to identify high-scoring projects based on evaluation metrics that focused on project performance. The project evaluation was not limited to technical analysis, public input also played an important role. The data-driven baseline process allowed for the highest performing projects to rise to the top for conversations with communities and elected leaders.

This chapter describes the creation of the Universe of Projects, the development of evaluation criteria, and the evaluation of the projects.

## PROJECT DEVELOPMENT

The Unified Plan team developed the Universe of Projects in a layered approach using four different sources consisting of previous plans done by others, technical analysis, public input, and input from agencies, stakeholders, and elected leaders. Each of these sources played an important role in ensuring the Unified Plan had a comprehensive list of projects before beginning evaluation.

More than 40 planning studies were reviewed to develop the Universe of Projects, including the ARC’s Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), DeKalb County 2014 Transportation Plan, city transportation plans, and small area studies (e.g., Livable Centers Initiatives [LCI] and CID plans). Regionally significant projects from these resources were included in the Universe of Projects, shown below:

### Universe of Projects

*   DeKalb County 2014 Transportation Plan
*   ARC RTP and Transportation Improvement Program (TIP)
*   City of Atlanta 2022 Infrastructure Program
*   City of Atlanta Transportation Plan
*   Cycle Atlanta Phase 2.0 Study
*   Avondale Estates Downtown Master Plan Update
*   Belvedere Master Active Living Plan
*   Briarcliff Road-Clairmont Road Small Area Plan

<!-- page 29 -->
### Continued

*   **Brookhaven 2020 CTP Update**
*   **Buford Highway Corridor LCI**
*   **Buford Highway Master Plan**
*   **Chamblee Doraville CID**
*   **Chamblee Mobility Multimodal Transportation Plan**
*   **Clarkston City Plan**
*   **Covington Highway Corridor Master Active Living Plan**
*   **City of Decatur CTP Update**
*   **Decatur 360 Comprehensive Plan**
*   **DeKalb Greenways Plan (2000)**
*   **DeKalb County Special Purpose Local Option Sales Tax (SPLOST)/Renewal**
*   **DeKalb SPLOST Trails**
*   **Doraville Comprehensive Plan**
*   **Doraville Mobility Plan**
*   **Doraville Peachtree Creek Greenway Study**
*   **Dunwoody CTP Update**
*   **Dunwoody Last Mile Connectivity Study**
*   **Gresham Road Study Area, Master Active Living Plan**
*   **GDOT Statewide TIP (STIP)**
*   **GDOT Strategic Statewide Transportation Plan**
*   **Hammond Drive Corridor Study**
*   **Indian Creek MARTA Master Active Living Plan**
*   **Kensington LCI Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Plan**
*   **Medline LCI Plan**
*   **Metro South CID Freight Cluster Plan**
*   **North Druid Hills LCI Plan**
*   **One Chamblee Comprehensive Plan Update**
*   **Panola Road-Salem Road Master Active Living Plan**
*   **Stone Mountain LCI Plan**
*   **Stone Mountain Village Forward Master Plan**
*   **Stonecrest Transportation Master Plan**
*   **Tucker-Northlake LCI**
*   **Tucker Strategic Transportation Master Plan**
*   **Tucker Summit CID Freight Cluster Plan**
*   **Tucker PATH Trail Master Plan and Implementation Strategy**
*   **Winters Chapel Road Area Study**

The results of various analyses done in the ECNA were used to identify additional surface transportation projects that were not mentioned in previous plans. Results from analyses, including historical traffic volumes, bottleneck congestion data, historical crash rates, and Level-of-Service were used to identify roadway operational and capacity projects. Similarly, results from analyses including gaps in the existing active transportation network and level of traffic stress were used to identify multimodal projects.

After compiling previous projects done by others and supplementing with projects from the technical analysis, the project team reviewed project ideas gathered from public engagement efforts, including the Social Pinpoint web platform, community intercepts, and charrettes. In Social Pinpoint, responders were able to place points throughout the County, specify a desired project type (i.e., Bicycle, Pedestrian, Safety, Traffic, or Transit), and like or dislike previously made comments. In some instances, the results of the public's feedback helped validate an idea that was already present in the Universe of Projects and in other instances the feedback helped identify a new project.

Agency and stakeholder input were essential for developing and refining the Universe of Projects. In previous months, the Unified Plan team conducted the following efforts in coordination with agency staff, elected leaders, and stakeholders:

*   Held a technical workshop with DeKalb County staff to vet new projects created from technical analyses and input from the public.
*   Gathered additional ideas for projects during individual meetings with each of the five County Commissioners and two County Super District Commissioners.
*   Met with the 13 incorporated municipalities and various agencies (e.g., CIDs, ARC, and GDOT) in the County for priority projects.

<!-- page 30 -->
# PROJECT EVALUATION

The project evaluation criteria developed for the Universe of Projects builds on the transportation priorities identified at the onset of the Unified Plan to ensure that the project prioritization reflects the goals of the community. Projects were coded in a Geographic Information System (GIS) environment and categorized as multiuse trails, small-scale roadway, or large-scale roadway projects. Note that sidewalk and bridge projects were not evaluated as these are included under set-aside funding mechanisms. Additionally, transit projects were not evaluated as the County is considering transit improvements separately. The evaluation criteria are shown in the table below.

| | Evaluation Criterion | Definition | Transportation Priorities |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **A** | Access to Existing/ Planned Transit Facilities | The project proposes improvements near existing and planned transit facilities | Provide Transportation Options through Connectivity across Modes |
| **B** | Access to Community Resources | The project improves access to community resources (e.g., parks, libraries, K-12 schools) and improves mobility in areas of no or low vehicle ownership | Enable Healthy Communities and Improve Quality of Life |
| **C** | Safety Improvement | Evaluates safety concerns near the project area using historical crash data, crash severity, and ARC Risk Assessment Score data | Improve Safety |
| **D** | Equitable Access | The project improves mobility in areas of traditionally underserved communities | Promote Equity |
| **E** | Employment and Educational Impact | Measures the project's impact on employment and higher educational opportunities | Increase Access to Jobs and Education |
| **F** | Economic Development Impact | Measures the project's impact on economic development based on proximity to CID, Tax Allocation District, Regional/Town Center/ Neighborhood Activity Centers, Federal/State Opportunity Zone | Encourage Economic Development |
| **G** | Mobility Improvement | Measures the reduction in travel time and vehicular congestion, proximity to built or funded trails, and project scale | Practice Fiscal Responsibility in Transportation Investments |
| **H** | Freight Movement Improvement | Measures the project's impact on freight movement based on proximity to regional truck routes, rail crossings, and if the project is in a freight cluster or industrial area | Better Accommodate Movement of Goods |
| **I** | Previous Plan Support | Recognizes if the project is included in a previous plan | N/A |
| **J** | Public Support | Recognizes if the project has received public support | N/A |

Projects scoring highly in the evaluation process were prioritized for conversations with staff and elected leaders and for possible inclusion in higher tiers.

<!-- page 31 -->
# CHAPTER 05
## TRANSPORTATION FUNDING AND FINANCIAL FRAMEWORK

<!-- page 32 -->
# CHAPTER 5: TRANSPORTATION FUNDING AND FINANCIAL FRAMEWORK

<<FIGURE>>

## FUNDING SOURCES

The Unified Plan considers multiple funding sources, including local, state, and federal levels. The image on the following page depicts the different types of funding sources considered during the planning process.

### Local Sources
Local sources of funds must be generated within DeKalb County. If marked with an asterisk (*), they are currently in use by the County.

* **Countywide Special Purpose Local Option Sales Tax (SPLOST)\*:** The current countywide SPLOST was voted in by residents in November 2017 and began collections in April 2018. The first SPLOST is slated to run for six years and generate nearly $650 million in revenue for transportation, public safety, and other DeKalb departments. The SPLOST also includes city allocations. The current SPLOST projection for transportation in unincorporated DeKalb is approximately $240 million. If the Board of Commissioners call and approve another referendum, DeKalb residents will have an opportunity to vote on a continuation of the current SPLOST in November 2023.
* **General Fund\*:** The Board of Commissioners and CEO can use general fund monies for the purposes of transportation. Today, the County uses general funds to pay for routine maintenance, bridge repair, and other related activities.
* **MARTA Tax\*:** DeKalb County residents currently pay a 1% sales tax to MARTA for the system maintenance of the MARTA rail and bus system. Some of the current penny is going toward new transit hubs, local bus expansion, and paratransit expansion in south and east DeKalb.
* **House Bill (HB) 170/Transportation SPLOST:** A new House bill allows the County to call a referendum to levy a new SPLOST of up to 1% for up to five years (in 0.05% increments) for the purpose of surface transportation improvements and small-scale capital transit investments.
* **House Bill (HB) 930/Transit SPLOST:** A new House bill allows the County to call a referendum to levy a new SPLOST of up to 1% for up to 30 years (in 0.05% increments) for the purpose of long-term capital, operations, and maintenance of transit systems. This longer timeframe allows local governments to be more competitive for federal transit funding due to a sustained, reliable source of income.
* **Other local sources:** DeKalb County could consider other funding opportunities, including tax allocation districts and other value capture mechanisms, property tax increases, bond referenda, etc.

<!-- page 33 -->
## Federal/State Sources (Formula + Discretionary)

Federal and state funds have two basic forms—formula funds and discretionary funds. Formula funds are allocated to the state and region based on population size, whereas discretionary funds are awarded through competitive federal grant applications and are not guaranteed to the state or region. Federal funds for all transportation projects now fall under the new transportation bill, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), also known as the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL). Under the IIJA/BIL, funding for transportation infrastructure has increased substantially and can be seen in both formula and discretionary funding programs.

* **Formula funds (administered by ARC and GDOT):** Formula funds for surface transportation projects allocated to the Atlanta region are administered to local governments through the ARC’s Regional Transportation Planning process (also includes GDOT). Local funds generated within DeKalb can be used as match funds for federal dollars awarded by ARC or other state funds from GDOT for pavement management, bridges, etc.

* **Formula funds (administered by MARTA and the Atlanta Transit Link Authority [ATL]):** Formula funds for transit are distributed by the FTA to designated recipients. In the Atlanta Region, the designated recipient for Section 5307, 5337, and 5339 funds is the ATL. The ATL is responsible for outlining the program of projects that detail specific projects that funds will be applied towards.
* **Discretionary/competitive grant programs:** Several competitive grant programs exist through both the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). Examples include the following: USDOT Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity (RAISE) Grant Program (formerly known as the Better Utilizing Investments to Leverage Development [BUILD] and Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery [TIGER]), USDOT Infrastructure for Rebuilding America (INFRA) Grant Program, FTA Capital Investment Grant (CIG) Program, FTA Bus and Bus Facilities Grant Program, and FTA Low or No Emissions Bus Grant Program.

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 34 -->
# 05 – TRANSPORTATION FUNDING AND FINANCIAL FRAMEWORK

## FINANCIAL FRAMEWORK ASSUMPTIONS

Planning for transportation and mobility includes more than just building new projects. It also includes having resources to maintain infrastructure (e.g., paving roads, repairing bridges and signal systems, etc.), preparing for future technology, and establishing support systems to oversee the implementation of future capital projects. In order to properly prepare for these financial needs, it is critical to develop a strong financial framework.

The DeKalb framework is based around the assumption of constraining expenditures based on local funding with a check to help ensure reasonable state and federal funding matches. Additional local funding sources could be considered; however, the primary source assumed in the development of this financial framework is a renewal of the countywide SPLOST program. While recent returns have been coming in above projections, the plan assumes a more conservative baseline of the early projections of approximately $106 million per year with a 1% per year growth in the tax base.

The cities in DeKalb are allocated a percentage of collected SPLOST revenues based on population and can use the funding to support a variety of needs beyond transportation. The City allocations total approximately 39% of the annual revenues under the current SPLOST program. Additionally, the percent of remaining unincorporated DeKalb County funding assumed to fund transportation needs remains the same as the current program, resulting in a total of 38% of total annual revenues.

If actual revenues exceed projections or the allocation to transportation exceeds current proportions, the Unified Plan team recommends the funds be allocated to two specific categories described later in the chapter.

*   **Countywide SPLOST continues**
*   **Conservative tax revenue assumptions**
*   **City allocation of SPLOST remains the same**
*   **Transportation allocation of SPLOST remains the same**
*   **Existing MARTA penny continues to be used primarily for state of good repair**

### SPLOST Fund Allocation

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 35 -->
# TRANSPORTATION FUNDING OVERVIEW (UNINCORPORATED DEKALB)

The table below displays the overall financial framework for unincorporated DeKalb County. The timeframe is broken into three tiers: Tier 1 represents the first 6 years (short-range), Tier 2 represents the next 6 years (mid-range), and Tier 3 represents the final 15 years (long-range). Rows are broken into two major groups, set-aside funding categories and a project funding category. Total anticipated applicable revenues from the SPLOST are shown in the last row.

Set-aside funding categories include programmatic funds instead of individual projects. These funds provide an allocation of money for a larger program (such as repaving)—the Unified Plan does not recommend specific roads for paving; however, it does allocate the funding needed to conduct the work. There are several key elements to note regarding the funding categories, including:

* The largest category, and the overall greatest need to this day in DeKalb County, is asset management and maintaining a state of good repair. This programmatic fund includes resurfacing, capital bridge investments (beyond maintenance), and a pavement asset management system and pavement management plan. As a percentage of total funding, asset management captures just over half of the total budget in the first tier and decreases over time as road condition improves and state of equilibrium is reached.
* The second largest set-aside category is for pedestrian improvements, including sidewalks and crossings. Specific projects are not being identified as a part of this plan. For example, a sidewalk inventory and condition assessment is planned for DeKalb County, which can better inform the locations of greatest need and priority for pedestrian investments.
* Additional categories in the set-aside categories include project/program management (an assumed 5% of the program for oversight), funding for Commission District identified projects ($1 million per district per 6-year period), technology and smart corridor investments (more information provided in the policy chapter), and a small discretionary fund for directed planning and support efforts.

If revenues from the SPLOST (or the transportation allocation) are higher than estimates below, the Unified Plan team recommends that additional funds are first allocated to asset management and then to pedestrian improvements.

The project category located at the bottom of the table includes funding for specific projects. An overview by project type follows, and more information on the individual projects can be found in Chapter 8.

| | Tier 1 6 Years | Tier 2 6 Years | Tier 3 15 Years |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **Set-aside Funding Categories** | **$179,000,000** | **$162,000,000** | **$371,000,000** |
| Asset Management (Resurfacing*, Bridge) | $127,500,000 | $107,000,000 | $206,000,000 |
| Transportation Project Management (5% of Program) | $12,500,000 | $13,000,000 | $37,000,000 |
| Commission District Projects ($1 million/District) | $7,000,000 | $7,000,000 | $17,000,000 |
| Technology/Smart Corridor Investments | $6,000,000 | $9,000,000 | $30,000,000 |
| Pedestrian Improvements (Sidewalks, Crossings) | $24,000,000 | $24,000,000 | $75,000,000 |
| Discretionary (Planning, etc.) | $2,000,000 | $2,000,000 | $6,000,000 |
| **Project Funding** | **$71,000,000** | **$103,000,000** | **$363,000,000** |
| **Total Transportation Funding** | **$250,000,000** | **$265,000,000** | **$734,000,000** |

<!-- page 36 -->
05 – TRANSPORTATION FUNDING AND FINANCIAL FRAMEWORK

## PROJECT FUNDING BY TYPE

Three overarching categories of projects are included in the list: multiuse trails, small-scale roadway projects, and large-scale roadway projects. Multiuse trail projects may include off-road trails that run along their own right-of-way, streams, or utility easements as well as side paths running along the side of a road. Small scale roadway improvements include intersection projects and safety projects anticipated to cost less than $4 million. Large scale roadway projects may include a combination of several project types, such as capacity or widening projects, operational projects with a series of intersection or access management elements, or multimodal projects that include roadway and trail projects.

The allocation of funds across the different project types and different tiers are shown in the chart below. Tier 3 has a substantially larger funding assumption due to its longer timeframe (15 years compared with 6 years) and smaller allocation to asset management in later years.

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 37 -->
# CHAPTER 06
## SURFACE TRANSPORTATION
## POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

<!-- page 38 -->
# CHAPTER 06: SURFACE TRANSPORTATION POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

## ASSET MANAGEMENT

Asset management includes all the activities of an organization that balance the cost, risk, and performance of assets to deliver service to customers. Managing assets is an organizational strategy that focuses on data-driven and fact-based decisions. In asset management, the focus is on the asset life cycle and can include planning and design, operating and maintaining, and rehabilitating.

Asset management is one of the most critical, yet often overlooked parts of a transportation system particularly when not enough funds are available to adequately maintain the system. Relative to transportation infrastructure, assets to manage can include roadways and assets within the right-of-way (e.g., signals, crosswalks, striping, sidewalks, curb and gutter, and curb ramps), bridges, and bike and pedestrian right-of-way or trails. In DeKalb County, with many established assets, the focus can be on maintaining an accurate inventory of assets and rehabilitating these assets in cost-effective ways. This may include repaving and reconstructing roadways, repairing and replacing bridges (including those with structural or functional issues), maintaining trails and paths for bicycles and pedestrians, and keeping signal systems operational and up to date. For a well-developed county like DeKalb County, asset management should be a substantial portion of the financial portfolio in order to properly maintain assets in a safe and functional way for community use. Implementing asset management can be achieved through a stepwise process over time that may add both steps to the management process as well as more assets to the program. The goal is to move from awareness of an asset management need and into competence in executing a program. Ultimately, proactively managing assets will save money in the long-term by applying the right maintenance and rehabilitation at the right time in the asset's life cycle.

### Roadways

DeKalb County has nearly 2,300 miles of roadway. Addition and deletion of roads from the DeKalb County system can be managed through tracking inventory data using a database or software tool. The inventory of roads should be inspected on a routine basis to determine the current condition score, which can be used to determine both the timing of and level of resurfacing or reconstruction needed. At the conclusion of the 2014 CTP, DeKalb County had approximately $175 million of paving backlog without a clear funding stream in sight. With the establishment of the SPLOST program in 2017, the County had substantial revenues to reduce this backlog and reach a better overall road condition. The current SPLOST program allocates $151 million over six years specifically for resurfacing.

Continued focus on asset management, and particularly rehabilitation of the road network, will be of critical importance

<!-- page 39 -->
to DeKalb County moving forward. The Unified Plan includes the following recommended activities for road resurfacing:
* Use a consistent roadway rating system based on the standardized ASTM (formerly known as the American Standardized Testing and Materials) system.
* Implement a software system to comprehensively manage the pavement and overall program.
* Use automated data collection methods in addition to visual inspection to provide more consistent and systematic evaluation.

The County should invest resources (approximately an average of $200,000 per year) to complete a full inventory of the system every three years, including the addition or removal of roadways in the system and updating the network for any construction or maintenance that has been conducted. As a part of developing a proactive pavement management plan, conduct “what-if” budget scenarios that show the impact of spending on the road network condition and the implications of different investment levels and philosophies on management. Ultimately, creating a three-year plan that includes both maintenance and reconstruction work for the County to manage closely until the time when an acceptable overall roadway condition is reached (and beyond) into routine management.

## Bridges

Bridge maintenance is critical for ensuring the safety of the traveling public. Routine inspections by GDOT allow organizations to prioritize where and when the investments need to be made. Approximately eight bridges were flagged as fair or worse considering structural components and nine additional non-GDOT bridges have weight limit restrictions. Some of these bridges already have funding identified for repair, while others will need to be upgraded or monitored over the coming years.

Funding within the asset management set-aside is included for bridge repair. However, large and critical bridge failures can come quickly and require more funding than originally allocated and including contingencies for these types of situations can be valuable.

## Signal Systems

DeKalb County operates and maintains 47% of traffic signals across both unincorporated DeKalb County roadways and in the cities of Avondale Estates, Clarkston, Decatur, Doraville, Pine Lake, Lithonia, Stonecrest, and Stone Mountain. More than 100 miles of fiber are used to connect DeKalb County traffic signals to GDOT-coordinated relays. DeKalb County’s annual expenditure for the operations and maintenance of ITS and traffic signals is approximately $0.75 million to $1 million.

As a part of the overall technology recommendations, it will be important for DeKalb County to first ensure that the basic programs, software systems, and infrastructure are well inventoried and maintained before advanced technology (I.e., Safety, Mobility, Automated, Real-time Traffic Management [SMART] corridors) can be implemented and leveraged to its greatest extent. In Tiers 1 and 2, set asides for technology should be prioritized for upgrading and maintaining software and infrastructure, and then future investments in Tiers 2 and 3 can focus more on advanced technology elements. A more detailed list of project recommendations for technology is included in the appendix.

## Funding Assumptions

The Unified Plan recommends the following investment levels for asset management (specifically roadway resurfacing and bridge repair) over the life of the plan:

* Tier 1 (6 years): $127,500,000
* Tier 2 (6 years): $107,000,000
* Tier 3 (15 years): $206,000,000

The amounts noted above are exclusively local funds through the SPLOST program and are in addition to state funding received through GDOT and Local Maintenance Improvement Grants (LMIG). The first tier assumes the largest annual investment due to the need to reach a state of good condition. In future tiers, fewer dollars are allocated to asset management, consistent with more of a maintenance level of investment. These amounts include not only the funds for repaving but also for the purchase and use of an asset management software system and the creation of a pavement

<!-- page 40 -->
# 06 – SURFACE TRANSPORTATION POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

management plan on a rotating three-year cycle. Also included in this amount is funding for capital bridge repair beyond traditional routine bridge maintenance. Funding for signal maintenance is included in the technology budgets discussed later in this chapter.

Recognizing that more funding in Tier 1 would be beneficial to reach a state of good condition sooner, the Unified Plan team recommends that surplus revenues from the SPLOST above and beyond the original projections from this plan should be allocated to asset management first to continue to reduce the County's resurfacing backlog. Beyond that, additional revenues could be reallocated to sidewalks and crossings as well as other areas of focus.

## DEKALB COUNTY FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION

Functional classification systems categorize roadways based on character and operational features. While the individual categories can vary between classification systems, they generally include arterials, collectors, and local roads. The key factors that determine a roadway's functional classification are mobility and access. Roads with higher mobility allow traffic to travel quicker over longer distances, while roads with better access offer vehicles with greater ability to enter and exit adjacent land uses through driveways and connecting roadways. Roadways cannot typically offer both high mobility and high access—there is always a trade-off. For example, arterials operate at higher speeds, offering high mobility but poor access to adjacent land uses. Conversely, local roads have low speeds and reduced mobility but offer greater access to adjacent destinations with more driveways and intersections.

The FHWA states that it is important to develop access standards that achieve a balance between property access and functional integrity of the road system in areas of varied land uses. Designating roadway facility hierarchy through functional classification promotes multimodal access. Proper functional classification designations ensure adequate property access, functional integrity of the roadway system, and non-vehicular travel.

Agencies define roadway classification for roads under their jurisdiction to apply more consistent design standards and policies. DeKalb’s roadway functional classification helps determine planning design elements that will influence many elements of access management, including right-of-way dedication, active transportation, number of access points, driveway spacing, emergency vehicle access, deceleration lane specifications, and interparcel access. *DeKalb County Code of Ordinances*, Section 14-200 defines access management specifications based on functional classification and land use characteristics. These access management specifications are applicable unless a more restrictive standard is required by GDOT.

Furthermore, functional classification drives design decisions for DeKalb County’s traffic calming program. The traffic calming program leverages the County’s functional classifications to determine eligibility. In this case, only local roads can currently participate in the program. DeKalb also determines sidewalk improvement eligibility using functional classification, as the County provides funding for sidewalks on non-local roads.

Because functional classification has such important and varied implications, the Unified Plan team coordinated with DeKalb County’s cities and neighboring jurisdictions to confirm functional classifications are consistent across borders. Within DeKalb, this coordination also meant that the recommended functional classifications met the needs of cities.

The CTP includes recommendations that the *DeKalb County Code of Ordinances* be reviewed for any mentions of functional classification and be updated according to the recommended functional classification map. This includes updating land use and development policies that are dependent upon functional classification and roadways to use the same roadway categories that are used in the recommended map. The CTP also includes recommendations that are consistent in functional classification, particularly across municipal boundaries, be assessed on a recurring basis.

<!-- page 41 -->
### DeKalb County Recommended Functional Classification

<<FIGURE>>

| | |
| :--- | :--- |
| — | Freeway |
| — | Major Arterial |
| — | Minor Arterial |
| -------- | Collector |
| — | Local |

<!-- page 42 -->
# Traffic Calming

The FHWA states that the primary purpose of traffic calming is to support the livability and vitality of residential and commercial areas through improvements in non-motorist safety, mobility, and comfort. These goals can be achieved by reducing vehicular speeds or volumes along roadways. Traffic calming measures include non-physical (e.g., enforcement and education for speeding) and physical treatments. Physical treatments calm traffic through horizontal deflection, vertical deflection, street width reduction, and traffic rerouting or restrictions.

DeKalb County developed a Traffic Calming Program (adopted in 1995 and revised in 2001) to address concerns from citizens for speeding along residential street. The full Residential Traffic Calming Code is found in Chapter 17, Article 3, Division 3 of the DeKalb County Code of Ordinances.

The following is a summary of the current criteria, evaluation, and implementation process for traffic calming treatments in DeKalb County.

* A street must be classified as local residential on the County’s Thoroughfare Plan and have a posted speed limit of 30 mph or less to be eligible for the Traffic Calming Program.
* The citizen (i.e., the initiator) makes a request to the County.
* The initiator is granted a 45-day initial interest petition period to gather signature representing 20% support from property owners or renters on the street.
* County staff conducts a traffic study to evaluate that the speed and volume of the location. The 85th percentile speed (i.e., the speed at which 85 percent are traveling at or below) must be 11 mph greater than the posted speed limit or the volume of vehicles must be greater than anticipated when compared to the Institute of Transportation Engineer’s (ITE) Trip Generation Rates.
* County staff develops conceptual plans and refines recommendations in coordination with the initiator.
* A public hearing is conducted and the County’s Board of Commissioners (BOC) votes starting the 90-day final petition process.
* The initiator must obtain signatures from property owners of the parcels within the identified affected area totaling a 65% approval within the 90-day petition process period. This step is done to identify property owners who will pay the special tax district for maintenance of the traffic calming treatments ($25 per parcel per year).
* The County’s BOC votes to approve the implementation.
* The traffic calming project is sent to DeKalb’s Roads and Drainage for implementation.
* Traffic calming treatments may be removed through a petition procedure outlined in County Code Section 17-129.

The following are some examples of traffic calming treatments considered by DeKalb for the Traffic Calming Program.

| Treatment | Treatment Typology |
| :--- | :--- |
| Splitter Island | Horizontal Deflection |
| Center Island | Horizontal Deflection |
| Speed Table | Vertical Deflection |
| Bike Lanes | Street Width Reduction |

DeKalb is currently evaluating expanding the Traffic Calming Program to include treatments and measures for roadways with functional classifications other than local residential. The County should continue to collaborate with local emergency services agencies and other stakeholders to ensure that the identified physical treatments are effective and adequate for all vehicle types.

<!-- page 43 -->
# Transportation Safety

The findings of the ECNA analyses indicate that, like nationwide and state trends, crashes involving fatalities and serious injuries in DeKalb increased between 2015 and 2019. Transportation safety should continue to be a central focus for DeKalb through developing policies that support the national movement and GDOT’s focus of moving towards zero deaths and serious injuries for all road users. DeKalb County and its neighboring agencies should strive to align regional efforts with the emphasis areas presented in the state’s Strategic Highway Safety Plan (2022-2024 SHSP), published by the governor’s Office of Highway Safety (GOHS) in 2021. The 2022-2024 SHSP identified the following emphasis areas to be the top contributing factors to fatal and serious injury crashes in Georgia:

* Pedestrian safety
* Motorcycle safety
* Older drivers (55+ years)
* Impaired driving
* Occupant protection (seatbelt)
* Distracted driving
* Young adult drivers
* Bicycle safety
* Intersection safety and roadway departure

While some crashes can be mitigated through roadway and intersection improvements, many crashes result from driver behavior and cannot be solved through engineering. Therefore, the 2022-2024 SHSP highlights the “4 Safety Es”: Engineering, Education, Enforcement, and Emergency Medical Services.

The following is a summary of policy recommendations that can help DeKalb County continue to improve safety for all road users:

* Monitor locations after implementing Tier 1 projects (i.e., years 1-6 of the Unified Plan) to assess the impact of improvements on historical crash trends before and after implementation. Please note, projects were identified, developed, and prioritized building upon the findings of the ECNA report which considered 5 years of crash data.
* Establish and regularly monitor transportation safety performance measures and goals for crashes occurring in the County like those summarized in the 2022-2024 SHSP to better understand how progress is being made.
* Collaborate with GDOT’s District 7 Safety Office and other agencies to obtain historical crash data and better understand high-risk roadway segment and intersection locations in the County.
* Participate in regional trainings such as GDOT’s “See & Be Seen” and “Drive Alert /Arrive Alive.”
* Participate in national trainings such as National Walking Summit and the Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals (APBP).
* Work with the County’s police department to focus on enforcement for distracted driving (i.e., texting while driving), failure to yield for pedestrians in crosswalk, speeding, and compliance with School Zones.
* Conduct a Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP) in collaboration with GDOT and ARC.

| Engineering Countermeasures (Source: 2022-2024 SHSP) |
| :--- |
| Intersection geometry improvements |
| Enhanced signing and pavement marking enhancements |
| Intersection lighting improvements |
| Signal backplates |
| Leading pedestrian intervals (LPI)—a signal timing treatment that improves safety for pedestrians |
| High visibility crosswalks and upgrade pedestrian signals |
| Flashing yellow arrows |
| Protected only left turn |

<!-- page 44 -->
# FREIGHT

The efficient movement of goods through the freight network is vital to the economic health of DeKalb County. DeKalb County’s local economy includes several industries (i.e., manufacturing, logistics, and distribution) that rely on freight movements to deliver or distribute material goods to and from the County. In addition to industry, the growth in e-commerce catalyzed during the COVID-19 pandemic has increased reliance of everyday families on freight deliveries. It is important for the DeKalb Unified Plan to account for transportation needs derived from freight demands and understand its effects on the larger transportation network.

<<FIGURE>>

Source: Atlanta Regional Freight Mobility Plan Update (2016)

## Truck Routes

Freight trucking plays a significant role in driving industries that contribute to DeKalb County’s economy. The ARC’s *Atlanta Regional Freight Mobility Plan Update (2016)* identified the I-85/Peachtree Industrial Boulevard/Jimmy Carter Boulevard area in DeKalb County as one of Metro Atlanta’s major freight activity clusters. Since the County is home to a lot of freight activity, it is especially important that its roadway network can accommodate large volumes of heavy vehicle traffic, where appropriate.

Chapter 17 of the *DeKalb County Code of Ordinances* designates truck routes where heavy vehicles can legally operate for the purpose of the general travel throughout the County. GDOT specifies that all state routes must be truck routes. Beyond state routes, the Unified Plan includes other roadways that should be designated as truck routes to effectively facilitate the movement of goods throughout the County. The truck route network also includes sanitation routes used by the DeKalb Sanitation Division. The *DeKalb County Code of Ordinances* also states that trucks may use roadways not designated as truck routes to make specific deliveries, within reason. I-285 is used by trucks traveling through metro Atlanta as truck traffic is not allowed along I-75 and I-85 unless they are making specific deliveries.

Continuous travel across jurisdictional boundaries is an important characteristic for operators to efficiently move goods throughout metro Atlanta. This goes beyond intra-county travel among unincorporated areas and incorporated cities as it includes roadways that cross jurisdictional boundaries between DeKalb County and adjacent communities. The Unified Plan team coordinated with adjacent communities to ensure truck route continuity and prevent costly miscommunications in the future. Many municipalities within DeKalb have adopted the County’s truck route network within their own jurisdictions and some municipalities maintain their own lists building upon the County’s (i.e., Atlanta, Avondale, Brookhaven, Doraville, Dunwoody, and Stonecrest). Some municipalities restrict truck travel along certain roadways based on specified truck sizes and weight classes. For example, Chamblee specifies truck restrictions along certain roads for trucks larger than 30 feet or 18 tons. **The following figure illustrates** the recommended truck routes network, transfer stations, and the Seminole Landfill. Transfer stations are used by the County’s commercial customers to process solid wasted material, and residents may use the Seminole Landfill to dispose of yard trimmings and solid waste.

The Unified Plan includes the following proposed modifications be made to the County’s code of ordinances for truck route restrictions as identified in coordination with adjacent communities:
* **Pleasantdale Road from I–85 to Gwinnett County line:** Designate as a DeKalb Truck Route to be consistent with Doraville

<!-- page 45 -->
and Gwinnett County designation
* **Klondike Road from Rockdale County line to Covington Highway:** Remove truck route designation to be consistent with Stonecrest designation

Roadway projects that are along designated truck routes should consider the safe accommodation of heavy vehicles in their designs. The ARC’s *Strategic Regional Thoroughfare Plan* identifies important considerations for the design of truck-friendly roadways, including lane and shoulder widths, speed limits, turning radii at intersections, bridge conditions, signal timing, and more. On roadways where heavy vehicles operate alongside bicycle and pedestrian traffic, design considerations must be even more carefully considered. Elements such as on-street parking, designated bicycle lanes, and green space buffer can protect pedestrians by providing auxiliary space in which heavy vehicles can turn with sufficient clearance. The ARC is beginning an update to the regional freight plan that will include further guidance for design standards within different contextual settings. Findings from the new plan can inform future roadway and multimodal designs within DeKalb County.

<!-- page 46 -->
# 06 – SURFACE TRANSPORTATION POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 47 -->
## Truck Parking

The demand for truck freight activity continues to increase nationwide, far outpacing the supply of available public and parking facilities. The FHWA states that commercial truck drivers need access to safe, secure, and accessible truck parking. A lack of adequate truck parking can result in drowsy truck drivers continuing to drive or choosing to park in unsafe locations (e.g., shoulder of the road, exit ramps, or vacant lots). DeKalb County and partner agencies also should ensure that designated parking facilities are located in areas buffered from residential. The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) establishes national hours-of-service regulations for truck activity, including driving limits (i.e., 11 hours of driving are allowed after 10 consecutive hours of rest) and 30-minute breaks after eight cumulative hours of driving. Regulations like these ensure that truck drivers stay alert but require the presence of strategic parking facilities along truck traffic corridors.

The ARC conducted the *Atlanta Regional Truck Parking Assessment Study (2018)* comprising the 20-county Metro Atlanta region and key adjacent counties. The study concluded that there is not enough designated truck parking in DeKalb County despite the County being a hub for freight activity in the region. The study identified 10 truck traffic corridors impacting the region of which five traverse DeKalb County (i.e., I-20, I-85, I-285 North/East, I-285 South, and I-675).

* As of 2018, DeKalb had zero publicly controlled truck parking facilities (out of 189 available spaces in the region) and three privately controlled truck parking facilities comprising of 114 truck parking spaces (out of 3,561 available spaces in the region)
* According to the study, DeKalb will need more than 900 truck parking spaces along the ARC's truck traffic corridors by 2045
* The ARC identified five illegal truck parking locations in DeKalb County in 2017 and illegal truck parking incidents were observed daily
* The ARC identified three candidate truck parking locations in DeKalb, including two vacant lot/building and a Walmart Superstore
* As of 2022, several new truck parking facilities are proposed in DeKalb (specifically in the south/Metro South CID [MSCID] area)

Truck parking facilities in DeKalb should be developed with design considerations that consider parking supply, location and quality of life, safety, and technology. The following is a summary of strategies and policy recommendations based on findings from ARC's *Atlanta Regional Truck Parking Assessment Study (2018)* and industry best practices. DeKalb should consider these strategies and policy recommendations for existing and planned designated truck parking facilities.

### Parking Supply

* Conduct an inventory to validate the truck parking supply identified in the ARC's *Atlanta Regional Truck Parking Assessment Study (2018)*
* Increase truck parking supply by considering the following:
    * Evaluate existing truck stops, public facilities, and private lots for opportunities to redesign and expand available truck parking spaces
    * Evaluate vacant industrial spaces and brownfield sites for new truck parking facilities. The Mid-America Freight Coalition (MAFC) provides screening guidelines in *An Evaluation of Vacant Urban Land for Truck Parking (2017)*
* Coordinate with shippers and receivers to allow onsite parking
* Use park-and-ride lots during non-peak and overnight periods
* Establish partnership agreements with commercial shopping centers
* Coordinate with existing manufacturing, logistics, and distribution centers in DeKalb to identify where additional truck parking locations within the County may be needed

### Location and Quality of Life

* Locate truck parking facilities away from residential areas and consider residential buffers of at least 500 feet
* Locate truck parking facilities near commercial/retail opportunities where truck drivers have access to food and other needs
* Ensure truck parking facilities are equipped with vending machines, restrooms, and showers
* Ensure that truck parking facilities are equipped with electric hookups to allow trucks to use the facilities without idling. This measure will improve air quality and reduce noise generated

<!-- page 48 -->
# 06 – SURFACE TRANSPORTATION POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

by parked trucks. Previous studies suggest the use of electric hookups at all spaces decreases noise by up to 30% compared to a site where trucks idle
* Ensure adequate noise abatement amenities. Concrete barrier walls are the most effective sight and noise abatement measure. An 8-foot concrete wall can reduce noise from a site by up to 10 decibels
* Ensure there is adequate water retention for site runoff

### Safety
* Identify locations where trucks are parking illegally and work with partner agencies to enforce policies
* Consider features that address safety for truck patrons and neighboring properties such as adequate lighting, fencing, gated entry, and security cameras
* Ensure truck parking facilities have space for fire department access

### Technology
* Partner with other agencies and parking facility property owners to implement and use mobile applications for truck drivers to find available parking (e.g., Trucker Path, myPilot, and Truck Smart)
* Promote the implementation of Truck Parking Information Management Systems (TPIMS) which convey real-time information to truck drivers about available parking
* Provide Wi-Fi for truck parking patrons
* Ensure that future electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure in DeKalb considers designated truck parking facilities as part of stakeholder activities related to regional efforts and the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Formula Program (NEVI)

## Rail Freight

Rail freight is equally influential to DeKalb's transportation system. Two Class I (i.e., defined by an operating revenue of $250 million or more) railroads operate in Metro Atlanta and traverse DeKalb County—CSX Transportation (CSXT) and Norfolk Southern (NS). The ARC's *Atlanta Regional Freight Mobility Plan Update (2016)* states that more than 25% of the freight tonnage in Metro Atlanta occurs by rail. Furthermore, global market trends such as the Panama Canal expansion will result in increased freight flows from the port of Savannah to Metro Atlanta on truck and rail.

