Brookhaven Bike Ped Trail Plan

BR
Bicycle, Pedestrian, & Trail Plan
KHAVEN
DRAFT | December 2015
Attachment: Brookhaven Bike Ped Trail Draft 12-30-15_RJM Comments (2265 : Brookhaven Bicycle, Pedestrian & Trail Plan (Draft) Review)
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 8
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 9
E.2.a

Prepared by:
Special Thanks to the Stakeholder

Committee
Pond & Company

3500 Parkway Lane, Suite 600
Norcross, GA 30092
www.pondco.com
678.336.7740
Shane Boyer
Patrick Bradshaw
Kevin Fitzpatrick
David Fournier
Mari Geier
Jennifer Harper
Jack Honderd
Arthur Kennedy
Michael Lennon
Ari Levine
Sean Pharr
Byron Rushing
Meg Strickler
Gerri Vereen
With Assistance from:

from
Center Forward, Inc.

376 Nelson Street, Suite G1
Atlanta, GA 30313
404.401.8884
Prepared For:
And Brookhaven Elected Officials

John Ernst Mayor
Linley Jones City Council District 1
John Park City Council District 2
Bates Mattison City Council District 3
Joe Gebbia City Council District 4
Rebecca Chase Williams Mayor (2015-2016)
J. Max Davis Mayor (2012-2015)
City of Brookhaven
4362 Peachtree Road
Brookhaven, GA 30319
www.brookhavenga.gov
Packet Pg. 10
BR
KHAVEN
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 11
E.2.a
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION
Background 1-1
Purpose of the Plan 1-3
Planning Process 1-3
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
Community Input 2-1
Stakeholder Committee 2-7
DATA COLLECTION & EXISTING CONDITIONS

Previous Plans & Studies
Neighboring Community Initiatives
Existing Transportation Network
Policy Review
Other Guidance
3-1
3-3
3-6
3-8
3-8
NEEDS ASSESSMENT
Active Transportation Corridor Analysis 4-1
Target Corridors 4-7
Feasibility Review 4-7
RECOMMENDATIONS
Policy & Regulation Initiatives 5-1
Project Recommendations 5-6
APPENDICES
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
Community Survey
Community Meeting #1
Public Comments
Stakeholder Committee Meetings
Existing Brookhaven Policies
Suitability Analysis
Feasibility Analysis
Project Prioritization
Conceptual Drawings
Packet Pg. 12
BR
KHAVEN
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 13
E.2.a
List of Figures
Figure 1.1 Brookhaven Community
Figure 2.1 Conceptual Vision
Figure 3.1 Existing Bike, Ped, & Trail Network
Figure 4.1 Attraction Analysis
Figure 4.2 Demand Analysis
Figure 4.3 Character Analysis
Figure 4.4 Overall Active Transportation Corridor Analysis
Figure 4.5 Target Corridors
Figure 5.1 Short and Mid-Term Project Recommendations
Figure 5.2 Long-Term Project Recommendations
Figure 5.3 All Project Recommendations
Figure 5.4 Bicycle Plan
Figure 5.5 Pedestrian Plan
Figure 5.6 Trail Plan
1-2
2-4
3-7
4-2
4-3
4-4
4-6
4-8
5-16
5-17
5-18
5-19
5-20
5-21
List of Tables
Table 2.1 Survey Responses
Table 2.2 Top Indicated Obstacles to Walking & Biking
Table 2.3 - Top Indicated Corridors by Group
Table 5.1 - Project Recommendations
2-1
2-2
2-5
5-8
Packet Pg. 14
BR
KHAVEN
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 15
Chapter One
INTRODUCTION
Background
Purpose of the Plan

Planning Process
E.2.a
BR
KHAVEN
Packet Pg. 16
Introduction
Background
The City of Brookhaven was incorporated in
2012 from twelve square miles in northwestern
unincorporated DeKalb County, Georgia.
Brookhaven sits to the northeast of Downtown
and Midtown Atlanta and is generally bounded
on the west by the Cities of Atlanta and Sandy
Springs, on the north by Interstate 285, on the
east by the City of Chamblee, and on the south
by Interstate 85, with a small, predominately
office and commercial area located south of
Interstate 85. A map of the community is shown
in Figure 1- 1.
Brookhaven is largely an inner suburb within the
metropolitan Atlanta region, with an estimated
50,603 residents in the year 2013, according to
the US Census. The city has a variety of
housing types, many of which have been
redeveloped in recent years.
Commercial
developments is mostly focused along major
corridors such as Buford Highway and
Peachtree Road. The city is also home to many
neighborhood parks and schools, which are a
core aspect of the citys character.
alignment which runs parallel to Peachtree

Road, and limits connectivity between the citys
northern and southern sections. This alignment
serves both long-distance freight trains and
urban rail provided by the Metropolitan Atlanta
Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA). MARTA has
an urban rail station at Brookhaven which
includes a stop in Brookhaven near the
intersections of Peachtree Road with North
Druid Hills Road and Dresden Drive, which has
recently become the focus for a planned Transit
Oriented Development (TOD),
The city is already served by some treatments
designed for bicyclists and pedestrians. Bike
lanes and shared lane markings (commonly
called sharrows) are present on Caldwell
Road while a multi-use trail connects Blackburn
Park and Murphy Candler Park along Ashford
Dunwoody Road.
The city also has an
extensive sidewalk network that has been
inventoried in great detail. In order to continue
to enable and encourage active transportation,
the City of Brookhaven undertook this Bike,
Pedestrian, and Trail Plan in order to create a
more balanced transportation network by
increasing access to pedestrian and bicycle
facilities.
Brookhavens transportation system features

many major roadways and some existing
pedestrian and bicycling infrastructure. The city
is crossed by both Buford Highway (SR 13) in
the south and Peachtree Road (SR 141) near its
center. Brookhaven is partially bounded by
Clairmont Road (SR 155) and Chamblee
Dunwoody Road to the east. Brookhaven can
also be accessed by Johnson Ferry Road and
Ashford Dunwoody Road, both of which
provide access to the Perimeter Area, a major
employment center located immediately to the
north. The city is bisected by a railroad
1-1
Packet Pg. 17
E.2.a
Figure 1-1
DRA FT | December 2015
E.2.a
BR
KHAVEN
Packet Pg. 18
1 -2
Purpose of the Plan

The goal of this plan is to develop a list of
implementable policies and transportation
projects aimed at accommodating all active
transportation users through a combination of
technical analysis, best practices in planning,
and engagement with the community. This plan
examines existing conditions in the city, and
identifies locations where improvements for
bicyclists and pedestrians are most needed or
could serve the largest demand. Based on this
potential, a variety of context-sensitive
improvements are considered throughout the
city, and a vision is created that will build upon
Brookhavens existing network to establish a
thorough network of trails, lanes, and paths for
transportation and recreation.
Planning Process
The planning process, as indicated in the
graphic below, began in the Spring of 2015 and
concluded in late 2015. In general, there were
two basic mechanisms used to create the plan:
(1) a community engagement effort to ascertain
the communities vision and individual attitudes
regarding proposed investments (documented
in Chapter 2 Community Engagement)

Engagement and
(2) a technical analysis comprised of several
steps.
Initial steps in the technical analysis comprised
an analysis of Existing Conditions (documented
in Chapter 3 Data Collection
Collection & Existing
Conditions)
Conditions followed by a system appraisal to
determine the suitability of various corridors
within the community for investment and a
subsequent feasibility phase to identify
potential improvements (documented in
Chapter 4 Needs Assessment
Assessment).
ssment In the final
step of the technical analysis, the potential
improvements were analyzed further to develop
recommendations and associated information
(documented
in
Chapter
5
Recommendations).
Recommendations
In general, this report is organized to be
succinct and provide a general documentation
of the process utilized to develop the
recommendations, which in turn, are
documented with more detail. In addition,
several technical appendices are provided with
this report to add further detail in the planning
process.
The Planning Process

SPRING 2015
SUMMER 2015
FALL 2015
PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT
STAKEHOLDER ADVISORY & PARTNER AGENCIES
TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
EXISTING CONDITIONS
SYSTEM APPRAISAL
NETWORK DEVELOPMENT
Field Inventory
Review of Other Planning Efforts
Review Community Conditions
Suitability Methodology
Suitability Evaluation
Corridor Feasibility Review

Identification of Improvements
RECOMMENDATIONS
Prioritization
Cost Estimates
Funding
Documentation
1-3
Packet Pg. 19
E.2.a
Chapter Two
Community Input
Stakeholder Committee
BR
KHAVEN
Packet Pg. 20
E.2.a
Community
Engagement
The plan effort included a significant amount of

community engagement, including surveys,
visioning meetings, and discussions with area
stakeholders. The communitys input was
incorporated in several ways, from the creation
of an overall vision for the future of the
community to the specific selection of
transportation recommendations.
Other
sections of this report will clarify how
community input was directly used as part of
the planning process, while this chapter
summarizes the engagement process itself.
Community Input
The public played a direct role in the creation of
the plan and its recommendations, through the
use of a survey instrument, ongoing
communication with the study team, and
various community meetings.
Community Survey
At the onset of the study process, a community
survey was administered through the City of
Brookhaven website to help guide the overall
planning process. This survey available in
both English and Spanish - asked respondents
a variety of questions regarding their use,
desire, and overall opinions regarding
investments in pedestrian, bicycle, and trail
facilities. Over the course of the study, a total
of 394 responses were received, over 90
percent who indicated they were residents of
Brookhaven. This section summarizes the
major themes associated with the survey
results, while the responses to all survey
questions can be viewed in Appendix A.
A
The community survey was conducted on the Citys website
In regards to general support for bicycle,

pedestrian, and trail facilities, respondents
indicated the following:
91 percent of respondents believe

Brookhaven needs more pedestrian
facilities
85 percent of respondents believe
Brookhaven needs more bicycling
facilities
Additionally, as shown in Table 2.1 and the

corresponding image below, respondents were
asked to indicate what part of Brookhaven they
resided, in an effort to understand how well the
survey represented a cross-section of the
community.
Table 2.1
Survey Responses
Percentage
of City
Zone
Residents
(2010
Census)
1
17%
2
14%
3
11%
4
44%
5
14%
Percentage
of All Survey
Respondents
20%
16%
19%
34%
2%
2-1
Packet Pg. 21
E.2.a
BR
KHAVEN
Respondents were asked a series of questions
about what types of trips they currently (or
would like to) take through either walking or
biking. These questions heavily suggested that
respondents did not see walking or biking as a
viable commuting option for primary work trips.
Rather, respondents primarily saw the
advantages of walking and biking for either
recreational purposes or to run errands in shortdistance trips near their homes.
On that note, respondents were asked what
they believed were the major obstacles to
walking and biking, as indicated in Table 2.2.
2.2
Table 2.2
Top Indicated Obstacles to Walking & Biking
Top Obstacles to Walking
1. There is nowhere to walk along the
streets I would take (missing sidewalks)
2. Walking along the streets I would take is
uncomfortable because of the amount of
traffic on them
3. Where I want to go is too far to walk
4. Lack of storefronts, restaurants, and
other activities
5. It is difficult to cross streets safely
Top Obstacles to Biking
1. Biking on the streets I would take is
uncomfortable because of the amount of
traffic on them
2. I do not have anywhere to safely store my
bike at work, shops, or other places I travel
to
3. Even though where I want to go is
nearby, there is no direct route and I have
to bike far out of my way
4. Lack of storefronts, restaurants, and
other activity
5. I do not own a bike
Respondents were additionally asked their

comfort level with riding a bicycle as indicated
in the graphic below, in an effort to determine
how many respondents were regular on-road
cyclists.
Bicycling Comfort Level

11.42%
23.60%
34.01%
30.96%
Very confident on almost any street or trail

Comfortable on most streets and trails
60%
Only comfortable on a few streets and trails
56%
Not comfortable at all
41%
34%
34%
%
75%
24%
Finally, to help guide the process of what type

of biking and pedestrian facilities should be
considered, respondents were asked to
indicate their preferences for different
improvements and treatments. As indicated in
the graphic below, responses showed a clear
preference for multi-use trails that could be
utilized by both pedestrians and bicyclists.
Preferred Types of Investments
21%
19%
Other
16%
Cycle Tracks
Sidewalks
Multi-Use Trails
The community survey was valuable to

understanding the preferred treatments for
bicycle and pedestrian travel.
Exclusive Bicycle Lanes

Sharrows
Bicycle Boulevards
0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00%
2 -2
Packet Pg. 22
E.2.a
The first community meeting was also held at
the onset of the study. Held at the Lynwood
Recreation Center in Lynwood Park on
Tuesday, May 19, 2015, attendance at the
meeting was strong with over 70 attendees
signing in. As community members arrived,
they were presented with an open house format
in which they were asked to indicate their
preferences on several items. Participants
were asked the same question indicated on the
survey
regarding
preferred
types
of
investments, also indicating a strong
preference for multi-use trails.
favored clusters indicated around the

Brookhaven
MARTA
station,
Town
Brookhaven, Brookhaven Village, and the area
near Blackburn Park.
Following a formal presentation in which the

study team and planning process was
introduced, attendees broke into six groups
and participated in a table top exercise to help
establish an overall vision for the plan. Initially,
participants were asked popular locations for
travel, followed by identifying primary routes
they use to get to those locations currently.
Based on this network, the participants were
asked to create a vision for a walking and biking
network in the community. Following the
completion of this exercise, each group
presented their vision to the other groups.
Consistently emerging from this process, was
the concept that eventually became known as
the spine in which a north-south axis of
pedestrian and biking facilities would connect
the various points of interest in the community,
complimented by a series of loops that would
feed into this major system. A diagram of this
concept is provided in Figure 2.1.
2.1
Participants were also asked to mark a variety
of maps of the community to indicate
destinations in and around Brookhaven they
would want to travel by walking or biking. Many
locations were indicated with commonly
A detailed summary of this meeting is provided

in Appendix B.
B
The communitys work resulted in the
conceptual vision for bicycle and pedestrian
connectivity.
2-3
Packet Pg. 23
E.2.a
Figure 2.1
BR
KHAVEN
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 24
2 -4
The second community meeting was also held
at the Lynwood Recreation Center in Lynwood
Park, taking place on Wednesday, September
30, 2015. At this point in the planning process,
the study team had utilized a technical process
to develop a map of candidate corridors for
bicycle, pedestrian, and/or trail improvements.
The intial part of the meeting took the form of
an open house in which these candidate
corridors were on display and attendees could
discuss their thoughts and feelings on the study
teams findings with study team members one
on one. Subsequent to a formal presentation in
which the technical process to develop those
candidate corridors was shared, meeting
attendees broke out into three groups to
discuss the benefits of the various corridors
indicated. In concluding the meeting, each
group was asked to collectively determine the
most desired corridors for investment, as
shown in Table 2.3.
2.3
A detailed summary of this meeting is provided

in Appendix C.
Table 2.3
Top Indicated Corridors by Group
Group
Corridor
1
Connection across
O
Peachtree Road
Ashford-Dunwoody Road
O
between Blackburn and
Murphey Candler Parks
O
Peachtree Road
Druid Hills Road
O
Dresden Road
Connection to Keswick
O
Park
O
Lenox Park Boulevard
O
Caldwell Road
Nancy Creek Trail
Osborne Road
Peachtree Creek Trail
Clairmont Road
Group
2
Group
3
O
O
O
O
O
O
2-5
Packet Pg. 25
E.2.a
BR
KHAVEN
Other Outreach Events
The third and final community meeting was held

at Brookhaven City Hall on Tuesday, December
8, 2015. The entire meeting was an open
format where the study team displayed the
various recommendations of the plan to solicit
any final comment or thoughts before finalizing
the plan.
The study team attended several other events

which provided opportunities for the
community to contribute to the plan.
Materials and comments received at this

meeting are provided in Appendix D.
Brookhaven Bolt
On May 16, 2015, the Brookhaven Bolt
Community Association held its annual 5k race
to support Ashford Park Elementary School.
Over 1,700 runners were registered for the race
and the Post Race Family and Fun Festival.
Among the various sponsors and vendors at the
festival was an information tent where study
team members were available to discuss the
plan and bring attention to the then-upcoming
first Community Meeting. Flyers advertising
that meeting were distributed and attendees
were asked to indicate their favorite
Brookhaven travel destinations on an available
map.
2 -6
Packet Pg. 26
E.2.a
Town Hall Meeting
Stakeholder Committee
On May 28, 2015, the study team participated

in a Mayor and City Council Town Hall. A brief
summary of the planning process was provided
with an orientation to expectations of the plan
and the schedule. A question & answer
session with a study team member followed.
The plan was also benefitted by the creation of

a Stakeholder Committee, comprising City
Council appointments of interested residents,
business owners, and community leaders. This
committee worked with the study team to
provide more in-depth conversation of specific
planning initiatives and to vet draft
recommendations.
City Council Workshop