DeKalb County has over 120 at-grade railroad crossings which can add to roadway delay and introduce conflict points between rail vehicles and other roadway users. The County should periodically (e.g., annually) evaluate rail crossings to identify locations that may pose a high risk and would benefit from capital improvements. A comprehensive safety evaluation of rail crossings should include the following information:
* **Historical Train Incidents Data:** Incident data summarizing crashes between train vehicles and motorists or pedestrians is available from the Federal Railroad Administration's (FRA) Office of Safety Analysis webpage.
* **Crossing Inventory Characteristics:** Inventory information summarizing average daily train crossings, maximum timetable train speed, and type of existing warning devices is available from the FRA's Office of Safety Analysis webpage.
* **Existing Traffic Characteristics:** Annual average daily traffic (AADT), posted speed limit, and other existing conditions information is available from County and GDOT resources.

The FRA and the FHWA developed the *Rail Crossing Handbook, Third Edition (2019)* which provides guidance and best practices for engineering treatments to improve rail crossing safety and mobility. The following is a summary of engineering treatments DeKalb may consider for future improvements at and near rail crossings:

**Passive Crossing Treatments** include warning and regulatory traffic control devices such as pavement markings and signage. Implementing clear signage and pavement markings at rail crossing locations can have a positive impact (i.e., reduction) in the number of vehicles stopping on the tracks or their influence area.

<!-- page 49 -->
Special emphasis pavement markings and signage that go beyond the typical installations can be further effective for congested areas where queuing on the tracks is of concern due to limited available storage downstream of the crossing. Dynamic envelope zone pavement marking is an example of special emphasis passive crossing treatment. White connecting Xs visually highlight to motorists the influence area they should avoid. The Florida DOT (FDOT) observed that vehicles stopping on or too close to rail crossings was reduced by 15% with the installation of dynamic envelope pavement markings based on a study conducted from 2014 to 2017.

<<FIGURE>>

**Source: FDOT, Operation STRIDE (2020)**

**Active Crossing Treatments** inform users of the approach or presence of rail traffic. These include flashing lights (i.e., both mast-mounted or cantilevered), bells, and automated gates. Four-quadrant gate systems consist of flashing lights and gates which extend across all lanes of travel of the roadway. Four-quadrant gates further inhibit drivers from crossing after the gates have lowered.

**Rail Preemption** should be enabled for traffic signals near rail crossings (i.e., within 200 feet). Rail preemption consists of a sequence in the traffic signal phasing and timing to allow traffic to clear from the track area prior to the arrival of a train.

The County should investigate using a tool like Texas DOT’s (TxDOT) Guide for Determining Time Requirements for Traffic Signal Pre-Emption at Highway Rail Grade Crossings (Form 2304). Tools such as this can aid traffic signal maintaining agencies to optimize and refine rail preemption parameters.

**Queue Management Strategies** include traffic signal equipment and systems beyond rail preemption to help keep vehicle queues from extending over the tracks. Chapter 2 of the *Rail Crossing Handbook, Third Edition (2019)* provides guidance for evaluating which queue management strategies are most applicable for rail crossing locations.

Clear Storage Distance and Minimum Track Clearance Distance are measurements for rail crossings that are used to evaluate suitable queue management strategies.

<<FIGURE>>

**Source: FRA**

**Pre-Signals** are used where the clear storage distance is not enough to store one or more vehicles. They control traffic approaching a grade crossing concurrently with the traffic signal beyond the tracks. Pre-Signals should be considered where the Clear Storage Distance is 50-75 feet to 200-250 feet.

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 50 -->
# 06 – SURFACE TRANSPORTATION POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

**Queue-Cutter Signals** operate independent of nearby traffic signals. They prevent vehicles queuing across tracks at crossings and are activated by the detection of a queue getting too close to the crossing. These signals are located just upstream of a rail crossing where traffic often queues across the crossing due to a downstream condition. Queue-Cutter Signals should be considered where the Clear Storage Distance is 450-500 feet.

<<FIGURE>>

**Source: FRA**

**Crossing Closure** should be considered where a rail crossing is redundant with nearby locations. Rail crossing locations may be eligible for elimination grant opportunities.

**Grade Separation** should be considered where posted highway speeds exceed 55 mph, traffic levels exceed 30,000 AADT, or where train activity is significantly great (i.e., 30 or more trains per day, high train speeds).

DeKalb should investigate if crossing or grade separation are suitable strategies for key rail crossing locations in the County using FRA’s GradeDec.net rail crossing investment online application.

## Airport

DeKalb-Peachtree Airport (PDK) is in the City of Chamblee and is generally bounded by Chamblee Tucker Road to the north, Dresden Drive to the south, US 23/Buford Highway NE to the east, and Clairmont Road to the west. PDK is classified as a general aviation reliever airport for Metro Atlanta. On average, PDK services 230,000 operations-takeoffs and landings per year and is considered the second-busiest airport in Georgia, second to Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport. The airport supports over 760 aviation-related jobs and is home to four aviation service companies, seven flight schools, and two helicopter operations.

DeKalb should continue to coordinate with PDK and partner agencies (i.e., Chamblee) on transportation projects that improve multimodal access to the airport as identified in previous plans, such as One Chamblee Comprehensive Plan, Chamblee Mobility Plan, and DeKalb Peachtree Airport’s Airport Master Plan Update.

*   Buford Highway Multimodal Improvements
*   Chamblee-Tucker Multiuse Path
*   Dresden Drive Streetscape
*   Hardee Avenue Multimodal Improvements
*   Peachtree Boulevard Access Management

DeKalb County can improve freight operations by focusing on the following key aspects of freight travel in coordination with partner agencies and organizations (e.g., adjacent jurisdictions and CIDs):

*   Continue to refine designated truck routes within the County coordinating across jurisdictional boundaries
*   Facilitate the creation of truck parking in appropriate locations within DeKalb County
*   Implement small-scale operational projects that improve safety and mobility for freight travel
*   Improve at-grade crossings with freight rail to increase safety and vehicular operations

<!-- page 51 -->
# ACCESS MANAGEMENT

As discussed earlier, a tension exists between providing mobility and providing access along a roadway. A traditional approach to dealing with issues of congestion is often to widen the roadway to increase its capacity. While this may add incremental value by reducing congestion, it also results in other negatives such as property impacts, more challenging environments for walking, cycling, and transit service, and more impervious surfaces and aesthetic impacts. In more developed communities, like much of DeKalb County, widening may not even be feasible.

An alternative approach to reducing congestion is access management. Access management preserves existing roadway corridors while improving access to nearby destinations, allowing corridors to maintain mobility without physically expanding. When done successfully, access management can improve safety and efficiency while decreasing commute times, fuel consumption and emissions, and cut-through traffic in residential areas.

There are three main strategies for successful access management:
* Minimizing the number of conflict points where vehicles are likely to be making opposing movements
* Maximizing the distance between conflict points
* Providing inter-parcel connectivity

Various techniques can be employed to accomplish these strategies. This section of the CTP will provide a brief overview of those techniques as well as final recommendations for access management in the *DeKalb County Code of Ordinances*.

The strategic placement and design of driveways along roadways can help to control access, reduce vehicular conflict points, and avoid traffic spillback onto the roadway. When driveways are placed close together or located across from each other, they can create driver confusion and cause potential turning movements to overlap. Concentrating turning movements to a few well-spaced, defined driveways reduce conflict points and allow drivers to better predict the movements of other vehicles. Additionally, designing driveways to have longer transition sections between the roadway and

<<FIGURE>>

onsite intersections improves mobility and gives drivers more time to make decisions, reducing the likelihood that the driveway will cause traffic to spill out onto the roadway. Reducing the number of driveways also creates predictability for pedestrians so they can be alert to the locations of potential conflict.

Implementing medians and improving traffic signal coordination can improve traffic flow, reduce congestion, and lower crash rates. Medians, especially raised or depressed medians, primarily yield benefits through the management of left-turn and U-turn movements along a corridor. Depending on the volume of turning movements, median openings can allow left turns along both the major and minor streets as well as U-turns from the major street, or they can only allow turning movements from the major street. Creating a series of appropriately spaced medians creates a hierarchy of decision points that allows for smoother traffic movements. Improving traffic signal coordination can yield similar benefits to medians. Providing adequate spacing between traffic signals and optimizing their timing can improve travel times and safety via the synchronization of signals along a corridor.

Some land use policies can also aid in successful access management. Land development regulations and zoning policies along a corridor have an impact on the mobility and safety of the roadway,

<!-- page 52 -->
# 06 – SURFACE TRANSPORTATION POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

so they should be designed to encourage or require the interconnectivity of parcels and local roadways. Numerous roadways within DeKalb County are designated as major arterials while also having many closely spaced driveways to commercial properties: North Druid Hills Road, Clairmont Road, and Scott Boulevard, to name a few. Promoting inter-parcel access and local road connectivity (at a minimum for new developments) relieves pressure on major roadways also tasked with facilitating cross-county travel.

The CTP recommends that the *DeKalb County Code of Ordinances* be reviewed for existing access management requirements. Moving these requirements into one access management ordinance will consolidate access management requirements, reducing overlapping and confusing requirements. If any specific areas (i.e., overlay areas) have specific access management requirements, their relevant zoning section should have a standard access management subsection. Existing access management policies should be reviewed and updated based on the strategies and techniques laid out in this section as well as GDOT access management standards and FHWA access management guidance. Additionally, existing access management requirements that are informed by functional classifications should be updated to match the functional classification map provided in this plan.

<<FIGURE>>

Source: FHWA

<!-- page 53 -->
## TECHNOLOGY

ITS leverage advanced technology and communications to monitor and manage the movement of people and goods across a transportation system. ITS infrastructure provides real-time data and information related to system performance to enable an agency to quickly respond to issues. Deployment of ITS technologies is one of many strategies that should be part of a successful Transportation System Management and Operations (TSMO) program. When compared with traditional roadway infrastructure projects, ITS can be an extremely cost-effective solution to enhance safety and mobility. Implementing ITS technologies and strategies could provide DeKalb County with a range of benefits, including enhanced traffic flow, reduced congestion, and more efficient and sustainable use of County resources.

The majority of the County’s existing ITS capabilities are located on state routes managed by GDOT as part of their statewide traffic signal operations (SigOps) program. Signalized intersections along state routes fall within GDOT District 7 and management is split between the SigOps Central Metro and SigOps Eastern Metro regions. GDOT traffic signals typically run time-of-day operational plans with traffic responsive (TR) plans implemented along Memorial Drive and several other corridors currently under consideration. TR operations are designed to implement preprogrammed traffic signal timing plans based on real-time traffic conditions. Many of the state routes maintained by GDOT are equipped with fiber optic communications and have closed-circuit television (CCTV) camera coverage.

DeKalb County manages almost 400 traffic signals located in incorporated and unincorporated areas of the County. These traffic signals are located outside of the jurisdiction of the cities of Atlanta, Brookhaven, Chamblee, and Dunwoody. All County managed traffic signals run time-of-day operations. DeKalb County has a small fiber optic communications network that connects several corridors to the County’s Traffic Control Center (TCC) and the GDOT communications network. The TCC performs some limited active traffic management activities for connected traffic signals, but a majority of the County’s traffic signals do not have the required technology or network communications needed to support remote management using GDOT’s MaxView software.

There are a limited number of connected vehicle (CV) deployments in the County. GDOT has deployed roadside units (RSUs) at several traffic signals within the County and has a multi-year plan to deploy RSUs at all GDOT managed signals. Additionally, GDOT and the County have deployed transit signal priority (TSP) along several corridors, including Memorial Drive and Candler Road. Many of the DeKalb County managed traffic signals do not currently have the infrastructure (technology or communications) required to support more advanced technologies. Upgrading County traffic signal controllers and installing a robust communications network will allow the County to take advantage of more advanced transportation technologies to improve operations throughout the transportation system.

<<FIGURE>>

To better manage the County’s transportation network and leverage the benefits of ITS technologies, the CTP includes a number of project recommendations, each of which has been assigned to one of four project categories: Programmatic, Infrastructure, Operations, and Advanced Functionality. Programmatic projects are those projects that are more institutional in nature and should be implemented first as they will provide the County with the framework on which all future CTP projects will be implemented. Once Programmatic project elements are implemented, the County will need to build out the transportation system through a series of infrastructure projects focused on traffic signal technology, ITS, and communications. Once the required technology and communications are in place, the County can begin to implement Operational projects designed to improve safety and mobility across the transportation system. The last project category, Advanced Functionality, should be implemented only after the other projects are successfully implemented. The following sections

<!-- page 54 -->
# 06 – SURFACE TRANSPORTATION POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

provide a brief overview of each project category and outline some of the projects included in each. The appendix has a full list of all transportation technology project recommendations included in the CTP.

## Programmatic

Programmatic projects are those projects that are focused on the development of strategies, processes, and procedures to be implemented by the County prior to beginning any large scale ITS or technology deployment projects. These projects will provide the foundation on which a robust transportation system and traffic management program will be built and will be integral to the success of future infrastructure, operations, and advanced functionality projects. With a strong Programmatic framework in place, the County could implement future projects in a strategic and consistent manner and is able to maximize the benefits obtained from each project.

Near-term Programmatic projects identified in the CTP include the development of active asset management plans for all ITS and traffic signal equipment, a transportation data management plan, and an operations and maintenance plan. Master plans for the deployment of traffic signal infrastructure, ITS assets, and a communications network were also included as near-term projects as they could be vital to the successful deployment of these assets. In the mid-term, the County can work to implement each of the various plans developed and could consider procurement, deployment, and integration of asset management system (AMS) software to effectively manage County assets. Long-term Programmatic projects will focus on reviewing and updating each of the plans developed and the automation of AMS processes and procedures.

## Infrastructure

Infrastructure projects are those projects focused on buildout of the transportation system, specifically from a technology and communications standpoint. Deployment of advanced traffic signal controller and ITS assets will be a significant component of these projects. When fully deployed, the Infrastructure projects will provide the foundational and technological capabilities required to better manage the transportation system, including the ability to remotely monitor and manage field assets, and operational strategies required for effective traffic management. Infrastructure projects should also allow the County to implement the Operational and Advanced Functionality projects outlined in the CTP.

Near-term Infrastructure projects include upgrades to and/or replacement of existing end-of-life, malfunctioning, or non-functioning traffic signal and ITS infrastructure, including traffic signal cabinets, controllers, and vehicle detection. Buildout of a fiber-optic communications network and deployment of ITS technology could be part of both near-and mid-term projects. The County could focus on buildout of critical, high-volume corridors first and gradually expand to less critical, lower volume corridors. Where fiber-optic communications to remote traffic signals is not practical or cost effective, cellular communications can be utilized. Long-term infrastructure projects consist of reevaluating existing traffic signal, ITS technology, and communications network infrastructure to determine its suitability for future use, identification of upgrades and/or additional improvement projects, and an evaluation of potential impacts of more advanced technologies including CV, automated vehicles (AV), and SMART corridors.

## Operations

Operations projects are those projects that are primarily focused on implementing operational improvements designed to improve safety and mobility throughout the County transportation system. These projects should focus on implementing strategies that are possible because of the technology and communications infrastructure deployed as part of the Infrastructure projects identified in the CTP. Operational projects also could include the deployment of or upgrades to central software systems that could allow the County to remotely manage ITS assets deployed in the field.

Near-term Operations projects included in the CTP (to be completed by the County) include modifications to existing traffic signal timing plans to improve safety, including implementing flashing-yellow arrow (FYA) and protected left turn phasing, where none is currently present. Operational projects also include corridor retiming to improve vehicle progression. Another near-term project that could extend to mid-term projects is further integration of traffic signals into GDOT's MaxView ATMS software and open-source Automated Traffic Signal Performance Measures (ATSPM) and SigOps

<!-- page 55 -->
Metrics software. Integration of traffic signals into
these software applications will allow the County
to remotely manage traffic signals and analyze
operations at the individual intersection, corridor,
and systemwide level. TR operational plans could
also be implemented on higher volume corridors as
part of mid-term projects. Long-term Operational
projects could focus on improvements in response
to changing traffic patterns that occur over the
near- and mid-term.

### Advanced Functionality

Advanced Functionality projects included in the CTP
are those projects that either cannot or should not
be initiated until other foundational elements of
the transportation system have been implemented.
Advanced Functionality projects include projects
that incorporate complex operational strategies
that may require additional software or technology
as well as significant inter-agency coordination
to implement. The benefits that can be achieved
through these projects can be significant, but they
are often difficult to realize without proper planning
and coordination.

The CTP does not identify any near-term Advanced
Functionality projects as these projects could require
buildout of traffic signal and ITS infrastructure and
the County communications network before they
can be implemented. Mid-term and long-term
projects include deployment of more advanced
traffic management strategies, including adaptive
traffic signal operations, vehicle preemption (i.e.,
emergency vehicles and rail), TSP, and enhanced
work zone management. Advanced Functionality
projects also include County deployment of CV and
AV projects as these technologies rapidly progresses
and are deployed more broadly in the coming years.

A major component of the mid-term and long-term
advanced functionality projects could be developing
and implementing SMART corridors in the County.
While there is no single definition for a SMART
corridor, the term generally refers to a corridor
that leverages technology and communications
to integrate multiple systems and real-time data
to enhance safety and improve mobility along the
corridor. SMART corridors generally have higher
traffic volumes, significant multimodal activity, are
located near activity centers or major businesses,
and provide opportunities to address equity in the
community.

The CTP project team performed a technical analysis
of DeKalb County's roadway network to determine
which roadway corridors would be good candidates
for future SMART corridor projects. The base unit
for the technical analysis was the ARC's travel
demand model line segments. Segments
were assigned scores based on seven equally
weighted criteria:

1. **Volume:** Daily bi-directional traffic volumes
were calculated for all travel demand model
line segments.
2. **Safety:** Segment crash rates calculated in the
ECNA report were spatially related to each
travel demand model line segment.
3. **Transit:** The transit score was comprised of
two components. The first component was
determined by using existing bus ridership,
and the second component depended on a
segment’s proximity to future transit stops
based on the MARTA full-penny scenario.
4. **Multimodality:** The multimodality score
was comprised of two components. The
first component was determined based on
a segment’s proximity to existing multiuse
paths/trails, and the second component was
based on the existing bike lane network.
5. **Employment/Activity Centers:** The ECNA
report identified areas in DeKalb County
considered to be either employment
centers or activity centers.
6. **Equity:** Segments were evaluated for
equity based on total population, minority
population, low-income population, and
zero-vehicle population.
7. **Existing infrastructure:** Segments were
evaluated for existing infrastructure based on
signal density and the presence of an existing
fiber network and CCTVs.

The technical analysis identified ten corridors with
the highest composite scores as potential candidates
for a SMART corridor. The project team worked with
County staff and analyzed other ongoing or planned
future projects within the County to identify two final
SMART corridor project candidates. The actual limits
of each SMART corridor project can be determined as
part of future discussions with the County staff and a
more detailed analysis of existing corridor conditions.

* **SMART Corridor #1 – Memorial Drive**
* **SMART Corridor #2 – Candler Road**

<!-- page 56 -->
<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 57 -->
# COMPLETE STREETS

Complete Streets are streets designed to be and feel safe for all users of the transportation system, regardless of mode, age, or ability. Design solutions are expected to be collaborative and take into consideration the access of all users, the context of local built and natural environments, and the appearance of the roadway corridor. While DeKalb County has been pursuing the expansion of its bicycle, pedestrian, and transit networks over the past several years, the CTP has included an updated Complete Streets Policy to formalize these efforts.

The CTP recommends that DeKalb County to continue using the most current complete streets guidelines and design best practices. Existing design manuals, guidance, and publications from organizations such as the FHWA, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), GDOT, ARC, and ITE should be used whenever possible. It is the continued intent of DeKalb County to pursue a complete streets policy that is aligned with USDOT and GDOT complete streets policies. The following bullets are the polices:

*   **USDOT Policy Statement:** “The DOT policy is to incorporate safe and convenient walking and bicycling facilities into transportation projects. Every transportation agency, including DOT, has the responsibility to improve conditions and opportunities for walking and bicycling and to integrate walking and bicycling into their transportation systems. Because of the numerous individual and community benefits that walking and bicycling provide—including health, safety, environmental, transportation, and quality of life—transportation agencies are encouraged to go beyond minimum standards to provide safe and convenient facilities for these modes.”
*   **GDOT Policy Statement:** “It is the policy of GDOT to routinely incorporate bicycle, pedestrian, and transit (user and transit vehicle) accommodations into transportation infrastructure projects as a means for improving mobility, access, and safety for the traveling public. Accordingly, GDOT coordinates with local governments and regional planning agencies to ensure that bicycle, pedestrian, and transit needs are addressed beginning with system planning and continuing through design, construction, and maintenance and operations.”

DeKalb County should also consider guidance published by the National Complete Streets Coalition (NCSC). The components established by the NCSC include:

*   **Establishes commitment and vision:** How and why does the community want to complete its streets? This specifies a clear statement of intent to create a complete, connected network and consider the needs of all users.
*   **Prioritizes diverse users:** It prioritizes serving the most vulnerable users and the most underinvested and underserved communities, improving equity.
*   **Applies to all projects and phases:** Instead of a limited set of projects, it applies to all new, retrofit/reconstruction, maintenance, and ongoing projects.
*   **Allows only clear exceptions:** Any exceptions must be specific, with a clear procedure that requires high-level approval and public notice prior to exceptions being granted.
*   **Mandates coordination:** Requires private developers to comply and interagency coordination between government departments and partner agencies.
*   **Adopts excellent design guidance:** Directs agencies to use the latest and best design criteria and guidelines and sets a time frame for implementing this guidance.
*   **Requires proactive land use planning:** Considers every project’s greater context as well as the surrounding community’s current and expected land use and transportation needs.
*   **Measures progress:** Establishes specific performance measures that match the goals of the broader vision, measurably improve disparities, and are regularly reported to the public.
*   **Sets criteria for choosing projects:** Creates or updates the criteria for choosing transportation projects so that Complete Streets projects are prioritized.
*   **Creates a plan for implementation:** A formal commitment to the Complete Streets approach is only the beginning. It must include specific steps for implementing the policy in ways that will make a measurable impact on what gets built and where.

While the County should consider the safety and mobility of all road users across all modes on every County-maintained roadway, certain types of urban

<!-- page 58 -->
# 06 – SURFACE TRANSPORTATION POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

thoroughfares should be given especially intense consideration. The ITE/CNU manual, *Designing Walkable Urban Thoroughfares: A Context Sensitive Approach*, defines different types of urban thoroughfares and their relation to functional classifications. Of the identified thoroughfare types, boulevards, avenues, and streets should receive the highest level of context sensitive considerations for complete street design.

The DeKalb County CTP team recommends that County incorporate Complete Streets principles into appropriate plans, projects, and programs and specify how the County can continue to support complete streets application on streets owned by DeKalb County. The County, at a minimum, should recommend that all roadway projects, including new construction and renovation, consider and document decisions regarding installation of facilities that safely accommodate for bicycle, pedestrian, and transit users. For roadways that are not directly owned by the County, DeKalb County should coordinate with partner agencies and departments. DeKalb County should also work to develop a community engagement plan in the project selection, design, and implementation process that includes and prioritizes vulnerable communities. There are certain roadway corridors that can serve as exceptions from the complete streets policy. Where exceptions might exist, the County should work to document the decision-making processes regarding the corridors. Exceptions may exist for:

* Corridors that legally prohibit specific users (such as freeways that prohibit bicyclists and pedestrians).
* Corridors that have a documented absence of current and future need for multimodal facilities
* Corridors that have a cost of providing bicycle and pedestrian facilities that is excessively disproportionate to the need or probable use.
* Roadways not owned or operated by DeKalb County. On these roadways, the County should encourage the appropriate agencies to design and construct projects in accordance with the Complete Streets policy.

To further the value of the CTP's Complete Streets recommendation, the County should consider revising the Code of Ordinances to include improved design guidance and proactive land use planning that is context sensitive.

| Throughfare Type | Description | Associated Functional Classes |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| Boulevard | Walkable, medium-speed divided urban thoroughfare<br>Through and local traffic, pedestrians, and bicyclists<br>Primary goods movement and emergency response route<br>Serves longer trips and provides pedestrian access to land<br>Typically a longer corridor with four or more lanes | Major Arterial, Minor Arterial |
| Avenue | Walkable, low-to-medium speed urban thoroughfare<br>Primary pedestrian and bicycle route<br>Shorter than boulevards and no larger than four lanes<br>Goods movement limited to local routes and deliveries<br>Access to land is a primary function<br>May serve commercial or mixed-use sectors | Major Arterial, Minor Arterial, Collector |
| Street | Walkable, low-speed urban thoroughfare<br>Primarily serves adjacent property<br>Connects neighborhoods with each other and commercial/other districts<br>Connects local roads with arterials<br>Often the main street of a commercial or mixed-use sector<br>Goods movement restricted to local deliveries only | Major Arterial, Minor Arterial, Collector, Local |

Adapted from tables 4.2 and 4.3 of *Designing Walkable Urban Thoroughfares: A Context Sensitive Approach*

<!-- page 59 -->
# BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN RECOMMENDATIONS

The ability of individuals to travel the County includes more than just those driving their vehicles. It also includes users of the transit system as well as those walking and riding bicycles. In a county as developed and diverse as DeKalb, providing meaningful connection for all user groups is tremendously important, however also challenging. The plan includes two different types of bicycle and pedestrian recommendations in this policy chapter. The first references a policy priority network for on-road facilities; the second includes a shortlist of possible recommended steps the County can take to make incremental progress in advancing safety and mobility for those walking and biking.

## Bicycle and Pedestrian Priority Roadway Network

The Bicycle and Pedestrian Priority Roadway Network is meant to identify facilities that are good candidates for bicycle and pedestrian travel within the unincorporated part of DeKalb County – particularly focused on roadway facilities and areas within the adjacent public right-of-way. Not included on this map are completely off-road trail projects that run along stream buffers, utility easements, within parks, etc. Because DeKalb County is preparing a countywide trail master plan, decisions around the priority trail policy network will be determined through that planning process.

The creation of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Priority Network included consideration for the following items:
* The 2014 Priority Bicycle Network (Priority 1 and Priority 2 levels)
* Existing on-road and side paths traveling along DeKalb County roadways
* The location of proposed projects that will advance bicycle infrastructure including multimodal roadway projects and new on-road or side path recommendations
* Connectivity to existing and proposed off-road trail projects (though not directly included in the priority network itself)

As future transportation projects are proposed along the corridors and new developments/redevelopments having a front along the corridors are built, the priority map should be considered a tool for facilitation of bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure investment.

<!-- page 60 -->
06 – SURFACE TRANSPORTATION POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 61 -->
| Strategy | Action |
| :--- | :--- |
| Identify which DeKalb County department should lead trail planning efforts and identify an individual to lead trail planning within the County. | Currently, DeKalb County trail planning and implementation takes place in three different departments: Recreation, Parks, and Cultural Affairs; Public Works, Transportation Division; and Planning and Sustainability. Having a clearly identified lead within the County could allow for a more cohesive and targeted investment in trails moving forward. In addition to identifying a county department lead, an individual should be appointed to lead trail planning. They can engage other liaisons from partner departments to ensure coordination. |
| Update the DeKalb County Trails Master Plan. | DeKalb County is currently procuring for the DeKalb County Trails Master Plan. This action is underway. |
| Conduct a sidewalk inventory and condition assessment for sidewalks in unincorporated DeKalb County. | In order to best prioritize sidewalk investments, it is first important to have a clear understanding of current assets and where gaps exist. The inventory and assessment can help to identify where sidewalk currently exists today as well as the condition of the existing facilities. Following the completion of the sidewalk plan, the funding set aside in the Unified Plan can be prioritized for high-priority investments. |
| Consider an update of DeKalb County's Complete Streets Policy. | DeKalb County's current complete streets policy was last formalized through the 2014[^] DeKalb County Transportation Plan. This policy recommended that all roadway projects include bicycle, pedestrian, and transit facilities. National best practices were updated since the 2014[^] update. The National Complete Streets Coalition publishes a set of essential elements that should be included in complete streets policies to ensure they are effective, implementable, and equitable. This document and other guiding documents listed in the Complete Streets section of this chapter should be referenced. |
| Review bicycle and pedestrian-related collisions, collision rates, and frequencies annually, and identify and implement safety strategies. | DeKalb County should analyze bicycle and pedestrian-involved collisions per facility type to identify trends, behaviors, and engineering solutions. DeKalb County should also work to develop a list of spot improvement projects—which can be included in annual capital improvement programs, SPLOST programs, or for the next CTP update. |
| Coordinate with law enforcement to locate hot spots of where cycling and pedestrian collisions are occurring. | As a part of the annual review of collisions that include cyclists and pedestrians, DeKalb County should regularly coordinate with law enforcement if there are patterns regarding specific vehicular movements or locations in the County. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has guidelines which encourage training of law enforcement on bicycle safety and developed training materials for this purpose. |
| Coordinate the development of more robust parking and amenities for bicycling. | The DeKalb County Code contains regulations requiring new development to provide bicycle parking. However, the requirements are limited to specifying the number of parking spaces and where the parking should be placed. DeKalb County should work on tracking the locations of bicycle parking within the County to understand if amenities align with where current facilities exist and future facilities are planned. |

<!-- page 62 -->
# 06 – SURFACE TRANSPORTATION POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

| Strategy | Action |
| :--- | :--- |
| Consider varying funding approaches to implement bicycling and pedestrian projects. | DeKalb County should continue to research and pursue grants that are available to make the most out of current SPLOST dollars. One such example is leveraging FTA funding opportunities to improve pedestrian facilities that increase and improve access to bus stops and shelters. |
| Consider e-mobility policy adoption for activity centers. | DeKalb County should consider the increase in demand for e-mobility devices in metro Atlanta, particularly regarding first- and last-mile connections. Although e-mobility devices will not likely affect the entire County, DeKalb should work with cities, agencies (e.g. MARTA), and local businesses to understand where e-mobility is occurring today and consider adopting a countywide policy in the future. The focus for DeKalb County should be given to regulation regarding how the devices can be operated and parked. |
| Support economic development through bicycle-related activities. | DeKalb County should consider promoting at least one bicycle-friendly event or campaign per year to encourage biking as a form of transportation. This can be conducted in a variety of ways, such as through partnering with local businesses or organizations to identify “bicycle friendly business districts” that offer discounts or incentives for those who visit via bicycle. Another more local example for metro Atlanta is “Atlanta Streets Alive” where a roadway is temporarily closed to automobile traffic and community members encouraged to walk, bike, and roll for a day while visiting local businesses and attractions. |

<!-- page 63 -->
# TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT

Transportation Demand Management (TDM) (sometimes referred to as Travel Demand Management) is a transportation industry term referring to a body of actions that seek to manage the demand for travel by drive-alone private car, rather than catering for that demand or managing the road system. In simple terms, TDM provides people with a variety of mobility options (other than driving alone) to reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and gain environmental, conservation, and sustainability benefits—generally without large infrastructure investments. Measures are directed at increasing vehicle occupancy, shifting travel mode or time of travel, or reducing the need for travel. Much of the time, the focus is to reduce vehicular demand during peak morning and afternoon commute periods, but TDM measures have benefits that extend to off-peak and special event travel times as well.

<<FIGURE>>

Source: FHWA

## Benefits of Transportation Demand Management

The benefits of reducing travel demand and dependence on the automobile are extensive, not only to an organization but also for the larger community. The benefits of TDM fall into five major categories: Transportation System Benefits, Social Benefits, Environmental Benefits, Health and Safety Benefits, and Economic and Financial Benefits. These categories are better defined below:

**Transportation System Benefits**
▶Reduced traffic congestion resulting in time savings
▶Enhanced overall access, convenience, and mobility equity

**Social Benefits**
▶Improved quality of life in communities with transportation options (walkable and bikeable)
▶Allows for social interactions and community connectedness
▶Reduced fragmentation and safety issues caused by wide, high-speed roads
▶Enables aging population to retain independence in the community

**Environmental Benefits**
▶Reduced dependence on fossil fuels and greenhouse gas emissions
▶Reduced congestion and energy consumption
▶Improved air and water quality (reduced emissions and fluid leaks)
▶Reduced heat dome effect (reduced need for paved surfaces)

**Health and Safety Benefits**
▶Improved health through active transportation (biking and walking)
▶Improved air quality
▶Reduced stress levels

**Economic and Financial Benefits**
▶Reduced car ownership, maintenance, and parking costs
▶Reduced need for expensive regional vehicular infrastructure yielding lower return on investment than transit
▶Reduced cost of healthcare (over the long-term)
▶Attracts individuals that value a multimodal environment (representing much of today's work force)

<!-- page 64 -->
# Existing Transportation Demand Management Programs

### Georgia Commute Options

The largest TDM program in the metro Atlanta region is Georgia Commute Options (GCO). Managed by the ARC, GCO helps commuters and employers find better ways to get around, reducing traffic congestion and improving air quality. GCO helps employer partners develop and implement commuter programs and worksites around metro-Atlanta and surrounding areas. It's Telework and Flexwork Programs help employers reduce costs, provide better planning options, and identify tax savings—all while improving air quality and helping employees save time and money. GCO provides the following services for employers:

* **Program Consultation:** working one-on-one to develop a commute options plan that meets the needs of the organization and its employees
* **Reporting Program Results:** capturing and reporting information specific to the company, including direct financial savings to employees, vehicle miles of travel reduced, and tons of air pollution reduced
* **Onsite Events:** presentation and/or tabling events about commute options, assistance, and resources available to employees
* **Telework/Flexwork Consulting:** expert consulting to start or expand telework, compressed work week, or flexible work hours program
* **Pre-tax Benefits to Lower Commute Expenses:** a program through the IRS that reduces employee commute costs up to 1/3 for vanpool, transit, and bicycling as well as saves employers on payroll taxes
* **Employee Commute Survey:** a 2-minute survey, customized to the workforce, used to determine how employees are getting to work today and their level of interest in alternatives and services offered
* **Employer Recognition:** public relations exposure in local media and annual awards program spotlighting the organization's positive impact on commute options
* **Employer Education Series:** webinars featuring subject matter experts with guidance on specific commute options topics
* **Case Studies:** summaries showing how similar employers have implemented successful commute options programs and the results achieved
* **Relocation Commute Planning:** special assistance when an employer moves, providing employees with information about the best commute options available to get them to their new worksite

GCO provides the following services for commuters:

* **Employee Financial Incentives:** monetary incentives to motivate commuters to switch from driving alone to carpool, vanpool, telework, transit, bike/walk options
* **Telework/Flexwork Consulting:** expert consulting to start or expand telework, compressed work week, or flexible work hours program
* **Commuter Ridematching and Guaranteed Ride Home:** assistance finding carpool or vanpool partners who live and work near each other as well as up to five free rides home each year for registered employees to use when unexpected events cause them to leave work earlier or later

### Existing Transportation Management Associations

Transportation Management Associations (TMA) are organizations that provide TDM programming and help to manage transportation within a specific geographic area. TMA's typically are organized through CIDs. Existing Transportation Management Associations in the metro Atlanta region include Perimeter Connects, Midtown Transportation, Central Atlanta Progress (CAP), Clifton Corridor Transportation Management Association, and Livable Buckhead. Information regarding the TMAs in DeKalb County include:

* **Perimeter Connects** is a program of the Perimeter CIDs (PCIDs) that supports the vitality of the Central Perimeter area by offering free consulting services to employers and commercial properties to implement transportation solutions for improving access and mobility and reducing congestion. Perimeter Connects provides information and resources for commuters and employers in the Central Perimeter area, including a guide

<!-- page 65 -->
to navigating projects and construction in Perimeter for a better commute.
www.perimeterconnects.com
* **The Clifton Corridor Transportation Management Association** engages GCO and enables employers within the Clifton Corridor to work cooperatively among themselves and with other governmental agencies, transportation providers, and other interested persons and entities to address common transportation concerns and provide and share transportation services in order to reduce traffic congestion in and improve accessibility to and within the Clifton Corridor.
www.cctma.org

### Recommended TDM Strategies
Traditional TDM strategies include programs and subsidies that seek to manage the demand for travel by drive-alone private car and provide greater mobility options with environmental, conservation, and sustainability benefits. Oftentimes, TDM strategies are facilitated through a local community organization or CID in partnership with GCO.

Organizations in DeKalb County with the opportunity to implement TDM strategies include, but are not limited to, the following local municipalities: DeKalb County Government, Cities of Decatur, Doraville, Chamblee, and Brookhaven, and the CIDs. Each organization should look at various TDM strategies and identify the ones that would best meet the goals of a TDM program. Many of these strategies may be implemented by leveraging a partnership with GCO or by learning about best practices from existing TMAs. The goal of the DeKalb Unified Plan is to highlight potential County-led program/policies.

### TDM Strategies for DeKalb County
As a developed, central County that is well served by transit and multimodal networks, DeKalb County has the opportunity to leverage TDM. This is not true for the entire expanse of the County, therefore, many of these recommendations are for DeKalb County to consider as internal policy and/or for the DeKalb Unified Plan defined activity centers, specifically the regional centers and town centers.