On November 17, 2015, the study team
presented the study process and initial findings
to the Mayor and City Council at one of their
workshops. A question & answer session with
the study team followed.
The committee met three times:
General Communication
At the first stakeholder meeting, an initial series

of candidate corridors had been developed
based on the visioning exercise conducted with
the general public at the first community
meeting. During the course of this meeting, the
stakeholder committee was briefed on a variety
of research and findings that had been
conducted to that point, including summaries of
the first community meeting and the community
survey.
Additionally, the study team and
committee reviewed through the selected
corridors using aerial and street photography to
discuss their applicability and the possible
infrastructure treatments that could be
considered.
Additionally,
an
e-mail
address
(bikepedtrailplan@brookhavenga.gov)
was
created
where
citizens
could
make
recommendations and provide comments
directly to the study team. The study team
periodically reviewed these comments and
where appropriate, responded with follow up
discussion.
The comments received are provided in
Appendix E.
E
July 28, 2015

September 17, 2015
November 19, 2015
At the second stakeholder meeting, the study

team briefed the committee on a feasibility
review that had been conducted on the
candidate corridors and resulting initial
recommendations for treatments to consider.
The majority of the meeting focused on the
overall nature of the recommendations being
made and a discussion of balancing a grand
vision with an incremental and pragmatic
approach to implementation. Similar to what
was asked of the general public at Community
Meeting #2, the committee was also asked to
indicate the corridors they felt were most
important to implement. Finally, a discussion
was held on policies that could be applicable to
2-7
Packet Pg. 27
E.2.a
BR
KHAVEN
E.2.a
pedestrian
issues
in
the
bicycle and
community.
At the third and final stakeholder meeting, the

study
team
had
prepared
refined
recommendations based on the second
stakeholder meeting and information collected
during Community Meeting #2.
These
recommendations also included consideration
of implementation phasing, prioritization, and
costing and discussion revolved around any
additional refinements that would appropriate.
Other topics included typical sections of select
corridors that were presented for discussion
and a follow-up conversation on applicable
policies for the community to consider.
Summaries of these meetings are provided in
Appendix F.
F
Working with the stakeholder committee

allowed the study team to dig in deeply to
project recommendations and policies,
expanding the value of the information
gained from the general public. This
allowed the study team to detail and
complete the concept vision into plan
recommendations and prioritization.
2 -8
Packet Pg. 28
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 29
Chapter Three
DATA COLLECTION &

EXISTING CONDITIONS
Policy Review
Other Guidance
E.2.a
BR
KHAVEN
Packet Pg. 30
State of Good RepairRepair To provide for

regular
maintenance
of
streets,
highways, sidewalks, bike lanes and
paths,
other
transportation-related
facilities to protect the Citys investment
in quality transportation infrastructure.
Economic Prosperity
Prosperitysperity To provide the
needed mobility and access for workers,
customers, goods, and services that are
essential to protecting the Citys
economic competitiveness within the
Atlanta region.
Public HealthHealth To plan and develop an

active transport system that contributes
positively to the health of residents of all
ages by providing opportunities to walk,
bicycle,
and
access
public
transportation.
Existing
Conditions
The technical elements of the planning effort

began with a data collection phase and
assessment of existing conditions.
This
chapter documents this process, including
review of previous plans and studies,
coordination with neighboring communities,
assessment of the existing transportation
network and community, a review of existing
policies, and adherence to general best
practices.

Several recent plans have emphasized
revamping the transportation network of
Brookhaven to better serve both choice users
as well as dependent populations.
The
following is a summary of the findings of these
recent plans.
Brookhaven Comprehensive Transportation
Plan
The recent Comprehensive Transportation Plan
(CTP), completed in 2014, summarizes
recommendations in the following goals:
SafetySafety To plan, develop, and manage a

multimodal transportation system that is
safe for all users.
Mobility and AccessAccess To efficiently and

affordably connect all City residents with
neighborhoods,
workplaces,
commercial areas, medical/wellness
centers, civic places, educational
venues, and green spaces to maintain a
highly desirable quality of life.
Four out of five of these goals directly

emphasize support for bolstered active
transportation options within Brookhaven, so
improvement in this regard is clearly a priority
for the city.
3-1
Packet Pg. 31
E.2.a
BR
KHAVEN
Brookhaven Comprehensive Plan
The Comprehensive
Plan (2014) echoes
the goals of the CTP
in a policy statement
that aims to achieve
greater
walkability,
bikeability, and overall
mobility for day-today activities through
transportation
and
land
use
coordination. It also recognizes a need to
promote infrastructure and design that support
health and exercise in the community. One of
the
top
priorities
identified
by
the
Comprehensive Plan is to implement a
Complete Streets policy, a need also
demonstrated in the CTP. Furthermore, the plan
promotes the creation of overlay districts
and/or design guidelines for specific areas and
corridors to enhance community character,
walkability and sense of place.
Brookhaven Parks & Recreations Plan
The
Parks
and
Recreation
Plan
(2014) further details
the
needs
of
Brookhaven, calling
for a network of
small neighborhood
parks connected by
a
community
greenway
system
that complements
the complete streets
initiatives of the city. The Parks and Recreation
Plan and other recent documents support the
achievement of all these goals by articulating
the current (deficient) conditions of the active
transportation
network
and
suggesting
potential outcomes based on these analyses.
Buford Highway Improvement
Economic Development Strategy
Plan
&
Most notably,
this
plan
recommended
the removal of
a
vehicular
travel lane in
each direction
of
Buford
Highway
as
part
of
a
streetscape to
include
sidewalk
on
one side of the
corridor and a
multi-trail on the other side.
Other
recommendations
included
mid-block
crossings, aesthetic treatments, and gateway
features.
DeKalb Comprehensive Transportation Plan
The DeKalb CTP (2014) recommended a

Complete Streets Policy so that all roadway
projects would be evaluated as candidates for
possible bicycle and pedestrian improvements.
Additionally, a priority bicycle network was
established with several corridors being
identified as part of either the Second Tier
Priority Network (corridors such as Peachtree
Road, Buford Highway, and Nancy Creek) or
the First Tier Priority Network: (Clairmont Road
and Ashford-Dunwoody Road).
3 -2
Packet Pg. 32
E.2.a
BrookhavenBrookhaven- Peachtree
Initiative
Livable
Centers
Perimeter Community Improvement District

Commuter Trail System Plan
Prepared in 2006, prior to

the formation of the City of
Brookhaven, this Livable
Centers Initiative (LCI) plan
focused on a variety of land
use and urban design
elements
within
the
Peachtree Road corridor
through central Brookhaven.
Specific
pedestrian and bicycle recommendations were
not included but overall challenges to
connectivity were addressed with the plan
concluding
that
while
neighborhood
connections would help, connectivity would
likely need to occur on the Peachtree Road
corridor itself.
This plan, also

completed for
PCID, focused
on bicycle and
pedestrian
improvements
to help facilitate
commuter
movements
within
the
Perimeter area.
Specific

Livable Centers
Centers Initiative
A 2011 update to the
original LCI plan for
the
Perimeter
Community
Improvement District
(PCID) was entitled
Perimeter @ The
Center
Future
Focus
and
was
intended to reflect the
areas evolution into a
mixed-use
community.
Among
the
overall
recommendations were concentrating growth
around transit stations, reducing large block
sizes, and improving bicycle and pedestrian
connectivity.
recommendations were developed for Lake

Hearn Drive (a shared lane marking, or
sharrow),
Ashford-Dunwoody
Road
(a
proposed sidepath), and Perimeter Center
Parkway (a proposed sidepath) within the
Brookhaven community.

As part of the data gathering effort, the study
team
met
with
representatives
from
surrounding jurisdictions and transportation
decision makers to coordinate planning
activities. The following summarizes findings
from these conversations.
City of Sandy Springs
The study team met with City of Sandy Springs
Staff to discuss the Sandy Springs Bicycle,
Pedestrian, and Trail Plan and Brookhavens
efforts. Discussion points included:
Improvements
along
PeachtreeDunwoody Road in the Sandy Springs
plan were identified but not ranked
highly due, in part, to lack of connectivity
with other planned facilities.
The
recommendations coming out of the
Brookhaven plan are likely to show
3-3
Packet Pg. 33
E.2.a
BR
KHAVEN
connections
to
the
Dunwoody Road corridor.
Peachtree-
The path of the Path400 Multi-use trail

and its relationship to the 400/285
interchange was discussed. GDOTs
plans include swinging the trail through
the SE quadrant of the interchange and
connecting to Peachtree-Dunwoody
Road at that roads interchange with I285.
The need to connect Keswick Park to

Brookhaven (immediately to its west)
was discussed and agreed to be an
important connection
Maintaining a similar section on Johnson

Ferry Road between Chamblee and
Brookhaven was discussed. Chamblee
isnt currently designing a streetscape
with 8 foot sidewalk (effectively a multiuse trail) on their side. This may be
important with the anticipated Whole
Foods development.
Extending the proposed trail along

Peachtree Road/Peachtree Boulevard
from Brookhaven to Chamblee was
discussed. This also would connect to
the
anticipated
Whole
Foods
development.
A formal intergovernmental coordination

committee to include the North DeKalb
cities
(Brookhaven,
Chamblee,
Dunwoody,
and
Doraville)
was
discussed. With greenways and trails
being a priority with Atlanta Regional
Commission, the possibility that this
could be a strong issue to frame this
cooperation was discussed.
City of Chamblee
The study team met with planning staff from the
City of Chamblee to discuss general
coordination
and
some
of
the
recommendations evolving out of the
Brookhaven Bike Ped and Trail Plan. The
following items were discussed:
The Clairmont Road corridor borders the

City of Chamblee but the right-of-way is
entirely within Brookhaven. Chamblee
staff were receptive to the idea of a
multi-use trail along this corridor and
requested that the City of Brookhaven
continue to coordinate, particularly in
regards to future development along the
corridor to ensure compatibility.
The Chamblee-Dunwoody Road corridor

borders the City of Chamblee with the
right-of-way being entirely within
Chamblee.
Chamblee staff was
receptive to the recommendation of
sidewalks along the entirety of the
corridor. An E-W greenway connection
from Chamblee Dunwoody Road, south
of Savoy Drive was also mentioned.
Sidewalk connections on Donaldson

Drive and Harts Mill Road (where rightof-way is within City of Chamblee) were
also discussed.

The study team met with PCID staff to discuss
the progress of initiatives documented in their
Trail System Plan. Among the items discussed
were the creation of a loop through the
southern part of the district (and extending into
Brookhaven) formed by a two-way cycle track
on Peachtree-Dunwoody Road (north of I-285)
and
corresponding
improvements
on
Hammond Drive, Perimeter Center Parkway,
and Lake Hearn Drive. Additionally, a trail
parallel to the MARTA line connecting to the
3 -4
Packet Pg. 34
E.2.a
Medical Center Station and Perimeter Center

Parkway was discussed.
Buckhead Community Improvement District
The study team met with Buckhead CID staff to
discuss Buckhead bicycle and pedestrian
initiatives. The following items were discussed:
BCID may work with them to

expand it in 2015 or 2016.
The City of Atlanta is developing a bike

boulevard through the Garden Hills
neighborhood along Grandview Avenue.
City of Atlanta
A cycle track is being planned along East

Paces Ferry Road using City of Atlanta
Infrastructure Bond funding. This would
connect to Brookhaven at Roxboro
Road.
The study team met with City of Atlanta staff to

further
discuss
connections
between
Brookhaven and the City of Atlanta. Among the
initiatives discussed were the Path 400 and
Beltline.
The Path 400 Trail is being extended

north from its current terminus at Old Ivy
Road to Wieuca Road. It will ultimately
proceed further north.
Regional Initiatives
I nitiatives
Buckhead CID is looking at the extension

of the Peachtree Streetscape and bike
lanes to the City limit and this is a
primary area of focus.
Another area being considered for bike

lanes is along Powers Ferry Road to
connect Chastain Park to Roswell Road
and along Old Ivy Road to Path 400 and
Wieuca Road.
Coordination is needed to find a

connection from the Old Ivy and Wieuca
Road access to Path 400 east into
Brookhaven, perhaps using sharrows
along residential roads.
Buckhead
has
several
ongoing
programs related to bicycle sharing and
establishing a bike boulevard:
o A bike share program with 6-8
kiosks
is
planned
for
implementation in 2016.
o Simon properties had a Holiday
bike taxi pilot program in 2014.
In addition to the initiatives of surrounding

communities and partner agencies, there are
several regionally significant initiatives relevant
to the City of Brookhaven.
Most notably is an update to the Atlanta
Regional Commission (ARC) Bicycle &
Pedestrian Plan, from which a draft version was
released in December 2015. As part of this
effort, ARC periodically shared information with
stakeholders such as the City of Brookhaven.
In their planning efforts, ARC had identified
major regional corridors to consider for
pedestrian and bicycle investment within the
City of Brookhaven, they identified both the
Peachtree Creek and the need for what is
effectively the north-south spine envisioned by
the community.
Other major regional initiatives include the
ongoing development of the Beltline Trail in the
City of Atlanta, a 22 mile loop utilizing
abandoned rail corridors that has contributed to
significant reinvestment along its path.
Connections through the Peachtree Creek will
eventually connect the City of Brookhaven to
the Beltline. In the opposite direction, the
former General Motors site in Doraville is the
focus of redevelopment efforts. Currently being
known as The Assembly, the redevelopment
3-5
Packet Pg. 35
E.2.a
BR
KHAVEN
efforts include the creation of a mixed-use livework-play regional attraction.
room for new facilities without being particularly

impactful to existing properties.
A map of the existing bicycle, pedestrian, and

trail network is provided in Figure 3.1.
3.1
Due to the nature of auto-oriented development

in Brookhaven within the last several decades,
the City lacks provisions for both bicyclists and
pedestrians. Though a rudimentary sidewalk
system exists in Brookhaven, the sidewalk
network is fragmented in many areas due to the
disconnected hierarchal street system endemic
to Brookhaven.
For instance, some destinations are separated
by large distances that discourage active
transportation by choice users. As such,
previous planning efforts have recommend
reconnecting the fragmented network wherever
possible to ensure optimal routes for
pedestrians and cyclists. In addition to these,
many plans assert the importance of multi-use
destinations to support incidental active
transportation and the eventual redevelopment
of the Brookhaven MARTA station into a dense,
multi-use destination is highly emphasized.
The pedestrian infrastructure present in
Brookhaven is far more developed than that
provided specifically for bicyclists.. Currently,
there are limited facilities for bicyclists,
especially in the form of separate bicycle
facilities strongly desired by the community.
There is only one dedicated multi-use trail in the
city, the Nancy Creek Trail in northern
Brookhaven.
Also notable is that several challenges exist in
implementing and constructing new bicycle,
pedestrian, and trail facilities in several of the
residential neighborhoods in the central and
southern parts of the community. In many of
these neighborhoods, existing roadway
pavement is not wide and there are limited
setbacks for the various structures located on
these corridors, creating very little physical
3 -6
Packet Pg. 36
E.2.a
Figure 3.1
E.2.a
3-7
Packet Pg. 37
BR
KHAVEN
Policy Review
The study team conducted a review of existing
policies in the City of Brookhaven code related
to bicyclists and pedestrians. The majority of
these policies were inherited from DeKalb
County at the Citys foundation and our
primarily related to function and do not take an
active role in promoting bicycle or pedestrian
travel within the City. For documentation
purposes, the applicable policies are indicated
in Appendix G.
G
GDOT Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety

Action Plan
GDOT Pedestrian and Streetscape
Guide
Manual of Uniform Traffic Control
Devices (MUTCD)
NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide
Other Guidance
Additionally, reviews were conducted of various
local, state, and national level resource
documents relating to bicycle, pedestrian, and
trail facilities. This includes:
United
States
Department
of
Transportation (USDOT) which authored a
Policy Statement (dated March 11, 2010)
re-emphasizing the consideration of
walking and biking as equal to other
transportation modes
The Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st
Century (MAP-21) which was signed into
law by President Obama on July 6, 2012
and makes a variety of progressive
changes from previous transportation bills.
Chapter 9 of the GDOT Design and Policy
Manual, which includes GDOTs Complete
Streets policy to routinely incorporate
bicycle, pedestrian, and transit (user and
transit vehicle) accommodations into
transportation infrastructure projects
Other resources such as:
AASHTO Guide for Planning, Design,
and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities
GDOT Guidebook for Pedestrian
Planning
3 -8
Packet Pg. 38
E.2.a
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 39
Chapter Four
NEEDS
ASSESSMENT
Active Transportation Corridor Analysis
Target Corridors
Feasibility Review
E.2.a
BR
KHAVEN
Packet Pg. 40
Needs
Assessment
In the needs assessment phase of the planning

process, the study team developed and applied
a set of criteria to determine the suitability of
corridors within the City for bicycle, pedestrian,
and trail investment.
Following this
assessment, a series of target corridors were
developed in which further analysis was
conducted to determine the feasibility of
different types of investments.
Active Transportation
Analysis
Corridor
Using a variety of pre-existing data, the study

team prepared a analysis to determine the
suitability of all corridors within the City of
Brookhaven in order to ascertain their relative
and objective merits for bicycle, pedestrian,
and trail investment.
This process was
developed to set some initial criteria for
considering different corridors and help
facilitate discussion with the community about
where investments would be appropriate.
Nonetheless, the criteria develop were intended
to be holistic and comprehensive to include
considerations of what would attract people to
certain
corridors
(Attraction
Analysis),
conditions within the community that could
likely create more local demand (Demand
Analysis), and miscellaneous conditions that
could affect the quality of any investments
along the corridor (Character Analysis).
Attraction Analysis
The attractions analysis set criteria for the
amenities, facilities, and other locations that
people might choose to walk or bike to within
4-1
the community. This included focusing on

areas with:
Concentrations of retail
Educational facilities
Parks and recreational facilities
Cultural and civic locations
Access to transit
Concentrations of employment
Based on these locations and the layout of

Brookhavens roadway network, areas of
propensity for travel were defined. For walking,
this is equivalent to approximately one quarter
and one half mile, and for bicycling, it is
equivalent to approximately one half and one
mile, respectively. Spatial analysis mapping
was developed for each of the criteria (as
shown in Appendix H) and combined to create
a distinct Attraction Analysis result as shown
in Figure 4.1.
4.1
Demand Analysis
The demand analysis was developed to
consider where people live, with emphasis on
populations who may be more likely to take
advantage of bicycling and walking
opportunities. In order to do this, US Census
data was used to determine the following:
Population density of aging population
(55+)
Population density of children (<19)
Households who do not own a car
General population density
Residents who bike to work
Residents who walk to work
Residents who take transit to work
Spatial analysis mapping was developed for
each of the criteria (as shown in Appendix H)
and combined to create a distinct Demand
Analysis result as shown in Figure 4.2.
4.2
Packet Pg. 41
E.2.a
Figure 4.1 Attractions
E.2.a
BR
KHAVEN
Packet Pg. 42
4 -2
Figure 4.2 Demand
4-3
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 43
BR
KHAVEN
Character Analysis
While the previous two categories considered
the
state
of
Brookhavens
residents,
community facilities, and workplaces, this
category considered the character of the
different corridors to ascertain the relative
quality and ease in which walking or biking
would be possible along these corridors. This
category considered the following attributes:
Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volumes
Block size
Topography
Posted or measured vehicle speeds
Spatial analysis mapping was developed for
each of the criteria (as shown in Appendix H)
and combined to create a distinct Character
Analysis result as shown in Figure 4.3.
4.3
Overall Active
Analysis
Transportation
Corridor
Using additional spatial analysis, the three

categories (Attraction, Demand, and Character)
were combined to develop an overall suitability
result for the community as shown in Figure
4.4.
4.4 it is important to note that this suitability
results in the overall desirability of the corridor
for additional pedestrian and bicycle facilities,
This is contrasted with an assessment of
suitability for on-street cycling on the road as
that type of analysis is commonly referred to as
a suitability analysis.
There is another high-suitability area in the

eastern part of the city, around the parks near
the intersection of Clairmont Road and Dresden
Drive. Higher than average suitability also exists
throughout the Drew Valley neighborhood
(which is between the two aforementioned
nodes and north of Buford Highway) thanks to
numerous parks, a dense roadway network and
relative proximity to retail hubs.
Additionally, high suitability is present near
Lanier Boulevard and Windsor Parkway (north
of Peachtree Road near the center of the city),
around the junction of Ashford Dunwoody Road
and Johnson Ferry Road, and further north near
Murphy Candler Park. These areas are driven
by schools, retail an aging population and
residents who already use alternative modes to
commute.
Contrastingly, the neighborhoods along
Osborne and Mabry Roads, as well as those
along Harts Mill Road typically have less overall
suitability, due to challenging terrain and poor
network connectivity. Stretches of Buford
Highway and the northern reaches of Peachtree
Road also faired similarly, likely due to their
heavy traffic and high driving speeds.
The highest areas of suitability are present in

the area immediately around the Brookhaven
MARTA Station, in the areas near the citys
western boundary around Peachtree Road.
High suitability extends from this node along
Dresden Drive and North Druid Hills Road into
adjacent neighborhoods. This area is close to a
number of parks and schools, is well served by
transit, and includes multiple retail hubs.
4 -4
Packet Pg. 44
E.2.a
Figure 4.3 Character
4-5
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 45
Figure 4.4 Overall Suitability
E.2.a
BR
KHAVEN
Packet Pg. 46
4 -6
E.2.a
Target Corridors
Using the suitability analysis as a general guide,
the study team held an internal work session to
develop a series of target corridors to
investigate further for possible implementation
initiatives.
Following this work session,
coordination with City staff, and feedback from
the studys stakeholder committee, an official
target corridors map, provided in Figure 4.5
was developed to help guide the additional
research.
Feasibility Review
Based on the target corridors map, the study
team conducted a series of specific field
reviews and research to determine the relative
opportunities and limitations along the
identified corridors. This process was farreaching and included a variety of different
considerations as disparate as identifying likely
right-of-way lines to consideration of physical
space including landscaping, utilities, and
roadway width. An in-depth documentation of
this effort is provided in Appendix I.
I
4-7
Packet Pg. 47
Figure 4.5 Target Corridors
E.2.a
BR
KHAVEN
Packet Pg. 48
4 -8
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 49
E.2.a
Chapter Five
RECOMMENDATIONS
Policy & Regulation Initiatives
Project Recommendations
BR
KHAVEN
Packet Pg. 50
Public Works Design and Maintenance Polices
Recommendations
Following the various stages of the technical

analysis and considering the advisement and
direction provided as part of the community
engagement process, the study team began the
process
of
developing
specific
recommendations for the City to consider.
These recommendations are categorized as
either (1) Policy and Regulation Initiatives or (2)
Project Recommendations.
Policy & Regulation Initiatives

The City of Brookhaven can adopt and put into
practice policies and initiatives that enable a
more balanced transportation system that is
safe and promotes a better quality of life. These
efforts can help institutionalize multi-modal
strategies and improve safety beyond the
project recommendations discussed later in
this chapter. The following list outlines a
number of overall topics that should be
considered:
Wayfinding signage sized and positioned to
inform and encourage bicyclists travel, also
indirectly promotes the Citys support for
bicyclists to passing vehicles
Public Awareness campaign utilizing State
and regional bicycle groups as well as police
sensitivity training, which has been well
received in other cities across the nation
Pursue League of American Bicyclists Bike
Friendly Community status
Distribute summary of articles or reports
regarding trail and positive property value
findings
The Department of Public Works is already

committed to improving bicycle and pedestrian
facilities and safety. Solidifying a practice by
putting it into writing helps elevate its priority.
Potential policy language to adopt reads as
follows, Promote safe and equitable bicycle
access on all roadways by integrating bicycle
travel considerations into all roadway planning,
design, construction and maintenance, as well
as incorporation of Complete Street standards
into all Capital improvements. This policy
should be implemented in accordance with the
GDOT Design Policy Manual Chapter 9
Complete Streets Design Policy. Other
measures to consider include:
Adopt the National Association of City
Transportation Officials (NACTO)s Urban
Street Design Guide (2013), which provides
the most updated principles and practices
from around the nation. Further design
details for bicycle facilities, can be found in
NACTOs Urban Bikeway Design Guide,
Second Edition (2014).
For City Staff use, compile summary and
other references of the most updated
bicycle-friendly traffic calming measures
Policies that enable room for bike facility or
at least wider shoulders (ex: 10 minimum
lane width for 35mph and less)
Formalize re-striping policy for Street
Maintenance of wide shoulder routes to
consider striping for bike lanes and other
improvements
Consideration of more solar speed radar
detectors to encourage driver compliance
with speed limits on shared use routes
Installation of Stop for Peds in-crosswalk
signs
5-1
Packet Pg. 51
E.2.a
BR
KHAVEN
Design and Zoning Regulations
Bicycle Parking
Community Development staff should consider

potential design and zoning regulation changes
as part of regulatory updates being developed
in 2016 including:
It is recommended that the City adopt an

ordinance requiring bicycle parking in
developments within all non-residential zoning
districts (as currently only required in
Brookhaven-Peachtree Overlay District). The
number of bicycle racks to be provided will be
calculated using the number of vehicular
parking spaces in the development.
Consider allowing more Transitional Zones

in zoning categories to support new trail
routes
Increase bicycle parking requirements in all
zoning districts, which provides actual
support to bicyclists and the visual
awareness helps with a Community
Awareness campaign.
Provide City and Council a summary of
current State law and local ordinance
flexibility regarding legality of bicycles on
sidewalks.
Art for Fun and funding which can include
regulations and considerations for public
art.
Additional and specific recommendations to
consider are indicated below.
Amend Zoning and Development Guidelines
Residential Sidewalk Petitioning Program
It is recommended that the city overturn its
policy that requires sidewalk construction in
residential zoning districts to be paid by
petitioning property owners as assessed by the
Department of Public Works, and adopt an
ordinance requiring the construction of
sidewalks along street frontage in all residential
zoning districts (as currently required in TND
(Traditional Neighborhood Development); PC1, PC-2, and PC-3 (Pedestrian Community);
and the Brookhaven-Peachtree Overlay
District; and new subdivisions within the City).
Transitional Zones
It is recommended that the zoning code should
be amended to allow transitional zones in multifamily residential and commercial zoning
district requirements to house multi-use trails
that would connect to public streets. This will
eliminate a potential barrier to true community
connectivity.
Sidewalks and Multi-Use Paths
According to the Georgia Department of
Transportation (GDOT) and the City of
Brookhaven, a sidewalk cannot be less than 5
wide. The City does not allow bicyclists on
sidewalks less than 8 wide. The City also has
larger minimum sidewalk widths in its PC-2
zoning district (9) and Brookhaven-Peachtree
Overlay District (6, 10, or 15 depending on the
street).
Multi-use paths are becoming popular options
for cities wishing to build both pedestrian and
bicycle infrastructure, but have limited space
for both. Developers designing and building
such paths have a bad habit of squishing
bikes onto slightly wider sidewalks, which
cannot safely or comfortably accommodate
both cyclists and pedestrians.
GDOT acknowledges the American Association
of State Highway and Transportation
Associations (AASHTO) multi-use path
5-2
Packet Pg. 52
E.2.a
minimum width of 10, and recommended width

of 12. This means that sidewalks wider than
10-12 can, legally, be considered a multi-use
path.
It is recommended that the City of Brookhaven

create and adopt a Complete Streets policy per
Chapter 9 of GDOTs most recent edition of
their Design Policy Manual.
The City of Brookhaven should adopt an

ordinance
regarding
multi-use
paths
constructed within city limits. It is suggested
that the city adopt AASHTOs definition, and
recommend that all designated multi-use paths
be at least 12, with 10 being the absolute legal
minimum width for specific constrained
portions of the trail. This will clarify the
difference between a sidewalk and a multi-use
path to prevent both cyclists and pedestrians
from being cramped on to too narrow paths.
Maintenance
Smart Bike Policies