### POSITIONS
* **Transportation Coordinator:** Create a position for an onsite professional transportation coordinator to provide personalized trip planning and commuter assistance. This new position at the County would serve as the liaison between TMAs, municipalities, and large employers as well as the internal advocate for DeKalb County policies and external expert on TDM policies.

### PROGRAMS
* **Rideshare Matching with Carpool:** Work with major employers to start carpooling programs and grow them based on interest. Start with providing information about carpooling and expand to providing incentives (e.g., better parking spots, rewards, etc.).
* **E-bike Fleet:** Consider adding E-bikes to service/County vehicle fleet to encourage short mid-day trips to be taken via a more sustainable mode. E-bikes can also reduce operational and capital costs.
* **Events (Gaming Theory):** Incentivize participation through rewards programs that promote alternative transportation including competitive events such as step challenges and bike month.

### POLICIES
* **New TMAs:** Create new TMAs within the DeKalb Unified Plan regional centers.
* **Site Design/Multimodal Supportive Zoning:** Encourage large commercial developments, both new and existing, to encourage internal trips through methods other than driving alone, for example:
    * **Onsite services/amenities:** Services and/or amenities are provided onsite or within convenient walking distance (e.g., childcare, gym facilities, dining/food service, grocery, post office, etc.).
    * **Alternative Mode Options Visibility:** Site design that focuses on visibility and convenience of active travel modes by showcasing options in easily accessible and high-volume areas.

<!-- page 66 -->
# 06 – SURFACE TRANSPORTATION POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

* **Passenger Loading Areas:** Site design that focuses on visibility and convenience of on-demand ride hail services (i.e., Lyft or Uber).
* **Bicycle Storage, Lockers, Changing Facilities, and Showers:** Conveniently located, covered, and secured facilities.
* **Parking Study:** Complete a parking study for the DeKalb County Government facilities to identify opportunities to improve parking strategies and encourage a reduction of driving alone, such as consideration of a County employee shuttle from Kensington Station. Consider parking studies for DeKalb Unified Plan activity centers, starting with regional centers.
* **E-bike Rebates:** Consider providing E-bike rebates to encourage bike trips to replace shorter length single occupancy vehicle trips.
* **Living Allowances:** Provide housing vouchers for those who choose to live within transit accessible/walking/biking distance.
* **First-mile/Last-mile Connectivity:** Partner with MARTA to create a micromobility policy to encourage bike share and scooter share companies to operate within a buffer around existing MARTA rail stations and regional centers.

## Conclusion

Policy recommendations are an important element of any transportation planning document because they provide an opportunity to improve transportation systems beyond the sole construction of infrastructure projects. Policy changes, in combination with the infrastructure projects, provide an opportunity to shape the way the County grows and serves its traveling public.

To implement the policy recommendations included in this chapter, it will require additional attention and work beyond this document to further refine the specifics of some of the topic areas. While not every policy may be advanced by County leadership and staff, the advancement of even some of the policies can help to change and advance the mobility for all users of the DeKalb County transportation system.

<!-- page 67 -->
# CHAPTER 07
TRANSIT RECOMMENDATIONS

<!-- page 68 -->
# CHAPTER 07: TRANSIT RECOMMENDATIONS

In 2019, DeKalb County completed and adopted a comprehensive long-range transit plan, known as the DeKalb County Transit Master Plan (DTMP). The DTMP provides a 30-year vision for future transit investments within DeKalb County and its municipalities. The plan’s recommendations include major new transit investments, as well as enhancements to existing transit services. The DTMP’s goals were to enhance countywide mobility and access, promote economic development, and improve residents’ overall quality-of-life.

The DTMP was developed through a transparent and collaborative partnership between the ARC, MARTA, DeKalb County Government, the 12 municipalities within the County, and agency partners (GDOT and the ATL). The DTMP was developed through a 13-month planning process, beginning in July 2018 and concluding in August 2019. Since the County has recently completed and adopted a comprehensive long-range transit master plan, the approach of the 2050 Unified Plan was to incorporate the recommendations of the DTMP and serve as a vehicle to further the goals of the plan.

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 69 -->
## OVERVIEW OF THE
## TRANSIT MASTER PLAN

The DTMP featured a comprehensive technical planning process and robust community engagement process. At key project milestones, public and stakeholder feedback was solicited to help ensure the plan was guided by the community's input and vision. Early plan milestones included developing a future transit vision and goals, conducting an inventory of existing transit service, and identifying unmet rider needs as well as economic development visioning and concentrated public and stakeholder meetings. Later milestones included planning charrettes and interactive public workshops as well as defining transit investment scenarios and identifying financial constraints. The final phase of the plan was spent refining four potential transit scenarios for consideration and their financial constraints.

The transit scenarios primarily focused on major new transit expansion projects. Recommended improvements to the existing transit system were identified in a separate process, which was focused on the unmet needs of riders. These needs were mapped in an accompanying figure entitled 'Current Unmet Rider Needs' and include areas where local bus, paratransit, and on-demand service expansion is desired. Improvements to high-ridership local bus routes, bus-to-rail transfers, and first-mile/last-mile connections were also identified. The need for mobility hub facilities that would accommodate bus-to-bus transfers and additional multimodal connections also were included. Improvements to existing services are largely assumed to be funded through DeKalb County's current MARTA sales tax and several projects have already advanced since the plan's adoption.

## KEY RECOMMENDATIONS OF
## THE TRANSIT MASTER PLAN

The DTMP concluded by advancing five major recommendations for the County's consideration moving forward. These recommendations are summarized below:

* **Recommendation 1: Advance Four Transit Scenarios for Further Consideration and Additional Public Input and Education.** It is recommended that four potential transit scenarios are advanced forward for additional public and stakeholder input and education. These scenarios include the Existing MARTA Penny Scenario, Half-Penny Scenario, Full-Penny Scenario, and Previously Adopted Scenario. The public and stakeholder education and input process should be designed to increase the public's understanding of the travel benefits and the costs and impacts of the scenarios. The four scenarios are described in detail in the following section.

* **Recommendation 2: More Public/Stakeholder and Input on Project Delivery and Innovative Financing Opportunities.** Additional public and stakeholder education is recommended on funding opportunities outside of the HB 930[^p69-1] sales tax option. This includes public-private-partnerships, value capture financing, and federal CIGs for transit.

* **Recommendation 3: Collaborate with MARTA on Current Unmet Needs.** Increased coordination between DeKalb County and MARTA is recommended to help ensure that transit investments address current unmet needs and are delivered using funds from the existing MARTA sales tax. These needs include paratransit expansion in south and east DeKalb, mobility hubs, bus-to-rail transfer improvements, last-mile/first-mile connectivity projects, expanded local bus coverage, community circulators, and mobility on-demand services.

[^p69-1]: HB 930 refers to the Georgia House Bill 930, which established the Atlanta-region Transit Link Authority (The ATL).

<!-- page 70 -->
# 07 – TRANSIT RECOMMENDATIONS

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

<<FIGURE>>

*   **Recommendation 4: Collaborate with MARTA and Agency Partners on the Advancement of Expansion Projects Consistent with DTMP.** DeKalb County should continue to coordinate with agency partners like MARTA, GDOT, and the ATL as well as other agencies to advance the definition (i.e., planning and design concept) of key projects included in the DTMP scenarios. This includes coordination with GDOT on the I-285 managed lanes project to accommodate bus rapid transit (BRT) design solutions. Coordination with GDOT is also recommended to re-evaluate I-20 East high-capacity transit to Stonecrest and the I-285 Top End Express Lanes. Finally, coordination with MARTA is recommended on high-capacity transit projects along Clifton Corridor, Buford Highway, and Candler Road as well as an arterial rapid transit (ART) network.

*   **Recommendation 5: Align Land Use, Development Codes, and Transit Efforts.** In order to be more competitive in receiving FTA grants for major transit investments, it is recommended that DeKalb County and the 13 cities within the County undertake efforts to better align land use and development policies to support transit investments. This includes encouraging transit supportive land use which promotes transit usage, walkability, and compact development forms at station areas and transit corridors. It is recommended that land use plans in the County direct growth into the high-capacity transit corridors identified in the DTMP.

<!-- page 71 -->
# FOUR TRANSIT SCENARIOS

The four transit scenarios advanced in DTMP were developed based upon different funding assumptions. These include the Existing MARTA Penny Scenario, Half-Penny Scenario, Full-Penny Scenario, and Previously Adopted Scenario, described below.

## Existing MARTA Penny Scenario

The Existing MARTA Penny Scenario assumes a continuation of the one-penny MARTA sales tax with no additional funding. The revenue in this scenario will support the maintenance and sustaining capital and operations of the existing system without new transit services. This scenario assumes existing revenues will be available to fund current unmet rider needs. Examples of this include MARTA station upgrades and the South DeKalb and Stonecrest Mobility Hubs.

<<FIGURE>>

## Half-Penny Scenario

The Half-Penny Scenario presumes the extension of the one-penny MARTA tax and includes an additional half-penny sales tax under the provisions of HB 930. Funding assumes the maintenance and operations of the existing system and a transit system expansion of 15 projects. The projects include 1 light rail transit (LRT), 5 BRT, and 9 ART projects for a total of 139 project miles. This scenario leverages investments in managed lanes for BRT on I-285 and I-20 East.

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 72 -->
# 07 – TRANSIT RECOMMENDATIONS

## Full-Penny Scenario

The Full-Penny Scenario presumes the extension of the one-penny MARTA tax and an additional one-penny sales tax under the provisions of HB 930. Funding assumes the maintenance and operations of the existing system and a transit system expansion of 16 projects. The projects include 4 LRT, 4 BRT, and 8 ART projects for a total of 180 project miles. This scenario also leverages investments in managed lanes for BRT on I-285 and I-20 East.

<<FIGURE>>

## The Previously Adopted Scenario

The previously adopted scenario assumes the continuation of the existing one-penny MARTA sales tax to support maintenance and sustaining capital and operations of the existing system. It also assumes an unidentified funding source that can generate more revenue than an additional one-penny sales tax under HB 930 to fund a transit system of three projects. This includes 1 heavy rail transit (HRT), 1 LRT, and 1 BRT project and 37 project miles. This scenario features the MARTA Board plans for the I-20 East and Clifton Corridors adopted in 2012.

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 73 -->
# THE UNIFIED PLAN’S APPROACH TO TRANSIT

The Unified Plan’s approach to transit planning has been to advance the recommendations of the DTMP and to continue facilitating important conversations related to transit needs and potential investments within the County. This Unified Plan’s transit planning activities can be summarized in the following key areas:

<<FIGURE>>

### Update baseline transit data from the DTMP.
The recommendations of the DTMP were based upon an inventory of existing transit conditions in 2017 and 2018. The Unified Plan updated the DTMP’s baseline transit data with more recent data available from 2019. Given the significant and temporary impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on transit usage, 2019 data was selected to establish a new baseline (as opposed to 2020 data). Data has been updated related to bus and rail ridership, on-time-performance, transit safety, and demographic transit propensity. An updated baseline is provided in the Unified Plan’s ECNA Report. This report also includes an inventory of recent developments to transit planning efforts since 2019.

<<FIGURE>>

### Continue public and stakeholder engagement.
The Unified Plan featured a robust community engagement process, which provided numerous opportunities to facilitate a dialog on transit and collect public and stakeholder input on transit needs. This included a multitude of public meetings, targeted stakeholder meetings, focus groups, community events, online surveys, and in-person intercept surveys. These engagement activities involved educating the community on the recommendations of the DTMP and provided an opportunity to solicit feedback. Public and stakeholder meetings included facilitated break-out group discussions on transit and interactive polling exercises. The feedback collected generally confirmed the continued need for projects identified in the DTMP and indicated a general willingness to support additional funding streams for transit.

<<FIGURE>>

### Provide additional stakeholder and community education.
Another important activity of the Unified Plan was to provide additional education to stakeholders, community leaders, and the public on potential transit options and solutions. Educational efforts focused on providing information on transit mode options and potential funding mechanisms the County may choose to pursue. Education was provided to the DeKalb County PWI Committee related to the differences between transit modes recommended in the DTMP, both in terms of costs and operating characteristics. Education was also provided to DeKalb County leadership related to the process of pursuing a transit TSPLOST to fund major transit investments, should the County decide to pursue this option.

<<FIGURE>>

### Align the DTMP’s recommendations with the Unified Plan’s Future Land Use Plan.
A key recommendation of the DTMP was to better align land use and development policies to support transit investments. This included the recommendation for land use plans to direct growth into high-capacity transit corridors identified within the DTMP and promote transit-oriented development (TOD). The Unified Plan’s Comprehensive Land Use Plan has proactively coordinated the recommendations of both plans in the following ways:

* The Future Land Use Plan has established a set of Guiding Principles, which are overarching themes to provide guidance and direction for development. Several of these principles align directly with the DTMP recommendations and include:
    * TOD: Promote and provide incentives for TOD near existing rail stations. Identify locations for additional development near planned premium transit stations.
    * Activity Centers, Nodes, and Corridors: In order to support continued growth and development within the County while protecting existing single-family areas, new and more intense development will be focused within activity centers, nodes, and corridors.

<!-- page 74 -->
# 07 – TRANSIT RECOMMENDATIONS

* **Multimodal Development:** Reduce vehicle miles traveled by promoting new development and redevelopment at or near activity centers, developing quality bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and providing better transit access.
* **Development Intensity:** Focus new and higher density development in existing developed areas, particularly in locations with existing services, facilities, and infrastructure with capacity to support additional development.

* The Character Area Map, which serves as a future land use guide, takes the approach of directing higher-density and transit-supportive development into areas with an Activity Center designation. Activity Center locations are consistent with the planned high-capacity transit corridors and station areas identified in the DTMP.

* The Character Area Map also includes a Commercial Redevelopment Corridor designation, which coincides with several planned high-capacity transit corridors in the DTMP (Candler Road and Covington Highway are two examples). Within these corridors there is the potential for transit investments to catalyze the redevelopment of declining or underutilized commercial areas with transit-supportive multi-family and mixed-use development. The economic development goals of both plans dovetail and support each other in these corridors.

* A special Policy Spotlight is included in the land use plan promoting TOD at potential high-capacity transit stations in the DTMP. This Policy Spotlight includes maps of proposed transit corridors and station areas for each of the four transit scenarios. Recommendations include developing station-area plans and implementing strategies to promote TOD at potential station locations.

<<FIGURE>>

### Character Area Map

<!-- page 75 -->
## PUBLIC INPUT ON TRANSIT

Through the Unified Plan’s community engagement efforts, the public was polled on their support and priorities for transit. Input was collected via an online survey and through community intercept surveys. Polling included the public’s support for an additional transit sales tax and desired funding level. Feedback was also collected on transit investment strategies and priority corridors for improved transit service. The polling results are shown below and indicate that more than half of respondents were supportive of an additional sales tax for transit with diversity seen in the desired level of tax increment. A slight preference was seen for a geographically dispersed investment strategy over a targeted corridor approach. All potential transit corridors received some support as priorities with Buford Highway standing out as the top priority and LaVista Road as the lowest amongst the group.

### Transit Investments

<<FIGURE>>

**46%**
Make large investments in a few priority corridors

**54%**
Spread investments geographically throughout the County

### Transit Sales Tax

<<FIGURE>>

**58%**
Yes

**25%**
No

**17%**
Unsure

**Would you support a transit sales tax?**

<<FIGURE>>

**49%**
Full Penny

**30%**
Half Penny

**15%**
Quarter Penny

**6%**
Three-Quarter Penny

**What is the maximum tax you would consider for funding transit projects?**

### Transit Investment Corridors

#### Which transportation corridors should be prioritized for major transit investments?

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 76 -->
# RECOMMENDED NEXT STEPS

To advance the DTMP’s efforts after the Unified Plan has concluded, a series of recommended next steps have been identified and are summarized below.

### Update the DTMP current with project definitions.
The planning environment is never static and significant changes have occurred to transit planning efforts since the DTMP was adopted in 2019. Several projects identified in the DTMP have been advancing through the planning process, these include the Top-End BRT, South DeKalb Transit Hub, Stonecrest Transit Hub, and Candler Road ART. The preferred transit mode for projects along Buford Highway, the Clifton Corridor, and I-20 East have changed or have the potential to change. The DTMP should be updated to reflect the current status of project definitions, modes, and costs. Updated project information will be required should the County decide to move forward with implementation.

### Continue education on transit funding options.
There is the need for additional education involving the public, stakeholders, and decision-makers to explore all transit financing options available. This includes federal, state, local, and private sources. A special focus should be placed on value capture strategies that include, but are not limited to, tax allocation districts (TAD), ground lease revenue from TOD and joint development opportunities, CID contributions, Special Service Districts, millage rates, and other strategies that optimize the benefits for both the public and private sectors.

### Reach consensus on a transit infrastructure and service investment strategy.
County leaders should consider reaching a consensus on a funding approach and level to invest in additional transit infrastructure. This may include a full-penny or half-penny sales tax revenue under authorities provided to DeKalb County in HB 930 (Ga. Code § 50-39-1 through § 50-39-61) in combination with value-capture strategies. Consensus should also be reached on a community outreach and education program and a strategy to develop a project list, costs, benefits, performance, priorities, and funding plan.

### Consider and prepare for a successful TSPLOST referendum.
Should the County decide to pursue a transit TSPLOST (HB 930), it is important to consider the necessary steps and approximate timeline of 15 months to help ensure a successful referendum.

#### The recommended key steps with timelines include:

*   **Update project definitions, costs, and tax revenue estimates in the DTMP to reflect recent changes.**
    4 months
*   **Confirm the updated projects are included within the ATL’s Regional Transit Plan (ARTP).**
    2 months
*   **Convene public outreach and community conversations for input on project list, priorities, and funding. Issue notice of meeting with cities and hold meeting 60 days before issuance of the call for referendum.**
    3 months
*   **Board of Commissioners adopt Resolution of Intent to Call Referendum.**
    1 month
*   **Submit referendum project list to the ATL.**
    1 month
*   **Receive the ATL approval of referendum project list.**
    2 months
*   **Board of Commissioners adopt Resolution to place Transit SPLOST on Ballot (formalize project list, anticipated costs, and intent for referendum) and public advertising of referendum (continue public and stakeholder education on overall benefits of transit and project list).**
    2 months
*   **Election day (include referendum on ballot in the next countywide election and receive majority ‘yes’ vote).**

<!-- page 77 -->
# CHAPTER 08
## PRIORITY PROJECTS 
## FOR UNINCORPORATED 
## DEKALB COUNTY

<!-- page 78 -->
# CHAPTER 08: PRIORITY PROJECTS FOR UNINCORPORATED DEKALB COUNTY

Chapter 4 outlined the development and evaluation of a Universe of Projects for consideration throughout the County. Chapter 5 outlined the financial framework encompassing revenue streams and assumptions for transportation funding through the year 2050. Chapter 8 includes the final list of prioritized projects over the three tiers of the plan.

Three categories of project types are included—each consists of different subtypes that are reflected in the map legends on the following pages:

*   **Multiuse Trails** include any off-road trail projects running in their own right-of-way or along utility easements. They also include sidepaths running alongside of a roadway.
*   **Small Scale Roadway Improvements** include all roadway projects with a cost of less than $4 million. They include intersection operational or safety improvements, signal technology projects, or small scale freight projects.
*   **Large Scale Roadway Improvements** include all roadway projects costing greater than $4 million. These may include large intersection improvements as well as multimodal projects, corridor operational improvements, capacity/widening projects, new connections, or interchange improvements.

## TIER 1: SHORT-RANGE (YEARS 1-6)

The CTP considers short-range projects as projects that are planned to be implemented in the first six years following the adoption of the plan and the beginning of a new SPLOST program. Projects in Tier 1 were included from the results of CTP analyses, DeKalb SPLOST Planning, Covington Highway Corridor Master Active Living Plan, Metro South CID, PATH Foundation, ARC RTP, and DeKalb County 2014 Transportation Plan. The project team also identified projects through conversations with stakeholders, elected officials, and members of the public.

A total of $71 million is assumed for DeKalb County’s contribution toward implementation of these projects, with additional funds for new sidewalk and crossing investments ($24 million) and technology investments ($6 million). Project funding per year is lowest in Tier 1 due to the substantial investment in asset management (specifically resurfacing) needed to continue the work of the current SPLOST and improve the overall road conditions in the County.

Levels of investment across project types are similar with Multiuse Trails having the largest funding amount and Large Scale Roadway Improvements having the smallest. Many of the larger roadway projects include early concept and preliminary engineering work as a part of Tier 1 with funding for right-of-way and construction phases happening in later tiers.

| Tier 1 | | | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **Project ID** | **Project Name** | **Extent From** | **Extent To** | **2022 Total Cost** |
| **Interchange—New or Improvements** | | | | |
| R_1069 | I-285 EB ramp at Moreland Avenue Interchange Improvement | Moreland Avenue | | $712,000 |
| R_709 | I-285 WB ramp at Moreland Avenue Interchange Improvement | Moreland Avenue | | $315,000 |
| **Multimodal** | | | | |
| M_043_PE | Chamblee Tucker Road Multimodal Improvement (Design Only) | I-285 | Tucker Norcross Road | $1,032,000 |

<!-- page 79 -->
### Tier 1 Continued

| Project ID | Project Name | Extent From | Extent To | 2022 Total Cost |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| M_045_PE | Church Street Multimodal Improvement (Design Only) | N Decatur Road | Medlock Road | $552,000 |
| M_2000_PE | Clifton Springs Road Road Diet (Design Only) | Panthersville Road | Flat Shoals Parkway | $500,000 |
| M_2016 | Glenwood Road Multimodal Improvement | Columbia Drive | Covington Highway | $4,329,000 |
| M_013_PE | Heritage Corridor Study (Design Only) | Stone Mountain | Lithonia | $300,000 |
| M_024_PE | N Decatur Road Multimodal Improvement (Design Only) | Clairmont Road | Church Street | $343,000 |
| X_010 | N Druid Hills Road at Spring Creek Road Bridge Improvement (Bridge ID: 089-0175-0) | Approximately 1,400 feet east of Spring Creek Road | | $12,500,000 |
| M_035bc_PE | N Druid Hills Road Multimodal Improvement (Design Only) | Briarcliff Road | Lawrenceville Highway | $2,290,000 |
| M_2017 | Pleasantdale Road Multimodal Improvement | Tucker/Norcross | I-85 | $3,000,000 |
| **New Connection** | | | | |
| R_2005_PE | Clairmont Road Reliever Connection (Scoping Study) | I-85 Frontage Road | Briarcliff Road NE | $200,000 |
| **Off-Road** | | | | |
| BP_022 | Deepdene Park Path Scoping Study (Design Only) | N Ponce De Leon Avenue | Parkwood Road | $750,000 |
| BP_1433 | Donzi Road Beltline Connector | Donzi Road | Southside BeltLine Trail (Fulton County) | $3,577,000 |
| BP_1446 | North Fork Peachtree Creek Trail Connector, Phase 1 | Fisher Trail Park | Peachwood Circle NE | $1,777,000 |
| BP_1502 | North Fork Peachtree Creek Trail Connector, Phase 2 | Shallowford Road | Chamblee Tucker Road | $6,376,000 |
| BP_1475 | Sagamore Trail | Alderbrook Road | Audobon Drive | $199,000 |
| BP_1476a | Sagamore Trail | Briarcliff Road NE | Peachtree Creek Greenway | $2,550,000 |
| BP_1477 | Sagamore Trail | S Peachtree Creek Trail/ N Druid Hills Road | Alderbrook Road | $3,707,000 |
| BP_1481 | South Peachtree Creek Trail, PATH, Phase 2 (Section 1) | Fulton County Line | Atlanta City Limits | $431,000 |
| BP_1482 | South Peachtree Creek Trail, PATH, Phase 2 (Section 2) | Briarcliff Road | Atlanta City Limits | $379,000 |
| BP_018 | South Peachtree Creek Trail, Phase 3 | Medlock Park | Farmers Market Trail and Zonolite Park | $1,951,000 |
| BP_037 | South River Multi-Use Trail Extension | Boulder Walk Drive | Crestdale Circle | $5,787,000 |
| BP_1464 | South River Trail Multiuse Trail Extension (Eastern End) | Waldrop Place | MLK High School | $7,090,000 |

<!-- page 80 -->
# 08 – PRIORITY PROJECTS FOR UNINCORPORATED DEKALB COUNTY

### Tier 1 Continued

| Project ID | Project Name | Extent From | Extent To | 2022 Total Cost |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **Operational-Corridor** | | | | |
| R_202 | Bouldercrest Road Operational Improvement | Constitution Road | Eastland Road | $3,490,000 |
| R_225 | Henderson Mill Road Operational Improvement | Henderson Road | Mercer University Drive | $2,300,000 |
| R_211 | Kensington MARTA Station Trail and Road Diets, Phase 1 | Covington Highway | Memorial Drive | $5,949,000 |
| R_1418 | North/South Hairston Drive Safety Study (Design Only) | Welsey Chapel Road | Ponce De Leon Avenue | $500,000 |
| R_405c | Redan Road Operational Improvement | Elder Lane | Allgood Road | $10,000,000 |
| R_2001 | SR 12/US 278 Operational Improvement | DeKalb Medical Parkway | Cragstone Court | $5,328,000 |
| **Operational-Intersection** | | | | |
| R_161 | Bermuda Road at Stewart Mill Road Roundabout | Stewart Mill Road | | $1,829,000 |
| R_1414 | Briarcliff Road at Briarlake Road Intersection Turn Lane Improvement | Briarlake Road | | $666,000 |
| R_153 | Candler Road at H F Shepherd Drive Intersection Improvement | H F Shepherd Drive | | $2,800,000 |
| R_926 | Cedar Grove Road at Bouldercrest Road Intersection Improvement and Roundabout | Bouldercrest Road | | $1,000,000 |
| R_925 | Cedar Grove Road at E Conley Road Intersection Improvement and Roundabout | E Conley Road | | $1,000,000 |
| R_1064_PE | Cedar Grove Road/Thurman Road (SR 160)/Old McDonough Road Roundabout (Design Only) | Thurman Road | | $438,000 |
| R_159 | Crestline Drive at Chrysler Drive Intersection Improvement | Chrysler Drive | | $1,300,000 |
| R_813 | DeKalb Industrial Way at Milscott Drive Traffic Signal Improvement | Milscott Drive | | $332,000 |
| R_927 | E Rock Springs Road NE at Cumberland Road NE/Beech Valley Way NE Intersection Improvement and Roundabout | Beech Valley Way NE | | $1,400,000 |
| R_1402 | Indian Creek Elementary Signal Installation | Lakes at Indian Creek Apartments Driveway | | $292,000 |
| R_1405 | North Clarendon Road Signal and RR Crossing Improvement | Ponce de Leon Avenue | | $520,000 |

<!-- page 81 -->
| Tier 1 Continued | | | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **Project ID** | **Project Name** | **Extent From** | **Extent To** | **2022 Total Cost** |
| R_1406 | North Decatur Road at Parkdale Road Intersection Improvement | Parkdale Road | | $588,000 |
| R_2000 | North DeKalb Mall Intersection Improvement | Birch Road | | $1,000,000 |
| R_157 | Redan Road at Lithonia Road Intersection Safety Evaluation | S Stone Mountain-Lithonia Road | | $560,000 |
| R_162 | Redwing Circle at Covington Highway or Nearby New Traffic Signal | Covington Highway | | $328,000 |
| R_145 | Stephenson Road at South Deshon Road Intersection Improvement | South Deshon Road | | $2,800,000 |
| R_112 | Wesley Chapel Road at Flat Shoals Parkway Intersection Improvement | Flat Shoals Parkway | | $922,000 |

<!-- page 82 -->
# TIER 1: SHORT-RANGE (YEARS 1-6)

<<FIGURE>>

### PROJECT TYPES
* Freight and Rail Crossing
* Interchange - New or Improvements
* Capacity - Widening
* ITS Improvements
* Multimodal
* New Connection
* On-Road/Off-Road Trail Projects
* Operational - Corridor
* Operational - Intersection
* Design Only

<!-- page 83 -->
# TIER 2: MID-RANGE (YEARS 7-12)

The CTP considers mid-range projects as those that are planned to be implemented in the second six years of the plan (consistent with a second iteration of a countywide SPLOST). Projects in Tier 2 were included from the results of CTP analyses, DeKalb SPLOST Planning, Belvedere Master Active Living Plan, Covington Highway Corridor Master Active Living Plan, Metro South CID, PATH Foundation, and DeKalb County 2014 Transportation Plan. The project team also identified projects through conversations with stakeholders, elected officials, and members of the public.

A total of $103 million is assumed for DeKalb County’s contribution toward implementation of these projects, with additional funds for new sidewalk and crossing investments ($24 million) and technology investments ($9 million). Project funding per year increases over Tier 1 due to a small assumption in growth of the sales tax base as well as a reduced need to fund asset management. This allows more funding to go to the development of new projects.

In Tier 2, Large Scale Roadway Improvements have substantially more funding than in Tier 1, this is a result of Tier 1 designs advancing to construction in Tier 2 for multiple projects. Some of the Large Scale Roadway projects also include trails (specifically multimodal projects), helping to advance the larger bicycle/pedestrian network while also making vehicular improvements.

| Tier 2 | | | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **Project ID** | **Project Name** | **Extent From** | **Extent To** | **2022 Total Cost** |
| **Capacity-Widening** | | | | |
| R_1077_PE | Old McDonough Road Capacity Improvement (Design Only) | Lancaster Road | Mason Dixon Road | $86,000 |
| R_407 | Wesley Chapel Road Capacity Improvement | Boring Road | Flat Shoals Parkway | $20,141,000 |
| **Freight and Rail Crossing** | | | | |
| R_904 | Constitution Drive SE at Old Constitution Road SE Rail Crossing Improvement (Norfolk Southern) | Old Constitution Road SE | | $130,000 |
| R_913 | Panola Road at Stone Mountain Lithonia Road Rail Crossing Improvement | Stone Mountain Lithonia Road | | $1,000,000 |
| **Multimodal** | | | | |
| M_043 | Chamblee Tucker Road Multimodal Improvement | I-285 | Tucker Norcross Road | $6,907,000 |
| M_045 | Church Street Multimodal Improvement | N Decatur Road | Medlock Road | $3,692,000 |
| M_2000 | Clifton Springs Road from Panthersville Road to Flat Shoals Parkway Road Diet | Panthersville Road | Flat Shoals Parkway | $2,300,000 |
| M_2006 | Covington Trails and Kensington MARTA Station Road Diets, Phase 2 | Memorial Drive | MARTA Indian Creek Station | $5,579,000 |
| M_1063 | Jolly Avenue Multimodal Improvement | Rowland Street | Indian Creek Way | $1,700,000 |

<!-- page 84 -->
# 08 – PRIORITY PROJECTS FOR UNINCORPORATED DEKALB COUNTY

| Tier 2 Continued | | | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **Project ID** | **Project Name** | **Extent From** | **Extent To** | **2022 Total Cost** |
| BP_1447 | Lullwater Road NE Multimodal Improvement | Ponce De Leon Avenue NE | N Decatur Rd | $1,000,000 |
| M_035b | N Druid Hills Road Multimodal Improvement | Briarcliff Road | Clairmont Road | $19,461,000 |
| M_035c | N Druid Hills Road Multimodal Improvement | Clairmont Road | Lawrenceville Highway | $24,036,000 |
| **Off-Road** | | | | |
| BP_1428 | Covington Trails, Phase 2 (South) | Covington Highway | Towers High School | $823,000 |
| BP_140 | DeKalb Industrial Way Greenway | Lawrenceville Highway | Jefferson Square Court | $2,000,000 |
| BP_015 | Farmers Market Trail | South Peachtree Creek Trail | Stone Mountain Trail in Avondale Estates | $3,851,000 |
| BP_1435 | Henderson Mill Creek Trail | Northlake Parkway | North Fork Peachtree Creek Trail | $2,484,000 |
| BP_1438 | Indian Creek MARTA Station Trails | Chemawa Drive | Elder Lane | $114,000 |
| BP_1439 | Indian Creek MARTA Station Trails | S Indian Creek Drive | Snapfiner Trail PATH | $2,696,000 |
| BP_1440 | Indian Creek MARTA Station Trails | S Indian Creek Drive | Rowland Road | $486,000 |
| BP_1441 | Indian Creek MARTA Station Trails | Elder Lane | Indian Creek MARTA | $468,000 |
| BP_040 | Multiuse Trail Connecting Delano-Line Park, White Oak Park, and Shoal Creek | White Oak Park | Shoal Creek I | $60,000 |
| BP_1445 | North Fork Peachtree Creek Trail Connector, Phase 2 Spur | Cravey Lane NE | Townley Circle | $3,679,000 |
| BP_1501 | North Fork Peachtree Creek Trail Connector, Phase 3 | Chamblee Tucker Road | Presidential Parkway | $2,627,000 |
| BP_1450 | Shoal Creek PATH Trail Connection 2 | Aspen Woods Apartments | Shoal Creek Crossing | $32,000 |
| BP_030 | Shoal Creek Trail | Candler Road | Flat Shoals Parkway | $3,534,000 |
| BP_1473 | South Fork Peachtree Trail Connection to Emory University | Emory University | Zonolite Park | $299,000 |
| BP_1480 | South River Trail-PATH, Phase 2 | Gresham Park | Sugar Creek Park | $4,931,000 |
| BP_1484 | South River Trail-PATH, Phase 2 | Constitution Lakes Park | Sugar Creek Park | $884,000 |
| **Operational-Corridor** | | | | |
| R_400b_PE | Briarcliff Road Arterial Managed Lanes (Design Only) | Clifton Road | N Druid Hills Road | $4,500,000 |

<!-- page 85 -->
COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

| Tier 2 Continued | | | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **Project ID** | **Project Name** | **Extent From** | **Extent To** | **2022 Total Cost** |
| R_1074 | Constitution Road Widening (within GTIB Grant), Phase 2 | Fayetteville Road | International Park Drive | $9,327,000 |
| R_222 | Covington Highway Operational Improvement | Glenwood Road | Young Road | $15,500,000 |
| R_224 | Frazier Road Operational Improvement | Lawrenceville Highway | LaVista Road | $676,000 |
| R_1078 | Henrico Road Operational Improvement | Moreland Avenue | Koppers Road | $7,984,000 |
| R_1417 | Lawrenceville Highway at North Druid Hills Road Operational Improvement | North Druid Hills Road | | $338,000 |
| R_1081 | Moreland Avenue Operational Improvement | Cedar Grove | Conley Road | $2,430,000 |
| R_1082 | Moreland Avenue Operational Improvement | Thurman Road | I-285 | $486,000 |
| R_234 | Raise Median along Covington Highway | Redan Road | Redwing Circle | $688,000 |
| R_405d | Redan Road Operational Improvement | Allgood Road | S Hairston Road | $10,000,000 |
| R_1422 | Rockbridge Road Traffic Engineering Study | Cobblestone Trail | Glen Cove Drive | $167,000 |
| R_1421 | South Rainbow Drive Corridor Safety Improvement Study | Fairlake Drive | Rainbow Drive | $146,000 |
| **Operational-Intersection** | | | | |
| R_1068 | Cedar Grove at Moreland Intersection Improvement | Moreland Avenue | | $1,880,000 |
| R_1064 | Cedar Grove Road/ Thurman Road (SR 160)/ Old McDonough Road Roundabout | Thurman Road | | $5,475,000 |
| R_152 | Central Drive at Hambrick Road Intersection Improvement | Hambrick Road | | $1,700,000 |
| R_1410 | Evans Road at Evans Wood Drive Intersection Improvement Study | Evans Wood Drive | | $63,000 |
| R_1401 | Frazier Road at SR 8 Intersection Improvement | SR 8 | | $676,000 |
| R_116 | Gresham Road at Brannen Road Intersection Improvement | Brannen Road | | $2,535,000 |
| R_1067 | Henrico Road at Bonsal Road Intersection Improvement | Bonsal Road | | $1,620,000 |
| R_1071 | Henrico Road at CSX Crossing Cul-de-Sac | 500 feet before CSX crossing | | $1,620,000 |

<!-- page 86 -->
# 08 – PRIORITY PROJECTS FOR UNINCORPORATED DEKALB COUNTY

| Tier 2 Continued | | | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **Project ID** | **Project Name** | **Extent From** | **Extent To** | **2022 Total Cost** |
| R_1070 | Henrico Road at Moreland Avenue Intersection Improvement | Moreland Avenue | | $5,719,000 |
| R_138 | Henrico Road/Westside Place at Moore Road Intersection Improvement | Moore Road | | $720,000 |
| R_1411 | Houston Mill Road at Lavista Road Intersection Improvement | Lavista Road | | $406,000 |
| R_1403 | Lavista Road at Clairmont Road Intersection Improvement | Clairmont Road | | $229,000 |
| R_1404 | Milscott Drive at Church Drive Intersection Improvement | Church Drive | | $406,000 |
| R_1062 | Moreland Avenue at Conley Road Intersection Improvement | Conley Road | | $2,912,000 |
| R_100 | N Clarendon Avenue at Rockbridge Road Intersection Improvement | Rockbridge Road | | $497,000 |
| R_160 | Rays Road at Norman Road Intersection Improvement Study | Norman Road | | $52,000 |
| R_166 | North Druid Hills Road at Lavista Road Intersection Improvement | Lavista Road | | $958,000 |
| R_1408 | Rainbow Drive at Cocklebur Road Intersection Improvement | Cocklebur Road | | $510,000 |
| R_172 | River Road at Lincrest Road Intersection Improvement | Lincrest Road | | $100,000 |
| R_148 | S Deshon Road at Alford Road Intersection Improvement | Alford Road | | $800,000 |
| R_151 | S Deshon Road at Rogers Lake Road Intersection Improvement | Rogers Lake Road | | $2,000,000 |
| R_170 | S Stone Mountain Lithonia Road at Shadow Rock Drive Intersection Improvement | Shadow Rock Drive | | $340,000 |
| R_143 | Wellborn Road at Dekalb Medical Parkway Intersection Improvement | DeKalb Medical Parkway | | $1,450,000 |
| R_149 | Wellborn Road at Marbut Road Intersection Improvement | Marbut Road | | $800,000 |