Complete Streets Approach
Complete streets are public right-of-ways that
include infrastructure for travelers utilizing
different modes of transportation, including
bicycle, pedestrian, cars, and transit. The
Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT)
created its first version of a Complete Streets
policy in 2012 as a means to incorporate the
consideration of bicycle, pedestrian, and transit
accommodations into roadway construction
and reconstruction projects. The Manual
includes both standards, recommendations,
and helpful resources for municipalities looking
to include Complete Streets as part of their
development regulations. The benefits of
Complete
Streets
include
economic
development, more equitable options of travel
for all users, better urban design, the reduction
of bicycle and pedestrian crashes, and
encourages higher levels of walking, biking, and
transit use in communities. Complete Street
policies can also act as Streetscape Standards
for communities looking to implement them.
The infrastructure that we construct for cyclists

and pedestrians are always great long-term
investments, but those investments lose their
worth if they are not regularly maintained. In
many municipalities, vehicle road maintenance
is often prioritized over maintenance for bicycle
and pedestrian infrastructure. As a result, this
leads to roads that are pleasant for driving, but
sidewalks, bike shoulders, and bike lanes that
are not easily traversable. This is not the vision
of any good bicycle and pedestrian planning
effort. Moreover, there are wide, paved
shoulders within the City that present
opportunities for repaving to create bicycle
infrastructure.
In examining the citys latest Comprehensive
Transportation Plan and that of DeKalb County,
there are no policies or recommendations that
specifically direct the maintenance of bicycle
and
pedestrian
infrastructure.
It
is
recommended that the City of Brookhaven
pledge part of its transportation dollars
designated for bicycle and pedestrian
infrastructure projects to the maintenance of
current and future projects. It is also
recommended that the City research and apply
for federal, state, and regional funds to enhance
its maintenance budget.
Lawful Cycling on Sidewalks
Section 40-6-144 of the Georgia Code requires
that No person shall drive any vehicle upon a
sidewalk or sidewalk area except upon a
permanent or duly authorized driveway. The
Georgia Code defines bicycles as vehicles;
5-3
Packet Pg. 53
E.2.a
BR
KHAVEN
therefore, this law applies to motor vehicles and
bicycles. Excluding designated multi-use
paths, sidewalks are designed for pedestrian
travel only. In 2009, the Georgia Code was
amended to allow local municipalities to
authorize the operation of bicycles on
sidewalks by persons under the age of 12.
Currently, the City of Brookhavens code of
ordinances does not include a provision
allowing children to ride on the sidewalk. If the
City wishes to foster a bicycle culture among its
citizens, then they should concentrate some
efforts onto their children. It is recommended
that the City of Brookhaven adopt an ordinance
allowing children under 12 to ride bicycles on
sidewalks, as well as up to one (1) supervising
adult per child.
Speed/Safety
Safety is a key concern with cyclists and
pedestrians utilizing on-road facilities. Safety is
connected to both speed and design. Some
cities have adopted policies to lower the speed
limit on busy streets to decrease crash
incidents on high-speed, high-volume streets,
while others have turned to traffic-calming
design measures to increase safety. It is
recommended that the City continue to
research strategies to increase cyclist and
pedestrian safety along corridors that are
otherwise perceived to be dangerous.
Brookhaven Transit-Oriented Development
The Transit Oriented Development (TOD) plan
needs to highlight connections to the greater
bicycle and pedestrian network in order to
maximize interoperability with other modes.
This can be done through wayfinding, the
design of the development, and network
development.
Wayfinding
Clear signs showing the direction and proximity
of the MARTA station from bicycle and
pedestrian trails, and the direction and
proximity of city destinations from MARTA will
be needed to aid trail and transit users to and
from the TOD.
Design
The design of the TOD needs to be easy to
navigate both on foot and by bike. Design
elements should include:
Avoid stairs when possible and provide
runnels so that cyclists can wheel bikes up
and down stairs when they are neccessary
ADA accessible ramps for both cyclists and
wheelchairs
Designated bike parking that is both
convenient and easily accessible.
There should be clear sight lines throughout the
development. The MARTA station should stand
out amongst all other structures throughout the
TOD, with no other structures blocking from
view. Pedestrians and cyclists utilizing the citys
trail network should be able to visually locate
the MARTA station as they arrive to the TOD.
On the other hand, visitors accessing the site
via MARTA should be able to see the
connecting trails as they leave the station and
move around the TOD.
Network Development
Many facilities in the bicycle and pedestrian
plan will lead directly to MARTA, or connect to
the paths that do. In order to promote multimodal connectivity, a policy that any new
bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure planned
and built must be connected to one or more
5-4
Packet Pg. 54
E.2.a
trails in the greater system should be put in

place.
TOD-specific zoning district
For TODs to be successful, they need to have
the right level of density (both population and
employment), an urban form that is appropriate
to the size and scale of the development, and a
strong land use mix. However, this kind of
development doesnt happen without some
form of regulation. It is recommended that the
City of Brookhaven adopt a new zoning district
that will regulate:
Density
Land Uses
Building Height
Bike Parking
Vehicle Parking
Sidewalks, Bike Lanes, and Multi-Use Paths
Architectural Design
Streetscape Design
Landscaping
The geographic boundaries of the TOD zoning
district should be clear in the interest of creating
a well-designed public realm.
development. In order for cross-regional

bikeshare program to be successful, there
needs to be a coordinated discussion and
understanding of interoperability objectives.
Therefore, the City of Brookhaven will likely
need to understand interoperability factors,
such as title sponsorship, branding and
marketing, membership reciprocity, technology
of reciprocal docks, a unified fare structure and
data sharing. Assuming at some point in the
future bikeshare is likely, the Brookhaven TODs
design team should consider the general
location and site-specific criteria that will need
to be met to maximize the benefits.
Public Art
Design regulations can also set the context for
public art including indicating intent (using
public art to engage pedestrians and bicyclists),
placement (ensuring adequate space for
efficient pedestrian movements), height and
size requirements, and regulations related to
locating on public property.
Safe Routes to School Zones
Safe routes to school zones can be developed
to improve and construct pedestrian and
bicycle connections within a half-mile walking
distance of public elementary schools. These
zones are further identified in the following
Project Recommendations section.
Bikeshare Interoperability
A city-wide bikeshare program will be launched
in Atlanta by summer 2016. This program does
not extend past City of Atlanta boundaries, but
there is an opportunity and stated demand for
bikeshare to expand. There are many benefits
to bikeshare, including providing first and lastmile connectivity to transit and as a marketing
and
branding
catalyst
for
economic
5-5
Packet Pg. 55
E.2.a
BR
KHAVEN
Specific project recommendations were
developed through the feasibility review of
target corridors (discussed previously in
Chapter 4)
4 and additional guidance through the
community engagement process.
The resulting list of recommended projects
represents an ambitious but comprehensive
plan for the City to consider as part of future
development and planning initiatives. The plan
includes a balancing of pragmatic initiatives
(such as sharrows which can be implemented
with relative low-cost and with ease) with
longer-term visionary improvements (such as
trails along major corridors throughout the
community). Overall, implementation of this
plan would result in:
20.4 miles of new sharrows

6.9 miles of new bicycle lanes or cycle tracks
31.3 miles of new sidewalks
38.7 miles of new multi-use trails
As the result of a planning process, these

recommendations will likely need further vetting
and refinement as they move into design
stages. However, the intent of this plan is to
provide a blueprint for the City to follow for
implementation.
Likewise, with several projects initiatives
identified, it was necessary to develop a
scheme to prioritize and determine the phasing
in which projects can be implemented.
Likewise, ball-park cost estimates for each of
the project initiatives were identified to help
with future budgeting. The detailed results of
this process are provided in Appendix J while
the overall recommendations are summarized
in Table 5.1.
.1. Figures 5.1 through 5. 3 indicate
the projects by the proposed phasing and
implementation schedule while Figures 5.4
through 5.6 identify the projects as either part

of the bicycle plan, pedestrian plan, or trail plan.
These maps also identify the safe route to
school zones discussed in the previous section
where
additional
implementation
is
recommended as appropriate.
Finally,
conceptual drawings of select corridors are
provided in Appendix K.
K
Phasing
In general, phasing refers to the likely timeframe
in which a project can be implemented given
the complexity of the project (need for in-depth
engineering and design), costs, and general
impacts to the community. All projects were
identified as being either ShortShort- Term (possible
to implement in the next 5-10 years), MidMid- Term
(likely to implement in the next 10-20 years), or
LongLong- Term (likely to implement in 20+ years)
though future changes in community
preferences and specific desires for individual
projects will likely require ongoing refinement.
Prioritization
In contrast, prioritization refers specifically to
the process of determining each individual
projects relative merits through the life of the
plan.
On a scale of 100, this process
considered five different factors, each worth up
to 20 points. The scores for individual projects
are provided in Appendix J.
J
Corridor Suitability
This criteria was based on the suitability
analysis described in Chapter 4 and assigned
a relative score for each project.
5-6
Packet Pg. 56
E.2.a
Consistency with Community Vision
Costs
This criteria was used to reward projects that

tied into the overall community vision of a
spine with loops developed through the
community engagement process. Projects that
would form the spine received 20 points and
project that would constitute a loop received
10 points.
Planning-level cost estimates were developed

utilizing per-mile costs and other assumptions
developed as part of the ARC cost estimating
tool. Assumptions include:
General Connectivity
This criteria was broadly applied to
acknowledge each projects ability to connect
neighborhoods and points of interest.
Ease of Implementation
This criteria is comprised of two considerations:
construction costs (worth up to 10 points with
less expensive projects being awarded more)
and right-of-way costs (also worth up to 10
points with less expensive projects being
awarded more).
Community Support
This criteria was used to award projects based
on specific and continued support registered
through the community engagement process.
Preliminary Engineering Cost Assumptions

30% of construction costs
Right-of-Way Cost Assumptions
(Cost per acre)
Residential Properties
$500,000
Commercial Properties
$2,000,000
Industrial Properties
$1,167,000
Construction Cost Assumptions
(Cost per linear mile)
Sidewalks (per side)
$260,000
Striping for Bike lanes or Sharrows
$30,000
Widening for Bike Lanes
$2,057,000
Multi-use Trails
$580,000
Contingency
10% of construction costs
Based on these cost estimates, implementation

of the plan would include the following
expenditures (in 2015 dollars):
$9.2 million dollars in the Short-Term phase
$25.2 million dollars in the Mid-Term phase
$32.0 million dollars in the Long-Term phase
5-7
Packet Pg. 57
E.2.a
Table 5.1.1
5-8
Packet Pg. 58
Table 5.1
E.2.a
BR
KHAVEN
Project Recommendations (continued)
Table 5.1.2
5-9
Table 5.1
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 59
5.1.3
5 -10
Packet Pg. 60
Table 5.1
E.2.a
BR
KHAVEN
5.1.4
5- 11
Table 5.1
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 61
Table 5.1.6
5 -12
Packet Pg. 62
Table 5.1
E.2.a
BR
KHAVEN
Table 5.1.7
5- 13
Table 5.1
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 63
Table 5.1.8
5 -14
Packet Pg. 64
Table 5.1
E.2.a
BR
KHAVEN
Table 5.1.9
5- 15
Table 5.1
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 65
Figure 5.1
5 -16
Packet Pg. 66
E.2.a
BR
KHAVEN
Figure 5.2
5- 17
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 67
Figure 5.3
5 -18
Packet Pg. 68
E.2.a
BR
KHAVEN
Figure 5.4
5- 19
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 69
Figure 5.5
5 -20
Packet Pg. 70
E.2.a
BR
KHAVEN
Figure 5.6
5- 21
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 71
Appendix A
COMMUNITY SURVEY
E.2.a
BR
KHAVEN
Packet Pg. 72
Q1 How often do you walk for each of the

following purposes?
Answered: 394
Skipped: 1
To get to and
from work
To run errands
or go to oth...
To exercise,
relax, or fo...
Daily
To get to and from work
To run errands or go to other placesex:

grocery shopping, dinner with friends
To exercise, relax, or for the sole purpose of
walking or running
Multiple times
each week
10
Weekly
12
14
Multiple times
each month
16
18
Once a
month or
less
20
Never
Total
Weighted
Average
375
1.60
2.67%
10
4.27%
16
1.60%
6
1.87%
7
6.13%
23
83.47%
313
3.13%
13.02%
11.98%
19.53%
25.26%
27.08%
12
50
46
75
97
104
384
4.01
31.89%
125
36.73%
144
14.03%
55
10.46%
41
4.34%
17
2.55%
10
392
15.89
1 / 48
Packet Pg. 73
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
Brookhaven Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Trail Plan Survey
Q2 How often do you ride a bike for each of

the following purposes?
Answered: 394
Skipped: 1
To get to and
from work
To run errands
or go to oth...
To exercise,
relax, or fo...
Daily
To get to and from work
To run errands or go to other placesex: grocery

shopping, dinner with friends
To exercise, relax, or for the sole purpose of
riding a bike
Multiple times
each week
Weekly
Multiple times
each month
Once a
month or
less
10
Never
1.05%
3.66%
1.83%
1.31%
7.85%
84.29%
14
30
322
1.55%
5.96%
4.15%
8.55%
15.28%
64.51%
23
16
33
59
249
5.37%
15.09%
13.55%
11.00%
17.39%
37.60%
21
59
53
43
68
147
2 / 48
Total
Weighted
Average
382
1.04
386
1.85
391
4.81
Packet Pg. 74
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
Q3 How many bicycles does your