<!-- page 87 -->
# TIER 2: MID-RANGE (YEARS 7-12)

<<FIGURE>>

### PROJECT TYPES
* Freight and Rail Crossing
* Interchange - New or Improvements
* Capacity - Widening
* ITS Improvements
* Multimodal
* New Connection
* On-Road/Off-Road Trail Projects
* Operational - Corridor
* Operational - Intersection
* Design Only

<!-- page 88 -->
# TIER 3: LONG-RANGE (YEARS 13-27)

The CTP considers projects as long-range as those that are planned to be implemented in the final 15 years of the plan. Projects in Tier 3 were included from the results of CTP analyses, DeKalb SPLOST Planning, Belvedere Master Active Living Plan, Kensington LCI TOD, Medline LCI, Metro South CID, North Druid Hills LCI, and DeKalb County 2014 Transportation Plan. The project team also identified projects through conversations with stakeholders, elected officials, and members of the public.
A total of $366 million is assumed for DeKalb County's contribution toward implementation of these projects, with additional funds for new sidewalk and crossing investments ($75 million) and technology investments ($30 million). Since this tier is much larger than the previous two, it includes far more funding in most categories, specifically Large Scale Roadway Improvements and Multiuse Trails.
The focus of investment in the last tier is on larger scale investments in operational improvements and alternative modes (whether through multimodal roadway projects or independent trail projects). Many of the vehicular-focused projects improve mobility east-to-west, particularly in the central and eastern parts of the County.

| Tier 3 Active Transportation | | | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **Project ID** | **Project Name** | **Extent From** | **Extent To** | **2022 Total Cost** |
| **Off-Road** | | | | |
| BP_1424 | Arabia Mountain-Stone Mountain Connector Trail 2 | Stonecrest City Limits | Stone Mountain Park | $4,643,000 |
| BP_1426 | Bouldercrest Court Connection to S River Trail | Bouldercrest Court | S River Trail | $60,000 |
| BP_1431 | Covington Trails, Phase 2 (South) | Memorial Drive | Covington Highway | $1,048,000 |
| BP_1430 | Covington Trails, Phase 2 (South) | Covington Highway | Holcombe Road | $1,004,000 |
| BP_1429 | Covington Trails, Phase 2 (South) | W Austin Road | Towers Way | $798,000 |
| BP_1432 | Covington Trails, Phase 2 (South) | Covington Highway | Redan Road | $328,000 |
| BP_1434 | Gresham Park Connection to S River Trail | South River Trail | Gresham Park | $288,000 |
| BP_1500 | I-285 Top End Trail | Hammond Drive | Northlake Mall | $38,000,000 |
| BP_1437 | Indian Creek MARTA Station Trails | Tie-in to Snapfinger Trail PATH | | $443,000 |
| BP_1436 | Indian Creek MARTA Station Trails | S Indian Creek Drive | Snapfinger Trail PATH | $331,000 |
| BP_1442 | James B Rivers Memorial Drive Trail | Stone Mountain City Limits | Silver Hill Road | $1,439,000 |
| BP_1443 | James R Hallford Stadium to Snapfinger PATH Trail Connection | James R Hallford Stadium Parking Lot | Snapfinger Trail PATH | $30,000 |
| BP_144 | McConnell Drive Three Parks Connector-Multiuse Trail | South of Intown Community School | Toco Hills Shopping Center | $4,229,000 |
| BP_136 | Memorial Drive Trail | Kensington Road | I-285 | $1,251,000 |

<!-- page 89 -->
### Tier 3 Active Transportation Continued

| Project ID | Project Name | Extent From | Extent To | 2022 Total Cost |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| BP_041 | Multiuse Trail from Monterey Drive to Shoal Creek I Parallel to Capastrana Place | Monterey Drive | Shoal Creek I | $79,000 |
| BP_1448 | Shoal Creek PATH Trail, Connection 1 | Elkhorn Drive | Shoal Creek PATH Trail | $66,000 |
| BP_1449 | Shoal Creek PATH Trail, Phase 2 Connection 2 | Thomas Road | Shoal Creek PATH Trail | $81,000 |
| BP_1454 | Shoal Creek PATH, Phase 2 Connection Trail | Shoal Creek PATH Trail | Glendale Court | $91,000 |
| BP_1451 | Shoal Creek Trail PATH, Phase 1 (Section 1) | S River Trail | S Columbia Drive/ Thomas Road | $8,873,000 |
| BP_1453 | Shoal Creek Trail PATH, Phase 2 | Candler Road | Flat Shoals Parkway | $4,064,000 |
| BP_1425 | Snapfinger Creek PATH Trail Connection | Red Cedar Trail | Snapfinger Creek Trail | $55,000 |
| BP_1455 | Snapfinger PATH Trail Connection 1 | Ramblewood Circle | Snapfinger Trail | $191,000 |
| BP_1456 | Snapfinger Trail PATH | Indian Creek Trail | Indian Creek MARTA | $357,000 |
| BP_010a | Snapfinger Trail PATH | Snapfinger Road | I-20 | $4,948,000 |
| BP_1457 | Snapfinger Trail PATH, Section 1 | S River Trail | Snapfinger Road | $4,133,000 |
| BP_1458 | Snapfinger Trail PATH, Section 2 | Stonecrest City Limits | Stoneview Park | $17,552,000 |
| BP_1459 | South Peachtree Creek Trail PATH, Phase 1 | Atlanta City Limits | Toco Hills Shopping Center | $1,739,000 |
| BP_1479 | South River Connector Trail | Panthersville Road | Smithfield Avenue | $6,052,000 |
| BP_1462 | South River Trail Extension | River Run Trail | South River Trail Extension | $91,000 |
| BP_1463 | South River Trail Extension, Connection 3 | Sage Place | South River Trail Extension | $53,000 |
| BP_1465 | South River Trail, Connection 2 | Waldrop Trail Cul-de-sac | South River Trail | $198,000 |
| BP_1460 | South River Trail, Connection 4 | English Valley Drive | South River Trail | $157,000 |
| BP_1461 | South River Trail, Connection 5 | River Edge Court | South River Trail | $35,000 |
| BP_1478 | Stone Mountain Creek Trail | Stone Mountain Park Lake | Yellow River at SE DeKalb County Line | $16,238,000 |
| BP_1466 | Stone Mountain Creek Trail Connection | Deer Trail Lane | Stone Mountain Creek Trail | $68,000 |
| BP_1467 | Stone Mountain Creek Trail Connection to Rockbridge Road | Stone Mountain Creek/ Yellow River | SE DeKalb County Line | $718,000 |
| BP_138 | Wellness Multiuse Path | Medlock Road | Church Street | $384,000 |
| BP_1468 | Zonolite Park Trail Extension | Zonolite Park | Dalon Road NE | $149,000 |
| B_211 | Sycamore Drive Resurfacing and Bike Lanes | Church Street | Grove Street | $206,000 |

<!-- page 90 -->
# TIER 3: LONG-RANGE (YEARS 13-27)
## ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION

<<FIGURE>>

**PROJECT TYPES**
*   Freight and Rail Crossing
*   Interchange - New or Improvements
*   Capacity - Widening
*   ITS Improvements
*   Multimodal
*   New Connection
*   On-Road/Off-Road Trail Projects
*   Operational - Corridor
*   Operational - Intersection
*   Design Only

<!-- page 91 -->
### Tier 3 Roadway

| Project ID | Project Name | Extent From | Extent To | 2022 Total Cost |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **Capacity-Widening** | | | | |
| R_401 | Covington Highway Capacity Improvement | Evans Mill Road | SR 124 (Turner Hill Road) | $12,168,000 |
| R_1080 | Old McDonough Road Capacity Improvement | Thurman Road | Lancaster Road | $1,754,000 |
| R_1077 | Old McDonough Road Capacity Improvement | Lancaster Road | Mason Dixon Road | $1,067,000 |
| **Freight and Rail Crossing** | | | | |
| R_909 | Rockbridge Road SW at Stone Mountain Lithonia Road Rail Crossing Improvement | Stone Mountain Lithonia Road | | $470,000 |
| R_914 | Stone Mountain Lithonia Road at Redan Road Rail Crossing Improvement | Redan Road | | $340,000 |
| **Interchange-New or Improvements** | | | | |
| R_710 | I-85 SB Ramp at Pleasantdale Road Interchange Improvement | Pleasantdale Road | | $50,000,000 |
| R_700 | Shallowford Road at I-85 Rail Interchange Improvement | I-85 | | $2,216,000 |
| **Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) Improvements** | | | | |
| R_809 | Briarcliff Road ITS Improvement | Johnson Road | N Decatur Road | $44,000 |
| R_800 | Briarcliff Road ITS Improvement | Johnson Road | Sheridan Road | $77,000 |
| R_808 | Flat Shoals Parkway/Flakes Mill Road/ Snapfinger Road/Wesley Chapel Road ITS Improvement | Boring Road at Flat Shoals | Covington Highway at Wesley Chapel Road | $278,000 |
| R_814 | New DeKalb County Traffic Control Center | | | $2,053,000 |
| R_811 | Pleasantdale Road ITS Improvement | Best Friend Road | Pleasantdale Crossing | $370,000 |
| R_807 | Rock Chapel Road/Rockbridge Road ITS Improvement | S Rockbridge Road/ Pembleton Court | Union Grove Road | $215,000 |
| R_806 | Turner Hill Road/Mall Parkway ITS Improvement | Klondike Road | Rock Chapel Road/ Union Grove Road | $146,000 |
| **Multimodal** | | | | |
| M_022a | Clairmont Road Multimodal Improvement | Lavista Road | N Decatur Road | $2,000,000 |
| M_028 | Covington Highway Multimodal Improvement | S Hairston Road | Klondike Road | $46,067,000 |
| M_2007 | Covington Trails and Kensington MARTA Station Road Diets, Phase 3 | Durham Park Road | Sagehill Drive | $920,000 |

<!-- page 92 -->
# 08 – PRIORITY PROJECTS FOR UNINCORPORATED DEKALB COUNTY

### Tier 3 Roadway Continued

| Project ID | Project Name | Extent From | Extent To | 2022 Total Cost |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| M_034 | Executive Park Ring Road New Alignment | Buford Highway | Briarcliff Road | $24,785,000 |
| M_042 | Gresham Road/Clifton Church Road Multimodal Improvement | Flat Shoals Road | Clifton Church Road | $10,538,000 |
| M_013 | Heritage Corridor Multimodal Improvement (Multiuse Path and Operational Improvements) | Stone Mountain | Lithonia | $25,400,000 |
| M_014 | Lavista Road Multimodal Improvement | N Druid Hills Road | Harobi Drive | $43,110,000 |
| M_025 | N Decatur Road Multimodal Improvement | Church Street | E Ponce De Leon Avenue | $21,295,000 |
| M_024 | N Decatur Road Multimodal Improvement | Clairmont Road | Church Street | $16,560,000 |
| M_023 | N Decatur Road Multimodal Improvement | Clifton Road | Clairmont Road | $14,849,000 |
| M_029 | N Druid Hills Road/I-85 Access Road Multimodal Improvement | I-85 Frontage Road underpass at Cliff Valley Way/ Executive Park S | Mount Mariah Road/ Briarwood Road | $10,777,000 |
| M_010 | Scott Boulevard Multimodal Improvement and Grade Separation | Eastland Drive | Hollywood Drive | $56,000,000 |
| M_035d | Valley Brook Road Multimodal Improvement | Lawrenceville Highway | Ponce De Leon Avenue | $15,310,000 |
| **New Connection** | | | | |
| R_2005 | Clairmont Road Reliever Connection | I-85 Frontage Road | Briarcliff Road NE | $10,000,000 |
| R_621 | McConnell Drive Extension | Clairmont Road | North Jamestown Road | $6,159,000 |
| R_612 | New Street A | Camp Circle | New Road | $712,000 |
| R_613 | New Street B | Camp Way | Camp Circle | $521,000 |
| R_614 | New Street C | Camp Street | New Street A | $664,000 |
| R_615 | New Street D | New Street A | Kensington Road | $432,000 |
| R_616 | New Street E | Camp Circle | Kensington Road | $267,000 |
| R_617 | New Street F | New Street C | Kensington Road | $904,000 |
| R_619 | New Street H | Northern Avenue | Mountain Drive | $1,307,000 |
| R_620 | New Street I | Kensington Road | Durham Park Road | $1,109,000 |
| **Operational-Corridor** | | | | |
| R_400b | Briarcliff Road Arterial Managed Lanes | Clifton Road | N Druid Hills Road | $40,500,000 |
| R_400a | Briarcliff Road Operational Improvement | Clifton Road | N Druid Hills Road | $29,040,000 |

<!-- page 93 -->
### Tier 3 Roadway Continued

| Project ID | Project Name | Extent From | Extent To | 2022 Total Cost |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| R_220 | Candler/Flat Shoals Road Operational Improvement | I-20 Ramps | I-285 Ramps | $8,000,000 |
| R_1079 | Continental Way Operational Improvement | Bouldercrest Road | International Park Drive | $3,100,000 |
| R_235 | County Jail Driveway Operational Improvement | Camp Road | Memorial Drive | $740,000 |
| R_223 | Ponce De Leon Avenue Operational Improvement | Brockett Road | Rays Road | $3,500,000 |
| R_219 | Rainbow Drive Operational Improvement | Candler Road | Wesley Chapel Road | $4,200,000 |
| R_405b | Redan Road Operational Improvement | S Hairston Road | Panola Road | $12,900,000 |
| R_423a | Redan Road Operational Improvement | Panola Road | S Deshon Road | $16,000,000 |
| R_422d | Rockbridge Road Operational Improvement | S Stone Mountain-Lithonia Road | Deshon Road | $27,200,000 |
| R_422a | Rockbridge Road Operational Improvement | Memorial Drive | Allgood Road | $12,000,000 |
| R_422b | Rockbridge Road Operational Improvement | Rowland Road | Orchard Drive | $17,600,000 |
| R_237 | Shallowford Road Operational Improvement | I-85 | Briarcliff Road | $6,400,000 |
| R_233 | Stephenson Road Operational Improvement | Rockbridge Road | SR 124 | $6,600,000 |
| **Operational-Intersection** | | | | |
| R_119 | Briarcliff Road at Clifton Road Intersection Improvement | Clifton Road | | $11,005,000 |
| R_117 | Flat Shoals Road at Brannen Road Intersection Improvement | Brannen Road | | $2,535,000 |
| R_115 | Flat Shoals Road at Cook Road Intersection Improvement | Cook Road | | $2,535,000 |
| R_905 | Frazier Road at Wilson Road Rail Intersection Improvement | Wilson Road | | $3,600,000 |
| R_114 | Gresham Road at Cook Road Intersection Improvement | Cook Road | | $2,535,000 |
| R_146 | Lloyd Road at Flat Shoals Road Intersection Improvement | Flat Shoals Road | | $2,350,000 |
| R_111 | Memorial Drive at N Hairston Road Intersection Improvement | N Hairston Road | | $452,000 |
| R_1497 | Moreland Avenue/Moreland Industrial Boulevard Intersection Improvement | Moreland Industrial Boulevard | | $3,176,000 |

<!-- page 94 -->
# 08 — PRIORITY PROJECTS FOR UNINCORPORATED DEKALB COUNTY

| Tier 3 Roadway Continued | | | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **Project ID** | **Project Name** | **Extent From** | **Extent To** | **2022 Total Cost** |
| R_158 | Scott Boulevard at Decatur Road Intersection Safety Evaluation | N Decatur Road | | $6,500,000 |
| R_1409 | South Hairston Drive at Statler Drive Intersection Improvement | Statler Drive | | $281,000 |
| R_134 | Turner Hill Road at Covington Highway Intersection Improvement | Covington Highway | | $3,500,000 |
| R_144 | Village Square Lane at Hambrick Road Intersection Improvement | Hambrick Road | | $850,000 |
| R_1065 | Westside Place-Constitution Road-International Park Drive Roundabout | Constitution Road | | $3,694,000 |

<!-- page 95 -->
COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

# TIER 3: LONG-RANGE (YEARS 13-27)
## ROADWAY

<<FIGURE>>

### PROJECT TYPES
*   Freight and Rail Crossing
*   Interchange - New or Improvements
*   Capacity - Widening
*   ITS Improvements
*   Multimodal
*   New Connection
*   On-Road/Off-Road Trail Projects
*   Operational - Corridor
*   Operational - Intersection
*   Design Only

<!-- page 96 -->
PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK

<!-- page 97 -->
# CHAPTER 09
PRIORITY PROJECTS FOR
DEKALB CITIES

<!-- page 98 -->
# CHAPTER 09: PRIORITY PROJECTS FOR DEKALB CITIES

The CTP team reviewed major projects located within DeKalb’s cities. Projects identified in this section were identified as priorities by one or more of DeKalb’s municipalities, either through conversations with city staff and elected officials or through previous transportation plans.

It is important to note that a number of projects are priorities for multiple cities and for unincorporated DeKalb County. Because of this, some projects in this section are included in multiple cities and/or are also included in the list of projects for unincorporated DeKalb.

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 99 -->
# ATLANTA

Projects in the City of Atlanta were included from the Atlanta Transportation Plan, Cycle Atlanta Phase 2.0 Study, ARC Regional Transportation Plan, DeKalb County 2014 Transportation Plan, and DeKalb SPLOST Planning. The project team also identified projects through conversations with stakeholders, elected officials, and members of the public.

| Project ID | Project Category | Project Name | Cost |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **Tier 1** | | | |
| M_2011 | Multimodal | Arizona Avenue/Clifton Street Multimodal Improvements | N/A |
| M_2012 | Multimodal | Caroline Street/La France Street Multimodal Improvements | N/A |
| M_016 | Multimodal | DeKalb Avenue Multimodal Improvements and Protected Bike Lane | $15,000,000 |
| M_2015 | Multimodal | McLendon Avenue/Euclid Terrace Multimodal Improvements (Enhanced Shared Roadway) | N/A |
| BP_1507 | Off-Road | La France Street Bike and Pedestrian Improvements | $200,000 |
| M_2014 | On-Road | Euclid Avenue Uphill Bike Lanes-Downhill Shared Lane Markings | N/A |
| B_204 | On-Road | Hosea L Williams Drive Bicycle Lanes | $746,000 |
| B_200 | On-Road | Oakdale Road Bicycle Lanes | $4,311,000 |
| B_205 | On-Road | Oakview Drive Bicycle Lanes | $42,000 |
| B_206 | On-Road | Whitefoord Avenue Bicycle Lanes | $2,129,000 |
| R_923 | Operational-Corridor | Euclid Avenue Safe Street and Little 5 Points Streetscape | $3,000,000 |
| **Tier 2** | | | |
| M_2009 | Multimodal | McLendon Avenue Multimodal Improvements | N/A |
| M_2010 | Multimodal | Moreland Avenue Streetscape Improvements | N/A |
| **Tier 3** | | | |
| R_705 | Interchange New or Improvements | I-20 East at US 23 (Moreland Avenue) Interchange Improvement | $9,084,000 |
| R_819 | ITS Improvements | Areawide Signal Upgrades on Briarcliff Road/ Clairmont Road/Church Street | $6,859,000 |
| R_809 | ITS Improvements | Briarcliff Road ITS Improvement | $44,000 |
| R_805 | ITS Improvements | Maynard Terrace ITS Improvement | $63,000 |
| R_816 | ITS Improvements | N Druid Hills Road ITS Improvement | $102,000 |
| R_804 | ITS Improvements | Panola Road/Redan Road ITS Improvement | $39,000 |
| R_817 | ITS Improvements | Ponce De Leon Avenue ITS Improvement | $2,026,000 |

<!-- page 100 -->
# 09 – PRIORITY PROJECTS FOR DEKALB CITIES

| Project ID | Project Category | Project Name | Cost |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| M_021 | Multimodal | Clifton Road/Haygood Road Multimodal Improvement | $6,843,000 |
| M_001 | Multimodal | Howard Circle/DeKalb Place Multimodal Improvement | $69,000 |
| BP_1447 | Multimodal | Lullwater Road NE Multimodal Improvement | $1,000,000 |
| M_044 | Multimodal | Moreland Avenue Multimodal Improvement | $10,730,000 |
| M_003 | Multimodal | New Peachtree Road Multimodal Improvement | $6,179,000 |
| M_2013 | Multimodal | Rogers Street/College Avenue Multimodal Improvements | N/A |
| BP_019 | Off-Road | 2nd Avenue Trail | $5,317,000 |
| BP_079 | Off-Road | Briarcliff Road NE Multiuse Path | $4,815,000 |
| BP_099 | Off-Road | Flat Shoals Road Multiuse Path | $2,079,000 |
| BP_118 | Off-Road | Glenwood Avenue SE Multiuse Path | $3,075,000 |
| BP_066 | Off-Road | Glenwood Road Multiuse Path | $9,987,000 |
| BP_083 | Off-Road | Memorial Drive Multiuse Path | $4,242,000 |
| BP_082 | Off-Road | Memorial Drive SE Multiuse Path | $6,817,000 |
| BP_117 | Off-Road | S Howard Street SE Multiuse Path | $1,702,000 |
| BP_116 | Off-Road | S Howard Street SE Neighborhood Greenway | $288,000 |
| BP_1473 | Off-Road | South Fork Peachtree Trail Connection to Emory University | $299,000 |
| BP_1482 | Off-Road | South Peachtree Creek Trail-PATH, Phase 2 (Section 2) | $379,000 |
| BP_1508 | Off-Road | Stone Mountain Trail-Ponce Spur and Bicycle/Pedestrian Bridge | N/A |
| B_202 | On-Road | Ponce De Leon Avenue Bicycle Lanes | $1,301,000 |
| B_208 | On-Road | S Candler Street Bicycle Lanes | $2,738,000 |
| R_202 | Operational-Corridor | Boldercrest Road Operational Improvements | $3,490,000 |
| R_207 | Operational-Corridor | SR 154 (Memorial Drive) Operational Improvements | $2,772,000 |
| R_208 | Operational-Corridor | SR 260 (Glenwood Avenue) at US 23 (Moreland Avenue) Operational Improvements | $3,582,000 |
| R_120 | Operational-Intersection | Clifton Road at Houston Mill Road Intersection Improvement | $1,416,000 |
| R_127 | Operational-Intersection | DeKalb County Signal Upgrades | $9,366,000 |
| R_118 | Operational-Intersection | Moreland Avenue at North Avenue Intersection Improvement | $2,000 |
| R_173 | Operational-Intersection | S Howard Street at Memorial Drive Intersection Improvement | $30,000 |
| R_302 | Operational-Realignment | Realign Skyhaven Road with Moreland Avenue | $3,291,000 |

<!-- page 101 -->
<<FIGURE>>

### PROJECT TYPES
| | |
|---|---|
| ◯ | Freight and Rail Crossing |
| ◯ | Interchange - New or Improvements |
| ◯ | Capacity - Widening |
| ◯ | ITS Improvements |
| ◯ | Multimodal |
| ◯ | New Connection |
| ◯ | On-Road/Off-Road Trail Projects |
| ◯ | Operational - Corridor |
| ◯ | Operational - Intersection |

<!-- page 102 -->
## 09 – PRIORITY PROJECTS FOR DEKALB CITIES

### AVONDALE ESTATES

Projects in the City of Avondale Estates were included from the Avondale Estates Downtown Master Plan, ARC Regional Transportation Plan, and DeKalb County 2014 Transportation Plan. The project team also identified projects through conversations with stakeholders, elected officials, and members of the public.

| Project ID | Project Category | Project Name | Cost |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **Tier 1** | | | |
| R_108 | Operational-Intersection | Intersection Improvement at Laredo Drive and N Clarendon Avenue | $1,396,000 |
| R_600 | New Connection | Downtown Avondale Street Grid | $5,165,000 |
| R_214 | Operational-Corridor | US 278 Improvements | $5,949,000 |
| BP_1106 | On-Road | Laredo Drive Bicycle Lanes | $971,000 |
| M_017 | Multimodal | W College Avenue/E College Avenue/ N Avondale Road/Covington Road Multimodal Improvement | $35,474,000 |
| **Tier 2** | | | |
| BP_001 | Off-Road | N Clarendon Avenue Trail | $83,000 |
| R_211 | Operational-Corridor | Kensington MARTA Station Trail and Road Diets, Phase 1 | $5,949,000 |
| BP_1105 | On-Road | N Clarendon Avenue Bicycle Lanes | $878,000 |
| BP_086 | Off-Road | Clarendon Avenue Multiuse Path | $604,000 |
| **Tier 3** | | | |
| R_915 | Freight and Rail Crossing | Avondale Plaza at Clarendon Avenue Rail Crossing Improvement | $150,000 |

<!-- page 103 -->
<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 104 -->
# BROOKHAVEN

Projects in the City of Brookhaven were included from the Brookhaven 2020 CTP Update, Chamblee Mobility Multimodal Transportation Plan, Dunwoody CTP Update, North Druid Hills LCI, One Chamblee Comprehensive Plan Update, ARC Regional Transportation Plan, DeKalb County 2014 Transportation Plan, and DeKalb Greenways Plan. The project team also created projects through conversations with stakeholders, elected officials, and members of the public.

| Project ID | Project Category | Project Name | Cost |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **Tier 1** | | | |
| M_027 | Multimodal | Dresden Drive Multimodal Improvement | $8,308,000 |
| BP_033 | Off-Road | Peachtree Creek Greenway Trail, Phase II | $7,864,000 |
| BP_035 | Off-Road | Peachtree Creek Greenway Trail, Phase III | $26,760,000 |
| BP_014 | Off-Road | Perimeter Trail | $1,346,000 |
| R_1004 | Operational-Corridor | Johnson Ferry Road Corridor Study | $163,000 |
| R_213 | Operational-Intersection | Ashford Dunwoody Road at Windsor Parkway Intersection Improvement | $2,488,000 |
| **Tier 2** | | | |
| R_712 | Interchange-New or Improvements | I-85 Interchange Improvement | $9,580,000 |
| P_1006 | Off-Road | Pedestrian Flyover Bridge Over I-85 into Executive Park | N/A |
| P_1007 | Off-Road | Pedestrian Flyover Bridge Over N Druid Hills Road | N/A |
| BP_124 | Off-Road | Perimeter Trail | $17,479,000 |
| B_201 | On-Road | Peachtree Road/North Peachtree Road Bicycle Lanes | $13,371,000 |
| **Tier 3** | | | |
| R_411 | Capacity-Widening | North Druid Hills Road Widening | $16,224,000 |
| R_711 | Interchange-New or Improvements | Executive Park Interchange Access | $1,506,000 |
| M_051 | Multimodal | Briarcliff Bicycle Lanes and Sidewalks | $8,622,000 |
| M_009 | Multimodal | Buford Highway Multimodal Improvement | $29,206,000 |
| M_026 | Multimodal | E Roxboro Road Multimodal Improvement | $5,666,000 |
| M_034 | Multimodal | Executive Park Ring Road New Alignment | $24,785,000 |
| M_035a | Multimodal | N Druid Hills Road from Buford Highway to Briarcliff Road Multimodal Improvement | $19,461,000 |
| M_035b | Multimodal | N Druid Hills Road from Briarcliff Road to Clairmont Road Multimodal Improvement | $2,290,000 |
| M_035bc_PE | Multimodal | N Druid Hills Road from Briarcliff Road to Lawrenceville Highway Multimodal Improvement (Design Only) | $8,997,000 |
| M_002 | Multimodal | N Druid Hills Road from Peachtree Road to Colonial Drive Multimodal Improvement | $3,597,000 |

<!-- page 105 -->
| Project ID | Project Category | Project Name | Cost |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| M_029 | Multimodal | N Druid Hills Road/I-85 Access Road Multimodal Improvement | $10,777,000 |
| R_1309 | New Connection | Buford Highway to Clairmont Road Connector | $788,000 |
| BP_032 | Off-Road | Clairmont Road Trail | $4,773,000 |
| BP_1306 | Off-Road | Dresden Drive Multiuse Trail | $5,962,000 |
| BP_009 | Off-Road | Perimeter Trail | $12,167,000 |
| BP_126 | Off-Road | Skyland Trail | $4,968,000 |
| BP_1104 | On-Road | Ashford Dunwoody Road Path | $16,805,000 |
| R_400b | Operational-Corridor | Briarcliff Road Arterial Managed Lanes | $40,500,000 |
| R_400b_PE | Operational-Corridor | Briarcliff Road Arterial Managed Lanes (Design Only) | $4,500,000 |
| R_400a | Operational-Corridor | Briarcliff Road Operational Improvement | $29,040,000 |
| R_216 | Operational-Corridor | Clairmont Road South Corridor Enhancements | $2,813,000 |

<!-- page 106 -->
09 – PRIORITY PROJECTS FOR DEKALB CITIES

<<FIGURE>>

| PROJECT TYPES | |
| :--- | :--- |
| ◯ | Freight and Rail Crossing |
| ◯ | Interchange - New or Improvements |
| ◯ | Capacity - Widening |
| ◯ | ITS Improvements |
| ◯ | Multimodal |
| ◯ | New Connection |
| ◯ | On-Road/Off-Road Trail Projects |
| ◯ | Operational - Corridor |
| ◯ | Operational - Intersection |

<!-- page 107 -->
(blank page)

<!-- page 108 -->
# CHAMBLEE

Projects in the City of Chamblee were included from the One Chamblee Comprehensive Plan Update, Chamblee Mobility Multimodal Transportation Plan, North Fork Peachtree Creek Greenway Comprehensive Study, ARC Regional Transportation Plan, and DeKalb County 2014 Transportation Plan. The project team also created projects through conversations with stakeholders, elected officials, and members of the public.

| Project ID | Project Category | Project Name | Cost |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **Tier 1** | | | |
| R_2003 | New Connection | Parsons Drive/Deacon Lane New Connection | N/A |
| BP_003 | Off-Road | Chamblee Rail Trail Multiuse Greenway Phase 3 | $4,554,000 |
| BP_048 | Off-Road | Chamblee Tucker Multiuse Path | $3,915,000 |
| BP_044 | Off-Road | Huntley Hills Park Trail Connector | $2,700,000 |
| BP_042 | Off-Road | Nancy Creek Trail | $799,000 |
| BP_047 | Off-Road | Savoy Park Trail | $642,000 |
| R_215 | Operational-Corridor | Johnson Road realignment | $8,977,000 |
| R_231 | Operational-Corridor | Peachtree Boulevard Operational Improvements | $7,600,000 |
| R_132 | Operational-Intersection | Buford/Dresden/Plaster Intersection Improvements | $1,800,000 |
| R_128 | Operational-Intersection | Sexton Woods-Malone Drive Intersection Alignment | $2,790,000 |
| R_129 | Operational-Intersection | Shallowford Operations at I-85 Interchange | $8,977,000 |
| R_2002 | Operational-Realignment | Chamblee International Logistics Center Catalina Drive Realignment | N/A |
| R_1310 | Operational-Realignment | Dresden Drive/Buford Highway/Plaster Road Safety and Operational Improvement | $1,125,000 |
| **Tier 2** | | | |
| R_1309 | New Connection | Buford Highway to Clairmont Road Connector | $788,000 |
| R_1319 | New Connection | Clyde Drive Extension | $394,000 |
| R_1318 | New Connection | Green Industrial Way to Clyde Drive Connection | $822,000 |
| R_1320 | New Connection | John Glenn Drive Extension | $3,120,000 |
| R_1311 | New Connection | Johnson Circle-Deacon Lane/ Parsons Drive Connector | $1,688,000 |
| R_610 | New Connection | Johnson Road South Extension | N/A |
| R_1312 | New Connection | Shallowford Road at I-85 New Street, Connection 1 | $1,463,000 |
| R_1313 | New Connection | Shallowford Road at I-85 New Street, Connection 2 | $2,025,000 |
| BP_1317 | Off-Road | Broad Street Extension and Bicycle Facility | $563,000 |
| BP_1305 | Off-Road | BRT Station Connector Trail | $4,000,000 |
| BP_1302 | Off-Road | Buford Highway Multiuse Trail | $5,737,000 |

<!-- page 109 -->
| Project ID | Project Category | Project Name | Cost |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | ---: |
| BP_1301 | Off-Road | Carroll Circle Multiuse Trail | $563,000 |
| BP_1300 | Off-Road | Chamblee Dunwoody Road Multiuse Trail | $2,925,000 |
| BP_1304 | Off-Road | Chamblee Plaza Redevelopment Multiuse Trail South | $1,125,000 |
| B_209 | Off-Road | Chamblee Dunwoody Road Protected Facility | N/A |
| BP_1306 | Off-Road | Dresden Drive Multiuse Trail | $5,962,000 |
| BP_049 | Off-Road | Dresden East Utility Corridor Trail and Beverly Hills-Dresden East Connector | $1,452,000 |
| BP_050 | Off-Road | Keswick Park Trails | N/A |
| X_1308 | Off-Road | Peachtree Creek Greenway Connector Bridge South | N/A |
| BP_043 | Off-Road | Peachtree Creek Greenway Dresden East Connector | $4,500,000 |
| BP_1315 | Off-Road | Pedestrian Rail Crossing-West Chamblee | $383,000 |
| R_218 | Operational-Corridor | Johnson Ferry Road Median | N/A |
| R_217 | Operational-Corridor | Keswick Drive Improvements | $68,000 |
| R_1326 | Operational-Intersection | Chamblee Dunwoody Road/ Carroll Circle Roundabout | N/A |
| R_1325 | Operational-Intersection | Chamblee Tucker Road/Carroll Circle Roundabout | N/A |
| R_1324 | Operational-Intersection | Chamblee Tucker Road/Shallowford Road Roundabout | N/A |
| R_1327 | Operational-Intersection | Johnson Circle Roundabout | N/A |
| R_131 | Operational-Intersection | N Shallowford Road/E Johnson Circle Roundabout | N/A |
| R_2004 | Operational-Intersection | Peachtree Road/Peachtree Boulevard Intersection Realignment | $3,744,000 |
| R_1322 | Operational-Intersection | Plaster Road/Woodacres Road/ Dresden Roundabout | N/A |
| R_1323 | Operational-Intersection | Shallowford Road/Dresden Drive Roundabout | N/A |
| **Tier 3** | | | |
| M_009 | Multimodal | Buford Highway Multimodal Improvement | $29,206,000 |
| M_015 | Multimodal | Chamblee Dunwoody Road from Harts Mill Road to Cumberland Drive Multimodal Improvement | $3,373,000 |
| M_018 | Multimodal | Chamblee Tucker Road from Peachtree Boulevard to New Peachtree Road Multimodal Improvement | $3,189,000 |
| M_1039 | Multimodal | New Peachtree-Shallowford Road Complete Street, Phase 2 | $3,959,000 |

<!-- page 110 -->
# 09 – PRIORITY PROJECTS FOR DEKALB CITIES

| Project ID | Project Category | Project Name | Cost |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| M_019 | Multimodal | Peachtree Road Multimodal Improvement | $5,063,000 |
| R_603 | New Connection | New Connection from Peachtree Boulevard to Buford Highway | $74,664,000 |
| R_1042 | New Connection | Park Avenue Extension and Covered Street | $13,183,000 |
| BP_002 | Off-Road | Chamblee Rail Trail Multiuse Greenway, Phase 2 | $1,756,000 |
| BP_032 | Off-Road | Clairmont Road Trail | $4,773,000 |
| BP_1506 | Off-Road | North Fork Peachtree Creek Trail Clairmont Road to Fisher Trail Park, Segment 1 | $5,917,000 |
| BP_014 | Off-Road | Perimeter Trail | $1,346,000 |
| BP_124 | Off-Road | Perimeter Trail | $17,479,000 |
| BP_126 | Off-Road | Skyland Trail | $4,968,000 |
| B_201 | On-Road | Peachtree Road/North Peachtree Road Bicycle Lanes | $13,371,000 |
| R_1004 | Operational-Corridor | Johnson Ferry Road Corridor Study | $163,000 |
| R_200 | Operational-Corridor | Malone Drive Operational Improvements | $1,041,000 |
| R_1057 | Operational-Intersection | Chamblee Tucker Road/Shallowford Road NE Intersection Realignment | $2,828,000 |

<!-- page 111 -->
<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 112 -->
# 09 – PRIORITY PROJECTS FOR DEKALB CITIES

## CLARKSTON

Projects in the City of Clarkston were included from the Tucker-Northlake LCI Study, Clarkston City Plan, and DeKalb County 2014 Transportation Plan. The project team also identified projects through conversations with stakeholders, elected officials, and members of the public.

| Project ID | Project Category | Project Name | Cost |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **Tier 1** | | | |
| M_1486 | Multimodal | North Indian Creek/Montreal Road Diet | $9,200,000 |
| BP_1485 | Off-Road | Clarkston Greenway | $9,100,000 |
| R_1488 | Operational-Intersection | Glendale at Church Street Operational Improvements | $5,000,000 |
| R_1487 | Operational-Intersection | Mell Avenue Multi-Leg Crossing Intersection Safety and Operational Improvements | $2,200,000 |
| **Tier 2** | | | |
| M_1063 | Multimodal | Jolly Avenue Multimodal Improvement | $1,700,000 |
| **Tier 3** | | | |
| M_1497 | Multimodal | Brockett Road Complete Streets | $1,414,000 |
| BP_060 | Off-Road | N Indian Creek Drive Multiuse Path | $3,941,000 |
| BP_010b | Off-Road | Snapfinger Trail-PATH | $1,979,000 |
| R_109 | Operational-Intersection | Church Street/Ponce de Leon at N Indian Creek Road Underpass Intersection Improvement | $1,765,000 |

<!-- page 113 -->
<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 114 -->
# 09 – PRIORITY PROJECTS FOR DEKALB CITIES

## DECATUR

Projects in the City of Decatur were included from the City of Decatur Community Transportation Plan Update, Medline LCI, Belvedere Master Active Living Plan, ARC Regional Transportation Plan, and DeKalb County 2014 Transportation Plan. The project team also identified projects through conversations with stakeholders, elected officials, and members of the public.

| Project ID | Project Category | Project Name | Cost |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **Tier 1** | | | |
| R_820 | ITS Improvements | Signal Upgrades in/around Downtown Decatur | $9,228,000 |
| M_047 | Multimodal | Clairemont Avenue, Commerce Drive, and Church Street Bicycle/ Pedestrian Improvements | $6,338,000 |
| M_024 | Multimodal | N Decatur Road from Clairmont Road to Church Street Multimodal Improvement | $16,902,000 |
| M_2008 | Multimodal | Sams Crossing Bridge Multimodal Improvements | $3,034,000 |
| M_017 | Multimodal | W College Avenue/E College Avenue/ N Avondale Road/Covington Road Multimodal Improvement | $35,474,000 |
| BP_005 | Off-Road | S Columbia Drive Trail | $2,738,000 |
| R_1018 | Operational-Intersection | E College Avenue at Sams Crossing Intersection Improvement | $1,404,000 |
| R_922 | Operational-Intersection | E Lake Road NE at Parkwood Road Operational Improvements | $385,000 |
| R_1022 | Operational-Intersection | E Ponce de Leon Avenue at N Acadia Avenue Intersection Improvements | $1,638,000 |
| R_169 | Operational-Intersection | N Decatur Road at Superior Avenue | $1,638,000 |
| R_920 | Operational-Intersection | Scott Boulevard at Clairmont Avenue Operational Improvements | $1,693,000 |
| R_921 | Operational-Intersection | Winn Way at N Arcadia Avenue Signal and Operational Improvements | N/A |
| **Tier 2** | | | |
| R_1020 | Operational-Intersection | East Lake Drive at 2nd Avenue Intersection Improvements | $1,287,000 |
| R_1021 | Operational-Intersection | Huron Street at Champlain Street Intersection Improvements | $468,000 |
| R_1019 | Operational-Intersection | W Ponce de Leon Avenue at Northern Avenue Intersection Improvements | $1,989,000 |
| **Tier 3** | | | |
| M_045 | Multimodal | Church Street Multimodal Improvement | $3,692,000 |
| M_045_PE | Multimodal | Church Street Multimodal Improvement (Design Only) | $552,000 |

<!-- page 115 -->
| Project ID | Project Category | Project Name | Cost |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| BP_019 | Off-Road | 2nd Avenue Trail | $5,317,000 |
| BP_021 | Off-Road | Coventry Road Trail | $3,155,000 |
| BP_039 | Off-Road | Multiuse Trail North of Memorial Drive to Dearborn Park | $35,000 |
| B_208 | On-Road | S Candler Street Bicycle Lanes | $2,738,000 |
| B_211 | On-Road | Sycamore Drive Resurfacing and Bike Lanes | $206,000 |
| B_212 | On-Road | Winn Way Resurfacing and Bike Lanes | $411,000 |
| R_206 | Operational-Corridor | Commerce Drive (East) Operational Improvements | $5,475,000 |
| R_214 | Operational-Corridor | US 278 Improvements | $5,949,000 |

<!-- page 116 -->
# 09 – PRIORITY PROJECTS FOR DEKALB CITIES

<<FIGURE>>

| PROJECT TYPES | |
| :--- | :--- |
| ◯ | Freight and Rail Crossing |
| ◯ | Interchange - New or Improvements |
| ◯ | Capacity - Widening |
| ◯ | ITS Improvements |
| ◯ | Multimodal |
| ◯ | New Connection |
| ◯ | On-Road/Off-Road Trail Projects |
| ◯ | Operational - Corridor |
| ◯ | Operational - Intersection |

<!-- page 117 -->
(blank page)

<!-- page 118 -->
# 09 – PRIORITY PROJECTS FOR DEKALB CITIES

## DORAVILLE

Projects in the City of Doraville were included from the Doraville Mobility Plan, Doraville Peachtree Creek Greenway Study, Buford Highway Master Plan, One Chamblee Comprehensive Plan Update, Chamblee Doraville CID, and DeKalb County 2014 Transportation Plan. The project team also identified projects through conversations with stakeholders, elected officials, and members of the public.

| Project ID | Project Category | Project Name | Cost |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **Tier 1** | | | |
| M_009 | Multimodal | Buford Highway Multimodal Improvement | $29,206,000 |
| M_1039 | Multimodal | New Peachtree-Shallowford Road Complete Street, Phase 2 | $3,959,000 |
| R_605 | New Connection | Assembly Redevelopment Street Grid | N/A |
| R_603 | New Connection | New Connection from Peachtree Boulevard to Buford Highway | $74,664,000 |
| R_1042 | New Connection | Park Avenue Extension and Covered Street | $13,183,000 |
| BP_1035 | Off-Road | City Center Connector Trail | $1,371,000 |
| BP_1032 | Off-Road | Flowers Road Multiuse Path | $1,745,000 |
| BP_146 | Off-Road | Longmire Way Bike-Pedestrian Project | $1,947,000 |
| BP_1037 | Off-Road | New Peachtree Road Multiuse Path | $1,600,000 |
| BP_1038 | Off-Road | Peachtree Creek Greenway Connector, South Spur | $695,000 |
| BP_1503 | Off-Road | Peachtree Creek Greenway, Segment 1 | $3,762,000 |
| BP_1031 | Off-Road | Peachtree Creek Greenway, Segment 2, Western Loop | $3,681,000 |
| BP_1504 | Off-Road | Peachtree Creek Greenway, Segment 3, Eastern Loop | $8,113,000 |
| BP_1505 | Off-Road | Peachtree Creek Greenway, Segment 4 | $2,716,000 |
| R_1058 | Operational-Intersection | Longmire/New Peachtree Intersection Improvements | $252,000 |
| R_2004 | Operational-Intersection | Peachtree Road/Peachtree Boulevard Intersection Realignment | $3,744,000 |
| R_1056 | Operational-Intersection | Realignment of Chestnut at Buford Highway | $2,900,000 |
| **Tier 2** | | | |
| M_1040 | Multimodal | Chestnut Drive Complete Street and Traffic Calming | $1,348,000 |
| R_1041 | New Connection | New Street-McClave to Shallowford | $4,515,000 |
| R_1044 | New Connection | New Street-Pleasant Valley Extension | $2,266,000 |
| BP_1034 | Off-Road | Bicycle-Pedestrian Railroad Bridge | $3,726,000 |
| B_201 | On-Road | Peachtree Road/North Peachtree Road Bicycle Lanes | $13,371,000 |
| R_1059 | Operational-Intersection | Longmire/Flowers Intersection Improvements | $864,000 |

<!-- page 119 -->
| Project ID | Project Category | Project Name | Cost |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **Tier 3** | | | |
| R_703 | Interchange-New or Improvements | Peachtree Industrial Boulevard at I-285 Interchange Improvement | $4,517,000 |
| R_811 | ITS Improvements | Pleasantdale Road ITS Improvement | $370,000 |
| R_601 | New Connection | Flowers Road New Connection | $16,040,000 |
| R_1320 | New Connection | John Glenn Drive Extension | $3,120,000 |
| R_1043 | New Connection | New Street-Longmire to Ashlyn Pointe Connection | $1,729,000 |
| R_604 | New Connection | Oakmont Avenue Extension | $5,012,000 |
| R_602 | New Connection | Shallowford Road New Connection | $36,332,000 |
| BP_1500 | Off-Road | I-285 Top End Trail | $38,000,000 |
| B_300 | On-Road | Dunwoody Area Trailway | $2,000,000 |
| R_1324 | Operational-Intersection | Chamblee Tucker Road/Shallowford Road Roundabout | N/A |
| R_1057 | Operational-Intersection | Chamblee Tucker Road/Shallowford Road NE Intersection Realignment | $2,828,000 |
| R_300 | Operational-Realignment | Pinetree Plaza Realignment | $6,400,000 |

<!-- page 120 -->
# 09 – PRIORITY PROJECTS FOR DEKALB CITIES

<<FIGURE>>

### PROJECT TYPES
* Freight and Rail Crossing
* Interchange - New or Improvements
* Capacity - Widening
* ITS Improvements
* Multimodal
* New Connection
* On-Road/Off-Road Trail Projects
* Operational - Corridor
* Operational - Intersection

<!-- page 121 -->
PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

<!-- page 122 -->
# 09 – PRIORITY PROJECTS FOR DEKALB CITIES

## DUNWOODY

Projects in the City of Dunwoody were included from the Dunwoody CTP Update and DeKalb County 2014 Transportation Plan. The project team also identified projects through conversations with stakeholders, elected officials, and members of the public.

| Project ID | Project Category | Project Name | Cost |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **Tier 1** | | | |
| R_1100 | Capacity-Widening | Hammond Drive Corridor Study | $34,644,000 |
| M_030 | Multimodal | Mount Vernon Road from Ashford Dunwoody Road to Mount Vernon Place Multimodal Improvement | $18,473,000 |
| B_301 | Off-Road | Georgia State University Multiuse Greenway | N/A |
| BP_1104 | On-Road | Ashford Dunwoody Road Path | $16,805,000 |
| B_300 | On-Road | Dunwoody Area Trailway | $2,000,000 |
| **Tier 2** | | | |
| R_701 | Interchange New or Improvements | I-285 North at Ashford Dunwoody Road Interchange Improvement | $43,105,000 |
| M_007 | Multimodal | Chamblee Dunwoody Road from Roberts Drive to Ashford Center Parkway Multimodal Improvement | $22,582,000 |
| R_1101 | New Connection | Westside Connector | $27,311,000 |
| BP_1305 | Off-Road | BRT Station Connector Trail | $4,000,000 |
| BP_1500 | Off-Road | I-285 Top End Trail | $38,000,000 |
| BP_1103 | On-Road | Cotillion Multimodal Improvements | $1,623,000 |
| R_103 | Operational-Intersection | Mount Vernon Road at Chamblee Dunwoody Road Intersection Improvement | $3,696,000 |
| **Tier 3** | | | |
| M_031 | Multimodal | Mount Vernon Road from Mount Vernon Place to Dunwoody Club Drive Multimodal Improvement | $11,085,000 |
| BP_124 | Off-Road | Perimeter Trail | $17,479,000 |
| B_201 | On-Road | Peachtree Road/North Peachtree Road Bicycle Lanes | $13,371,000 |
| R_106 | Operational-Intersection | Mount Vernon Road at Ashford Dunwoody Road Intersection Improvement | $1,416,000 |

<!-- page 123 -->
<<FIGURE>>

### PROJECT TYPES
* Freight and Rail Crossing
* Interchange - New or Improvements
* Capacity - Widening
* ITS Improvements
* Multimodal
* New Connection
* On-Road/Off-Road Trail Projects
* Operational - Corridor
* Operational - Intersection

<!-- page 124 -->
# LITHONIA

Projects in the City of Lithonia were included from the DeKalb County 2014 Transportation. The project team also identified projects through conversations with stakeholders, elected officials, and members of the public.

| Project ID | Project Category | Project Name | Cost |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| R_401 | Capacity-Widening | Covington Highway Capacity Improvement | $12,168,000 |
| R_916 | Freight and Rail Crossing | Main Street at Max Cleland Boulevard Rail Crossing Improvement | $50,000 |
| M_032 | Multimodal | Stone Mountain Street Multimodal Improvement | $1,212,000 |
| BP_023 | Off-Road | Loop A Trail | $1,095,000 |
| BP_025 | Off-Road | Loop B Trail | $2,050,000 |
| BP_024 | Off-Road | Loop C Trail | $685,000 |

<!-- page 125 -->
COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

<<FIGURE>>

### PROJECT TYPES
* Freight and Rail Crossing
* Interchange - New or Improvements
* Capacity - Widening
* ITS Improvements
* Multimodal
* New Connection
* On-Road/Off-Road Trail Projects
* Operational - Corridor
* Operational - Intersection

<!-- page 126 -->
# 09 – PRIORITY PROJECTS FOR DEKALB CITIES

## PINE LAKE

A projects list was not identified for the City of Pine Lake since nearby projects do not traverse into the City. The operational-corridor projects (R_422a and R_422b) are proposed along Rockbridge Road.

## STONE MOUNTAIN

Projects in the City of Stone Mountain were included from the Stone Mountain Village Forward Master Plan and DeKalb Greenways Plan. The project team also identified projects through conversations with stakeholders, elected officials, and members of the public.

| Project ID | Project Category | Project Name | Cost |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **Tier 1** | | | |
| BP_1001 | Off-Road | 2nd Street Side Path | $1,082,000 |
| BP_130 | Off-Road | James B Rivers Memorial Drive Multiuse Path | $1,823,000 |
| R_1002 | Operational-Intersection | Mimosa Drive at Poole Street Intersection Improvements | $541,000 |
| **Tier 2** | | | |
| R_139 | Operational-Intersection | E Mountain Road at 4th Street Intersection Improvement | $20,000 |
| R_156 | Operational-Intersection | Ponce De Leon/Main Street at James B Rivers Memorial Drive | $1,082,000 |
| **Tier 3** | | | |
| M_013 | Multimodal | Heritage Corridor Multimodal Improvement | $25,400,000 |
| M_013_PE | Multimodal | Heritage Corridor Study (Design Only) | $300,000 |
| BP_127 | Off-Road | Smoke Rise Trail | $14,131,000 |
| R_1003 | Operational-Corridor | Reestablish Mackin Street between S Main Street and 2nd Street | $541,000 |

<!-- page 127 -->
### PROJECT TYPES
*   Freight and Rail Crossing
*   Interchange - New or Improvements
*   Capacity - Widening
*   ITS Improvements
*   Multimodal
*   New Connection
*   On-Road/Off-Road Trail Projects
*   Operational - Corridor
*   Operational - Intersection

<<FIGURE>>

<!-- page 128 -->
# STONECREST

Projects in the City of Stonecrest were included from the Stonecrest Transportation Master Plan, ARC Regional Transportation Plan, DeKalb County 2014 Transportation Plan, and DeKalb Greenways Plan. The project team also identified projects through conversations with stakeholders, elected officials, and members of the public.

| Project ID | Project Category | Project Name | Cost |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **Tier 1** | | | |
| R_402 | Capacity-Widening | Panola Road Widening | $22,835,000 |
| R_413 | Capacity-Widening | Thompson Mill Road Widening | $30,285,000 |
| R_1120 | New Connection | East Glen Road Upgrade and Extension | $3,570,000 |
| R_607 | New Connection | Hayden Quarry Road/Sigman Road Extension | $15,346,000 |
| BP_113 | Off-Road | Browns Mill Road Multiuse Path | $6,623,000 |
| BP_1130 | Off-Road | Farrington Parkway Path | $2,974,000 |
| BP_1129 | Off-Road | Joels Lake Path | $3,435,000 |
| BP_1155 | Off-Road | Joels Lake Path, Segment 2 | $2,196,000 |
| BP_108 | Off-Road | Panola Road Multiuse Path | $2,791,000 |
| BP_1128 | Off-Road | Pole Bridge Creek Path | $4,438,000 |
| BP_114 | Off-Road | Salem Road Multiuse Path | $5,068,000 |
| BP_1125 | On-Road | Brisbane Way/Fannin Drive Neighborhood Greenway | $941,000 |
| BP_1123 | On-Road | Ottawa Trail Neighborhood Greenway | $678,000 |
| BP_1126 | On-Road | Sheffield Woods Neighborhood Greenway | $1,728,000 |
| BP_1124 | On-Road | Woodrow Road Neighborhood Greenway | $1,295,000 |
| R_204 | Operational-Corridor | Covington Road at Lithonia Industrial Boulevard (LIB) Operational Improvements | $797,000 |
| R_1122 | Operational-Corridor | LIB Operational Improvements, Segment 1 | $8,653,000 |
| R_1121 | Operational-Corridor | LIB Operational Improvements, Segment 2 | $16,224,000 |
| R_1141 | Operational-Intersection | Evans Mill Road at Browns Mill Road Intersection Improvement | $1,190,000 |
| R_1137 | Operational-Intersection | Evans Mill Road at Covington Highway | $3,786,000 |
| R_1139 | Operational-Intersection | Klondike Road at Mall Parkway | $2,813,000 |
| R_1135 | Operational-Intersection | Klondike Road at SR 212-Browns Mill Road | $2,813,000 |
| R_1140 | Operational-Intersection | Mall Parkway at Evans Mill Road | $2,813,000 |
| R_1138 | Operational-Intersection | Mall Parkway at Tuner Hill Road | $4,327,000 |
| R_1143 | Operational-Intersection | Miller Road at Thompson Mill Road | $2,596,000 |
| R_1142 | Operational-Intersection | Panola Road at Browns Mill Road | $5,949,000 |
| R_1144 | Operational-Intersection | Panola Road at Covington Highway | $4,435,000 |
| R_1145 | Operational-Intersection | Salem Road at Evans Mill Road | $1,839,000 |

<!-- page 129 -->
| Project ID | Project Category | Project Name | Cost |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **Tier 2/3** | | | |
| R_401 | Capacity-Widening | Covington Highway Capacity Improvement | $12,168,000 |
| R_412 | Capacity-Widening | Evans Mill Road Widening | $69,223,000 |
| R_409 | Capacity-Widening | Panola Road from Browns Mill Road to Thompson Mill Road Capacity Improvement, Phase II | $26,522,000 |
| R_404 | Capacity-Widening | Panola Road from Thompson Mill Road to Fairington Road Capacity Improvement | $22,971,000 |
| R_420 | Capacity-Widening | Rock Springs Road Widening | $46,509,000 |
| R_414 | Capacity-Widening | Salem Road Widening | $30,285,000 |
| R_430 | Capacity-Widening | Snapfinger Road (SR 155) Capacity Improvement | $20,900,000 |
| R_406 | Capacity-Widening | Turner Hill Road Widening | $18,011,000 |
| R_910 | Freight and Rail Crossing | Deshon Road at Holt Road Rail Crossing Improvement | $470,000 |
| R_1149 | Interchange-New or Improvements | New I-20 East Express Lanes Access Point at Fairington Road | $16,765,000 |
| R_1148 | Interchange-New or Improvements | New I-20 East Express Lanes Access Point at Stonecrest Mall | $10,816,000 |
| R_1147 | Interchange-New or Improvements | Panola Road, Segment 3 Operations Improvements | $73,008,000 |
| R_803 | ITS Improvements | Panola Road/Fairington Road ITS Improvement | $44,000 |
| R_807 | ITS Improvements | Rock Chapel Road/Rockbridge Road ITS Improvement | $215,000 |
| R_806 | ITS Improvements | Turner Hill Road/Mall Parkway ITS Improvement | $146,000 |
| M_028 | Multimodal | Covington Highway from Hairston Road to Klondike Road Multimodal Improvement | $46,067,000 |
| M_038 | Multimodal | Panola Road Multimodal Improvement | $28,894,000 |
| R_203 | New Connection | LIB Extension, Phase IV | $6,843,000 |
| BP_1132 | Off-Road | Arabia Mountain High School/Murphey Candler Elementary School Safe Routes to School (SRTS) | $805,000 |
| BP_1133 | Off-Road | Arabia Mountain High School/ Murphey Candler Elementary SRTS | $855,000 |
| BP_028 | Off-Road | Arabia Mountain Trail | $9,060,000 |
| BP_029 | Off-Road | Arabia Mountain Trail | $3,651,000 |
| BP_119 | Off-Road | Arabia Mountain Trail | $11,258,000 |
| BP_1153 | Off-Road | Miller Grove High School Path | $3,627,000 |
| BP_1156 | Off-Road | Miller Grove Path, Phases 2 and 3 | $1,262,000 |

<!-- page 130 -->
# 09 – PRIORITY PROJECTS FOR DEKALB CITIES

| Project ID | Project Category | Project Name | Cost |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| BP_073 | Off-Road | Phillips Road Multiuse Path | $5,258,000 |
| BP_010a | Off-Road | Snapfinger Trail-PATH | $4,948,000 |
| BP_1131 | On-Road | Bouie Theme Neighborhood Greenway | $818,000 |
| BP_1152 | On-Road | Chupp Road Path, Segments 1 and 2 | $2,288,000 |
| BP_1154 | On-Road | Fairington Parkway Path | $489,000 |
| BP_1151 | On-Road | Hillandale Drive Path-Segments 1, 2, and 3 | $6,085,000 |
| BP_1150 | On-Road | LIB Path, Segments 1, 2 and 3 | $6,286,000 |
| R_2001 | Operational-Corridor | SR 12/US 278 Operational Improvement | $5,328,000 |
| R_122 | Operational-Intersection | Covington Highway at Hillvale Road/ Wellington Circle Intersection Improvement | $2,172,000 |
| R_107 | Operational-Intersection | Snapfinger Road (SR 155) at Browns Mill Road Intersection Improvement | $359,000 |
| R_1146 | Operational-Intersection | Turner Hill Road at I-20 East | $7,788,000 |
| R_1136 | Operational-Intersection | US 278-Covington Highway at LIB | $3,570,000 |

<!-- page 131 -->
<<FIGURE>>

### PROJECT TYPES

| | |
|---|---|
| ◯ | Freight and Rail Crossing |
| ◯ | Interchange - New or Improvements |
| ◯ | Capacity - Widening |
| ◯ | ITS Improvements |
| ◯ | Multimodal |
| ◯ | New Connection |
| ◯ | On-Road/Off-Road Trail Projects |
| ◯ | Operational - Corridor |
| ◯ | Operational - Intersection |

<!-- page 132 -->
# TUCKER

Projects in the City of Tucker were included from the Tucker Strategic Transportation Master Plan, 2020 Tucker-Northlake LCI, Tucker Summit CID-Freight Cluster Plan, ARC Regional Transportation Plan, and DeKalb County 2014 Transportation Plan. The project team also identified projects in coordination with City staff, stakeholders, elected officials, and members of the public.

| Project ID | Project Category | Project Name | Cost |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **Tier 1** | | | |
| M_1497 | Multimodal | Brockett Road Complete Streets | $1,414,000 |
| M_043_PE | Multimodal | Chamblee Tucker Road from I-285 to Tucker Norcross Road Multimodal Improvement (Design Only) | $1,032,000 |
| M_041 | Multimodal | Chamblee Tucker Road from Tucker Norcross Road to Lavista Road Multimodal Improvement | $4,079,000 |
| M_1498 | Multimodal | Fellowship Road Complete Streets | $377,000 |
| M_1499 | Multimodal | Idlewood Road Complete Streets | $996,000 |
| R_415 | Operational-Corridor | Cooledge Road Operational Improvement | $2,500,000 |
| R_121 | Operational-Intersection | Chamblee Tucker Road/Lavista Road/ Fellowship Road Intersection Redesign | $1,681,000 |
| R_1110 | Operational-Intersection | E. Ponce de Leon Avenue at Rock Mountain Boulevard Intersection Improvement | $364,000 |
| R_1092 | Operational-Intersection | Fellowship Road at Idlewood Road Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) | $57,000 |
| R_1087 | Operational-Intersection | Hugh Howell Road at Mountain Industrial Boulevard Intersection Improvement | $9,016,000 |
| R_1496 | Operational-Intersection | Lawrenceville Highway at Old Norcross Road Intersection Improvements | $1,442,000 |
| R_1089 | Operational-Intersection | Lynburn Drive at Lawrenceville Highway Intersection Improvement and Traffic Study | $1,772,000 |
| R_1116 | Operational-Intersection | Mountain Industrial Boulevard at Elmdale Drive/Roger Marten Way Intersection Improvement | $552,000 |
| R_1113 | Operational-Intersection | Mountain Industrial Boulevard at Greer Circle Intersection Improvements | $396,000 |
| R_1112 | Operational-Intersection | Mountain Industrial Boulevard at Hammermill Road (South) Intersection Improvements | $292,000 |
| R_1114 | Operational-Intersection | Mountain Industrial Boulevard at Lewis Road Intersection Improvements | $416,000 |
| R_1108 | Operational-Intersection | Mountain Industrial Boulevard at N Royal Atlanta Drive Intersection Improvement | $749,000 |
| R_1107 | Operational-Intersection | Mountain Industrial Boulevard at S Royal Atlanta Drive Intersection Improvement | $208,000 |

<!-- page 133 -->
| Project ID | Project Category | Project Name | Cost |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| R_1111 | Operational-Intersection | Mountain Industrial Boulevard at Tuckerstone Parkway Intersection Improvements | $224,000 |
| R_2006 | Operational-Intersection | Northlake Parkway at Lawrenceville Highway Intersection Improvements | $2,500,000 |
| **Tier 2** | | | |
| R_906 | Freight and Rail Crossing | Brockett Road at Moon Street Rail Crossing Improvement | $470,000 |
| R_907 | Freight and Rail Crossing | Main Street at Railroad Avenue Rail Crossing Improvement | $400,000 |
| R_706 | Interchange New or Improvements | Mountain Industrial Boulevard at Stone Mountain Parkway Interchange Improvement | $377,000 |
| M_043 | Multimodal | Chamblee Tucker Road from I-285 to Tucker Norcross Road Multimodal Improvement | $6,907,000 |
| B_1495 | On-Road | Main Street Bicycle Improvements, Shared Lane | $23,000 |
| B_1493 | On-Road | Montreal Road Bicycle Improvements, Bike Lane | $4,223,000 |
| B_1494 | On-Road | Woodlawn Circle Bicycle Improvements, Shared Lane | $44,000 |
| R_2010 | Operational-Corridor | Downtown Alley Improvements | $1,500,000 |
| R_2008 | Operational-Corridor | Lavista Road Access Management and Safety Improvements | $3,000,000 |
| R_2007 | Operational-Corridor | Lawrenceville Highway Access Management and Safety Improvements | $6,500,000 |
| R_1418 | Operational-Corridor | North Hairston Drive Safety Study | $47,000 |
| R_917 | Operational-Intersection | Briarcliff Road at Henderson Mill Road Intersection Improvement | $50,000 |
| R_2011 | Operational-Intersection | Brockett Road at Cooledge Road Intersection Improvement | $3,800,000 |
| R_105 | Operational-Intersection | Hugh Howell Road at Lawrenceville Highway Intersection Improvement | $5,475,000 |
| R_1093 | Operational-Intersection | Lavista Road at Fellowship Road Intersection Improvements | $10,299,000 |
| R_1088 | Operational-Intersection | Lawrenceville Highway (US 29) at Fellowship Road Intersection Improvement | $7,553,000 |
| R_1115 | Operational-Intersection | Lawrenceville Highway (US 29/SR 8) at N Royal Atlanta Drive Improvements | $479,000 |
| R_1090 | Operational-Intersection | Lawrenceville Highway at Lavista Road Intersection Improvement | $3,720,000 |
| R_1109 | Operational-Intersection | Mountain Industrial and E Ponce De Leon Avenue Intersection Improvements | $1,363,000 |

<!-- page 134 -->
# 09 – PRIORITY PROJECTS FOR DEKALB CITIES

| Project ID | Project Category | Project Name | Cost |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| R_1117 | Operational-Intersection | Tucker Industrial Road at Hugh Howell Road Improvements | $416,000 |
| **Tier 3** | | | |
| R_417 | Capacity-Widening | Mountain Industrial Road Widening | $43,264,000 |
| R_901 | Freight and Rail Crossing | Goldsmith Road at E Ponce De Leon Avenue Rail Crossing Improvement | $166,000 |
| R_1085 | Interchange New or Improvements | Mountain Industrial Boulevard at US-78 Interchange Improvement | $22,334,000 |
| M_014 | Multimodal | Lavista Road Multimodal Improvement | $43,110,000 |
| BP_051 | Off-Road | Pleasantdale Road Multiuse Path | $5,277,000 |
| R_113 | Operational-Corridor | Briarcliff Road Operational Improvement | $58,080,000 |
| R_210 | Operational-Corridor | E Ponce De Leon Avenue Operational Improvements | $8,937,000 |
| R_223 | Operational-Corridor | Ponce De Leon Avenue Operational Improvements | $3,500,000 |
| R_1091 | Operational-Intersection | Grade Separation of Montreal Road at Railroad Crossing | $7,301,000 |

<!-- page 135 -->
COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

<<FIGURE>>

### PROJECT TYPES
*   Freight and Rail Crossing
*   Interchange - New or Improvements
*   Capacity - Widening
*   ITS Improvements
*   Multimodal
*   New Connection
*   On-Road/Off-Road Trail Projects
*   Operational - Corridor
*   Operational - Intersection

<!-- page 136 -->
(blank page)

<!-- page 137 -->
# CHAPTER 10
## FIVE-YEAR ACTION PLAN AND PERFORMANCE MONITORING

<!-- page 138 -->
# FIVE-YEAR ACTION PLAN AND PERFORMANCE MONITORING

## INTRODUCTION

The overall CTP includes a multitude of recommendations over the nearly 30-year horizon. While all of the recommendations are important, it is most critical to think about the near-term action items that need to be undertaken to move the plan forward. The Five-Year Action Plan provides a framework for establishing metrics the County may use to track progress against implementation of projects and policy items. It focuses on general topic areas, surface transportation projects (particularly those in Tier 1), transit next steps, and multiple policy-level recommendations.

## FIVE-YEAR ACTION PLAN

| General Recommendations | | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **Category** | **Action Item** | **Local Champion** | **Coordinate With** |
| Plan Adoption | Adopt the DeKalb 2050 Unified Plan, including transportation and land use plans. | DeKalb County | |
| Regional and Statewide Transportation Planning | Work with ARC and GDOT to advance projects for evaluation and possible inclusion in the RTP, TIP, and STIP. | DeKalb County, DeKalb cities | ARC, GDOT |
| Code of Ordinances | Amend the existing Code of Ordinances to reflect transportation policy recommendations from the DeKalb 2050 Unified Plan. | DeKalb County | |
| Performance Monitoring | Develop a project monitoring program to track progress with funding and implementation. | DeKalb County | |

<!-- page 139 -->
| Surface Transportation Project Recommendations |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **Category** | **Action Item** | **Local Champion** | **Coordinate With** |
| Unincorporated DeKalb County Tier 1 Project List | Advance select Tier 1 projects with current SPLOST funding, where possible, to begin engineering with current program revenues. Advance remaining Tier 1 projects from engineering through construction, as applicable, if successful adoption of a SPLOST renewal takes place. | DeKalb County | ARC, GDOT |
| Unincorporated DeKalb Tier 2 and 3 Project List | If select Tier 1 projects are advanced during the current SPLOST, identify priority projects within Tier 2 to be pulled forward for Tier 1 funding. As new SPLOST funding and state/federal match funding becomes available, consider advancing relevant Tier 2 project design work. | DeKalb County | ARC, GDOT |
| Grant Opportunities | Consider new federal discretionary grant programs and determine if any projects might qualify and be competitive. Prepare relevant information and monitor for Notice of Funding Opportunities (NOFOs). | DeKalb County | ARC, GDOT, Cities (as relevant) |
| DeKalb Cities Project List | Facilitate periodic meetings with city staff to review progress of the high priority city projects and ensure coordination and collaboration between the County and its cities. | DeKalb County | Cities |

| Transit Recommendations |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **Category** | **Action Item** | **Local Champion** | **Coordinate With** |
| Staffing | Identify a transit lead within the County for internal planning efforts, public education and input, and coordination with MARTA. | DeKalb County | MARTA, Cities |
| Plan Update | Update the DTMP with updated project definitions, costs, tax revenue estimates, and federal match opportunities, etc. to ensure a well developed baseline for renewed conversations. | DeKalb County | |
| Public Education | Continue education on transit funding options, both local and federal. | DeKalb County | Cities, ATL |
| Investment Strategy | Reach consensus on a transit infrastructure and service investment strategy, including local funding options like sales tax and value capture. | DeKalb County | Cities |
| Referendum Opportunity | Consider and prepare for a successful Transit SPLOST referendum. | DeKalb County | Cities, ATL |

<!-- page 140 -->
# 10 – FIVE-YEAR ACTION PLAN AND PERFORMANCE MONITORING

| Policy Recommendations |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **Category** | **Action Item** | **Local Champion** | **Coordinate With** |
| Asset Management: Pavement | Adopt a consistent roadway rating system based on the standardized ASTM, implement a software system to manage the pavement and overall program, and use automated data collection methods in addition to visual inspection. Conduct pavement inventory on a rotating three-year cycle. Develop a proactive pavement management plan. | DeKalb County | GDOT, Cities |
| Asset Management: Bridges | Set aside sufficient funding for unanticipated larger scale bridge projects. Repair/rehabilitate and monitor bridges of concern. | DeKalb County | GDOT, Cities |
| Asset Management: Signal Systems | Formalize a signal maintenance program that establishes standards and best practices for traffic signal equipment, communications, and central software. | DeKalb County | GDOT, Cities |
| Functional Classification | Adopt the recommended functional classifications (accomplished with the adoption of the DeKalb 2050 Unified Plan). Review the County Code of Ordinances to ensure that any sections of the code that are reliant upon functional classification are consistent with the 2050 Unified Plan. | DeKalb County | |
| Freight | Adopt the recommended truck route network into the Code of Ordinances. Coordinate with ARC and adjacent counties and cities to ensure that any updates made to their truck route networks are consistent with DeKalb County's. Identify criteria for truck parking facilities. Perform recurring evaluation of rail crossing locations and identify high-risk locations. | DeKalb County | ARC, GDOT, Adjacent Communities |
| Access Management | Reviews and consolidates access management requirements in the DeKalb County Code of Ordinances. Update the code based on recommendations from the DeKalb 2050 Unified Plan, GDOT standards, and FHWA guidance. Additionally, update the access management requirements according to updated functional classifications. | DeKalb County | |

<!-- page 141 -->
### Policy Recommendations Continued

| Category | Action Item | Local Champion | Coordinate With |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| Technology | Begin implementing programmatic and infrastructure technology projects. Coordinate with local, regional, and state agencies to identify possible opportunities for collaboration. Coordinate with GDOT on implementing the identified pilot SMART Corridors: Memorial Drive and Candler Road. | DeKalb County | GDOT, ARC, Cities |
| Complete Streets | Adopt a Complete Streets policy and revise the Code of Ordinances to include improved design guidance/requirements. Establish official performance metrics to evaluate the effectiveness of the Complete Streets policy. Encourage local, regional, and state agencies to incorporate the Complete Streets policy on roadway projects not led by the County. | DeKalb County | GDOT, ARC, Cities |
| Bicycle and Pedestrian Recommendations | Adopt the recommended bicycle priority network (accomplished with the adoption of the DeKalb 2050 Unified Plan). Identify a lead department for trail planning and implementation, update the DeKalb County Trails Master Plan, and conduct a sidewalk inventory and condition assessment. Prioritize sidewalk investments following the completion of the inventory/ condition assessment. | DeKalb County | ARC, Cities |
| Transportation Demand Management | Create a position for Transportation Coordinator within the County who can work to establish programs such as rideshare matching for carpool, plan events to incentivize participation, etc. Consider the creation of new TMAs within regional centers and zoning revisions to support improved site design for multimodal accommodation. | DeKalb County | Georgia Commute Options (ARC), Cities |

<!-- page 142 -->
# PERFORMANCE MONITORING PLAN

Along with the Five-Year Action Plan, DeKalb County should work to monitor progress of the plan over time. This will allow the County to identify places where additional focus should be placed and will provide a baseline status for the beginning of the next CTP update.

### Coordination

* Coordination among County departments will be key. This includes Planning and Sustainability, Public Works—Transportation, Public Works—Roads and Drainage, and Recreation, Parks, and Cultural Affairs. Additional groups include the DeKalb SPLOST team and Decide DeKalb. This coordination will allow for both project and policy implementation to proceed while including key department leadership in regular communication. A standing meeting of representatives from these departments is recommended.
* Regular coordination with outside agencies is also beneficial, includes MARTA, ARC, the ATL, and GDOT as well as the cities and CIDs. Coordination among these groups and the County can allow for better projects, more meaningful public education and input, and clear communication to constituents.
* Timely updates to the Board of Commissioners and CEO’s office can ensure that elected leadership (as well as the public) can remain knowledgeable of the transportation planning and implementation work taking place throughout the County.

### Implementation

* The Five-Year Action Plan will need a point person for monitoring to ensure that pieces are moving forward over the coming years. It is recommended that a schedule be developed for key aspects of the Action Plan with milestone check-ins.
* Ideally, the Tier 1 and Tier 2 projects from the CTP will represent a majority of the projects in an upcoming SPLOST renewal. Tracking of those projects associated with a local funding mechanism should take place (likely through the SPLOST program).
* The County should identify leads for policy project implementation and set up milestones working toward implementation.
* A new opportunity of value to the County is to identify possible funding matches through the IIJA/BIL federal discretionary grant programs. Identify mechanisms to deliver grant applications, including staff leads, consultant support (if needed), approval processes through elected leadership, and local match dollars.

### Monitoring (implementation and performance)

* DeKalb County has an opportunity to show the impact of project implementation to County leadership, members of the public, and regional/state/federal agencies. In order to do that, the County should develop performance metrics for project evaluation (e.g., operational, safety, multimodal, etc.).
* For each capital investment, the County should conduct studies before and after project implementation to further understand the impacts of the project and compare against early projected improvements.