household own?
Answered: 387
Skipped: 8
Responses
Date
12/15/2015 12:09 PM
12/12/2015 2:04 PM
12/11/2015 6:35 PM
12/10/2015 9:03 AM
12/9/2015 9:09 PM
12/9/2015 3:14 PM
12/8/2015 2:29 PM
12/8/2015 1:48 PM
12/8/2015 11:20 AM
10
12/8/2015 10:46 AM
11
12/7/2015 4:55 PM
12
12/6/2015 11:39 AM
13
12/5/2015 2:27 AM
14
12/5/2015 1:18 AM
15
12/2/2015 9:14 PM
16
12/2/2015 6:24 PM
17
12/2/2015 9:03 AM
18
12/2/2015 6:47 AM
19
12/2/2015 5:24 AM
20
11/20/2015 5:27 PM
21
11/19/2015 10:23 AM
22
11/18/2015 9:17 PM
23
11/18/2015 9:06 AM
24
11/16/2015 12:03 PM
25
11/10/2015 2:00 PM
26
11/9/2015 11:30 PM
27
11/9/2015 12:58 PM
28
11/9/2015 4:32 AM
29
11/7/2015 4:54 AM
30
11/3/2015 8:26 PM
31
10/30/2015 2:51 PM
32
10/27/2015 9:36 AM
33
10/26/2015 2:20 PM
34
10/24/2015 8:37 AM
3 / 48
Packet Pg. 75
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
35
10/23/2015 11:40 AM
36
10/19/2015 1:05 PM
37
10/17/2015 6:16 PM
38
10/17/2015 3:05 PM
39
10/17/2015 12:46 PM
40
10/17/2015 10:49 AM
41
10/17/2015 9:01 AM
42
10/17/2015 8:30 AM
43
10/17/2015 7:34 AM
44
10/17/2015 7:07 AM
45
10/16/2015 10:17 PM
46
10/16/2015 10:08 PM
47
10/16/2015 10:07 PM
48
10/16/2015 10:06 PM
49
10/16/2015 9:10 PM
50
10/16/2015 5:02 PM
51
10/16/2015 4:48 PM
52
10/16/2015 4:07 PM
53
10/15/2015 12:13 PM
54
10/14/2015 6:03 PM
55
10/14/2015 8:12 AM
56
10/14/2015 5:55 AM
57
10/13/2015 7:31 PM
58
10/13/2015 7:00 PM
59
10/13/2015 4:34 PM
60
10/13/2015 4:24 PM
61
10/13/2015 4:11 PM
62
10/13/2015 4:06 PM
63
10/13/2015 3:38 PM
64
10/13/2015 3:37 PM
65
10/13/2015 3:34 PM
66
10/13/2015 3:05 PM
67
10/13/2015 2:59 PM
68
10/13/2015 2:58 PM
69
10/13/2015 2:58 PM
70
10/13/2015 2:52 PM
71
10/13/2015 2:52 PM
72
10/13/2015 2:43 PM
73
10/13/2015 2:31 PM
74
10/13/2015 2:19 PM
75
10/13/2015 1:41 PM
4 / 48
Packet Pg. 76
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
76
10/13/2015 1:28 PM
77
10/13/2015 11:39 AM
78
10/13/2015 11:37 AM
79
10/13/2015 11:34 AM
80
10/13/2015 11:26 AM
81
10/13/2015 10:58 AM
82
10/13/2015 10:46 AM
83
10/13/2015 9:27 AM
84
10/12/2015 11:13 PM
85
10/12/2015 6:22 PM
86
10/12/2015 5:32 PM
87
10/12/2015 5:21 PM
88
10/12/2015 2:19 PM
89
10/12/2015 1:34 PM
90
10/12/2015 12:56 PM
91
10/12/2015 12:26 PM
92
10/12/2015 11:38 AM
93
10/12/2015 11:25 AM
94
10/12/2015 11:10 AM
95
10/12/2015 10:51 AM
96
10/12/2015 10:22 AM
97
10/12/2015 10:17 AM
98
10/12/2015 10:01 AM
99
10/12/2015 9:25 AM
100
10/12/2015 9:22 AM
101
10/12/2015 9:09 AM
102
10/10/2015 8:43 AM
103
10/10/2015 7:21 AM
104
10/9/2015 11:41 PM
105
10/9/2015 10:02 PM
106
10/9/2015 7:16 PM
107
10/2/2015 8:08 AM
108
10/1/2015 8:44 PM
109
9/30/2015 8:50 PM
110
9/30/2015 4:32 PM
111
9/30/2015 11:40 AM
112
9/29/2015 7:03 PM
113
9/28/2015 11:16 AM
114
9/23/2015 7:48 AM
115
9/22/2015 10:28 AM
116
9/21/2015 12:11 PM
5 / 48
Packet Pg. 77
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
117
9/19/2015 10:41 PM
118
9/18/2015 10:10 PM
119
9/18/2015 2:05 PM
120
9/18/2015 12:30 PM
121
9/16/2015 9:51 PM
122
9/14/2015 3:23 PM
123
9/14/2015 1:48 PM
124
9/14/2015 1:47 PM
125
9/14/2015 1:15 PM
126
9/13/2015 2:28 PM
127
9/12/2015 6:40 PM
128
9/12/2015 8:06 AM
129
9/11/2015 1:41 PM
130
9/6/2015 12:04 PM
131
9/1/2015 5:42 PM
132
9/1/2015 10:10 AM
133
8/28/2015 1:28 PM
134
8/26/2015 8:49 AM
135
8/25/2015 10:42 PM
136
8/25/2015 5:39 PM
137
8/23/2015 5:00 PM
138
8/19/2015 3:14 PM
139
8/18/2015 2:33 PM
140
8/17/2015 4:20 PM
141
8/15/2015 10:33 PM
142
8/13/2015 4:12 PM
143
8/13/2015 3:17 PM
144
8/12/2015 8:49 AM
145
8/11/2015 2:03 PM
146
8/8/2015 10:33 PM
147
8/6/2015 6:15 AM
148
8/4/2015 10:15 AM
149
7/30/2015 9:37 AM
150
7/24/2015 9:11 AM
151
7/21/2015 10:40 PM
152
7/20/2015 10:58 PM
153
7/19/2015 2:38 PM
154
7/16/2015 2:29 PM
155
7/15/2015 5:28 PM
156
7/15/2015 5:18 PM
157
7/15/2015 2:30 PM
6 / 48
Packet Pg. 78
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
158
7/15/2015 1:23 PM
159
7/15/2015 9:23 AM
160
7/15/2015 9:00 AM
161
7/12/2015 12:23 PM
162
7/9/2015 10:40 PM
163
7/9/2015 7:17 PM
164
7/8/2015 1:10 PM
165
7/8/2015 12:12 PM
166
7/7/2015 11:54 AM
167
7/7/2015 9:16 AM
168
7/6/2015 4:11 PM
169
7/6/2015 10:34 AM
170
7/5/2015 11:20 AM
171
7/2/2015 1:41 PM
172
7/2/2015 12:21 PM
173
7/1/2015 11:33 AM
174
6/30/2015 2:06 PM
175
6/29/2015 3:56 PM
176
6/26/2015 5:09 PM
177
6/25/2015 3:21 PM
178
6/25/2015 12:15 PM
179
6/25/2015 7:00 AM
180
6/23/2015 6:42 PM
181
6/22/2015 4:53 PM
182
6/22/2015 1:23 PM
183
6/21/2015 6:41 AM
184
6/19/2015 11:44 PM
185
6/19/2015 5:08 PM
186
6/19/2015 12:23 AM
187
6/19/2015 12:12 AM
188
6/18/2015 10:28 PM
189
6/17/2015 9:38 AM
190
6/17/2015 8:10 AM
191
6/16/2015 2:06 PM
192
6/16/2015 1:55 PM
193
6/16/2015 12:24 PM
194
6/15/2015 4:13 PM
195
6/15/2015 1:47 PM
196
6/15/2015 12:21 PM
197
6/15/2015 9:25 AM
198
6/14/2015 5:21 PM
7 / 48
Packet Pg. 79
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
199
6/13/2015 10:58 PM
200
6/13/2015 6:23 PM
201
6/13/2015 1:05 PM
202
6/13/2015 11:53 AM
203
6/13/2015 11:45 AM
204
6/13/2015 9:24 AM
205
6/12/2015 10:50 PM
206
6/12/2015 9:08 PM
207
6/12/2015 7:40 PM
208
6/12/2015 6:48 PM
209
6/10/2015 11:39 PM
210
6/10/2015 4:38 PM
211
6/10/2015 3:56 PM
212
6/10/2015 3:18 PM
213
6/10/2015 2:44 PM
214
6/10/2015 12:29 PM
215
6/10/2015 8:59 AM
216
6/10/2015 7:52 AM
217
6/10/2015 6:21 AM
218
6/9/2015 10:00 PM
219
6/9/2015 5:48 PM
220
6/9/2015 2:19 PM
221
6/9/2015 1:08 PM
222
6/9/2015 11:32 AM
223
6/9/2015 11:31 AM
224
6/9/2015 9:29 AM
225
6/8/2015 11:47 PM
226
6/8/2015 10:26 PM
227
6/8/2015 6:53 PM
228
6/8/2015 4:43 PM
229
6/8/2015 3:55 PM
230
6/8/2015 3:48 PM
231
6/8/2015 3:18 PM
232
6/8/2015 3:11 PM
233
6/8/2015 12:45 PM
234
6/8/2015 11:12 AM
235
6/8/2015 11:12 AM
236
6/8/2015 11:06 AM
237
6/8/2015 10:19 AM
238
6/8/2015 10:17 AM
239
6/7/2015 11:21 PM
8 / 48
Packet Pg. 80
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
240
6/7/2015 10:12 PM
241
6/7/2015 8:49 PM
242
6/7/2015 4:13 PM
243
6/7/2015 3:58 PM
244
6/7/2015 2:00 PM
245
6/7/2015 12:00 PM
246
6/7/2015 10:09 AM
247
6/7/2015 9:42 AM
248
6/7/2015 9:08 AM
249
6/7/2015 8:12 AM
250
6/7/2015 7:41 AM
251
6/7/2015 1:41 AM
252
6/7/2015 1:10 AM
253
6/6/2015 11:39 PM
254
6/6/2015 10:47 PM
255
6/6/2015 10:44 PM
256
6/6/2015 10:24 PM
257
6/6/2015 10:07 PM
258
6/6/2015 9:45 PM
259
6/6/2015 9:42 PM
260
6/6/2015 8:45 PM
261
6/6/2015 8:38 PM
262
6/6/2015 8:37 PM
263
6/6/2015 8:34 PM
264
6/6/2015 8:29 PM
265
6/6/2015 6:13 PM
266
6/6/2015 6:04 PM
267
6/6/2015 4:36 PM
268
6/6/2015 3:59 PM
269
6/6/2015 3:43 PM
270
6/6/2015 2:31 PM
271
6/6/2015 2:25 PM
272
6/6/2015 1:56 PM
273
6/6/2015 1:41 PM
274
6/6/2015 1:03 PM
275
6/6/2015 12:02 PM
276
6/6/2015 11:51 AM
277
6/6/2015 11:26 AM
278
6/6/2015 11:25 AM
279
6/6/2015 11:09 AM
280
6/6/2015 10:45 AM
9 / 48
Packet Pg. 81
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
281
6/6/2015 10:14 AM
282
6/6/2015 10:05 AM
283
6/6/2015 9:59 AM
284
6/6/2015 9:34 AM
285
6/6/2015 9:04 AM
286
6/6/2015 9:02 AM
287
6/6/2015 8:58 AM
288
6/6/2015 8:51 AM
289
6/6/2015 8:49 AM
290
6/6/2015 8:30 AM
291
6/6/2015 8:25 AM
292
6/6/2015 8:04 AM
293
6/6/2015 7:58 AM
294
6/6/2015 7:50 AM
295
6/6/2015 7:48 AM
296
6/6/2015 7:36 AM
297
6/6/2015 7:34 AM
298
6/6/2015 7:30 AM
299
6/6/2015 7:29 AM
300
6/6/2015 7:20 AM
301
6/6/2015 7:14 AM
302
6/6/2015 7:07 AM
303
6/6/2015 6:52 AM
304
6/6/2015 6:50 AM
305
6/6/2015 6:47 AM
306
6/6/2015 6:42 AM
307
6/6/2015 2:43 AM
308
6/6/2015 1:36 AM
309
6/6/2015 12:40 AM
310
6/5/2015 11:57 PM
311
6/5/2015 11:47 PM
312
6/5/2015 11:41 PM
313
6/5/2015 11:38 PM
314
6/5/2015 11:31 PM
315
6/5/2015 11:20 PM
316
6/5/2015 11:09 PM
317
6/5/2015 11:00 PM
318
6/5/2015 10:55 PM
319
6/5/2015 10:51 PM
320
6/5/2015 10:50 PM
321
6/5/2015 10:48 PM
10 / 48
Packet Pg. 82
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
322
6/5/2015 10:38 PM
323
6/5/2015 10:25 PM
324
6/5/2015 10:18 PM
325
6/5/2015 10:17 PM
326
6/5/2015 10:15 PM
327
6/5/2015 10:15 PM
328
6/5/2015 10:15 PM
329
6/5/2015 10:09 PM
330
6/5/2015 9:53 PM
331
6/5/2015 9:50 PM
332
6/5/2015 9:41 PM
333
6/5/2015 9:39 PM
334
6/5/2015 9:36 PM
335
6/5/2015 9:35 PM
336
6/5/2015 9:31 PM
337
6/5/2015 9:20 PM
338
6/5/2015 9:17 PM
339
6/5/2015 9:16 PM
340
6/5/2015 9:14 PM
341
6/5/2015 9:14 PM
342
6/5/2015 9:02 PM
343
6/5/2015 9:02 PM
344
6/5/2015 9:01 PM
345
6/5/2015 8:58 PM
346
6/5/2015 8:57 PM
347
6/5/2015 8:54 PM
348
6/5/2015 8:54 PM
349
6/5/2015 8:46 PM
350
6/5/2015 8:38 PM
351
6/5/2015 8:32 PM
352
6/5/2015 8:26 PM
353
6/5/2015 8:24 PM
354
6/5/2015 8:14 PM
355
6/5/2015 8:12 PM
356
6/5/2015 8:06 PM
357
6/5/2015 7:46 PM
358
6/5/2015 7:41 PM
359
6/5/2015 6:57 PM
360
6/5/2015 6:49 PM
361
6/5/2015 6:48 PM
362
6/5/2015 6:38 PM
11 / 48
Packet Pg. 83
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
363
6/5/2015 6:34 PM
364
6/5/2015 6:29 PM
365
6/5/2015 6:27 PM
366
6/5/2015 6:19 PM
367
6/5/2015 6:14 PM
368
6/5/2015 6:00 PM
369
6/5/2015 5:51 PM
370
6/5/2015 5:42 PM
371
6/5/2015 5:15 PM
372
6/5/2015 5:15 PM
373
6/5/2015 5:07 PM
374
6/5/2015 5:00 PM
375
6/5/2015 4:38 PM
376
6/5/2015 4:23 PM
377
6/5/2015 4:22 PM
378
6/5/2015 4:19 PM
379
6/5/2015 4:19 PM
380
6/5/2015 4:13 PM
381
6/5/2015 4:09 PM
382
6/5/2015 4:06 PM
383
6/5/2015 4:05 PM
384
6/5/2015 4:01 PM
385
6/5/2015 4:01 PM
386
10
6/5/2015 3:59 PM
387
6/5/2015 3:56 PM
12 / 48
Packet Pg. 84
Q4 Where do you live? For City of

Brookhaven residents, please select the
zone from the map to the right
Answered: 392
Skipped: 3
Brookhaven Zone 1Johnso...

Brookhaven Zone 2Peacht...
Brookhaven Zone 3Dresde...
Brookhaven Zone 4Buford...
Sandy Springs
Dunwoody
Chamblee
City of Atlanta
Other location
in Metropoli...
Outside
Metropolitan...
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
Answer Choices
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Responses
Brookhaven - Zone 1Johnson Ferry Road north to Interstate 285
20.15%
79
Brookhaven - Zone 2Peachtree Road north to Johnson Ferry Road
16.07%
63
Brookhaven - Zone 3Dresden Drive north to Peachtree Road
18.62%
73
Brookhaven - Zone 4Buford Highway north to Dresden Drive and Peachtree Road
33.67%
132
Brookhaven - Zone 5Buford Highway south to city limits
2.04%
Sandy Springs
0.51%
1.53%
3.32%
13
Dunwoody
Chamblee
13 / 48
Packet Pg. 85
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
City of Atlanta
1.28%
Other location in Metropolitan Atlanta
2.04%
Outside Metropolitan Atlanta
0.77%
Total
392
14 / 48
Packet Pg. 86
Q5 Where do you work or go to school? For

City of Brookhaven workers, please select
the zone from the map from the previous
question
Answered: 376
Skipped: 19
Brookhaven Zone 1Johnso...

Brookhaven Zone 2Peacht...
Brookhaven Zone 3Dresde...
Sandy Springs
Dunwoody
Chamblee
Buckhead
Atlanta
Midtown Atlanta
Downtown
Atlanta
Other location
in Metropoli...
Outside
Metropolitan...
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
Answer Choices
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Responses
Brookhaven - Zone 1Johnson Ferry Road north to Interstate 285
8.78%
33
Brookhaven - Zone 2Peachtree Road north to Johnson Ferry Road
3.72%
14
Brookhaven - Zone 3Dresden Drive north to Peachtree Road
3.72%
14
Brookhaven - Zone 4Buford Highway north to Dresden Drive and Peachtree Road
7.45%
28
15 / 48
Packet Pg. 87
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
Brookhaven - Zone 5Buford Highway south to city limits
2.13%
Sandy Springs
7.18%
27
Dunwoody
6.65%
25
Chamblee
3.46%
13
Buckhead Atlanta
13.30%
50
Midtown Atlanta
9.31%
35
Downtown Atlanta
7.18%
27
Other location in Metropolitan Atlanta
18.62%
70
Outside Metropolitan Atlanta
8.51%
32
Total
376
16 / 48
Packet Pg. 88
Q6 How comfortable are you riding a bike?

Answered: 394
Skipped: 1
Very confident
on almost an...
Comfortable on
most streets...
Only
comfortable ...
Not
comfortable ...
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
Answer Choices
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Responses
Very confident on almost any street or trail
23.60%
93
Comfortable on most streets and trails
30.96%
122
Only comfortable on a few streets and trails
34.01%
134
Not comfortable at all
11.42%
45
Total
394
17 / 48
Packet Pg. 89
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
Q7 What is your gender?

Answered: 392
Skipped: 3
Male
Female
Other/Prefer
not to answer
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
Answer Choices
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Responses
Male
46.17%
181
Female
51.53%
202
Other/Prefer not to answer
2.30%
Total
9
392
18 / 48
Packet Pg. 90
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
Q8 What is your age?