<!-- page 143 -->
# APPENDIX

<!-- page 144 -->
APPENDIX

# UNINCORPORATED DEKALB COUNTY TIERED PROJECTS - DETAILED INFORMATION

| Draft ID | Project Category | Project Source | County Districts | Project Name | Extent From | Extent To | Project Description | Municipality |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| R_1069 | Interchange- New or Improvements | Metro South CID | District 3, District 6 | I-285 EB ramp at Moreland Avenue Interchange Improvement | Moreland Avenue | | Widen the channelized right turn and the left turn lanes (2) on SB Moreland Avenue to accommodate truck movement. Restripe the channelized right turn and the pavement markings on bridge to enhance driver awareness and maintain safety. Install pedestrian crosswalks across ramp terminals to connect with existing sidewalks on bridge and determine warrants for signalized crossings | Unincorporated |
| R_709 | Interchange- New or Improvements | Metro South CID | District 3, District 6 | I-285 WB ramp at Moreland Avenue Interchange Improvement | Moreland Avenue | | Widen the channelized right turn onto ramp from SB Moreland Avenue. Restripe the channelized right turn and the pavement markings on bridge to enhance driver awareness and maintain safety. Install pedestrian crosswalks and signals across ramp terminals to connect with existing sidewalks on bridge | Unincorporated |
| M_043_PE | Multimodal | 2014 Transportation Plan | District 1, District 7 | Chamblee Tucker Road Multimodal Improvement (Design Only) | I-285 | Tucker Norcross Road | Road diet to include two through lanes and a center left-turn lane and bike lanes. Operational and pedestrian improvements will also be made at key locations along the corridor | Tucker, Unincorporated |
| M_045_PE | Multimodal | 2014 Transportation Plan | District 2, District 6 | Church Street Multimodal Improvement (Design Only) | N Decatur Road | Medlock Road | Add center turn lane and on-street parking along with bicycle lanes | Decatur, Unincorporated |
| M_2000_ PE | Multimodal | Consultant Team | District 3, District 6 | Clifton Springs Road Road Diet (Design Only) | Panthersville Road | Flat Shoals Parkway | Multimodal improvements. Add and infill sidewalks | Unincorporated |

<!-- page 145 -->
| Tier Assigned by City | Total Length (mi) | Tier Assigned by County | On GDOT Roadway | 2022 Eng. Cost | 2022 ROW Cost | 2022 Const. Cost | 2022 Other Cost | 2022 Total Cost | "Preliminary 2022 Cost by Others" | "Preliminary 2022 County Cost" |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
|  |  | Tier 1 | YES | $53,000 | $66,000 | $439,000 | $154,000 | $712,000 | $712,000 | $- |
|  |  | Tier 1 | YES | $24,000 | $30,000 | $194,000 | $68,000 | $315,000 | $315,000 | $- |
| Tier 1 | 2.10 | Tier 1 | NO | $1,032,000 | $- | $- | $- | $1,032,000 | $825,600 | $206,400 |
| Tier 3 | 0.48 | Tier 1 | NO | $552,000 | $- | $- | $- | $552,000 | $441,600 | $110,400 |
|  | 0.72 | Tier 1 | NO | $500,000 | $- | $- | $- | $500,000 | $- | $500,000 |

<!-- page 146 -->
# APPENDIX

| Draft ID | Project Category | Project Source | County Districts | Project Name | Extent From | Extent To | Project Description | Municipality |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| M_2016 | Multimodal | Consultant Team | District 3, District 5, District 7 | Glenwood Road Multimodal Improvement | Columbia Drive | Covington Highway | Install sidewalks and improve pedestrian crossings along this corridor. Project assumes approximately 2.0 miles of moderate grading | Unincorporated |
| M_013_PE | Multimodal | Consultant Team | District 4, District 5, District 7 | Heritage Corridor Study (Design Only) | Stone Mountain | Lithonia | Multimodal improvements connecting Stone Mountain and Lithonia downtowns. Sidewalk improvements and pedestrian crossings | Stone Mountain, Unincorporated |
| M_024_PE | Multimodal | 2014 Transportation Plan | District 2, District 6 | N Decatur Road Multimodal Improvement (Design Only) | Clairmont Road | Church Street | Four lane section will include a combination of bicycle and pedestrian improvements and will be consistent with Clifton Corridor transit design | Decatur, Unincorporated |
| X_010 | Multimodal | 2014 Transportation Plan | District 2, District 6 | N Druid Hills Road at Spring Creek Road Bridge Improvement (Bridge ID: 089-0175-0) | Approx. 1400 ft east of Spring Creek Road | | In County's TIP for design; 2020 Evaluation is Fair; Bridge sufficiency rating is 50 or less and therefore meets the threshold for qualifying for bridge replacement funding. Bridge considerations should include the potential for future transit lines running below | Unincorporated |
| M_035bc_ PE | Multimodal | Consultant Team | District 2, District 6 | N Druid Hills Road Multimodal Improvement (Design Only) | Briarcliff Road | Lawrenceville Highway | Multimodal improvements. Add and infill sidewalks; GDOT projects GOASIS ID 21-7050, GOASIS ID 22-7092 and, GOASIS ID 20-7083/PI 0018284 | Brookhaven, Unincorporated |
| M_2017 | Multimodal | Consultant Team | District 1, District 7 | Pleasantdale Road Multimodal Improvement | Tucker/ Norcross | I-85 | Improve pedestrian crossings along this corridor; Currently under review by County staff | Unincorporated |
| R_2005_ PE | New Connection | Consultant Team | District 2, District 6 | Clairmont Road Reliever Connection (Scoping Study) | I-85 Frontage Road | Briarcliff Road NE | New connection from I-85 Frontage Road to Briarcliff Road NE east of Clairmont Road | Unincorporated |
| BP_022 | Off-Road | 2014 Transportation Plan | District 2, District 6 | Deepdene Park Path Scoping Study (Design Only) | N Ponce De Leon Avenue | Parkwood Road | Complete linear park path connection from Deepdene Park to existing bicycle lanes starting at Parkwood Road | Unincorporated |

<!-- page 147 -->
| Tier Assigned by City | Total Length (mi) | Tier Assigned by County | On GDOT Roadway | 2022 Eng. Cost | 2022 ROW Cost | 2022 Const. Cost | 2022 Other Cost | 2022 Total Cost | "Preliminary 2022 Cost by Others" | "Preliminary 2022 County Cost" |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
|  | 2.03 | Tier 1 | NO | $- | $- | $4,329,000 | $- | $4,329,000 | $- | $4,329,000 |
| Tier 3 | 11.69 | Tier 1 | NO | $- | $- | $- | $- | $300,000 | $162,963 | $137,037 |
| Tier 1 | 1.29 | Tier 1 | NO | $343,000 | $- | $- | $- | $343,000 | $161,210 | $181,790 |
|  |  | Tier 1 | NO | $900,000 | $2,000,000 | $9,300,000 | $300,000 | $12,500,000 | $8,000,000 | $4,500,000 |
| Tier 3 | 3.82 | Tier 1 | NO | $2,290,000 | $- | $- | $- | $2,290,000 | $1,832,000 | $458,000 |
|  | 1.98 | Tier 1 | NO | $- | $- | $- | $- | $3,000,000 | $600,000 | $2,400,000 |
|  | 0.20 | Tier 1 | NO | $- | $- | $- | $- | $200,000 | $- | $200,000 |
|  | 0.26 | Tier 1 | YES | $750,000 | $- | $- | $- | $750,000 | $- | $750,000 |

<!-- page 148 -->
# APPENDIX

| Draft ID | Project Category | Project Source | County Districts | Project Name | Extent From | Extent To | Project Description | Municipality |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| BP_1433 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 3, District 6 | Donzi Road Beltline Connector | Donzi Road | Southside BeltLine Trail (Fulton County) | DeKalb County connection to Atlanta's Southside BeltLine rail via Custer Avenue westward to the City of Atlanta in Fulton County, through to Boulevard SE and northward to the BeltLine | Unincorporated |
| BP_1446 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 1, District 2, District 6, District 7 | North Fork Peachtree Creek Trail Connector, Phase 1 | Fisher Trail Park | Peachwood Circle NE | Connects trail to neighborhood | Unincorporated |
| BP_1502 | Off-Road | PATH Foundation | District 1, District 7 | North Fork Peachtree Creek Trail Connector, Phase 2 | Shallowford Road | Chamblee Tucker Road | Connects trail to multiple residential and retail areas | Unincorporated |
| BP_1475 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 2, District 6 | Sagamore Trail | Alderbrook Road | Audobon Drive | New trail facility to improve connectivity | Unincorporated |
| BP_1476a | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 2, District 6 | Sagamore Trail | Briarcliff Road NE | Peachtree Creek Greenway | New trail facility to improve connectivity | Unincorporated |
| BP_1477 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 2, District 6 | Sagamore Trail | S Peachtree Creek Trail/ N Druid Hills Road | Alderbrook Road | New trail facility to improve connectivity | Unincorporated |
| BP_1481 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 2, District 6 | South Peachtree Creek Trail - PATH, Phase 2 (Section 1) | Fulton County Line | Atlanta City Limits | New trail facility to improve connectivity | Unincorporated |
| BP_1482 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 2, District 6 | South Peachtree Creek Trail - PATH, Phase 2 (Section 2) | Briarcliff Road | Atlanta City Limits | New trail facility to improve connectivity | Atlanta, Unincorporated |
| BP_018 | Off-Road | 2014 Transportation Plan | District 2, District 4, District 6 | South Peachtree Creek Trail - Phase 3 | Medlock Park | Farmers Market Trail and Zonolite Park | Expansion of the PATH Foundation trail system (South Peachtree Creek Trail). Multiuse path was assumed for the third phase (1.3 miles) of this three-phase 6.3-mile project, but a detailed corridor study is needed to determine recommended improvements | Unincorporated |

<!-- page 149 -->
| Tier Assigned by City | Total Length (mi) | Tier Assigned by County | On GDOT Roadway | 2022 Eng. Cost | 2022 ROW Cost | 2022 Const. Cost | 2022 Other Cost | 2022 Total Cost | “Preliminary 2022 Cost by Others” | “Preliminary 2022 County Cost” |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| | 2.05 | Tier 1 | NO | $312,000 | $156,000 | $3,111,000 | $- | $3,577,000 | $- | $3,577,000 |
| | 1.02 | Tier 1 | NO | $155,000 | $78,000 | $1,545,000 | $- | $1,777,000 | $- | $1,777,000 |
| | | Tier 1 | NO | $555,000 | $278,000 | $5,545,000 | $- | $6,376,000 | $3,825,600 | $2,550,400 |
| | 0.12 | Tier 1 | NO | $18,000 | $9,000 | $174,000 | $- | $199,000 | $- | $199,000 |
| | 1.70 | Tier 1 | NO | $- | $- | $- | $- | $2,550,000 | $- | $2,550,000 |
| | 1.59 | Tier 1 | NO | $323,000 | $162,000 | $3,224,000 | $- | $3,707,000 | $- | $3,707,000 |
| | 0.25 | Tier 1 | NO | $38,000 | $19,000 | $375,000 | $- | $431,000 | $40,247 | $390,753 |
| Tier 3 | 0.22 | Tier 1 | YES | $33,000 | $17,000 | $329,000 | $- | $379,000 | $- | $379,000 |
| | 1.30 | Tier 1 | NO | $98,000 | $683,000 | $1,171,000 | $- | $1,951,000 | $- | $1,951,000 |

<!-- page 150 -->
# APPENDIX

| Draft ID | Project Category | Project Source | County Districts | Project Name | Extent From | Extent To | Project Description | Municipality |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| BP_037 | Off-Road | ARC RTP | District 3, District 6 | South River Multiuse Trail Extension | Boulder Walk Drive | Crestdale Circle | Offers pedestrian and bicyclist accessibility along Intrenchment Creek from Boulder Walk Drive to Crestdale Circle. It is intended to provide safe connectivity between the Atlanta BeltLine Trail and the Arabia Mountain Trail through ADA compliant infrastructure including a wide shared use path, ramp connection, and high visibility crosswalks | Unincorporated |
| BP_1464 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 3, District 5, District 7 | South River Trail Multiuse Trail Extension (Eastern End) | Waldrop Place | MLK High School | New connection trail to neighborhood. | Unincorporated |
| R_202 | Operational-Corridor | 2014 Transportation Plan | District 3, District 6 | Bouldercrest Road Operational Improvement | Constitution Road | Eastland Road | Operational improvements along with pedestrian and bicycle accommodations | Atlanta, Unincorporated |
| R_225 | Operational-Corridor | Consultant Team | District 1, District 7 | Henderson Mill Road Operational Improvement | Henderson Road | Mercer University Drive | Operational improvements to address failing LOS and bottlenecks along Henderson Mill Road; Extension of left turn lanes at Henderson, Evans and Mercer intersections | Unincorporated |
| R_211 | Operational-Corridor | ARC RTP | District 3, District 4, District 5, District 6, District 7 | Kensington MARTA Station Trail and Road Diets, Phase 1 | Covington Highway | Memorial Drive | Phase 1 will occur along SR 10/Mountain Drive, Kensington Road, SR 154/ Memorial Drive and US 278/Covington highway and will implement a road diets, a 12-foot multi-use trail, and improved pedestrian and bicycle facilities; GDOT PI Number 0018335 - Road Diet | Avondale Estates, Unincorporated |
| R_1418 | Operational-Corridor | DeKalb SPLOST | District 3, District 4, District 5, District 6, District 7 | North/South Hairston Drive Safety Study (Design Only) | Welsey Chapel Road | Ponce De Leon Avenue | Corridor Safety High Level Audit; High-level character transformation and safety review | Tucker, Unincorporated |
| R_405c | Operational-Corridor | Consultant Team | District 4, District 5, District 7 | Redan Road Operational Improvement | Elder Lane | Allgood Road | Operational improvements to address capacity needs | Unincorporated |

<!-- page 151 -->
| Tier Assigned by City | Total Length (mi) | Tier Assigned by County | On GDOT Roadway | 2022 Eng. Cost | 2022 ROW Cost | 2022 Const. Cost | 2022 Other Cost | 2022 Total Cost | “Preliminary 2022 Cost by Others” | “Preliminary 2022 County Cost” |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
|  | 1.49 | Tier 1 | NO | $- | $- | $- | $- | $5,787,000 | $- | $5,787,000 |
|  | 5.80 | Tier 1 | NO | $617,000 | $309,000 | $6,165,000 | $- | $7,090,000 | $4,254,000 | $2,836,000 |
| Tier 3 | 2.49 | Tier 1 | NO | $175,000 | $1,222,000 | $2,094,000 | $- | $3,490,000 | $- | $3,490,000 |
|  | 0.54 | Tier 1 | NO | $400,000 | $200,000 | $1,500,000 | $200,000 | $2,300,000 | $- | $2,300,000 |
| Tier 2 | 1.27 | Tier 1 | YES | $536,000 | $217,000 | $5,198,000 | $- | $5,949,000 | $4,759,200 | $1,189,800 |
| Tier 2 | 8.27 | Tier 1 | NO | $500,000 | $- | $- | $- | $500,000 | $- | $500,000 |
|  | 1.10 | Tier 1 | NO | $869,000 | $2,276,000 | $5,420,000 | $1,438,000 | $10,000,000 | $5,000,000 | $5,000,000 |

<!-- page 152 -->
# APPENDIX

| Draft ID | Project Category | Project Source | County Districts | Project Name | Extent From | Extent To | Project Description | Municipality |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| R_2001 | Operational- Corridor | GDOT | District 5, District 7 | SR 12/US 278 Operational Improvement | DeKalb Medical Parkway | Cragstone Court | Operational improvements to address capacity needs; Sidewalk infill improvements; GDOT PI Number 0008288 | Stonecrest, Unincorporated |
| R_161 | Operational- Intersection | Consultant Team | District 4, District 7 | Bermuda Road at Stewart Mill Road Roundabout | Stewart Mill Road | | Install a roundabout at intersection | Unincorporated |
| R_1414 | Operational- Intersection | DeKalb SPLOST | District 2, District 6 | Briarcliff Road at Briarlake Road Intersection Turn Lane Improvement | Briarlake Road | | Traffic study to develop turn-lane and operational improvements | Unincorporated |
| R_153 | Operational- Intersection | Consultant Team | District 3, District 6 | Candler Road at H F Shepherd Drive Intersection Improvement | H F Shepherd Drive | | Part of RSA conducted in 2021; Recommend operational and pedestrian improvements to address safety and capacity needs; GDOT PI Number M006292 | Unincorporated |
| R_926 | Operational- Intersection | Consultant Team | District 3, District 6 | Cedar Grove Road at Bouldercrest Road Intersection Improvement and Roundabout | Bouldercrest Road | | Intersection improvements and new roundabout | Unincorporated |
| R_925 | Operational- Intersection | Consultant Team | District 3, District 6 | Cedar Grove Road at E Conley Road Intersection Improvement and Roundabout | E Conley Road | | Intersection improvements and new roundabout | Unincorporated |

<!-- page 153 -->
| Tier Assigned by City | Total Length (mi) | Tier Assigned by County | On GDOT Road-way | 2022 Eng. Cost | 2022 ROW Cost | 2022 Const. Cost | 2022 Other Cost | 2022 Total Cost | “Preliminary 2022 Cost by Others” | “Preliminary 2022 County Cost” |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| Tier 2 | 0.85 | Tier 1 | YES | $603,000 | $1,258,000 | $3,467,000 | $- | $5,328,000 | $5,328,000 | $- |
| | | Tier 1 | NO | $217,000 | $52,000 | $1,560,000 | $- | $1,829,000 | $- | $1,829,000 |
| | | Tier 1 | NO | $42,000 | $208,000 | $416,000 | $- | $666,000 | $- | $666,000 |
| | | Tier 1 | YES | $500,000 | $400,000 | $1,500,000 | $400,000 | $2,800,000 | $1,960,000 | $840,000 |
| | | Tier 1 | NO | $- | $- | $- | $- | $1,000,000 | $- | $1,000,000 |
| | | Tier 1 | NO | $- | $- | $- | $- | $1,000,000 | $- | $1,000,000 |

<!-- page 154 -->
# APPENDIX

| Draft ID | Project Category | Project Source | County Districts | Project Name | Extent From | Extent To | Project Description | Municipality |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| R_1064_ PE | Operational- Intersection | Metro South CID | District 3, District 6 | Cedar Grove Road/ Thurman Road (SR 160)/Old McDonough Road Roundabout (Design Only) | Thurman Road | | A truck roundabout for this intersection with 13’ lanes and adequate turning radii. Reconstruct pavement and restripe Old McDonough Road and Cedar Grove Road to accommodate truck traffic and enhance delineation for driver awareness and safety. Improve roadway drainage infrastructure, including a maintenance schedule to ensure efficacy. Install a storage lane on Old McDonough to relieve truck queuing from truck wash facility. Resurface Cedar Grove Road and Thurman Road as part of roadway and drainage maintenance. Improve roadway drainage infrastructure | Unincorporated |
| R_159 | Operational- Intersection | Consultant Team | District 2, District 6 | Crestline Drive at Chrysler Drive Intersection Improvement | Chrysler Drive | | Intersection pedestrian safety improvements | Unincorporated |
| R_813 | Operational- Intersection | 2014 Transportation Plan | District 4, District 6 | DeKalb Industrial Way at Milscott Drive Traffic Signal Improvement | Milscott Drive | | New signal and pedestrian safety improvements | Unincorporated |
| R_927 | Operational- Intersection | Consultant Team | District 2, District 6 | E Rock Springs Road NE at Cumberland Road NE/ Beech Valley Way NE Intersection Improvement and Roundabout | Beech Valley Way NE | | Intersection improvements and new roundabout | Unincorporated |

<!-- page 155 -->
| Tier Assigned by City | Total Length (mi) | Tier Assigned by County | On GDOT Roadway | 2022 Eng. Cost | 2022 ROW Cost | 2022 Const. Cost | 2022 Other Cost | 2022 Total Cost | "Preliminary 2022 Cost by Others" | "Preliminary 2022 County Cost" |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
|  |  | Tier 1 | YES | $438,000 | $- | $- | $- | $438,000 | $359,160 | $78,840 |
|  |  | Tier 1 | NO | $- | $- | $- | $- | $1,300,000 | $- | $1,300,000 |
|  |  | Tier 1 | NO | $31,000 | $- | $302,000 | $- | $332,000 | $- | $332,000 |
|  |  | Tier 1 | NO | $- | $- | $- | $- | $1,400,000 | $392,000 | $1,008,000 |

<!-- page 156 -->
# APPENDIX

| Draft ID | Project Category | Project Source | County Districts | Project Name | Extent From | Extent To | Project Description | Municipality |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| R_1402 | Operational-Intersection | DeKalb SPLOST | District 4, District 6 | Indian Creek Elementary Signal Installation | Lakes at Indian Creek Apts Driveway |  | Signal warrant study and potential signal installation; May require school coordination at the new school driveway; Signal mast arms if possible (preferred option for DeKalb County where applicable). | Unincorporated |
| R_1405 | Operational-Intersection | DeKalb SPLOST | District 4, District 6 | North Clarendon Road Signal and RR Crossing Improvements | Ponce de Leon Avenue |  | Railroad crossing assessment and improvements; Does not currently have railroad preemption (priority project) | Unincorporated |
| R_1406 | Operational-Intersection | DeKalb SPLOST | District 4, District 6 | North Decatur Road at Parkdale Road Intersection Improvement | Parkdale Road |  | Priority project for TE Study. Signal installation and pedestrian enhancements; Study to evaluate converting Gifford Dr into an RCUT to funnel left turn traffic to Parkdale | Unincorporated |
| R_2000 | Operational-Intersection | Consultant Team | District 2, District 6 | North DeKalb Mall Intersection Improvement | Birch Road |  | Mall redevelopment set asides for transportation improvements including a left turn lane at the intersection of N Druid Hills Road at Birch Road | Unincorporated |
| R_157 | Operational-Intersection | Consultant Team | District 5, District 7 | Redan Road at Lithonia Road Intersection Safety Evaluation | S Stone Mountain-Lithonia Road |  | Improvements to improve intersection geometry, install traffic signal, signal coordination w/ Young Road and Wellborn Road | Unincorporated |
| R_162 | Operational-Intersection | Covington Highway Corridor Master Active Living Plan | District 3, District 7 | Redwing Circle at Covington Highway or Nearby New Traffic Signal | Covington Highway |  | New traffic signal; Safety Project High Level Crash Screening, Project ID: 22-7126 | Unincorporated |
| R_145 | Operational-Intersection | Consultant Team | District 4, District 7 | Stephenson Road at South Deshon Road Intersection Improvement | South Deshon Road |  | Operational improvements to address capacity and safety needs; Potentially new roundabout and auxiliary lanes | Unincorporated |
| R_112 | Operational-Intersection | 2014 Transportation Plan | District 3, District 7 | Wesley Chapel Road at Flat Shoals Parkway Intersection Improvement | Flat Shoals Parkway |  | Operational improvements to address capacity and safety needs; GDOT GOASIS Project ID: 22-7078 - TE Report/RSA | Unincorporated |

<!-- page 157 -->
| Tier Assigned by City | Total Length (mi) | Tier Assigned by County | On GDOT Roadway | 2022 Eng. Cost | 2022 ROW Cost | 2022 Const. Cost | 2022 Other Cost | 2022 Total Cost | "Preliminary 2022 Cost by Others" | "Preliminary 2022 County Cost" |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| | | Tier 1 | NO | $32,000 | $- | $260,000 | $- | $292,000 | $- | $292,000 |
| | | Tier 1 | NO | $52,000 | $- | $468,000 | $- | $520,000 | $- | $520,000 |
| | | Tier 1 | NO | $42,000 | $26,000 | $520,000 | $- | $588,000 | $- | $588,000 |
| | | Tier 1 | NO | $- | $- | $- | $- | $1,000,000 | $- | $1,000,000 |
| | | Tier 1 | NO | $20,000 | $20,000 | $500,000 | $20,000 | $560,000 | $- | $560,000 |
| | | Tier 1 | YES | $43,000 | $- | $285,000 | $- | $328,000 | $229,600 | $98,400 |
| | | Tier 1 | NO | $400,000 | $300,000 | $1,800,000 | $300,000 | $2,800,000 | $- | $2,800,000 |
| | | Tier 1 | YES | $80,000 | $55,000 | $787,000 | $- | $922,000 | $645,400 | $276,600 |

<!-- page 158 -->
# APPENDIX

| Draft ID | Project Category | Project Source | County Districts | Project Name | Extent From | Extent To | Project Description | Municipality |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| R_1077_ PE | Capacity- Widening | Metro South CID | District 3, District 6 | Old McDonough Road Capacity Improvement (Design Only) | Lancaster Road | Mason Dixon Road | Pave and widen existing dirt road to 12 ft. lanes with 3-5 ft. shoulders to accommodate truck traffic | Unincorporated |
| R_407 | Capacity- Widening | 2014 Transportation Plan | District 3, District 7 | Wesley Chapel Road Capacity Improvement | Boring Road | Flat Shoals Parkway | Widening from 2 to 4 lanes, including bike and pedestrian improvements; GDOT GOASIS Project ID: 21-7008 - TE Report | Unincorporated |
| R_904 | Freight and Rail Crossing | Consultant Team | District 3, District 6 | Constitution Drive SE at Old Constitution Road SE Rail Crossing Improvement (Norfolk Southern) | Old Constitution Road SE | | At-grade crossing safety and operational improvements; Recent request for quiet zone; County evaluating closure of Old Constitution | Unincorporated |
| R_913 | Freight and Rail Crossing | Consultant Team | District 5, District 7 | Panola Road at Stone Mountain Lithonia Road Rail Crossing Improvement | Stone Mountain Lithonia Road | | At-grade crossing safety and operational improvements; Improve signage and pavement markings including reflectors; Evaluate Florida-T signalized intersection | Unincorporated |
| M_043 | Multimodal | 2014 Transportation Plan | District 1, District 7 | Chamblee Tucker Road Multimodal Improvement | I-285 | Tucker Norcross Road | Road diet to include two through lanes and a center left-turn lane and bike lanes. Operational and pedestrian improvements at key locations along the corridor | Tucker, Unincorporated |
| M_045 | Multimodal | 2014 Transportation Plan | District 2, District 6 | Church Street Multimodal Improvement | N Decatur Road | Medlock Road | Add center turn lane, on-street parking, and bicycle lanes | Decatur, Unincorporated |
| M_2000 | Multimodal | Consultant Team | District 3, District 6 | Clifton Springs Road from Panthersville Road to Flat Shoals Parkway Road Diet | Panthersville Road | Flat Shoals Parkway | Currently 4 lanes with no room for SW; Consider a road diet | Unincorporated |
| M_2006 | Multimodal | Consultant Team | District 3, District 4, District 5, District 6, District 7 | Covington Trails and Kensington MARTA Station Road Diets, Phase 2 | Memorial Drive | MARTA Indian Creek Station | New trail facility to improve connectivity; GDOT Safety Project PI Number 0018335 - Road Diet | Unincorporated |

<!-- page 159 -->
| Tier Assigned by City | Total Length (mi) | Tier Assigned by County | On GDOT Roadway | 2022 Eng. Cost | 2022 ROW Cost | 2022 Const. Cost | 2022 Other Cost | 2022 Total Cost | "Preliminary 2022 Cost by Others" | "Preliminary 2022 County Cost" |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| | | Tier 2 | YES | $86,000 | $- | $- | $- | $86,000 | $7,740 | $78,260 |
| | 1.27 | Tier 2 | NO | $1,008,000 | $7,050,000 | $12,085,000 | $- | $20,141,000 | $7,854,990 | $12,286,010 |
| | | Tier 2 | NO | $- | $- | $- | $- | $130,000 | $- | $130,000 |
| | | Tier 2 | NO | $- | $- | $- | $- | $1,000,000 | $- | $1,000,000 |
| Tier 2 | 2.10 | Tier 2 | NO | $- | $2,350,000 | $4,557,000 | $- | $6,907,000 | $5,525,600 | $1,381,400 |
| Tier 3 | 0.48 | Tier 2 | NO | $- | $1,256,000 | $2,436,000 | $- | $3,692,000 | $2,953,600 | $738,400 |
| | 0.72 | Tier 2 | NO | $- | $100,000 | $2,100,000 | $100,000 | $2,300,000 | $- | $2,300,000 |
| | 1.26 | Tier 2 | NO | $- | $- | $- | $- | $5,579,000 | $4,463,200 | $1,115,800 |

<!-- page 160 -->
# APPENDIX

| Draft ID | Project Category | Project Source | County Districts | Project Name | Extent From | Extent To | Project Description | Municipality |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| M_1063 | Multimodal | Consultant Team | District 4, District 6 | Jolly Avenue Multimodal Improvement | Rowland Street | Indian Creek Way | Explore making Jolly Avenue a one-way neighborhood street with the potential for sidewalk, multimodal, and road diet improvements | Clarkston, Unincorporated |
| BP_1447 | Multimodal | Consultant Team | District 2, District 6 | Lullwater Road NE Multimodal Improvement | Ponce De Leon Avenue NE | N Decatur Rd | Multimodal and operational improvements. Add and infill sidewalks | Atlanta, Unincorporated |
| M_035b | Multimodal | Consultant Team | District 2, District 6 | N Druid Hills Road Multimodal Improvement | Briarcliff Road | Clairmont Road | Multimodal and operational improvements. Add and infill sidewalks | Brookhaven, Unincorporated |
| M_035c | Multimodal | Consultant Team | District 2, District 6 | N Druid Hills Road Multimodal Improvement | Clairmont Road | Lawrenceville Highway | Multimodal and operational improvements. Add and infill sidewalks | Unincorporated |
| BP_1428 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 3, District 7 | Covington Trails, Phase 2 (South) | Covington Highway | Towers High School | New trail facility to improve connectivity | Unincorporated |
| BP_140 | Off-Road | Medline LCI | District 4, District 6 | DeKalb Industrial Way Greenway | Lawrenceville Highway | Jefferson Square Court | New Greenway facility | Unincorporated |
| BP_015 | Off-Road | 2014 Transportation Plan | District 2, District 4, District 6 | Farmers Market Trail | South Peachtree Creek Trail | Stone Mountain Trail in Avondale Estates | Expansion of the PATH Foundation trail system (Farmers’ Market Trail). Multiuse path was assumed for the entire 2.6-mile corridor, but a detailed corridor study is needed to determine recommended improvements | Unincorporated |
| BP_1435 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 1, District 7 | Henderson Mill Creek Trail | Northlake Parkway | North Fork Peachtree Creek Trail | Trail connection between North Fork Peachtree Creek Trail and Tucker-Northlake Activity Center. Closely follows the Northlake Trail. | Unincorporated |
| BP_1438 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 5, District 7 | Indian Creek MARTA Station Trails | Chemawa Drive | Elder Lane | New trail facility to improve connectivity | Unincorporated |
| BP_1439 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 5, District 7 | Indian Creek MARTA Station Trails | S Indian Creek Drive | Snapfinger Trail PATH | Loop from Redan Road to Elder Lane to Durham Park Rd to S Indian Creek Drive | Unincorporated |

<!-- page 161 -->
| Tier Assigned by City | Total Length (mi) | Tier Assigned by County | On GDOT Roadway | 2022 Eng. Cost | 2022 ROW Cost | 2022 Const. Cost | 2022 Other Cost | 2022 Total Cost | "Preliminary 2022 Cost by Others" | "Preliminary 2022 County Cost" |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| Tier 3 | 0.55 | Tier 2 | NO | $300,000 | $100,000 | $1,200,000 | $100,000 | $1,700,000 | $440,471 | $1,259,529 |
| Tier 3 | 1.30 | Tier 2 | NO | $- | $- | $- | $- | $1,000,000 | $- | $1,000,000 |
| Tier 3 | 1.71 | Tier 2 | NO | $- | $7,170,000 | $12,291,000 | $- | $19,461,000 | $7,979,010 | $11,481,990 |
| | 2.11 | Tier 2 | NO | $- | $8,856,000 | $15,181,000 | $- | $24,036,000 | $7,931,880 | $16,104,120 |
| | 0.47 | Tier 2 | NO | $72,000 | $36,000 | $715,000 | $- | $823,000 | $- | $823,000 |
| | 0.71 | Tier 2 | NO | $- | $- | $- | $- | $2,000,000 | $- | $2,000,000 |
| | 2.55 | Tier 2 | NO | $193,000 | $1,348,000 | $2,311,000 | $- | $3,851,000 | $- | $3,851,000 |
| | 1.43 | Tier 2 | NO | $216,000 | $108,000 | $2,160,000 | $- | $2,484,000 | $- | $2,484,000 |
| | 0.07 | Tier 2 | NO | $10,000 | $5,000 | $99,000 | $- | $114,000 | $- | $114,000 |
| | 1.55 | Tier 2 | NO | $235,000 | $118,000 | $2,345,000 | $- | $2,696,000 | $- | $2,696,000 |

<!-- page 162 -->
# APPENDIX

| Draft ID | Project Category | Project Source | County Districts | Project Name | Extent From | Extent To | Project Description | Municipality |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| BP_1440 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 4, District 5, District 7 | Indian Creek MARTA Station Trails | S Indian Creek Drive | Rowland Road | New trail facility to improve connectivity | Unincorporated |
| BP_1441 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 5, District 7 | Indian Creek MARTA Station Trails | Elder Lane | Indian Creek MARTA | New trail facility to improve connectivity | Unincorporated |
| BP_040 | Off-Road | Belvedere Master Active Living Plan | District 3, District 7 | Multiuse Trail Connecting Delano-Line Park, White Oak Park, and Shoal Creek | White Oak Park | Shoal Creek I | Multiuse Trail connecting Delano-Line Park, White Oak Park, and Shoal Creek I from west to east | Unincorporated |
| BP_1445 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 1, District 7 | North Fork Peachtree Creek Trail Connector, Phase 2 Spur | Cravey Lane NE | Townley Circle | New trail facility to improve connectivity | Unincorporated |
| BP_1501 | Off-Road | PATH Foundation | District 1, District 7 | North Fork Peachtree Creek Trail Connector, Phase 3 | Chamblee Tucker Road | Presidential Parkway | New trail facility to improve connectivity | Unincorporated |
| BP_1450 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 3, District 6 | Shoal Creek PATH Trail Connection 2 | Aspen Woods Apartments | Shoal Creek Crossing | New trail facility to improve connectivity | Unincorporated |
| BP_030 | Off-Road | 2014 Transportation Plan | District 3, District 6, District 7 | Shoal Creek Trail | Candler Road | Flat Shoals Parkway | Shoal Creek Trail from Rainbow Drive to SR 155/ Flat Shoals Parkway at Warriors Path/county-owned "Hudson Park" (2 miles) | Unincorporated |
| BP_1473 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 2, District 6 | South Fork Peachtree Trail Connection to Emory University | Emory University | Zonolite Park | New trail facility to improve connectivity to Emory University | Atlanta, Unincorporated |
| BP_1480 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 3, District 6 | South River Trail - PATH, Phase 2 | Gresham Park | Sugar Creek Park | New trail facility to improve connectivity | Unincorporated |
| BP_1484 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 3, District 6 | South River Trail - PATH, Phase 2 | Constitution Lakes Park | Sugar Creek Park | New trail facility to improve connectivity | Unincorporated |
| R_400b_PE | Operational-Corridor | Consultant Team | District 2, District 6 | Briarcliff Road Arterial Managed Lanes (Design Only) | Clifton Road | N Druid Hills Road | Study and design of arterial managed lanes; GDOT PI Number M005990 | Brookhaven, Unincorporated |

<!-- page 163 -->
COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

| Tier Assigned by City | Total Length (mi) | Tier Assigned by County | On GDOT Roadway | 2022 Eng. Cost | 2022 ROW Cost | 2022 Const. Cost | 2022 Other Cost | 2022 Total Cost | "Preliminary 2022 Cost by Others" | "Preliminary 2022 County Cost" |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| | 0.28 | Tier 2 | NO | $43,000 | $22,000 | $422,000 | $- | $486,000 | $- | $486,000 |
| | 0.27 | Tier 2 | NO | $41,000 | $21,000 | $407,000 | $- | $468,000 | $- | $468,000 |
| | 0.95 | Tier 2 | NO | $10,000 | $- | $50,000 | $- | $60,000 | $- | $60,000 |
| | 2.11 | Tier 2 | NO | $- | $- | $- | $- | $3,679,000 | $2,207,400 | $1,471,600 |
| | 1.51 | Tier 2 | NO | $229,000 | $115,000 | $2,284,000 | $- | $2,627,000 | $1,576,200 | $1,050,800 |
| | 0.02 | Tier 2 | NO | $3,000 | $2,000 | $28,000 | $- | $32,000 | $- | $32,000 |
| | 2.34 | Tier 2 | NO | $177,000 | $1,237,000 | $2,121,000 | $- | $3,534,000 | $- | $3,534,000 |
| Tier 3 | 0.76 | Tier 2 | NO | $26,000 | $13,000 | $260,000 | $- | $299,000 | $244,985 | $54,015 |
| | 2.83 | Tier 2 | NO | $429,000 | $215,000 | $4,288,000 | $- | $4,931,000 | $- | $4,931,000 |
| | 0.50 | Tier 2 | NO | $77,000 | $39,000 | $768,000 | $- | $884,000 | $- | $884,000 |
| Tier 3 | 1.67 | Tier 2 | YES | $- | $- | $- | $- | $4,500,000 | $3,600,000 | $900,000 |

<!-- page 164 -->
# APPENDIX

| Draft ID | Project Category | Project Source | County Districts | Project Name | Extent From | Extent To | Project Description | Municipality |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| R_1074 | Operational-Corridor | Metro South CID | District 3, District 6 | Constitution Road Widening (within GTIB Grant), Phase 2 | Fayetteville Road | International Park Drive | Constitution Road widening (within GTIB Grant) - Phase 2 | Unincorporated |
| R_222 | Operational-Corridor | Consultant Team | District 3, District 5, District 7 | Covington Highway Operational Improvement | Glenwood Road | Young Road | Access management improvements to address capacity and safety needs including 11'-lanes with 20-ft raised median, RCUTS and U-turns, other intersection improvements exclusive of S Hairston Road and Young Road; GDOT Project ID: 22-7126 | Unincorporated |
| R_224 | Operational-Corridor | Consultant Team | District 2, District 6, District 7 | Frazier Road Operational Improvement | Lawrenceville Highway | Lavista Road | Intersection improvements including widening from Tolbert Dr to Camden Walk to provide better storage for approaches to Lawrenceville Hwy and left turn lanes at Pangborn Rd and Tolbert Dr; Sidewalk improvements for both sides | Unincorporated |
| R_1078 | Operational-Corridor | Metro South CID | District 3, District 6 | Henrico Road Operational Improvement | Moreland Avenue | Koppers Road | Significant pavement drop-off on roadway shoulders. History of truck rollovers due to low shoulders. Shoulder and pavement widening and road re-construction to accommodate truck traffic | Unincorporated |
| R_1417 | Operational-Corridor | DeKalb SPLOST | District 2, District 4, District 6 | Lawrenceville Highway at North Druid Hills Road Operational Improvement | North Druid Hills Road | | Extend the northbound left-turn lane on Lawrenceville Hwy (SR-8/ US-78) for left-turning vehicles onto North Druid Hills Rd. May require the median to close to extend left-turn lane. Possibly a Quick Response project with GDOT | Unincorporated |