Answered: 391
Skipped: 4
0-14
15-34
35-54
55 or older
Prefer not to
answer
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
Answer Choices
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Responses
0-14
0.26%
15-34
23.79%
93
35-54
52.17%
204
55 or older
20.97%
82
Prefer not to answer
2.81%
11
Total
391
19 / 48
Packet Pg. 91
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
Q9 How much more or less would you like

to walk for the following reasons?
Answered: 373
Skipped: 22
I would like
to walk to work
I would like
to walk to...
I would like
to walk (or...
much more
than I do
now
I would like to walk to work
I would like to walk to

other places
I would like to walk (or
run) for recreation or
exercise
0.2
0.4
more than
I do now
0.6
0.8
about the
same as I do
now
1.2
less than
I do now
1.4
much less
than I do
now
1.6
1.8
I do not do this now

and I do not want to
20.33%
73
14.48%
52
15.88%
57
0.00%
0
0.00%
0
49.30%
177
47.81%
36.07%
12.02%
0.00%
0.55%
3.55%
175
132
44
13
37.16%
33.88%
27.05%
0.55%
0.00%
1.37%
136
124
99
20 / 48
Total
Weighted
Average
359
1.09
366
1.35
366
1.09
Packet Pg. 92
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
Q10 How much more or less would you like

to ride a bicycle for the following reasons?
Answered: 372
Skipped: 23
I would like
to bike to work
I would like
to bike to...
I would like
to bike for...
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.4
1.8
more than
I do now
about the same

as I do now
24.23%
16.16%
11.14%
0.00%
0.28%
48.19%
87
58
40
I would like to bike to

other places
42.08%
154
32.51%
119
6.01%
22
0.27%
1
I would like to bike for

recreation or exercise
43.72%
160
31.42%
115
10.93%
40
0.27%
1
work
21 / 48
much less
than I do now
1.6
much more
than I do now
I would like to bike to
less than
I do now
1.2
I do not do this now

and I do not want to
Total
Weighted
Average
173
359
1.24
0.27%
1
18.85%
69
366
1.43
0.00%
0
13.66%
50
366
1.37
Packet Pg. 93
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
Q11 Which of the following keep you from

walking as much as you would like? (check
all that apply)
Answered: 372
Skipped: 23
There is
nowhere to w...
Walking along
the streets ...
Where I want
to go is too...
Lack of
storefronts,...
It is
difficult to...
Outside
temperature...
It would take
too long to...
Risk of bad
weather
Even though
where I want...
I do not want
to have to...
I feel unsafe
for some rea...
None of these
apply; I am...
Difficult
terrain (ex:...
Other (please
specify)
I am
physically...
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Answer Choices
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Responses
There is nowhere to walk along the streets I would take (missing sidewalks)
60.22%
224
Walking along the streets I would take is uncomfortable because of the amount of traffic on them
55.65%
207
Where I want to go is too far to walk
41.13%
153
22 / 48
Packet Pg. 94
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
Lack of storefronts, restaurants, and other activities
34.14%
127
It is difficult to cross streets safely
33.60%
125
Outside temperature (too hot or cold)
28.49%
106
It would take too long to walk
27.69%
103
Risk of bad weather
19.89%
74
Even though where I want to go is nearby, there is no direct route and I would have to walk far out of my way
19.89%
74
I do not want to have to carry things while traveling
13.98%
52
I feel unsafe for some reason other than traffic
8.87%
33
None of these apply; I am able to walk as much as I would like
8.60%
32
Difficult terrain (ex: steep hills)
6.72%
25
Other (please specify)
6.72%
25
I am physically disabled and can not walk
0.27%
Total Respondents: 372
Date
Lack of path/trail easily accessible (I drive to chastain to walk)
12/8/2015 1:52 PM
Children
11/9/2015 1:00 PM
So much the infrastructure is ugly and not inviting to walk.
11/7/2015 4:56 AM
No major employment center within walking distance within my industry.
10/16/2015 10:23 PM
Brookhaven streets are way too narrow for cars let alone walkers or bicyclists. Widen the streets first, then add any
bike lanes
10/14/2015 5:59 AM
It doesn't feel safe to push my baby's jogging stroller down a lot of streets in Brookhaven.
10/13/2015 3:03 PM
In Summer, there is no shade along the road.
10/13/2015 2:36 PM
I am retired. I only walk when the temperature is above 55 degrees and it's not raining. My walking range is 4 miles
10/13/2015 10:59 AM
total. Lots of stores and restaurants within range. Sometimes I walk to grocery store when I need just a few items. If I
need many and/or large items I use my car.
9
It's no fun walking along Peachtree Road. Nothing much to look at; no points of interest.
10/12/2015 11:20 PM
10
This is one of the most idiotic ideas I have heard in a while with as much traffic as we have in our neighborhood. Plus
you want to cut up to 10' of property owners yards where the path would reside. I can think of many area;s where our
10/2/2015 8:12 AM
tax dollars could go towards such as more traffic calming devices and security measures.
11
Uneven and poorly maintained sidewalks
8/23/2015 5:04 PM
12
too much traffic noise; sidewalks keep switching the side of the street
7/26/2015 12:42 PM
13
side walks look like a war zone. Police permit high speeding on residential streets making it hazardous to cross.
Insufficient stop lights and stop signs (white paint designating walkways across street are not understood or
6/15/2015 1:52 PM
recognized by many motorists, rendering them a sort of russian roulette for anyone trying to use them as traffic
continues
14
Sidewalks have curbs which are difficult with strollers
6/10/2015 6:22 AM
15
I live on Bubbling Creek Road which parallels a section of Ashford Dunwoody Road. During morning and evening rush
hour and noon lunch it is extremely dangerous to walk, ride bikes and push strollers on the street. People do it anyway
6/9/2015 11:41 AM
including myself but if the traffic could be controlled it would be a wonderful area for bicyclists walkers, runners and
baby strollers.
16
A lot of street crossing is required to stay on sidewalks. Many streets do not have sidewalks.
6/8/2015 4:47 PM
17
Would love to have more connectivity to the parks nearby without having to go way out of the way to get there.
6/7/2015 11:25 PM
23 / 48
Packet Pg. 95
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
18
bad connectivity... last mile
6/7/2015 7:45 AM
19
I walk a lot, but it is unsafe because the right-of-way is filled with (illegal) fences, overgrown bushes, not enough
6/6/2015 10:52 PM
sidewalks, and terrifying routes along Peachtree Road!

20
I walk quite a bit, but only on low-traffic streets.
6/6/2015 6:49 AM
21
We need more walk and bike friendly routes. It is very dangerous now.
6/6/2015 12:01 AM
22
sidewalks in bad disrepair.
6/5/2015 10:29 PM
23
Lack of sidewalks is a huge problem in my area.
6/5/2015 5:54 PM
24
Sidewalks are horrible along Dresden and are on just one side of the street.
6/5/2015 5:18 PM
25
Don't tax us again lime for the sttreet lights sling Buford Highway.
6/5/2015 4:21 PM
24 / 48
Packet Pg. 96
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
Answered: 361
Q12 Which of the following keep you from

riding a bicycle as much as you would like?
(check all that apply)
Skipped: 34
25 / 48
Packet Pg. 97
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
I do not have
anywhere to...
Even though
where I want...
Lack of
storefronts,...
I do not own a
bike
Outside
temperature...
Risk of bad
weather
Difficult
terrain (ex:...
Where I want
to go is too...
Other (please
specify)
I feel unsafe
for some rea...
I do not want
to have to...
None of these
apply; I am...
It would take
too long to...
I do not want
to have to...
I do not have
anywhere to...
I do not know
how to ride ...
I am
physically...
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Answer Choices
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Responses
Biking on the streets I would take is uncomfortable because of the amount of traffic on them
74.79%
270
I do not have anywhere to safely store my bike at work, shops, or other places I travel to
24.38%
88
26 / 48
Packet Pg. 98
Biking on the
streets I wo...
Even though where I want to go is nearby, there is no direct route and I have to bike far out of my way
21.05%
76
Lack of storefronts, restaurants, and other activity
18.84%
68
I do not own a bike
16.34%
59
Outside temperature (too hot or cold)
15.51%
56
Risk of bad weather
14.13%
51
Difficult terrain (ex: steep hills)
12.47%
45
Where I want to go is too far to bike
11.91%
43
8.86%
32
I feel unsafe for some reason other than traffic
8.31%
30
7.76%
28
None of these apply; I am able to bike as much as I would like
7.48%
27
It would take too long to bike
7.20%
26
6.09%
22
I do not have anywhere to safely store my bike at home
3.32%
12
I do not know how to ride a bike
0.28%
I am physically disabled and can not ride a bike
0.28%
Date
Lack of safe bike lane or path to travel on
12/8/2015 1:52 PM
I hate bikes
11/16/2015 12:05 PM
There are so few safe bike trails. Traffic moves too fast.
11/7/2015 4:56 AM
It is not safe for biking on Atlanta streets
10/27/2015 9:39 AM
I would have to bike on Osborne and that road has no room for bikes and has turns that would blind drivers to bikers.
10/19/2015 1:07 PM
No dedicated bike lanes. It is too dangerous to share lanes and/or narrow shoulders with the speeding cars.
10/16/2015 10:23 PM
VERY unsafe to bike with a toddler in tow
10/14/2015 8:14 AM
Brookhaven streets are insanely narrow and can barely support two cars. There is no way they can support a bike lane
without first widening the streets
10/14/2015 5:59 AM
I wish I could ride my bike but it gives me a real pain in the ass
10/13/2015 10:59 AM
10
I would certainly bike to work daily if road conditions permitted.
9/21/2015 12:13 PM
11
not enough side walks
9/14/2015 1:49 PM
12
a bike lane needs to be added from Windsor to Johnson ferry on Ashford Dunwoody. I feel very unsafe riding up this
hill on the road. Please add a 24 to 36 inch bike lane
8/26/2015 8:52 AM
13
idiots in cars
8/12/2015 8:50 AM
14
it makes you sweat
8/6/2015 6:18 AM
15
No biking route
7/7/2015 11:56 AM
16
unsafe traffic and the bike lanes are TOO NARROW!!!!!!!!
6/15/2015 1:52 PM
17
I want trails- I have no interest in riding bikes on streets!
6/13/2015 11:00 PM
18
Lack of safe trails for biking. I would never ride on the street
6/8/2015 4:47 PM
27 / 48
Packet Pg. 99
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
19
I wish there was more sidewalk and continuous sidewalk on both sides of busy main streets such as Harts Mill
because we live on the side with NO sidewalk and crossing the road is very unsafe with people often driving close to
50mph :(
6/7/2015 11:25 PM
20
No biking trail from Chamblee to north druid hills
6/7/2015 8:15 AM
21
problems with last mile connectivity
6/7/2015 7:45 AM
22
Soooo unsafe on most Brookhaven roads! Yipes!
6/6/2015 10:52 PM
23
Need more bike racks!! Village place, town Brookhaven, etc
6/6/2015 7:52 AM
24
I'm very confident riding my bikes all over Atlanta w or without cycling infrastructure but realize having it would promote
others to ride more
6/6/2015 7:51 AM
25
No shower at work
6/6/2015 7:30 AM
26
I don't want to get run over biking on the streets
6/6/2015 6:49 AM
27
drivers who don't obey the speed limits. no bike lanes
6/6/2015 1:38 AM
28
We need more bike lanes and dedicated bike paths
6/6/2015 12:01 AM
29
All
6/5/2015 11:48 PM
30
bad sidewalks
6/5/2015 10:29 PM
31
idiot drivers
6/5/2015 9:55 PM
32
Mo bike path ease.
6/5/2015 4:21 PM
28 / 48
Packet Pg. 100
Q13 In your opinion, does Brookhaven have

enough _________ facilities?
Answered: 334
Skipped: 61
Pedestrian ex:
sidewalks,...
Bicyclingex:
bike lanes,...
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.4
1.8
No, Brookhaven
needs some
more
Pedestrian ex:
sidewalks, walking
paths, trails
54.79%
183
35.93%
120
7.19%
24
0.60%
2
1.50%
5
Bicyclingex: bike
57.58%
27.27%
8.79%
2.42%
3.94%
190
90
29
13
29 / 48
No, Brookhaven has

some more than it
needs
1.6
No, Brookhaven
needs many
more
lanes, cycle tracks
Yes, Brookhaven
has the right
amount
1.2
No, Brookhaven has

many more than it
needs
Total
Weighted
Average
334
1.42
330
1.32
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
Packet Pg. 101
Q14 Which of the following types of

investments would you like to see in
Brookhaven? Images of each are shown
below the question text. (check between
one and four options)
Answered: 340
Skipped: 55
Bicycle
Boulevards:...
Sharrows:
Pavement...
Exclusive
Bicycle Lane...
Multi-Use
Trails: Wide...
Sidewalks:
Separate spa...
Cycle Tracks:
Wide, buffer...
Other (please
specify)
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Answer Choices
Responses
17.35%
59
Bicycle Boulevards: Streets designed with an emphasis on cycling instead of vehicular travel. Designs vary, but may include any of the following: low
speed limits, signals timed for bicyclists, measures to discourage non-local vehicular travel, and/or additional wayfinding signage for cyclists.
9.71%
Sharrows: Pavement markings that indicate to drivers that a roadway is a cycling corridor. Typically used on low-speed, low-traffic streets with wide
outer lanes. Formally called "shared-lane markings"
33
30.88%
105
Exclusive Bicycle Lanes: Separate, marked lanes exclusively for bicyclists. Typically placed immediately adjacent to vehicle lanes.
77.94%
265
Multi-Use Trails: Wide, completely separate pathways for non-vehicular travel, including, but not limited to, walking and bicycling. May be immediately
next to a roadway or along a separate path.
60.88%
207
Sidewalks: Separate space designated for walking (or running) only. Typically built on a curb, adjacent to a street.
39.41%
134
Cycle Tracks: Wide, buffered bike lane on one side of a roadway. Usually built with some kind of barrier to protect from the adjacent roadway.
5.59%

30 / 48
19
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
Packet Pg. 102
Date
none
12/9/2015 3:16 PM
none
10/30/2015 2:53 PM
Like I said, there is much more traffic due to the overdevelopment of apartment buildings in Brookhaven. The streets
are narrow and cannot accommodate sharrows, especially windsor parkway, Ashford dunwoody, hermance, Dresden,
10/14/2015 6:09 AM
etc.
4
don"t use private property
10/13/2015 3:04 PM
I believe this question is not presented properly because by answering/checking any of the options is indicating full
buy-in to invest money. Conversely, by not checking a box would indicate no support for any investment. To totally
invest or not invest are poor choices. Multiuse trails and cycle paths do not belong in residential neighborhoods with
10/13/2015 12:17 PM
already narrow streets and front yards close to a street or existing sidewalk. Why would the city install any of these
options and destroy private property. The greater good and quality of life of residential neighborhoods trumps the BPT.
Again, the options listed make better sense in selected major thoroughfares. Sidewalks? Repair our existing sidwalks
first. And as already stated, don't try and install sidewalks in residential neighborhoods with narrow streets and small
front yards. The same logic I am expressing for this question also applies to question 13. Add walking and bike paths
where itmakes sense. Finally, any of these options will cost the city (and tax payers eventually) hugh amounts of
money. I do not support the city making these long term investments without a public vote.
6
You are skewing the survey results because these are not yes/no options. There are so many variables involved that
definitately EXCLUDE multi-use trails, cycle tracks and sidewalks. Fix the existing sidewalks currently in disrepair
10/12/2015 12:03 PM
before taking off on an EXPENSIVE pipe dream. Some of the alternatives sound wonderful if they were considered in
pre-planning development phases. But to come down a residential neighborhood with narrow streets, residential
streets already heavily traveled with speeding and aggressive drivers, and yards already close distance to the
street...are you serious about trying to force any of these options against the wishes of a neighborhood (Brookhven
Heights is our neighborhood) is poor judgement and use of city resources. Also, Question 15 skewers survey results
because there is no option to vote "none." So my comments also apply to question # 15.
7
Sidewalks only no golf carts.
10/12/2015 9:29 AM
See note on sidewalks
10/10/2015 8:49 AM
I've always been told to WALK against traffic and BIKE with the traffic. Is this an ordinance that needs tobe enforced?
Mnay bikers think they owne the roads/sidewalks over pedestrians
10/9/2015 7:42 PM
10
PTV lanes
9/29/2015 7:08 PM
11
As traffic increases, drivers are LESS aware of bicyclists. Better to separate cycles from cars as much as possible.
9/21/2015 12:18 PM
12
none -- do not want to expend funds for such things
8/25/2015 10:49 PM
13
See notes below
8/19/2015 3:40 PM
14
Nature Trails
8/17/2015 4:25 PM
15
I don't want to see any of my money spent on pedestrian or bicycle "improvements."
7/19/2015 2:43 PM
16
None
6/13/2015 12:01 PM
17
connectivity points... Ie random spots you can't get from a to b directly
6/7/2015 7:50 AM
18
Natural trails connecting Brookhaven parks
6/6/2015 8:35 PM
19
repair damaged sidewalks
6/5/2015 10:55 PM
31 / 48
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
Packet Pg. 103
Q15 Do you think that trails and paths

should be designed to accommodate small
vehicles like golf carts, or should they only
allow non-motorized travel, such as walking
and bicycling?
Answered: 327
Skipped: 68
Include small
vehicles
Only walking
and bicycling
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
Answer Choices
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Responses
Include small vehicles
22.02%
72
Only walking and bicycling
77.98%
255
Total
327
32 / 48
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
Packet Pg. 104
Q16 How important are the following types

of pedestrian and bicycling connections?
Answered: 337
Skipped: 58
Connections
between...
Connections to
commercial...
Connections to
public trans...
Connections to
parks
Connections to
schools,...
Very
Important
Connections between residential neighborhoods
Important
Somewhat
Important
10
Not important
at all
Total
Weighted
Average
53.73%
180
25.37%
85
13.73%
46
7.16%
24
335
3.26
Connections to commercial retail areasex: grocery stores, Town