<!-- page 165 -->
| Tier Assigned by City | Total Length (mi) | Tier Assigned by County | On GDOT Roadway | 2022 Eng. Cost | 2022 ROW Cost | 2022 Const. Cost | 2022 Other Cost | 2022 Total Cost | “Preliminary 2022 Cost by Others” | “Preliminary 2022 County Cost” |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| | 1.77 | Tier 2 | NO | $967,000 | $325,000 | $7,106,000 | $930,000 | $9,327,000 | $7,554,870 | $1,772,130 |
| | 1.91 | Tier 2 | YES | $2,500,000 | $2,500,000 | $9,000,000 | $1,500,000 | $15,500,000 | $15,500,000 | $- |
| | 1.04 | Tier 2 | NO | $52,000 | $104,000 | $520,000 | $- | $676,000 | $- | $676,000 |
| | 1.38 | Tier 2 | NO | $559,000 | $740,000 | $6,686,000 | $- | $7,984,000 | $6,387,200 | $1,596,800 |
| | 0.08 | Tier 2 | YES | $26,000 | $- | $312,000 | $- | $338,000 | $338,000 | $- |

<!-- page 166 -->
# APPENDIX

| Draft ID | Project Category | Project Source | County Districts | Project Name | Extent From | Extent To | Project Description | Municipality |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| R_1081 | Operational-Corridor | Metro South CID | District 3, District 6 | Moreland Avenue Operational Improvement | Cedar Grove | Conley Road | Widen Moreland Avenue to include 1) a deceleration lane and travel lanes that are 12-ft wide southbound and 2) a deceleration lane, left turn lane, acceleration lane/U-turn loon that are 12-ft wide northbound. Modify opposing left-turn lanes on Moreland Avenue to be offset to provide better sight distance. Install advanced warning traffic signs and signals as appropriate, including 1) flashing sign for SB traffic to signal left turns from driveway and 2) signs along Moreland Avenue to signal an upcoming driveway with incoming/ turning traffic | Unincorporated |
| R_1082 | Operational-Corridor | Metro South CID | District 3, District 6 | Moreland Avenue Operational Improvement | Thurman Road | I-285 | Reconstruct the right turn from SB Moreland Avenue into the driveway to enlarge the turning radius to accommodate truck movements. Modify opposing left-turn lanes on Moreland Avenue to be offset to provide better intersection sight distance. Modify median end-treatments into a "bullet-nose" type to improve left turn movements for trucks. | Unincorporated |
| R_234 | Operational-Corridor | Covington Highway Corridor Master Active Living Plan | District 3, District 7 | Raise Median along Covington Highway | Redan Road | Redwing Circle | Raised median and operational improvements; GDOT Project ID: 22-7126 | Unincorporated |
| R_405d | Operational-Corridor | Consultant Team | District 4, District 5, District 7 | Redan Road Operational Improvement | Allgood Road | S Hairston Road | Raised median, access management, and intersection capacity and operational improvements | Unincorporated |
| R_1422 | Operational-Corridor | DeKalb SPLOST | District 4, District 6 | Rockbridge Road Traffic Engineering Study | Cobblestone Trail | Glen Cove Drive | Traffic Engineering study to identify safety improvements for curved portion | Unincorporated |

<!-- page 167 -->
| Tier Assigned by City | Total Length (mi) | Tier Assigned by County | On GDOT Roadway | 2022 Eng. Cost | 2022 ROW Cost | 2022 Const. Cost | 2022 Other Cost | 2022 Total Cost | "Preliminary 2022 Cost by Others" | "Preliminary 2022 County Cost" |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| | 0.69 | Tier 2 | YES | $180,000 | $225,000 | $1,500,000 | $525,000 | $2,430,000 | $2,041,200 | $388,800 |
| | 0.51 | Tier 2 | YES | $36,000 | $45,000 | $300,000 | $105,000 | $486,000 | $408,240 | $77,760 |
| | 0.46 | Tier 2 | YES | $90,000 | $- | $598,000 | $- | $688,000 | $688,000 | $- |
| | 1.20 | Tier 2 | NO | $869,000 | $2,276,000 | $5,420,000 | $1,438,000 | $10,000,000 | $5,000,000 | $5,000,000 |
| | 0.14 | Tier 2 | NO | $11,000 | $- | $156,000 | $- | $167,000 | $- | $167,000 |

<!-- page 168 -->
# APPENDIX

| Draft ID | Project Category | Project Source | County Districts | Project Name | Extent From | Extent To | Project Description | Municipality |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| R_1421 | Operational-Corridor | DeKalb SPLOST | District 3, District 7 | South Rainbow Drive Corridor Safety Improvement Study | Fairlake Drive | Rainbow Drive | Traffic Engineering study to identify safety improvements for curved portion | Unincorporated |
| R_1068 | Operational-Intersection | Metro South CID | District 3, District 6 | Cedar Grove at Moreland Intersection Improvement | Moreland Avenue | | Widen right-turn lane from Cedar Grove Road onto Moreland Avenue. Reconstruct pavement of Cedar Grove Road to accommodate truck traffic and minimize load-related pavement deterioration. Install sidewalks to accompany the existing crosswalks and existing signals to improve pedestrian safety. Improve radius (east side) | Unincorporated |
| R_1064 | Operational-Intersection | Metro South CID | District 3, District 6 | Cedar Grove Road/ Thurman Road (SR 160)/Old McDonough Road Roundabout | Thurman Road | | A truck roundabout for this intersection with 13' lanes and adequate turning radii. Reconstruct pavement and restripe Old McDonough Road and Cedar Grove Road to accommodate truck traffic and enhance delineation for driver awareness and safety. Improve roadway drainage infrastructure, including a maintenance schedule to ensure efficacy. Install a storage lane on Old McDonough to relieve truck queuing from truck wash facility. Resurface Cedar Grove Road and Thurman Road as part of roadway and drainage maintenance. Improve roadway drainage infrastructure | Unincorporated |
| R_152 | Operational-Intersection | Consultant Team | District 4, District 6 | Central Drive at Hambrick Road Intersection Improvement | Hambrick Road | | Turn lane capacity and operational improvements | Unincorporated |

<!-- page 169 -->
| Tier Assigned by City | Total Length (mi) | Tier Assigned by County | On GDOT Roadway | 2022 Eng. Cost | 2022 ROW Cost | 2022 Const. Cost | 2022 Other Cost | 2022 Total Cost | "Preliminary 2022 Cost by Others" | "Preliminary 2022 County Cost" |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| | 0.21 | Tier 2 | NO | $11,000 | $- | $136,000 | $- | $146,000 | $- | $146,000 |
| | | Tier 2 | YES | $140,000 | $174,000 | $1,160,000 | $406,000 | $1,880,000 | $1,598,000 | $282,000 |
| | | Tier 2 | YES | $- | $548,000 | $3,650,000 | $1,278,000 | $5,475,000 | $4,489,500 | $985,500 |
| | | Tier 2 | NO | $300,000 | $200,000 | $1,000,000 | $200,000 | $1,700,000 | $- | $1,700,000 |

<!-- page 170 -->
# APPENDIX

| Draft ID | Project Category | Project Source | County Districts | Project Name | Extent From | Extent To | Project Description | Municipality |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| R_1410 | Operational-Intersection | DeKalb SPLOST | District 1, District 7 | Evans Road at Evans Wood Drive Intersection Improvement Study | Evans Wood Drive | | Traffic Engineering study to identify safety improvements | Unincorporated |
| R_1401 | Operational-Intersection | DeKalb SPLOST | District 4, District 6 | Frazier Road at SR 8 Intersection Improvement | SR-8 | | New eastbound right-turn lane from Frazier Road onto Lawrenceville Hwy (SR-8) | Unincorporated |
| R_116 | Operational-Intersection | 2014 Transportation Plan | District 3, District 6 | Gresham Road at Brannen Road Intersection Improvement | Brannen Road | | Feasibility study is needed to examine the appropriateness of a roundabout | Unincorporated |
| R_1067 | Operational-Intersection | Metro South CID | District 3, District 6 | Henrico Road at Bonsal Road Intersection Improvement | Bonsal Road | | Widen Henrico Road and Bonsal Road to include 12-ft travel lanes and dedicated turn lanes. Reconstruct pavement and restripe Henrico Road and Bonsal Road to accommodate the increased truck traffic due to Cedar Grove Road closures. Include paved shoulders on both roads and improvements to drainage infrastructure. Reconstruct intersection to include adequate turning radii from and onto Henrico Road. Perform operational analysis investigating possible improvements | Unincorporated |
| R_1071 | Operational-Intersection | Metro South CID | District 3, District 6 | Henrico Road at CSX Crossing Cul-de-Sac | 500 feet before CSX crossing | | Resiliency project to reduce impacts from NS train crossing blockage. Allow cars and trucks opportunity to bypass long waits at train crossing and find alternate routes to their destination. Construct on westside of crossing an eyebrow cul-de-sac that will accommodate truck turning movements. Law enforcement to enforce illegal truck parking | Unincorporated |

<!-- page 171 -->
COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

| Tier Assigned by City | Total Length (mi) | Tier Assigned by County | On GDOT Road-way | 2022 Eng. Cost | 2022 ROW Cost | 2022 Const. Cost | 2022 Other Cost | 2022 Total Cost | "Preliminary 2022 Cost by Others" | "Preliminary 2022 County Cost" |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| | | Tier 2 | NO | $63,000 | $- | $- | $- | $63,000 | $- | $63,000 |
| | | Tier 2 | YES | $52,000 | $104,000 | $520,000 | $- | $676,000 | $473,200 | $202,800 |
| | | Tier 2 | YES | $230,000 | $- | $2,305,000 | $- | $2,535,000 | $1,774,500 | $760,500 |
| | | Tier 2 | NO | $120,000 | $150,000 | $1,000,000 | $350,000 | $1,620,000 | $97,200 | $1,522,800 |
| | | Tier 2 | NO | $120,000 | $150,000 | $1,000,000 | $350,000 | $1,620,000 | $1,393,200 | $226,800 |

<!-- page 172 -->
# APPENDIX

| Draft ID | Project Category | Project Source | County Districts | Project Name | Extent From | Extent To | Project Description | Municipality |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| R_1070 | Operational-Intersection | Metro South CID | District 3, District 6 | Henrico Road at Moreland Avenue Intersection Improvement | Moreland Avenue | | Widening Moreland Avenue to include a dedicated right turn lane from NB Moreland Avenue onto Henrico Road. Reconstruct the channelized right turn on Henrico Road to NB Moreland Avenue to include a larger radius for turning trucks. Reconstruct pavement on Henrico Road and re-stripe to accommodate the increased truck traffic. Consider closing driveways that are close to the intersection, including 1) the Circle K entrance on Moreland Avenue, and 2) the Chevron entrance on Henrico Road | Unincorporated |
| R_138 | Operational-Intersection | Consultant Team | District 3, District 6 | Henrico Road/ Westside Place at Moore Road Intersection Improvement | Moore Road | | Geometric improvements to address skew | Unincorporated |
| R_1411 | Operational-Intersection | DeKalb SPLOST | District 2, District 6 | Houston Mill Road at Lavista Road Intersection Improvement | Lavista Road | | Northbound right-turn lane from Houston Mill Road onto Lavista Road. Currently it is a shared right-thru lane | Unincorporated |
| R_1403 | Operational-Intersection | DeKalb SPLOST | District 2, District 6 | Lavista Road at Clairmont Road Intersection Improvement | Clairmont Road | | GDOT proposes right-turn lane improvements within the existing ROW; GDOT PI 0015680 | Unincorporated |
| R_1404 | Operational-Intersection | DeKalb SPLOST | District 4, District 6 | Milscott Drive at Church Drive Intersection Improvement | Church Drive | | Traffic signal and pedestrian improvements | Unincorporated |

<!-- page 173 -->
| Tier Assigned by City | Total Length (mi) | Tier Assigned by County | On GDOT Roadway | 2022 Eng. Cost | 2022 ROW Cost | 2022 Const. Cost | 2022 Other Cost | 2022 Total Cost | “Preliminary 2022 Cost by Others” | “Preliminary 2022 County Cost” |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| | | Tier 2 | YES | $424,000 | $530,000 | $3,530,000 | $1,236,000 | $5,719,000 | $4,689,580 | $1,029,420 |
| | | Tier 2 | NO | $150,000 | $20,000 | $500,000 | $50,000 | $720,000 | $- | $720,000 |
| | | Tier 2 | YES | $42,000 | $52,000 | $312,000 | $- | $406,000 | $284,200 | $121,800 |
| | | Tier 2 | YES | $21,000 | $- | $208,000 | $- | $229,000 | $229,000 | $- |
| | | Tier 2 | NO | $42,000 | $52,000 | $312,000 | $- | $406,000 | $- | $406,000 |

<!-- page 174 -->
# APPENDIX

| Draft ID | Project Category | Project Source | County Districts | Project Name | Extent From | Extent To | Project Description | Municipality |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| R_1062 | Operational-Intersection | Metro South CID | District 3, District 6 | Moreland Avenue at Conley Road Intersection Improvement | Conley Road | | Install a new actuated uncoordinated signal with a 100 second cycle length for both AM and PM peak hours, as suggested in Greater Conley CID Master Plan. Widening of Moreland Avenue to include: 1) Increase width of left turn lane on SB Moreland Avenue to 12-ft; 2) Dedicated right turn lane onto Bailey Street from NB Moreland Avenue; and Acceleration/Deceleration lane for the driveway on the East side with large turning radius. Install pedestrian crosswalk and determine warrant for pedestrian signal to cross Moreland Avenue at Bailey Street. Improve/ rehabilitate/reconstruct pavement along Moreland Avenue and Bailey Street | Unincorporated |
| R_100 | Operational-Intersection | 2014 Transportation Plan | District 4, District 6 | N Clarendon Avenue at Rockbridge Road Intersection Improvements | Rockbridge Road | | Intersection operational improvements as well as bicycle and pedestrian access improvements | Unincorporated |
| R_160 | Operational-Intersection | DeKalb SPLOST | District 4, District 6 | Rays Road at Norman Road Intersection Improvement Study | Norman Road | | Study to identify intersection improvements | Unincorporated |
| R_166 | Operational-Intersection | North Druid Hills LCI | District 2, District 6 | North Druid Hills Road at Lavista Road Intersection Improvement | Lavista Road | | Safety and operational intersection improvement including median along Lavista Road across from Toco Hill shopping center | Unincorporated |
| R_1408 | Operational-Intersection | DeKalb SPLOST | District 3, District 7 | Rainbow Drive at Cocklebur Road Intersection Improvement | Cocklebur Road | | Intersection capacity and operational improvements including dedicated left-turn lanes | Unincorporated |

<!-- page 175 -->
| Tier Assigned by City | Total Length (mi) | Tier Assigned by County | On GDOT Roadway | 2022 Eng. Cost | 2022 ROW Cost | 2022 Const. Cost | 2022 Other Cost | 2022 Total Cost | "Preliminary 2022 Cost by Others" | "Preliminary 2022 County Cost" |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| | | Tier 2 | NO | $216,000 | $270,000 | $1,797,000 | $629,000 | $2,912,000 | $2,416,960 | $495,040 |
| | | Tier 2 | NO | $46,000 | $- | $452,000 | $- | $497,000 | $- | $497,000 |
| | | Tier 2 | NO | $52,000 | $- | $- | $- | $52,000 | $- | $52,000 |
| | | Tier 2 | YES | $- | $- | $- | $- | $958,000 | $670,600 | $287,400 |
| | | Tier 2 | NO | $42,000 | $52,000 | $416,000 | $- | $510,000 | $- | $510,000 |

<!-- page 176 -->
# APPENDIX

| Draft ID | Project Category | Project Source | County Districts | Project Name | Extent From | Extent To | Project Description | Municipality |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| R_172 | Operational-Intersection | Public Engagement | District 3, District 7 | River Road at Lincrest Road Intersection Improvement | Lincrest Road | | Add channelized island and pavement for existing right-turn lane on Linecrest Rd | Unincorporated |
| R_148 | Operational-Intersection | Consultant Team | District 5, District 7 | S Deshon Road at Alford Road Intersection Improvement | Alford Road | | Intersection capacity and operational improvements including potential mini-roundabout | Unincorporated |
| R_151 | Operational-Intersection | Consultant Team | District 5, District 7 | S Deshon Road at Rogers Lake Road Intersection Improvement | Rogers Lake Road | | Intersection capacity and operational improvements including potential mini-roundabout | Unincorporated |
| R_170 | Operational-Intersection | Public Engagement | District 5, District 7 | S Stone Mountain Lithonia Road at Shadow Rock Drive Intersection Improvement | Shadow Rock Drive | | New traffic signal (if warranted), add turn lane on Shadow Rock, improve at-grade RR crossing and Shadow Rock profile | Unincorporated |
| R_143 | Operational-Intersection | Consultant Team | District 5, District 7 | Wellborn Road at DeKalb Medical Parkway Intersection Improvement | DeKalb Medical Parkway | | Intersection operational improvements including channelization and signal upgrades | Unincorporated |
| R_149 | Operational-Intersection | Consultant Team | District 5, District 7 | Wellborn Road at Marbut Road Intersection Improvement | Marbut Road | | Intersection capacity and operational improvements including potential mini-roundabout | Unincorporated |
| R_401 | Capacity-Widening | 2014 Transportation Plan | District 5, District 7 | Covington Highway Capacity Improvement | Evans Mill Road | SR 124 (Turner Hill Road) | Widen roadway from 2 to 4 lanes including a center turn lane from Evans Mill Road to SR 124 (Turner Hill Road) as well as a median treatment with bicycle and pedestrian improvements | Lithonia, Stonecrest, Unincorporated |
| R_1080 | Capacity-Widening | Metro South CID | District 3, District 6 | Old McDonough Road Capacity Improvement | Thurman Road | Lancaster Road | Operational Improvements along Old McDonough Road from Thurman Road to Lancaster Road | Unincorporated |
| R_1077 | Capacity-Widening | Metro South CID | District 3, District 6 | Old McDonough Road Capacity Improvement | Lancaster Road | Mason Dixon Road | Pave and widen existing dirt road to 12 ft. lanes with 3-5 ft. shoulders. Pavement section to be designed for trucks | Unincorporated |

<!-- page 177 -->
| Tier Assigned by City | Total Length (mi) | Tier Assigned by County | On GDOT Roadway | 2022 Eng. Cost | 2022 ROW Cost | 2022 Const. Cost | 2022 Other Cost | 2022 Total Cost | "Preliminary 2022 Cost by Others" | "Preliminary 2022 County Cost" |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| | | Tier 2 | NO | $20,000 | $- | $80,000 | $- | $100,000 | $- | $100,000 |
| | | Tier 2 | NO | $100,000 | $100,000 | $500,000 | $100,000 | $800,000 | $- | $800,000 |
| | | Tier 2 | NO | $300,000 | $300,000 | $1,200,000 | $200,000 | $2,000,000 | $- | $2,000,000 |
| | | Tier 2 | NO | $40,000 | $- | $300,000 | $- | $340,000 | $- | $340,000 |
| | | Tier 2 | NO | $250,000 | $100,000 | $1,000,000 | $100,000 | $1,450,000 | $- | $1,450,000 |
| | | Tier 2 | NO | $100,000 | $100,000 | $500,000 | $100,000 | $800,000 | $- | $800,000 |
| Tier 2 | 2.65 | Tier 3 | YES | $154,000 | $5,743,000 | $6,273,000 | $- | $12,168,000 | $2,372,399 | $9,795,601 |
| | 0.92 | Tier 3 | YES | $130,000 | $163,000 | $1,083,000 | $379,000 | $1,754,000 | $105,240 | $1,648,760 |
| | 0.23 | Tier 3 | YES | $- | $107,000 | $711,000 | $249,000 | $1,067,000 | $96,030 | $970,970 |

<!-- page 178 -->
# APPENDIX

| Draft ID | Project Category | Project Source | County Districts | Project Name | Extent From | Extent To | Project Description | Municipality |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| R_909 | Freight and Rail Crossing | Consultant Team | District 4, District 7 | Rockbridge Road SW at Stone Mountain Lithonia Road Rail Crossing Improvement | Stone Mountain Lithonia Road | | At-grade crossing safety and operational improvements; Evaluate queue management strategies such as a a pre-signal | Unincorporated |
| R_914 | Freight and Rail Crossing | Consultant Team | District 5, District 7 | Stone Mountain Lithonia Road at Redan Road Rail Crossing Improvement | Redan Road | | At-grade crossing safety and operational improvements; Evaluate rail crossing operational, safety, and queue management strategies | Unincorporated |
| R_710 | Interchange- New or Improvements | Consultant Team | District 1, District 7 | I-85 SB Ramp at Pleasantdale Road Interchange Improvement | Pleasantdale Road | | Interchange improvements; GDOT PI Number 0008582 | Unincorporated |
| R_700 | Interchange- New or Improvements | 2014 Transportation Plan | District 1, District 7 | Shallowford Road at I-85 Rail Interchange Improvement | I-85 | | Interchange upgrade to include ITS/ operational improvements as well as accommodations for bicycles and pedestrians | Unincorporated |
| R_809 | ITS Improvements | 2014 Transportation Plan | District 2, District 6 | Briarcliff Road ITS Improvement | Johnson Road | N Decatur Road | Install fiber optic interconnect and convert signals to ethernet | Atlanta, Unincorporated |
| R_800 | ITS Improvements | 2014 Transportation Plan | District 2, District 6 | Briarcliff Road ITS Improvement | Johnson Road | Sheridan Road | Install switches and cameras to upgrade traffic operations | Unincorporated |
| R_808 | ITS Improvements | 2014 Transportation Plan | District 3, District 5, District 7 | Flat Shoals Parkway/ Flakes Mill Road/ Snapfinger Road/Wesley Chapel Road ITS Improvement | Boring Road at Flat Shoals | Covington Highway at Wesley Chapel Road | Convert from dial-up to ethernet-connect Wesley Chapel to Panola via fiber on I-20 (DeKalb 24 cable); Must be done concurrently or after completion of Panola Road/Fairington Road improvements; GDOT GOASIS Project ID: 22-7078 - Resurfacing striping plans | Unincorporated |
| R_814 | ITS Improvements | 2014 Transportation Plan | District 5, District 7 | New DeKalb County Traffic Control Center | | | New DeKalb County Traffic Control Center (TCC) facility | Unincorporated |

<!-- page 179 -->
| Tier Assigned by City | Total Length (mi) | Tier Assigned by County | On GDOT Roadway | 2022 Eng. Cost | 2022 ROW Cost | 2022 Const. Cost | 2022 Other Cost | 2022 Total Cost | "Preliminary 2022 Cost by Others" | "Preliminary 2022 County Cost" |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| | | Tier 3 | NO | $- | $- | $- | $- | $470,000 | $- | $470,000 |
| | | Tier 3 | NO | $40,000 | $- | $300,000 | $- | $340,000 | $- | $340,000 |
| | | Tier 3 | YES | $8,000,000 | $4,000,000 | $34,000,000 | $4,000,000 | $50,000,000 | $50,000,000 | $- |
| | | Tier 3 | YES | $162,000 | $440,000 | $1,615,000 | $- | $2,216,000 | $2,216,000 | $- |
| Tier 3 | 0.99 | Tier 3 | YES | $14,000 | $- | $31,000 | $- | $44,000 | $- | $44,000 |
| | 1.49 | Tier 3 | YES | $17,000 | $- | $60,000 | $- | $77,000 | $61,600 | $15,400 |
| | 8.08 | Tier 3 | YES | $35,000 | $- | $243,000 | $- | $278,000 | $222,400 | $55,600 |
| | | Tier 3 | NO | $- | $- | $2,053,000 | $- | $2,053,000 | $- | $2,053,000 |

<!-- page 180 -->
# APPENDIX

| Draft ID | Project Category | Project Source | County Districts | Project Name | Extent From | Extent To | Project Description | Municipality |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| R_811 | ITS Improvements | 2014 Transportation Plan | District 1, District 7 | Pleasantdale Road ITS Improvement | Best Friend Road | Pleasantdale Crossing | Install fiber optic interconnect and convert signals to ethernet; This portion requires fiber along the interstate from Pleasantdale Road to Shallowford Road in order to tie into the TCC (not shown in project geometry) | Doraville, Unincorporated |
| R_807 | ITS Improvements | 2014 Transportation Plan | District 4, District 5, District 7 | Rock Chapel Road/ Rockbridge Road ITS Improvement | S Rockbridge Road/ Pembleton Court | Union Grove Road | Install fiber optic interconnect (no current connection to TCC or path to TCC); add Rockbridge at S Deshon, Registry Bluff, Wynbrook Parkway to connect with Five Station | Stonecrest, Unincorporated |
| R_806 | ITS Improvements | 2014 Transportation Plan | District 5, District 7 | Turner Hill Road/Mall Parkway ITS Improvement | Klondike Road | Rock Chapel Road/ Union Grove Road | Install fiber optic interconnect, convert signals to ethernet and install fiber optic link to library | Stonecrest, Unincorporated |
| M_022a | Multimodal | Consultant Team | District 2, District 6 | Clairmont Road Multimodal Improvement | Lavista Road | N Decatur Road | Corridor improvements to include a median (center turn lane or landscaped) as well as bike and pedestrian facilities and operational improvements at key intersections | Unincorporated |
| M_028 | Multimodal | 2014 Transportation Plan | District 5, District 7 | Covington Highway Multimodal Improvement | S Hairston Road | Klondike Road | Addition of a landscaped median to include pedestrian (sidewalk and crossing) and bicycle accommodations and operational improvements at key locations along the corridor; GDOT Safety Project High Level Crash Screening: Project ID: 22-7126 | Stonecrest, Unincorporated |
| M_2007 | Multimodal | Consultant Team | District 5, District 7 | Covington Trails and Kensington MARTA Station Road Diets, Phase 3 | Durham Park Road | Sagehill Drive | New trail facility to improve connectivity | Unincorporated |

<!-- page 181 -->
| Tier Assigned by City | Total Length (mi) | Tier Assigned by County | On GDOT Roadway | 2022 Eng. Cost | 2022 ROW Cost | 2022 Const. Cost | 2022 Other Cost | 2022 Total Cost | "Preliminary 2022 Cost by Others" | "Preliminary 2022 County Cost" |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| Tier 3 | 1.00 | Tier 3 | NO | $42,000 | $- | $329,000 | $- | $370,000 | $121,891 | $248,109 |
| Tier 2 | 6.39 | Tier 3 | YES | $31,000 | $- | $185,000 | $- | $215,000 | $193,500 | $21,500 |
| Tier 2 | 3.55 | Tier 3 | YES | $28,000 | $- | $118,000 | $- | $146,000 | $131,400 | $14,600 |
|  | 2.23 | Tier 3 | YES | $- | $- | $- | $- | $2,000,000 | $1,600,000 | $400,000 |
| Tier 2 | 5.08 | Tier 3 | YES | $2,573,000 | $10,087,000 | $33,407,000 | $- | $46,067,000 | $41,460,300 | $4,606,700 |
|  | 0.76 | Tier 3 | NO | $- | $- | $- | $- | $920,000 | $- | $920,000 |

<!-- page 182 -->
# APPENDIX

| Draft ID | Project Category | Project Source | County Districts | Project Name | Extent From | Extent To | Project Description | Municipality |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| M_034 | Multimodal | 2014 Transportation Plan | District 2, District 6 | Executive Park Ring Road New Alignment | Buford Highway | Briarcliff Road | New roadway connection across I-85 connecting Buford Highway with Sheridan Road and Briarcliff Road. New connection will include multimodal and transit accommodations | Brookhaven, Unincorporated |
| M_042 | Multimodal | 2014 Transportation Plan | District 3, District 6 | Gresham Road/Clifton Church Road Multimodal Improvement | Flat Shoals Road | Clifton Church Road | Roadway operational improvements and inclusion of bicycle lanes and sidewalks to connect with PATH trail connection at Clifton Church Road and Gresham Road | Unincorporated |
| M_013 | Multimodal | Consultant Team | District 4, District 5, District 7 | Heritage Corridor Multimodal Improvement | Stone Mountain | Lithonia | A multimodal corridor study will consider roadway, bike, and pedestrian improvements throughout and connecting Stone Mountain and Lithonia downtowns. Pedestrian improvements will be considered to improve pedestrian crossings along this corridor | Stone Mountain, Unincorporated |
| M_014 | Multimodal | 2014 Transportation Plan | District 2, District 4, District 6, District 7 | Lavista Road Multimodal Improvement | N Druid Hills Road | Harobi Drive | Corridor operational and bike improvements to include a center turn lane/ bike lanes; pedestrian improvements at key intersections especially between Cheshire Bridge Road/ N Druid Hills Road, and passive pedestrian ATMS between Sheffield Dr/Houston Mill Road | Tucker, Unincorporated |
| M_025 | Multimodal | 2014 Transportation Plan | District 2, District 4, District 6 | N Decatur Road Multimodal Improvement | Church Street | E Ponce De Leon Avenue | Four lane section will include a combination of bicycle and pedestrian improvements and will be consistent with corridor transit design | Unincorporated |
| M_024 | Multimodal | 2014 Transportation Plan | District 2, District 6 | N Decatur Road Multimodal Improvement | Clairmont Road | Church Street | Four lane section will include a combination of bicycle and pedestrian improvements and will be consistent with corridor transit design | Decatur, Unincorporated |

<!-- page 183 -->
| Tier Assigned by City | Total Length (mi) | Tier Assigned by County | On GDOT Roadway | 2022 Eng. Cost | 2022 ROW Cost | 2022 Const. Cost | 2022 Other Cost | 2022 Total Cost | “Preliminary 2022 Cost by Others” | “Preliminary 2022 County Cost” |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| Tier 3 | 0.93 | Tier 3 | NO | $2,309,000 | $11,085,000 | $11,392,000 | $- | $24,785,000 | $17,195,784 | $7,589,216 |
| | 1.78 | Tier 3 | NO | $527,000 | $3,689,000 | $6,323,000 | $- | $10,538,000 | $- | $10,538,000 |
| Tier 3 | 11.69 | Tier 3 | NO | $- | $- | $- | $- | $25,400,000 | $13,797,555 | $11,602,445 |
| Tier 3 | 5.92 | Tier 3 | YES | $1,958,000 | $15,862,000 | $25,292,000 | $- | $43,110,000 | $38,799,000 | $4,311,000 |
| | 1.25 | Tier 3 | NO | $1,065,000 | $7,454,000 | $12,777,000 | $- | $21,295,000 | $- | $21,295,000 |
| Tier 1 | 1.29 | Tier 3 | NO | $- | $6,624,000 | $9,936,000 | $- | $16,560,000 | $7,783,200 | $8,776,800 |

<!-- page 184 -->
# APPENDIX

| Draft ID | Project Category | Project Source | County Districts | Project Name | Extent From | Extent To | Project Description | Municipality |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| M_023 | Multimodal | 2014 Transportation Plan | District 2, District 6 | N Decatur Road Multimodal Improvement | Clifton Road | Clairmont Road | Four lane section will include bicycle and pedestrian improvements (particularly pedestrian crossings), and will be consistent with corridor transit design. N Decatur Road/Haygood Drive intersection to include improved striping, lighting and signage | Unincorporated |
| M_029 | Multimodal | 2014 Transportation Plan | District 2, District 6 | N Druid Hills Road/I-85 Access Road Multimodal Improvement | I-85 Frontage Road underpass at Cliff Valley Way/ Executive Park S | Mount Mariah Road/ Briarwood Road | I-85 North Druid Hills Connector and North Druid Hills/ I-85 - Access road modifications along corridor | Brookhaven, Unincorporated |
| M_010 | Multimodal | 2014 Transportation Plan | District 2, District 6 | Scott Boulevard Multimodal Improvement and Grade Separation | Eastland Drive | Hollywood Drive | Recommendations for the Scott Boulevard corridor throughout the Medline LCI area are anticipated but not yet known. This is a set-aside for future recommendations | Unincorporated |
| M_035d | Multimodal | Consultant Team | District 2, District 4, District 6 | Valley Brook Road Multimodal Improvements | Lawrenceville Highway | Ponce De Leon Avenue | Multimodal improvements including capacity and operational improvements at key intersections, access management measures, and sidewalk infill | Unincorporated |
| R_2005 | New Connection | Consultant Team | District 2, District 6 | Clairmont Road Reliever Connection | I-85 Frontage Road | Briarcliff Road NE | New connection from I-85 Frontage Road to Briarcliff Road NE east of Clairmont Road | Unincorporated |
| R_621 | New Connection | North Druid Hills LCI | District 2, District 6 | McConnell Drive Extension | Clairmont Road | North Jamestown Road | New connection | Unincorporated |
| R_612 | New Connection | Kensington LCI TOD | District 5, District 7 | New Street A | Camp Circle | New Road | New grid network for Kensington LCI | Unincorporated |
| R_613 | New Connection | Kensington LCI TOD | District 5, District 7 | New Street B | Camp Way | Camp Circle | New grid network for Kensington LCI | Unincorporated |
| R_614 | New Connection | Kensington LCI TOD | District 5, District 7 | New Street C | Camp Street | New Street A | New grid network for Kensington LCI | Unincorporated |
| R_615 | New Connection | Kensington LCI TOD | District 3, District 5, District 6, District 7 | New Street D | New Street A | Kensington Road | New grid network for Kensington LCI | Unincorporated |

<!-- page 185 -->
| Tier Assigned by City | Total Length (mi) | Tier Assigned by County | On GDOT Roadway | 2022 Eng. Cost | 2022 ROW Cost | 2022 Const. Cost | 2022 Other Cost | 2022 Total Cost | “Preliminary 2022 Cost by Others” | “Preliminary 2022 County Cost” |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| | 0.93 | Tier 3 | NO | $743,000 | $5,198,000 | $8,910,000 | $- | $14,849,000 | $- | $14,849,000 |
| Tier 3 | 1.54 | Tier 3 | YES | $1,078,000 | $5,081,000 | $4,619,000 | $- | $10,777,000 | $3,931,702 | $6,845,298 |
| | 1.13 | Tier 3 | YES | $2,800,000 | $19,600,000 | $33,600,000 | $- | $56,000,000 | $56,000,000 | $- |
| | 1.28 | Tier 3 | NO | $766,000 | $5,359,000 | $9,186,000 | $- | $15,310,000 | $7,961,200 | $7,348,800 |
| | 0.20 | Tier 3 | NO | $- | $- | $- | $- | $10,000,000 | $- | $10,000,000 |
| | 0.22 | Tier 3 | NO | $- | $- | $- | $- | $6,159,000 | $- | $6,159,000 |
| | 0.42 | Tier 3 | NO | $- | $- | $- | $- | $712,000 | $- | $712,000 |
| | 0.27 | Tier 3 | NO | $- | $- | $- | $- | $521,000 | $- | $521,000 |
| | 0.34 | Tier 3 | NO | $- | $- | $- | $- | $664,000 | $- | $664,000 |
| | 0.20 | Tier 3 | NO | $- | $- | $- | $- | $432,000 | $- | $432,000 |

<!-- page 186 -->
# APPENDIX

| Draft ID | Project Category | Project Source | County Districts | Project Name | Extent From | Extent To | Project Description | Municipality |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| R_616 | New Connection | Kensington LCI TOD | District 5, District 7 | New Street E | Camp Circle | Kensington Road | New grid network for Kensington LCI | Unincorporated |
| R_617 | New Connection | Kensington LCI TOD | District 5, District 7 | New Street F | New Street C | Kensington Road | New grid network for Kensington LCI | Unincorporated |
| R_619 | New Connection | Kensington LCI TOD | District 4, District 6 | New Street H | Northern Avenue | Mountain Drive | New grid network for Kensington LCI | Unincorporated |
| R_620 | New Connection | Kensington LCI TOD | District 5, District 7 | New Street I | Kensington Road | Durham Park Road | New grid network for Kensington LCI | Unincorporated |
| BP_1424 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 5, District 7 | Arabia Mountain - Stone Mountain Connector Trail 2 | Stonecrest City Limits | Stone Mountain Park | Trail/Path alignment alternative to connect Stone Mountain Park to Arabia Mountain Park within DeKalb County's jurisdiction | Unincorporated |
| BP_1426 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 3, District 6 | Bouldercrest Court Connection to S River Trail | Bouldercrest Court | S River Trail | Connection from South River Trail to local neighborhood via Bouldercrest Court | Unincorporated |
| BP_1431 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 3, District 7 | Covington Trails, Phase 2 (South) | Memorial Drive | Covington Highway | New trail facility to improve connectivity | Unincorporated |
| BP_1430 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 3, District 7 | Covington Trails, Phase 2 (South) | Covington Highway | Holcombe Road | New trail facility to improve connectivity | Unincorporated |
| BP_1429 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 3, District 5, District 7 | Covington Trails, Phase 2 (South) | W Austin Road | Towers Way | New trail facility to improve connectivity | Unincorporated |
| BP_1432 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 3, District 5, District 7 | Covington Trails, Phase 2 (South) | Covington Highway | Redan Road | New trail facility to improve connectivity | Unincorporated |
| BP_1434 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 3, District 6 | Gresham Park Connection to S River Trail | South River Trail | Gresham Park | Trail connection between South River Trail and Gresham Recreation Center Park | Unincorporated |
| BP_1500 | Off-Road | Consultant Team | District 1, District 6, District 7 | I-285 Top End Trail | Hammond Drive | Northlake Mall | Regional trail facility | Chamblee, Doraville, Dunwoody, Tucker, Unincorporated |
| BP_1437 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 4, District 5, District 6, District 7 | Indian Creek MARTA Station Trails | Tie-in to Snapfinger Trail PATH |  | Indian Creek Station area walkability improvements | Unincorporated |
| BP_1436 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 4, District 5, District 6, District 7 | Indian Creek MARTA Station Trails | S Indian Creek Drive | Snapfinger Trail PATH | Indian Creek Station area walkability improvements | Unincorporated |