Brookhaven
70.54%
237
17.56%
59
8.04%
27
3.87%
13
336
3.55
Connections to public transit stops and stations
58.51%
196
21.49%
72
10.15%
34
9.85%
33
335
3.29
76.12%
13.43%
7.76%
2.69%
255
45
26
335
3.63
50.90%
169
27.41%
91
15.06%
50
6.63%
22
332
3.23
Connections to parks
Connections to schools, churches and other community

resources
33 / 48
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
Packet Pg. 105
Q17 What percentage of the City of

Brookhaven's total transportation budget
do you think should be used to build
bicycle and pedestrian facilities? (Enter a
number between 0 and 100)
Answered: 302
Skipped: 93
Responses
Date
20
12/15/2015 12:12 PM
40
12/11/2015 6:53 PM
30
12/10/2015 9:07 AM
25
12/9/2015 9:16 PM
12/9/2015 3:16 PM
15
12/8/2015 2:31 PM
40
12/8/2015 2:02 PM
15
12/8/2015 11:23 AM
25
12/8/2015 10:51 AM
10
25
12/7/2015 4:59 PM
11
10
12/6/2015 11:42 AM
12
12/5/2015 2:37 AM
13
25
12/5/2015 1:22 AM
14
10
12/2/2015 9:18 PM
15
25
12/2/2015 6:29 PM
16
10
12/2/2015 9:10 AM
17
10
12/2/2015 5:29 AM
18
15
11/20/2015 5:30 PM
19
20
11/19/2015 10:26 AM
20
65
11/18/2015 9:09 AM
21
11/16/2015 12:30 PM
22
50
11/10/2015 2:03 PM
23
33
11/9/2015 11:37 PM
24
20
11/9/2015 1:03 PM
25
11/9/2015 4:35 AM
26
30
11/7/2015 5:00 AM
27
11/3/2015 8:29 PM
28
10/30/2015 2:53 PM
29
50
10/27/2015 9:42 AM
30
25
10/26/2015 2:25 PM
31
50
10/24/2015 8:42 AM
32
30
10/19/2015 1:22 PM
34 / 48
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
Packet Pg. 106
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
33
25
10/17/2015 3:09 PM
34
45
10/17/2015 10:57 AM
35
10
10/17/2015 9:08 AM
36
20
10/17/2015 8:37 AM
37
80
10/17/2015 7:15 AM
38
33
10/16/2015 10:32 PM
39
15
10/16/2015 10:22 PM
40
25
10/16/2015 10:09 PM
41
15
10/16/2015 9:18 PM
42
30
10/16/2015 5:04 PM
43
50
10/16/2015 4:54 PM
44
35
10/16/2015 4:13 PM
45
10/15/2015 12:16 PM
46
40
10/14/2015 6:09 PM
47
30
10/14/2015 8:18 AM
48
75
10/13/2015 7:38 PM
49
10/13/2015 7:04 PM
50
20
10/13/2015 4:40 PM
51
10
10/13/2015 4:28 PM
52
15
10/13/2015 4:09 PM
53
60
10/13/2015 3:52 PM
54
10/13/2015 3:41 PM
55
30
10/13/2015 3:38 PM
56
12
10/13/2015 3:25 PM
57
30
10/13/2015 3:09 PM
58
20
10/13/2015 3:06 PM
59
10/13/2015 3:04 PM
60
10
10/13/2015 2:59 PM
61
50
10/13/2015 2:56 PM
62
20
10/13/2015 2:54 PM
63
40
10/13/2015 2:42 PM
64
30
10/13/2015 2:22 PM
65
10/13/2015 1:43 PM
66
10/13/2015 1:32 PM
67
10/13/2015 12:17 PM
68
10/13/2015 11:44 AM
69
20
10/13/2015 11:29 AM
70
10
10/13/2015 11:14 AM
71
25
10/13/2015 10:52 AM
72
75
10/12/2015 11:34 PM
35 / 48
Packet Pg. 107
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
73
30
10/12/2015 6:26 PM
74
50
10/12/2015 5:37 PM
75
25
10/12/2015 2:22 PM
76
10/12/2015 12:58 PM
77
10/12/2015 12:03 PM
78
50
10/12/2015 11:15 AM
79
25
10/12/2015 10:26 AM
80
75
10/12/2015 10:21 AM
81
20
10/12/2015 10:14 AM
82
10/12/2015 9:26 AM
83
100
10/12/2015 9:16 AM
84
10/10/2015 8:49 AM
85
10
10/10/2015 7:27 AM
86
30
10/9/2015 11:44 PM
87
10/9/2015 10:06 PM
88
15
10/9/2015 7:42 PM
89
10/2/2015 8:13 AM
90
50
9/30/2015 8:53 PM
91
50
9/30/2015 12:00 PM
92
9/29/2015 7:08 PM
93
9/28/2015 11:27 AM
94
25
9/23/2015 7:51 AM
95
9/22/2015 10:39 AM
96
50
9/21/2015 12:18 PM
97
20
9/19/2015 10:50 PM
98
50
9/18/2015 10:13 PM
99
60
9/18/2015 3:16 PM
100
50
9/18/2015 12:32 PM
101
30
9/14/2015 3:32 PM
102
20
9/14/2015 1:51 PM
103
40
9/14/2015 1:30 PM
104
60
9/13/2015 2:31 PM
105
25
9/12/2015 6:45 PM
106
20
9/12/2015 8:14 AM
107
33
9/11/2015 1:44 PM
108
25
9/6/2015 12:07 PM
109
10
9/1/2015 10:15 AM
110
15
8/28/2015 1:36 PM
111
10
8/26/2015 8:56 AM
112
8/25/2015 10:49 PM
113
40
8/23/2015 5:07 PM
36 / 48
Packet Pg. 108
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
114
8/19/2015 3:40 PM
115
8/17/2015 4:25 PM
116
10
8/15/2015 10:41 PM
117
20
8/13/2015 4:41 PM
118
8/13/2015 3:20 PM
119
8/12/2015 8:51 AM
120
15
8/11/2015 2:10 PM
121
40
8/8/2015 10:38 PM
122
8/6/2015 6:23 AM
123
20
8/4/2015 10:18 AM
124
50
7/30/2015 9:41 AM
125
7/26/2015 12:47 PM
126
35
7/24/2015 9:14 AM
127
10
7/21/2015 10:44 PM
128
40
7/20/2015 11:05 PM
129
7/19/2015 2:43 PM
130
50
7/16/2015 2:31 PM
131
25
7/15/2015 5:30 PM
132
25
7/15/2015 5:26 PM
133
60
7/15/2015 2:35 PM
134
30
7/15/2015 9:28 AM
135
33
7/15/2015 9:04 AM
136
15
7/12/2015 12:25 PM
137
40
7/9/2015 10:47 PM
138
20
7/8/2015 1:14 PM
139
30
7/8/2015 12:16 PM
140
60
7/7/2015 11:57 AM
141
25
7/7/2015 9:21 AM
142
30
7/6/2015 4:15 PM
143
40
7/6/2015 10:39 AM
144
7/2/2015 1:55 PM
145
75
6/30/2015 2:11 PM
146
45
6/29/2015 3:59 PM
147
30
6/26/2015 5:14 PM
148
30
6/25/2015 3:25 PM
149
6/25/2015 12:23 PM
150
10
6/25/2015 7:06 AM
151
50
6/23/2015 6:46 PM
152
15
6/19/2015 5:12 PM
153
30
6/19/2015 12:36 AM
154
40
6/19/2015 12:20 AM
37 / 48
Packet Pg. 109
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
155
50
6/18/2015 11:14 AM
156
51
6/17/2015 9:45 AM
157
6/17/2015 8:14 AM
158
25
6/16/2015 2:08 PM
159
45
6/16/2015 1:59 PM
160
20
6/16/2015 12:30 PM
161
50
6/15/2015 4:15 PM
162
25
6/15/2015 2:19 PM
163
50
6/15/2015 12:32 PM
164
25
6/14/2015 7:03 PM
165
6/14/2015 5:26 PM
166
15
6/13/2015 11:03 PM
167
40
6/13/2015 6:33 PM
168
25
6/13/2015 1:11 PM
169
6/13/2015 12:01 PM
170
10
6/13/2015 11:48 AM
171
75
6/13/2015 9:27 AM
172
20
6/12/2015 10:54 PM
173
6/12/2015 7:49 PM
174
15
6/11/2015 1:25 PM
175
15
6/10/2015 11:44 PM
176
30
6/10/2015 6:09 PM
177
10
6/10/2015 4:41 PM
178
50
6/10/2015 4:00 PM
179
20
6/10/2015 2:49 PM
180
75
6/10/2015 9:03 AM
181
30
6/10/2015 6:23 AM
182
40
6/9/2015 10:05 PM
183
50
6/9/2015 2:22 PM
184
30
6/9/2015 1:11 PM
185
20
6/9/2015 9:33 AM
186
60
6/8/2015 11:52 PM
187
25
6/8/2015 10:29 PM
188
20
6/8/2015 4:04 PM
189
15
6/8/2015 4:00 PM
190
30
6/8/2015 3:23 PM
191
20
6/8/2015 12:47 PM
192
15
6/8/2015 11:18 AM
193
30
6/8/2015 11:15 AM
194
6/8/2015 11:09 AM
195
80
6/8/2015 10:23 AM
38 / 48
Packet Pg. 110
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
196
75
6/7/2015 11:34 PM
197
30
6/7/2015 10:18 PM
198
20
6/7/2015 4:17 PM
199
15
6/7/2015 4:01 PM
200
15
6/7/2015 12:05 PM
201
6/7/2015 10:44 AM
202
10
6/7/2015 10:19 AM
203
15
6/7/2015 9:45 AM
204
85
6/7/2015 8:16 AM
205
10
6/7/2015 7:50 AM
206
30
6/7/2015 1:44 AM
207
80
6/7/2015 1:16 AM
208
25
6/6/2015 11:44 PM
209
50
6/6/2015 11:09 PM
210
20
6/6/2015 10:49 PM
211
20
6/6/2015 10:32 PM
212
20
6/6/2015 10:12 PM
213
90
6/6/2015 9:52 PM
214
30
6/6/2015 9:47 PM
215
20
6/6/2015 8:49 PM
216
25
6/6/2015 8:40 PM
217
39
6/6/2015 8:40 PM
218
40
6/6/2015 8:35 PM
219
30
6/6/2015 4:42 PM
220
30
6/6/2015 3:47 PM
221
20
6/6/2015 2:50 PM
222
35
6/6/2015 2:41 PM
223
20
6/6/2015 2:00 PM
224
75
6/6/2015 1:44 PM
225
20
6/6/2015 1:22 PM
226
25
6/6/2015 11:29 AM
227
75
6/6/2015 11:12 AM
228
10
6/6/2015 10:20 AM
229
10
6/6/2015 10:02 AM
230
20
6/6/2015 9:13 AM
231
50
6/6/2015 9:09 AM
232
25
6/6/2015 9:07 AM
233
6/6/2015 8:58 AM
234
25
6/6/2015 8:52 AM
235
6/6/2015 8:37 AM
236
75
6/6/2015 8:36 AM
39 / 48
Packet Pg. 111
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
237
15
6/6/2015 8:08 AM
238
25
6/6/2015 8:02 AM
239
10
6/6/2015 7:42 AM
240
50
6/6/2015 7:24 AM
241
40
6/6/2015 7:18 AM
242
20
6/6/2015 7:16 AM
243
50
6/6/2015 6:58 AM
244
50
6/6/2015 6:55 AM
245
30
6/6/2015 2:49 AM
246
40
6/6/2015 1:42 AM
247
100
6/6/2015 12:46 AM
248
6/5/2015 11:49 PM
249
50
6/5/2015 11:45 PM
250
20
6/5/2015 11:44 PM
251
20
6/5/2015 11:38 PM
252
10
6/5/2015 11:25 PM
253
15
6/5/2015 11:16 PM
254
30
6/5/2015 11:02 PM
255
20
6/5/2015 10:55 PM
256
100
6/5/2015 10:55 PM
257
20
6/5/2015 10:24 PM
258
30
6/5/2015 10:23 PM
259
10
6/5/2015 10:20 PM
260
40
6/5/2015 10:19 PM
261
20
6/5/2015 9:59 PM
262
15
6/5/2015 9:54 PM
263
15
6/5/2015 9:43 PM
264
33
6/5/2015 9:42 PM
265
50
6/5/2015 9:25 PM
266
10
6/5/2015 9:25 PM
267
20
6/5/2015 9:20 PM
268
15
6/5/2015 9:20 PM
269
6/5/2015 9:19 PM
270
20
6/5/2015 9:08 PM
271
45
6/5/2015 9:05 PM
272
57
6/5/2015 9:02 PM
273
10
6/5/2015 9:00 PM
274
50
6/5/2015 8:57 PM
275
15
6/5/2015 8:54 PM
276
50
6/5/2015 8:46 PM
277
20
6/5/2015 8:37 PM
40 / 48
Packet Pg. 112
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
278
20
6/5/2015 8:31 PM
279
60
6/5/2015 8:18 PM
280
90
6/5/2015 8:17 PM
281
40
6/5/2015 7:49 PM
282
45
6/5/2015 7:47 PM
283
50
6/5/2015 6:53 PM
284
10
6/5/2015 6:52 PM
285
20
6/5/2015 6:48 PM
286
100
6/5/2015 6:46 PM
287
20
6/5/2015 6:39 PM
288
10
6/5/2015 6:32 PM
289
30
6/5/2015 6:23 PM
290
20
6/5/2015 5:11 PM
291
30
6/5/2015 5:05 PM
292
60
6/5/2015 4:46 PM
293
50
6/5/2015 4:28 PM
294
15
6/5/2015 4:23 PM
295
20
6/5/2015 4:16 PM
296
70
6/5/2015 4:11 PM
297
15
6/5/2015 4:09 PM
298
50
6/5/2015 4:08 PM
299
30
6/5/2015 4:05 PM
300
30
6/5/2015 4:04 PM
301
25
6/5/2015 4:04 PM
302
25
6/5/2015 4:04 PM
41 / 48
Packet Pg. 113
Q18 Please provide any additional

comments or concerns you may have about
improving walking or bicycling in
Brookhaven:
Answered: 124
Skipped: 271
Responses
Date
I would love to see Brookhaven emerge as a walking/biking city. I think it would draw more people who enjoy an
12/8/2015 2:02 PM
active lifestyle and be more convienient for those of us who reside here already. (A o-ring tram system would be the
next step) wishful thinking!
2
Brookhaven should first address pedestrian sidewalks, safe crossing walks in all low income areas due to a higher
usage getting to and from public transportation/and more walkers.
12/5/2015 2:37 AM
Q17 is a poorly designed question. There is no context given. We need dog parks and sidewalks to get there.
12/2/2015 9:18 PM
Our streets are already narrow and overcrowded. I can't see any of this working based on the current street size and
traffic. The traffic is getting much worse due to all of the apartments being built around Brookhaven. Can't imagine how
this can be accomplished.
12/2/2015 9:10 AM
more sidewalks and less bike paths
11/16/2015 12:30 PM
Brookhaven is a wonderful community. It will be more wonderful when it is more pedestrian friendly. Thank you for
11/10/2015 2:03 PM
seeking resident input.