<!-- page 187 -->
| Tier Assigned by City | Total Length (mi) | Tier Assigned by County | On GDOT Roadway | 2022 Eng. Cost | 2022 ROW Cost | 2022 Const. Cost | 2022 Other Cost | 2022 Total Cost | "Preliminary 2022 Cost by Others" | "Preliminary 2022 County Cost" |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| | 0.12 | Tier 3 | NO | $- | $- | $- | $- | $267,000 | $- | $267,000 |
| | 0.36 | Tier 3 | NO | $- | $- | $- | $- | $904,000 | $- | $904,000 |
| | 0.47 | Tier 3 | NO | $- | $- | $- | $- | $1,307,000 | $- | $1,307,000 |
| | 0.59 | Tier 3 | NO | $- | $- | $- | $- | $1,109,000 | $- | $1,109,000 |
| | 2.67 | Tier 3 | NO | $404,000 | $202,000 | $4,037,000 | $- | $4,643,000 | $- | $4,643,000 |
| | 0.05 | Tier 3 | NO | $6,000 | $3,000 | $52,000 | $- | $60,000 | $- | $60,000 |
| | 0.61 | Tier 3 | YES | $92,000 | $46,000 | $911,000 | $- | $1,048,000 | $- | $1,048,000 |
| | 0.45 | Tier 3 | NO | $88,000 | $44,000 | $873,000 | $- | $1,004,000 | $- | $1,004,000 |
| | 0.19 | Tier 3 | NO | $70,000 | $35,000 | $694,000 | $- | $798,000 | $- | $798,000 |
| | 0.58 | Tier 3 | NO | $29,000 | $15,000 | $285,000 | $- | $328,000 | $- | $328,000 |
| | 0.17 | Tier 3 | NO | $26,000 | $13,000 | $251,000 | $- | $288,000 | $- | $288,000 |
| Tier 2 | 9.00 | Tier 3 | NO | $8,000,000 | $- | $30,000,000 | $- | $38,000,000 | $23,180,000 | $14,820,000 |
| | 0.25 | Tier 3 | NO | $39,000 | $20,000 | $385,000 | $- | $443,000 | $- | $443,000 |
| | 0.19 | Tier 3 | NO | $29,000 | $15,000 | $288,000 | $- | $331,000 | $- | $331,000 |

<!-- page 188 -->
# APPENDIX

| Draft ID | Project Category | Project Source | County Districts | Project Name | Extent From | Extent To | Project Description | Municipality |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| BP_1442 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 4, District 7 | James B Rivers Memorial Drive Trail | Stone Mountain City Limits | Silver Hill Road | New trail facility to improve connectivity | Unincorporated |
| BP_1443 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 4, District 6 | James R Hallford Stadium to Snapfinger PATH Trail Connection | James R Hallford Stadium Parking Lot | Snapfinger Trail PATH | New trail facility to improve connectivity with Snapfinger Trail. | Unincorporated |
| BP_144 | Off-Road | North Druid Hills LCI | District 2, District 6 | McConnell Drive Three Parks Connector-Multiuse Trail | South of Intown Community School | Toco Hills Shopping Center | New trail facility to improve connectivity | Unincorporated |
| BP_136 | Off-Road | Kensington LCI TOD | District 3, District 4, District 5, District 6, District 7 | Memorial Drive Trail | Kensington Road | I-285 | New trail facility to improve connectivity | Unincorporated |
| BP_041 | Off-Road | Belvedere Master Active Living Plan | District 3, District 7 | Multiuse Trail from Monterey Drive to Shoal Creek I Parallel to Capastrana Place | Monterey Drive | Shoal Creek I | Multiuse trail connecting east from Columbia Drive to Midway Park and Recreation Center throughout park and Memorial Dr | Unincorporated |
| BP_1448 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 3, District 6 | Shoal Creek PATH Trail, Connection 1 | Elkhorn Drive | Shoal Creek PATH Trail | New trail facility to improve connectivity | Unincorporated |
| BP_1449 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 4, District 6 | Shoal Creek PATH Trail, Phase 2 Connection 2 | Thomas Road | Shoal Creek PATH Trail | New trail facility to improve connectivity | Unincorporated |
| BP_1454 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 3, District 7 | Shoal Creek PATH, Phase 2 Connection Trail | Shoal Creek PATH Trail | Gelndale Court | New trail facility to improve connectivity | Unincorporated |
| BP_1451 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 2, District 3, District 4, District 6, District 7 | Shoal Creek Trail-PATH, Phase 1 (Section 1) | S River Trail | S Columbia Drive/Thomas Road | New trail facility to improve connectivity | Unincorporated |
| BP_1453 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 3, District 6 | Shoal Creek Trail-PATH, Phase 2 | Candler Road | Flat Shoals Parkway | New trail facility to improve connectivity | Unincorporated |

<!-- page 189 -->
| Tier Assigned by City | Total Length (mi) | Tier Assigned by County | On GDOT Roadway | 2022 Eng. Cost | 2022 ROW Cost | 2022 Const. Cost | 2022 Other Cost | 2022 Total Cost | "Preliminary 2022 Cost by Others" | "Preliminary 2022 County Cost" |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| | 0.83 | Tier 3 | NO | $126,000 | $63,000 | $1,252,000 | $- | $1,439,000 | $- | $1,439,000 |
| | 0.02 | Tier 3 | NO | $3,000 | $2,000 | $26,000 | $- | $30,000 | $- | $30,000 |
| | 0.53 | Tier 3 | NO | $- | $- | $- | $- | $4,229,000 | $- | $4,229,000 |
| | 0.68 | Tier 3 | YES | $- | $- | $- | $- | $1,251,000 | $- | $1,251,000 |
| | 0.42 | Tier 3 | NO | $10,000 | $- | $70,000 | $- | $79,000 | $- | $79,000 |
| | 0.04 | Tier 3 | NO | $6,000 | $3,000 | $58,000 | $- | $66,000 | $- | $66,000 |
| | 0.05 | Tier 3 | NO | $8,000 | $4,000 | $71,000 | $- | $81,000 | $- | $81,000 |
| | 0.05 | Tier 3 | NO | $8,000 | $4,000 | $79,000 | $- | $91,000 | $- | $91,000 |
| | 5.09 | Tier 3 | NO | $772,000 | $386,000 | $7,715,000 | $- | $8,873,000 | $- | $8,873,000 |
| | 1.56 | Tier 3 | NO | $354,000 | $177,000 | $3,534,000 | $- | $4,064,000 | $- | $4,064,000 |

<!-- page 190 -->
# APPENDIX

| Draft ID | Project Category | Project Source | County Districts | Project Name | Extent From | Extent To | Project Description | Municipality |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| BP_1425 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 5, District 7 | Snapfinger Creek PATH Trail Connection | Red Cedar Trail | Snapfinger Creek Trail | New trail facility to improve connectivity | Unincorporated |
| BP_1455 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 5, District 7 | Snapfinger PATH Trail Connection 1 | Ramblewood Circle | Snapfinger Trail | New trail facility to improve connectivity | Unincorporated |
| BP_1456 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 5, District 7 | Snapfinger Trail - PATH | Indian Creek Trail | Indian Creek MARTA | New trail facility to improve connectivity | Unincorporated |
| BP_010a | Off-Road | Consultant Team | District 5, District 7 | Snapfinger Trail - PATH | Snapfinger Road | I-20 | New trail facility to improve connectivity | Stonecrest |
| BP_1457 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 5, District 7 | Snapfinger Trail - PATH, Section 1 | S River Trail | Snapfinger Road | New trail facility to improve connectivity | Unincorporated |
| BP_1458 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 4, District 5, District 6, District 7 | Snapfinger Trail - PATH, Section 2 | Stonecrest City Limits | Stoneview Park | New trail facility to improve connectivity | Unincorporated |
| BP_1459 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 2, District 6 | South Peachtree Creek Trail - PATH, Phase 1 | Atlanta City Limits | Toco Hills Shopping Center | New trail facility to improve connectivity | Unincorporated |
| BP_1479 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 3, District 6 | South River Connector Trail | Panthersville Road | Smithfield Avenue | New trail facility to improve connectivity | Unincorporated |
| BP_1462 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 3, District 7 | South River Trail Extension | River Run Trail | South River Trail Extension | New trail facility to improve connectivity | Unincorporated |
| BP_1463 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 3, District 6 | South River Trail Extension, Connection 3 | Sage Place | South River Trail Extension | New trail facility to improve connectivity | Unincorporated |
| BP_1465 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 3, District 6 | South River Trail, Connection 2 | Waldrop Trail Cul-de-sac | South River Trail | New trail facility to improve connectivity | Unincorporated |
| BP_1460 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 3, District 5, District 7 | South River Trail, Connection 4 | English Valley Drive | South River Trail | New trail facility to improve connectivity | Unincorporated |
| BP_1461 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 3, District 7 | South River Trail, Connection 5 | River Edge Court | South River Trail | New trail facility to improve connectivity | Unincorporated |
| BP_1478 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 4, District 5, District 7 | Stone Mountain Creek Trail | Stone Mountain Park Lake | Yellow River at SE DeKalb County Line | New trail facility to improve connectivity | Unincorporated |
| BP_1466 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 4, District 7 | Stone Mountain Creek Trail Connection | Deer Trail Lane | Stone Mountain Creek Trail | New trail facility to improve connectivity | Unincorporated |

<!-- page 191 -->
COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

| Tier Assigned by City | Total Length (mi) | Tier Assigned by County | On GDOT Roadway | 2022 Eng. Cost | 2022 ROW Cost | 2022 Const. Cost | 2022 Other Cost | 2022 Total Cost | “Preliminary 2022 Cost by Others” | “Preliminary 2022 County Cost” |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| | 0.03 | Tier 3 | NO | $5,000 | $3,000 | $48,000 | $- | $55,000 | $- | $55,000 |
| | 0.12 | Tier 3 | NO | $17,000 | $9,000 | $166,000 | $- | $191,000 | $- | $191,000 |
| | 0.20 | Tier 3 | NO | $32,000 | $16,000 | $311,000 | $- | $357,000 | $- | $357,000 |
| Tier 2 | 2.31 | Tier 3 | NO | $- | $- | $- | $- | $4,948,000 | $2,474,000 | $2,474,000 |
| | 2.37 | Tier 3 | NO | $360,000 | $180,000 | $3,594,000 | $- | $4,133,000 | $- | $4,133,000 |
| | 10.14 | Tier 3 | NO | $1,527,000 | $764,000 | $15,263,000 | $- | $17,552,000 | $- | $17,552,000 |
| | 1.00 | Tier 3 | NO | $152,000 | $76,000 | $1,512,000 | $- | $1,739,000 | $- | $1,739,000 |
| | 3.49 | Tier 3 | NO | $527,000 | $264,000 | $5,263,000 | $- | $6,052,000 | $- | $6,052,000 |
| | 0.07 | Tier 3 | NO | $8,000 | $4,000 | $79,000 | $- | $91,000 | $- | $91,000 |
| | 0.03 | Tier 3 | NO | $5,000 | $3,000 | $46,000 | $- | $53,000 | $- | $53,000 |
| | 0.12 | Tier 3 | NO | $18,000 | $9,000 | $172,000 | $- | $198,000 | $- | $198,000 |
| | 0.09 | Tier 3 | NO | $14,000 | $7,000 | $136,000 | $- | $157,000 | $- | $157,000 |
| | 0.02 | Tier 3 | NO | $4,000 | $2,000 | $31,000 | $- | $35,000 | $- | $35,000 |
| | 9.35 | Tier 3 | NO | $1,412,000 | $706,000 | $14,120,000 | $- | $16,238,000 | $- | $16,238,000 |
| | 0.04 | Tier 3 | NO | $6,000 | $3,000 | $59,000 | $- | $68,000 | $- | $68,000 |

<!-- page 192 -->
# APPENDIX

| Draft ID | Project Category | Project Source | County Districts | Project Name | Extent From | Extent To | Project Description | Municipality |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| BP_1467 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 4, District 5, District 7 | Stone Mountain Creek Trail Connection to Rockbridge Road | Stone Mountain Creek/Yellow River | SE DeKalb County Line | New trail facility to improve connectivity | Unincorporated |
| BP_138 | Off-Road | Medline LCI | District 2, District 6 | Wellness Multiuse Path | Medlock Road | Church Street | Wellness Multiuse Path | Unincorporated |
| BP_1468 | Off-Road | DeKalb SPLOST Trails | District 2, District 6 | Zonolite Park Trail Extension | Zonolite Park | Dalon Road NE | New trail facility to improve connectivity | Unincorporated |
| B_211 | On-Road | Medline LCI | District 2, District 4, District 6 | Sycamore Drive Resurfacing and Bike Lanes | Church Street | Grove Street | Pavement resurfacing and bike lanes | Decatur, Unincorporated |
| R_400b | Operational-Corridor | Consultant Team | District 2, District 6 | Briarcliff Road Arterial Managed Lanes | Clifton Road | N Druid Hills Road | Arterial managed lanes and operational improvements; GDOT PI Number M005990 | Brookhaven, Unincorporated |
| R_400a | Operational-Corridor | Consultant Team | District 2, District 6 | Briarcliff Road Operational Improvement | Clifton Road | N Druid Hills Road | Operational improvements to address capacity and safety needs; GDOT GOASIS Project ID: 21-7008 - TE Report | Brookhaven, Unincorporated |
| R_220 | Operational-Corridor | Consultant Team | District 3, District 6, District 7 | Candler/Flat Shoals Road Operational Improvements | I-20 Ramps | I-285 Ramps | Widening at key locations to add raised median with left-turn bays; Pedestrian hybrid signal crossings at 2 locations; GDOT GOASIS Project ID: 22-7078 - Resurfacing striping plans | Unincorporated |
| R_1079 | Operational-Corridor | Metro South CID | District 3, District 6 | Continental Way Operational Improvements | Bouldercrest Road | International Park Drive | Reconstruct and widen to 13 ft. lanes – curb and gutter urban section. Re-align West Fayetteville Road 90 degrees at Constitution Road. Correct deficient drainage at West Fayetteville/Constitution intersection and correct geometrics. Install roadway lighting and sidewalks | Unincorporated |
| R_235 | Operational-Corridor | Kensington LCI TOD | District 5, District 7 | County Jail Driveway Operational Improvements | Camp Road | Memorial Drive | Convert County Jail driveway into a public street | Unincorporated |

<!-- page 193 -->
| Tier Assigned by City | Total Length (mi) | Tier Assigned by County | On GDOT Roadway | 2022 Eng. Cost | 2022 ROW Cost | 2022 Const. Cost | 2022 Other Cost | 2022 Total Cost | “Preliminary 2022 Cost by Others” | “Preliminary 2022 County Cost” |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| | 0.41 | Tier 3 | NO | $63,000 | $32,000 | $624,000 | $- | $718,000 | $- | $718,000 |
| | 0.28 | Tier 3 | NO | $42,000 | $- | $343,000 | $- | $384,000 | $- | $384,000 |
| | 0.09 | Tier 3 | NO | $13,000 | $7,000 | $129,000 | $- | $149,000 | $- | $149,000 |
| Tier 3 | 0.98 | Tier 3 | NO | $42,000 | $- | $165,000 | $- | $206,000 | $148,467 | $57,533 |
| Tier 3 | 1.67 | Tier 3 | YES | $- | $- | $- | $- | $40,500,000 | $32,400,000 | $8,100,000 |
| Tier 3 | 1.67 | Tier 3 | YES | $- | $- | $- | $- | $29,040,000 | $23,232,000 | $5,808,000 |
| | 1.22 | Tier 3 | YES | $1,000,000 | $1,000,000 | $4,500,000 | $1,500,000 | $8,000,000 | $8,000,000 | $- |
| | 0.63 | Tier 3 | NO | $500,000 | $300,000 | $2,000,000 | $300,000 | $3,100,000 | $217,000 | $2,883,000 |
| | 0.25 | Tier 3 | NO | $- | $- | $- | $- | $740,000 | $- | $740,000 |

<!-- page 194 -->
# APPENDIX

| Draft ID | Project Category | Project Source | County Districts | Project Name | Extent From | Extent To | Project Description | Municipality |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| R_223 | Operational-Corridor | Consultant Team | District 4, District 6, District 7 | Ponce De Leon Avenue Operational Improvements | Brockett Road | Rays Road | Access management and operational improvements to address capacity and safety needs including a raised median and turn lane extensions | Tucker, Unincorporated |
| R_219 | Operational-Corridor | Consultant Team | District 3, District 6, District 7 | Rainbow Drive Operational Improvements | Candler Road | Wesley Chapel Road | Access management and operational improvements to address capacity and safety needs including center turn lane treatments and pedestrian crossings | Unincorporated |
| R_405b | Operational-Corridor | Consultant Team | District 5, District 7 | Redan Road Operational Improvements | S Hairston Road | Panola Road | Access management improvements to address capacity and safety needs | Unincorporated |
| R_423a | Operational-Corridor | Consultant Team | District 5, District 7 | Redan Road Operational Improvements | Panola Road | S Deshon Road | Widening at key intersections to address capacity needs | Unincorporated |
| R_422d | Operational-Corridor | Consultant Team | District 4, District 7 | Rockbridge Road Operational Improvement | S Stone Mountain-Lithonia Road | Deshon Road | Operational and safety improvements to address capacity and safety needs including widening at key locations, access management, and pedestrian improvements | Unincorporated |
| R_422a | Operational-Corridor | Consultant Team | District 4, District 6, District 7 | Rockbridge Road Operational Improvements | Memorial Drive | Allgood Road | Operational and safety improvements to address capacity and safety needs including widening at key locations, access management, and pedestrian improvements | Unincorporated |
| R_422b | Operational-Corridor | Consultant Team | District 4, District 7 | Rockbridge Road Operational Improvements | Rowland Road | Orchard Drive | Operational and safety improvements to address capacity and safety needs including widening at key locations, access management, and pedestrian improvements | Unincorporated |
| R_237 | Operational-Corridor | Public Engagement | District 1, District 2, District 6, District 7 | Shallowford Road Operational Improvements | I-85 | Briarcliff Road | Operational and safety improvements to address capacity and safety needs including widening at key locations, access management, and pedestrian improvements; Some retaining walls are required | Unincorporated |

<!-- page 195 -->
| Tier Assigned by City | Total Length (mi) | Tier Assigned by County | On GDOT Roadway | 2022 Eng. Cost | 2022 ROW Cost | 2022 Const. Cost | 2022 Other Cost | 2022 Total Cost | "Preliminary 2022 Cost by Others" | "Preliminary 2022 County Cost" |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| Tier 3 | 0.79 | Tier 3 | NO | $500,000 | $400,000 | $2,000,000 | $600,000 | $3,500,000 | $2,297,423 | $1,202,577 |
|  | 3.17 | Tier 3 | NO | $700,000 | $300,000 | $3,000,000 | $200,000 | $4,200,000 | $- | $4,200,000 |
|  | 1.94 | Tier 3 | NO | $1,800,000 | $3,100,000 | $6,800,000 | $1,200,000 | $12,900,000 | $- | $12,900,000 |
|  | 2.11 | Tier 3 | NO | $1,900,000 | $4,200,000 | $8,400,000 | $1,500,000 | $16,000,000 | $- | $16,000,000 |
|  | 3.62 | Tier 3 | NO | $3,300,000 | $6,900,000 | $14,500,000 | $2,500,000 | $27,200,000 | $- | $27,200,000 |
|  | 1.47 | Tier 3 | NO | $1,400,000 | $3,100,000 | $6,300,000 | $1,200,000 | $12,000,000 | $- | $12,000,000 |
|  | 2.29 | Tier 3 | NO | $2,100,000 | $4,600,000 | $9,200,000 | $1,700,000 | $17,600,000 | $7,920,000 | $9,680,000 |
|  | 0.81 | Tier 3 | NO | $900,000 | $1,000,000 | $3,500,000 | $1,000,000 | $6,400,000 | $- | $6,400,000 |

<!-- page 196 -->
# APPENDIX

| Draft ID | Project Category | Project Source | County Districts | Project Name | Extent From | Extent To | Project Description | Municipality |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| R_233 | Operational- Corridor | Consultant Team | District 4, District 5, District 7 | Stephenson Road Operational Improvements | Rockbridge Road | SR 124 | Operational and safety improvements to address capacity and safety needs including widening at key locations, access management, and pedestrian improvements; Evaluate roundabout at intersection S Deshon Road | Unincorporated |
| R_119 | Operational- Intersection | 2014 Transportation Plan | District 2, District 6 | Briarcliff Road at Clifton Road Intersection Improvement | Clifton Road | | Intersection improvements including turn lanes and signal timing to reduce vehicular delay (and possibly a realignment of the intersection from Briarcliff Road to Clifton Road) and pedestrian improvements as needed | Unincorporated |
| R_117 | Operational- Intersection | 2014 Transportation Plan | District 3, District 6 | Flat Shoals Road at Brannen Road Intersection Improvement | Brannen Road | | Feasibility study needed to examine the appropriateness of a roundabout | Unincorporated |
| R_115 | Operational- Intersection | 2014 Transportation Plan | District 3, District 6 | Flat Shoals Road at Cook Road Intersection Improvement | Cook Road | | Feasibility study needed to examine the appropriateness of a roundabout | Unincorporated |
| R_905 | Operational- Intersection | Consultant Team | District 2, District 6 | Frazier Road at Wilson Road Rail Intersection Improvement | Wilson Road | | At-grade crossing safety and operational improvements; Existing quiet zone; Sidewalk improvements | Unincorporated |
| R_114 | Operational- Intersection | 2014 Transportation Plan | District 3, District 6 | Gresham Road at Cook Road Intersection Improvement | Cook Road | | Feasibility study needed to examine the appropriateness of a roundabout | Unincorporated |
| R_146 | Operational- Intersection | Consultant Team | District 3, District 6 | Lloyd Road at Flat Shoals Road Intersection Improvement | Flat Shoals Road | | Feasibility study needed to examine the appropriateness of a roundabout | Unincorporated |
| R_111 | Operational- Intersection | 2014 Transportation Plan | District 4, District 6 | Memorial Drive at N Hairston Road Intersection Improvement | N Hairston Road | | Safety and operational intersection improvements | Unincorporated |

<!-- page 197 -->
| Tier Assigned by City | Total Length (mi) | Tier Assigned by County | On GDOT Roadway | 2022 Eng. Cost | 2022 ROW Cost | 2022 Const. Cost | 2022 Other Cost | 2022 Total Cost | “Preliminary 2022 Cost by Others” | “Preliminary 2022 County Cost” |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| | 3.50 | Tier 3 | NO | $1,000,000 | $800,000 | $4,000,000 | $800,000 | $6,600,000 | $- | $6,600,000 |
| | | Tier 3 | YES | $923,000 | $867,000 | $9,218,000 | $- | $11,005,000 | $7,703,500 | $3,301,500 |
| | | Tier 3 | YES | $230,000 | $- | $2,305,000 | $- | $2,535,000 | $1,774,500 | $760,500 |
| | | Tier 3 | YES | $230,000 | $- | $2,305,000 | $- | $2,535,000 | $1,774,500 | $760,500 |
| | | Tier 3 | NO | $500,000 | $700,000 | $2,200,000 | $200,000 | $3,600,000 | $- | $3,600,000 |
| | | Tier 3 | YES | $230,000 | $- | $2,305,000 | $- | $2,535,000 | $1,774,500 | $760,500 |
| | | Tier 3 | NO | $350,000 | $300,000 | $1,500,000 | $200,000 | $2,350,000 | $- | $2,350,000 |
| | | Tier 3 | YES | $42,000 | $- | $411,000 | $- | $452,000 | $316,400 | $135,600 |

<!-- page 198 -->
# APPENDIX

| Draft ID | Project Category | Project Source | County Districts | Project Name | Extent From | Extent To | Project Description | Municipality |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| R_1497 | Operational-Intersection | Metro South CID | District 3, District 6 | Moreland Avenue/ Moreland Industrial Boulevard Intersection Improvements | Moreland Industrial Boulevard | | Widening Moreland Avenue to include a 12-ft center turn lane and dedicated turn lanes on NB Moreland Avenue for Moreland Industrial Boulevard traffic. Install right turn lane with large turning radii on Moreland Industrial Boulevard to accommodate truck turning movements onto Moreland Avenue. Increase lateral offset on Moreland Industrial Boulevard. Determine warrants for pedestrian signals along Moreland Avenue at the intersecting roads. Install traffic signs and signals as appropriate, including flashing sign for SB traffic to signal left turns from Moreland Industrial Boulevard and advanced signage to signal an upcoming intersection with crossing traffic (along Moreland Avenue). | Unincorporated |
| R_158 | Operational-Intersection | Consultant Team | District 2, District 6 | Scott Boulevard at Decatur Road Intersection Safety Evaluation | N Decatur Road | | Access management and pedestrian crossing improvements to address safety needs; GDOT GOASIS Project ID: 21-7063 - Crash Screening Performed | Unincorporated |
| R_1409 | Operational-Intersection | DeKalb SPLOST | District 5, District 7 | South Hairston Drive at Statler Drive Intersection Improvement | Statler Drive | | Within limits of South Hairston study. R-Cut or other alternative options | Unincorporated |
| R_134 | Operational-Intersection | Consultant Team | District 5, District 7 | Turner Hill Road at Covington Highway Intersection Improvement | Covington Highway | | Traffic signal upgrade, extend turn lanes for queueing for RR crossing | Unincorporated |

<!-- page 199 -->
| Tier Assigned by City | Total Length (mi) | Tier Assigned by County | On GDOT Roadway | 2022 Eng. Cost | 2022 ROW Cost | 2022 Const. Cost | 2022 Other Cost | 2022 Total Cost | “Preliminary 2022 Cost by Others” | “Preliminary 2022 County Cost” |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
|  |  | Tier 3 | YES | $236,000 | $294,000 | $1,960,000 | $686,000 | $3,176,000 | $2,636,080 | $539,920 |
|  |  | Tier 3 | YES | $1,200,000 | $800,000 | $4,000,000 | $500,000 | $6,500,000 | $4,550,000 | $1,950,000 |
|  |  | Tier 3 | NO | $21,000 | $- | $260,000 | $- | $281,000 | $- | $281,000 |
|  |  | Tier 3 | YES | $600,000 | $400,000 | $2,000,000 | $500,000 | $3,500,000 | $2,450,000 | $1,050,000 |

<!-- page 200 -->
# APPENDIX

| Draft ID | Project Category | Project Source | County Districts | Project Name | Extent From | Extent To | Project Description | Municipality |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| R_144 | Operational-Intersection | Consultant Team | District 4, District 6 | Village Square Lane at Hambrick Road Intersection Improvement | Hambrick Road | | Potential RCUT at a few locations with some vegetation clearing for sight distance along 0.7 mile corridor | Unincorporated |
| R_1065 | Operational-Intersection | Metro South CID | District 3, District 6 | Westside Place-Constitution Road-International Park Drive Roundabout | Constiution Road | | A truck roundabout to correct side street offsets and improve truck flow | Unincorporated |

<!-- page 201 -->
| Tier Assigned by City | Total Length (mi) | Tier Assigned by County | On GDOT Roadway | 2022 Eng. Cost | 2022 ROW Cost | 2022 Const. Cost | 2022 Other Cost | 2022 Total Cost | “Preliminary 2022 Cost by Others” | “Preliminary 2022 County Cost” |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| | | Tier 3 | NO | $150,000 | $50,000 | $600,000 | $50,000 | $850,000 | $- | $850,000 |
| | | Tier 3 | NO | $274,000 | $342,000 | $2,280,000 | $798,000 | $3,694,000 | $3,066,020 | $627,980 |
| | | | | | | | | | | |

<!-- page 202 -->
APPENDIX

# DETAILED TECHNOLOGY RECOMMENDATIONS

| Category | Time Period | Category |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **Programmatic Projects** | "Year 1-6 (Short Term)" | Develop an Asset Management Program that includes all traffic signal and transportation technology assets |
| | | Inventory all existing traffic signal and transportation technology assets |
| | | Develop a technology focused Lifecycle Replacement Plan |
| | | Develop a Communications Master Plan |
| | | Develop a transportation focused Data Management Plan |
| | | Develop and implement a Configuration and Change Management Plan |
| | | Begin implementing elements of the Asset Management Program |
| | | Planning and development of procurement documents for a transportation focused Asset Management System (AMS) |
| | | **Total:** |
| | "Year 7-12 (Tier 2 Considerations)" | Complete implementing elements of the Asset Management Program |
| | | Advertise, procure, deploy, and integrate a transportation focused AMS solution |
| | | Implement the transportation focused Data Management Plan |
| | | Update Configuration and Change Management Plan to incorporate new technologies and change management requirements |
| | "Year 13+ (Tier 3 Considerations)" | Review/update individual elements of the Asset Management Program to account for current priorities and the evolution of technology |
| | | Identify areas for collaboration and develop partnerships with agencies to streamline traffic operations across the transportation network |
| | | Identify areas for process improvement and implement automation where possible to streamline program operations |

<!-- page 203 -->
| Budget | Year 1 & 2 | Year 3 & 4 | Year 5 & 6 |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| $100,000 | $100,000 | $- | $- |
| $100,000 | $- | $100,000 | $- |
| $50,000 | $- | $50,000 | $- |
| $100,000 | $100,000 | $- | $- |
| $50,000 | $- | $50,000 | $- |
| $50,000 | | $50,000 | |
| $50,000 | $- | $50,000 | |
| $100,000 | $- | $- | $100,000 |
| **$600,000** | **$200,000** | **$300,000** | **$100,000** |

Year 7-12

Year 13+

<!-- page 204 -->
# APPENDIX

| Category | Time Period | Category |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **Infrastructure Projects** | “Year 1-6 (Short Term)” | Traffic signal technology upgrades (e.g., cabinets, controllers, and vehicle detection) |
| | | Pedestrian traffic signal equipment upgrades |
| | | Communications network buildout (fiber and cellular) |
| | | Deployment of CCTV cameras at critical locations and intersections |
| | | **Total:** |
| | “Year 7-12 (Mid Term Considerations)” | Traffic signal technology upgrades and life cycle replacements (e.g., cabinets, controllers, vehicle detection, pedestrian signals, and CCTV cameras) |
| | | Communications network equipment upgrades and life cycle replacements |
| | | Planning for buildout of a new/upgraded Traffic Management Center (TMC) |
| | | Conduct a network bandwidth analysis to assess future needs associated with new technologies included connected and automated vehicles (CAV) |
| | | Assess maintenance needs associated with CAV infrastructure |
| | “Year 13+ (Long Term Considerations)” | Traffic signal technology upgrades and life cycle replacements (e.g., cabinets, controllers, vehicle detection, pedestrian signals, and CCTV cameras) |
| | | Communications network equipment upgrades and lifecycle replacements |
| | | Buildout of a new/upgraded TMC |
| | | Assess the impact of CAV technologies on traffic signal design standards and specifications and update as necessary |
| | | Assess network design requirements and updates to network standards based on changes in communications technologies |

<!-- page 205 -->
| Budget | Year 1 & 2 | Year 3 & 4 | Year 5 & 6 |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| $500,000 | $100,000 | $200,000 | $200,000 |
| | | | |
| $200,000 | | $100,000 | $100,000 |
| $400,000 | | $200,000 | $200,000 |
| $100,000 | | $50,000 | $50,000 |
| **$1,200,000** | **$100,000** | **$550,000** | **$550,000** |

Year 7-12

Year 13+

<!-- page 206 -->
# APPENDIX

| Category | Time Period | Category |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **Operations Projects** | “Year 1-6 (Short Term)” | Develop/update traffic signal timing plans along critical corridors |
| | | Integrate traffic signals into GDOT arterial ATMS software |
| | | Integrate traffic signals into GDOT ATSPM and SigOps Metrics software |
| | | Develop and implement an arterial Performance Management Program to support data driven traffic operations |
| | | Identify and implement technology focused safety project(s) |
| | | **Total:** |
| | “Year 7-12 (Mid Term Considerations)” | Continue to develop/update traffic signal timing plans on critical corridors |
| | | Continue to Integrate traffic signals into GDOT arterial ATMS software |
| | | Continue to integrate traffic signals into GDOT ATSPM/SigOps Metrics software |
| | | Integrate CV technologies associated with smart sidewalks (i.e. complete streets, pedestrian/bicycle detection) |
| | | Consider the use and integration of CV data to provide performance data that can be used in the development of updated traffic signal timing plans |
| | | Assess the impacts of technology on traffic signal operations |
| | “Year 13+ (Long Term Considerations)” | Develop complete street guidelines for “smart” streets with connected pedestrian/bicycle detection |
| | | Develop guidelines for the inclusion of exclusive bike lanes with the design of dedicated AV lanes and facilities |
| | | Assess the opportunity for dedicated AV lanes on major arterials |
| | | Conduct an assessment on the impacts of CAV technologies on transit infrastructure such as stops and park-and-ride locations |
| | | Revise design requirements to accommodate more AV transit vehicles |

<!-- page 207 -->
| Budget | Year 1 & 2 | Year 3 & 4 | Year 5 & 6 |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| $250,000 | $50,000 | $100,000 | $100,000 |
| $150,000 | $50,000 | $50,000 | $50,000 |
| $150,000 | $50,000 | $50,000 | $50,000 |
| | | | |
| $100,000 | | $100,000 | |
| | | | |
| $150,000 | $- | $50,000 | $100,000 |
| **$800,000** | **$150,000** | **$350,000** | **$300,000** |

Year 7-12

Year 13+

<!-- page 208 -->
# APPENDIX

| Category | Time Period | Category |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **Advanced Functionality Projects** | "Year 1-6 (Short Term)" | Identify and implement traffic responsive (TR) or adaptive traffic signal operations at critical intersections or along high-volume traffic corridors |
| | | Identify and implement transit signal priority (TSP) along critical transportation corridors |
| | | Develop a CAV Market and Opportunity Plan (evaluate current state of CAV, identify potential CAV project patterns, develop CAV deployment strategy) |
| | | Identify and implement CAV pilot deployment project (pedestrian safety, RR and EVP safety, or freight progression) |
| | | Planning for deployment for one or more Smart Corridor projects |
| | | **Total:** |
| | "Year 7-12 (Mid Term Considerations)" | Consider additional projects to implement advanced operational strategies including TR, adaptive, and TSP along critical corridors |
| | | Implement Smart Corridor Project(s) |
| | | Plan for dynamic transit routing and stops in response to real time or near-real time ridership needs |
| | | Consider opportunities with unconventional intersections and impacts to access management with mixed fleet of legacy, CV, and AV. |
| | "Year 13+ (Long Term Considerations)" | Consider additional projects to implement advanced operational strategies including TR, adaptive, and TSP along critical corridors |
| | | Implement additional Smart Corridor Project(s) |
| | | Consider impacts to roadway design as freight delivery shifts to leverage more AV technologies (long-haul or local distribution) |
| | | Consider impacts to parking demand based on the conversation of private transportation fleet to more AV |

<!-- page 209 -->
| Budget | Year 1 & 2 | Year 3 & 4 | Year 5 & 6 |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| $200,000 | $- | $100,000 | $100,000 |
| | | | |
| $200,000 | | $100,000 | $100,000 |
| $100,000 | $- | $100,000 | |
| | | | |
| $150,000 | $- | $50,000 | $100,000 |
| $150,000 | $- | $50,000 | $100,000 |
| **$800,000** | **$-** | **$400,000** | **$400,000** |

Year 7-12

Year 13+

<!-- page 210 -->
# ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

### DeKalb County Elected Leadership
Michael Thurmond, CEO
Robert Patrick, District 1 Commissioner
Jeff Rader, District 2 Commissioner
Larry Johnson, District 3 Commissioner
Steve Bradshaw, District 4 Commissioner
Mereda Davis Johnson, District 5 Commissioner
Edward “Ted” Terry, Super District 6 Commissioner
Lorraine Cochran-Johnson, Super District 7 Commissioner

### Project Management Team
DeKalb County Department of Planning and Sustainability
DeKalb County Department of Public Works, Transportation Division
Atlanta Regional Commission

### Transportation and Land Use Stakeholder Committee/Partners
City of Atlanta; City of Avondale Estates; City of Brookhaven; City of Chamblee; City of Clarkston; City of Decatur; City of Doraville; City of Dunwoody; City of Lithonia; City of Pine Lake; City of Stone Mountain; City of Stonecrest; City of Tucker; Decide DeKalb; DeKalb Chamber of Commerce; DeKalb Chief Operating Officer’s Office; DeKalb County Department of Community Development; DeKalb County Department of Parks, Recreation, and Cultural Affairs; DeKalb County Department of Roads and Drainage; DeKalb County Department of Watershed Management; DeKalb County Department of Finance; DeKalb County Department of Geographic Information System; DeKalb Peachtree Airport; DeKalb County School District; Chamblee-Doraville Community Improvement District; East Metro Community Improvement District; Metro South Community Improvement District; Perimeter Community Improvement Districts; Tucker Northlake Community Improvement District; Tucker Summit Community Improvement District; Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT); Atlanta-Region Transit Link Authority (ATL); Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA)

### Consultant Team
Kimley-Horn
The Collaborative Firm (TCF)
Vanasse Hangen Brustlin (VHB)
RDG Planning & Design
Perez Planning + Design (PP+D)
Sycamore Consulting
Center for Pan Asian Community Services (CPACS)