7
Stop wasting money on things you think are best for residents.
11/9/2015 4:35 AM
Physical beauty is an important point to keep into consideration. While so many of our neighborhoods are inviting and
walkable, the routes to get to shops schools and other activity areas are uninviting and ugly. Please don't overlook
trees and their role in keeping paths, trails and streets cool and beautiful.
11/7/2015 5:00 AM
Safety of residents along any trails must be a consideration.
11/3/2015 8:29 PM
10
We absolutely need pedestrian and biking trails & accommodations. We absolutely do NOT need any paths or
accommodations for golf carts or other motorized vehicles.
10/24/2015 8:42 AM
11
I just moved to Brookhaven and would love to be able to bike to the Marta station and commercial shops on Peachtree
from my house. Unfortunately, that would require me to bike down Osborne. I tried it once and it was terrifying. Drivers
10/19/2015 1:22 PM
can't see the bikers around the corners and they risk crashing into on-coming traffic if they try to pass the biker.
Osborne connects a massive amount of residential buildings to commercial areas and has the potential to be a
fantastic corridor that would be heavily utilized if made safer for non-vehicular traffic.
12
Very skeptical about Brookhaven government. Too litigious. Too much bullying.
10/17/2015 10:57 AM
13
Brookhaven Heights needs sidewalks. Hundreds of cars cut through the neighborhood to access Kroger each day.
10/17/2015 9:08 AM
When Walgreens comes it will be much worse. My children and I can't be outside walking/playing bc of all the traffic.
That really cant be stopped, but sidewalks would be a wonderful solution. Another would be a trail that would allow us
to access Lenox Park easily from the neighborhood. Thanks for offering this survey!
14
Healthier citizens provide more tax revenues since they live longer.
10/17/2015 7:15 AM
15
We have to be realistic about the balance between vehicular traffic and pedestrian/bike traffic. There are currently very
10/16/2015 10:32 PM
few employment centers reasonably serviced by MARTA, so very few people can use public transportation on a daily
basis. As such, there will continue to be a major influx of vehicular traffic on major thoroughfares such as Dresden/ N.
Druid/ Ashford Dunwoody during the rush hours. It's already nearly unbearable to drive on these roads during peak
hours. I don't want to see plans implemented that will add to that congestion. Ideally, I'd love to see these plans focus
on connecting the neighborhoods to each other safely, and connecting the neighborhoods to the existing commercial
districts. Additionally, I'd love to see a greater focus on attracting great storefronts and new tenants to the
Dresden/Apple Valley/N. Druid corridor. It's only a mile from Thompson to Dresden, but it feels so much further
because there is so little in the way of family-friendly and/or casual businesses on that stretch.
16
Question #17 is not easily answered without knowing what is spent today on these facilities, was there a surplus or
deficit to previous years transportation budget, were would funding be decreased to fund additional bike/ped lanes. In
short #17 is a flawed question for this given audience.
42 / 48
10/16/2015 10:22 PM
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
Packet Pg. 114
17
I see a lot of commentary from Brookhaven neighbors about cyclists not having a right to the streets. It's only my POV,
but if you look at the global cities that are considered great, one thing that they all have in common is human scale
architecture that placed first priority on pedestrians and cyclists. For me, it's not a matter of who has what right to use
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
10/16/2015 9:18 PM
which roads, but how do we make our city great. I encourage you to look outside of Atlanta and outside of Georgia.
Find the cities around the world that people hunger to live in...you'll find, almost universally, that walking and cycling
are central to their city planning. It's no accident.
18
Pedestrian and cycling friendly infrastructure is clearly already a major attractant to the communities that have already
secured them. In particular, this has proven to be an important imperative to wage earners in upper tax brackets,
10/16/2015 4:54 PM
making it that much more important to municipalities. It would be in Brookhaven's strategic longterm interest to invest
heavily in such infrastructure in my opinion. Plus as an avid cyclist, it would make the community more pleasant and
livable.
19
-safe bike storage at MARTA (not just bike locks/racks) with lockers for storing belongings -effort to educate drivers
about biking rules and vice versa (bikers don't stop at crosswalks, red lights, etc)
10/14/2015 8:18 AM
20
My biggest comment is this. Brookhaven streets are extremely narrow for vehicular traffic and could not safely
accommodate a sharrow or bike lane without completely re vamping and widening the streets. We need to look at
driver safety as well. There is not enough room to maneuver around a bicyclist on Windsor without moving into the
oncoming lane which typically always has a lot of traffic. Whatever plan is chosen, drivers of vehicles should not have
to slow down, stop, or endanger themselves to accommodate a bicyclist or walker on the street. There should be
10/14/2015 6:09 AM
separate facilities and/or much wider streets.

21
Build it and they will come.
10/13/2015 7:38 PM
22
Sidewalks are very important. I would not want the lanes reduced on streets to accommodate bikes. There is already
too much congestion with cars.
10/13/2015 4:28 PM
23
The small Brookhaven neighborhoods cannot accommodate the large groups of cyclists occupying the entire lanes.
10/13/2015 4:20 PM
They need a separate path on which to ride.

24
Listen, I live in Brookhaven, I work in Alpharetta. If there was a safe route, I would ride to work every day, 20 miles,
each way, without blinking.
10/13/2015 3:38 PM
25
Because a fit cyclist can travel at an average rate of 15 to 20+ MPH, mixing cyclists with walkers, runners, dog
walkers and families with children on bikes or in carriages can be hazardous. Better to separate them.
10/13/2015 3:25 PM
26
Walking/biking improves health, property values, safety and overall desirability of an area. Look at the success of the
Beltline!
10/13/2015 3:09 PM
27
speeding groups of bicycles are very dangerous in neighborhoods!!!!!
10/13/2015 3:04 PM
28
Don't forget when planning, that it is above 90 degrees the better part of the summer. Brookhaven folks don't have the
kind of jobs, at least in my neighborhood, where they can show up all sweaty to work. This stuff is for recreation. I
10/13/2015 2:59 PM
doubt you will encourage a new way of transportation to work on the hot and cold and rainy days. How many days
does that leave you, for this kind of planning and expense? Pay attention in the extreme weather. People are not out
because of no walking or bike paths. They are not out because the weather is too hot, too cold, too rainy, too much
threat of rain, etc. Pay attention to when they do come out. It's pretty miniscule. Stay real with this. It's for recreation
only for the very largest majority of District 3 people at least. Thanks for the survey!
29
do this in concert with other organizations that have the experience in design and raising matching funds.
10/13/2015 2:56 PM
30
Hard to state what % to allocate of the transportation budget and prioritize without knowing the other transportation
projects. But I firmly believe that having a path in front of or behind my house will improve the community much more
than it will detract from my personal enjoyment of my home. With increased community comes reduced crime and
improved quality of life for everyone involved. Many people are just afraid of change. But not all change is bad. This
10/13/2015 2:42 PM
change would be for the better.

31
You are going to need to fix traffic first
10/13/2015 1:32 PM
32
The questionnaire has been prepared to force positive responses for this initiative.
10/13/2015 12:17 PM
33
n/a
10/13/2015 11:44 AM
34
I wish Brookhaven could be like Copenhagen. People there bike and walk a lot and are happier than us. But most
10/13/2015 11:14 AM
Brookhavenites won't or can't give up their cars. So while I think it's noble to spend some money for the brave souls
who bike, we need creative vehicular traffic solutions and major expenditures to implement them.
35
Unless the infrastructure ,roads widened, is improved there is no need for separate bike lanes,
10/13/2015 10:52 AM
36
If the majority of people are behind this, then we need to commit in a big way . . . no half measures.
10/12/2015 11:34 PM
43 / 48
Packet Pg. 115
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
37
Do not want additional concrete paths added through existing neighborhoods. We live in brookhaven heights with
narrow streets and small lots. A 10" wide concrete path thru our front yard would leave us no yard!
10/12/2015 6:26 PM
38
Please see all my earlier comments. This is a very expensive initiative that will only pi** off residents if you start taking
away front yards already close to the street to satisfy an entitled/elitist group of cyclist speeding through neighborhood
and disobeying traffic laws.
10/12/2015 12:03 PM
39
While I do want to see more pedestrian friendly areas in brookhaven, I would hate to see this in Brookhaven Heights;
especially the roads that are already used as cut throughs by vehicles.
10/12/2015 10:56 AM
40
On what other things is the budget used? (Need that info to properly answer #17) For the narrower streets, there
should be a pedestrian walkway lane on the street. Pedestrians should not be walking in the middle of the streets and
giving drivers dirty looks. Streets were made for driving and are being shared with pedestrians. Pedestrians should
then be respectful of that and not walk in the middle or have their dog leashes stretching across the road.
10/12/2015 10:14 AM
41
No golf carts, this is not Peachtree City, if you want Peachtree City move to it.
10/12/2015 9:29 AM
42
Would love to see this in our community so much for so many reasons!
10/12/2015 9:16 AM
43
I waited years to be able to afford to move to Brookhaven. Sidewalks are great, but their placement on our very small
lots is a reduction in the quality of life for those homeowners - you need to recognize that.
10/10/2015 8:49 AM
44
I would be ok with a small sidewalk in my yard but not a big old bike bath or multi use through my yard!
10/10/2015 7:27 AM
45
I do not want a side walk or path cut into my front yard.
10/9/2015 11:44 PM
46
No need for golf carts, this not Peachtree City.
10/9/2015 10:06 PM
47
I'd love to see older neighborhoods HAVE sidewalks and adequate lighting. This would encourage residents to get out
and walk and not have to worry if they are going to make it home alive because of having to share the road with cars
and trucks. I just moved back to GA Dec 2014, and I live in Brookhaven Heights and I cannot enjoy my daily walks
with the dog (who stays at my heels), if I have to get OFF the roadway to dodge a car going too fast or because cars
are parked on the side and it's not wide enough for 2 cars and ME. I do not agree with the 10' poured concrete paths
10/9/2015 7:42 PM
that are proposed for a street inside our n'hood. I'm only okay with a 3-4' wide sidewalk because we are too much of a
cut-through as it is with Starbucks taking everyones '5bucks' for a cup of java. Maybe they need to move. Cars back
up at N. Druid Hills so they cut through Thornwell, Pine Grove, Oglethorpe, etc. OR make Peachtree/Colonial a
ROUND A BOUT? I heard a rumor that Colonial/Standard was going to become a round-a-bout. YAY!! We're pleased
to see Walgreens come into that delapitated lot on the other side of Colonial, but that is just going to ADD to the traffic
and backups into our neighborhood. I'd like to see N. Druid Hills sidewalk situation improved, on both sides of the
street.
48
Fix what you have. No need to build more
9/29/2015 7:08 PM
49
I find no enforcement of laws relating to bicycling. I view cyclists as a hazard on major roads and in packs greater than
9/28/2015 11:27 AM
5. Gas taxes and ad valorem taxes pay for our roads and I am not in favor of roads being devoted to cyclists. I am in
favor of resources other than gas taxes and ad valorem taxes being used. Perhaps a licensing program or a tax of
bicycles that would have them pay their way would be a good idea to allow them to share the costs of the mode of
transportation they elect to use.
50
If a new path is developed between the north east and north west side of Murphy Candler Park, it should only be
9/22/2015 10:39 AM
considered if there is a very significant boundary (at least 50 feet) from a property's side yard. It is very unfair to the
owners of a property to have a path align with the side boundary of that property. Who wants to have unknown people
constantly walking or biking immediately next to their side yard? What a terrible invasion of privacy!
51
The more Brookhaven invests in pedestrian/bicycle friendly communities now, the larger the return on investment
later. I urge leadership to think of walking and biking as a MODE of transportation and not just a recreational activity.
9/21/2015 12:18 PM
As our residents walk and bike more, their health will naturally improve.
52
Exercise Trails are the new Golf Courses. Connect a trail from Brookhaven to the Atlanta Beltway Trail.
9/19/2015 10:50 PM
53
I put a high % because something has to give with area traffic. Either people who live, work and attend school in the
area need better (and more importantly, safer) options for getting around (walk, bike, cart) or a solution to divert traffic
away from heavily congested areas (i.e. Johnson Ferry/Ash-Dunwdy) need to be made a priority.
9/18/2015 3:16 PM
54
The streets are not wide enough for the many bicylists on the roads. They are suppose to follow driving rules, but they
do not. They need their own space and it might help improve traffic congession.
9/14/2015 3:32 PM
55
There should be connectivity with the Peachtree Greenway. Sidewalks are needed on the north end of Buford Hwy for
that walking oriented community. It would be good to have everyone share the trails. Cyclists and pedestrians should
come together. If you want to ride as fast as cars, then those cyclists should probably be on the road with sharrows or
9/14/2015 1:30 PM
bike lanes.
44 / 48
Packet Pg. 116
56
Murphey Candler and the areas around Montgomery Elementary are the areas in most dire need of walking and biking
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
9/12/2015 6:45 PM
facilities for our family. I feel apprehensive every time my three young children and I need to go to or from school or
the ballpark. Since these 2 sites accommodate hundreds of people on a daily basis, I would like to see Brookhaven
give priority to these (and similar) areas/locations.
57
Enforce the speed limits on roads! Even when there are sidewalks I often feel unsafe because of the speed of the
vehicles traveling on the road next to me. Slow down the vehicle traffic!!!!
9/12/2015 8:14 AM
58
Golf carts should have to be licensed and children should not be allowed to drive them like they do now in Ashford
Park. That idiotic bicycle path on Caldwell for two blocks is extremely confusing and to put a bicycle path in between
cars at Caldwell and Redding is just asking for an accident. Everyone I know in the neighborhood thinks it was an
absolute waste of money. I sure hope the city makes better decisions in the future on how to spend our limited dollars.
9/1/2015 5:48 PM
59
I have cycled Brookhaven for 17 years. The 1 road that needs most improvement is the adding a cycling lane going up
8/26/2015 8:56 AM
the hill from Windsor Parkway to Johnson ferry on Ashford Dunwoody. Just add a narrow strip for cycling only. This
would be very good improvement.
60
Why are funds being used for such things. I do not want money expended in this manner.
8/25/2015 10:49 PM
61
Do not create more trails or connect existing trails. Privacy: creating or connecting trails through or alongside
residential neighborhoods reduces home privacy. One moves to suburban neighborhoods to have a sense of privacy
8/19/2015 3:40 PM
and quiet. Trails running through/along said neighborhoods would increase noise and decrease privacy. Safety:
creating or connecting trails through/along our established neighborhoods would permit greater access to these
neighborhoods, which can increase the likelihood of criminal activity. Trails and bike paths behind homes offer easy
ways in and out of private property, increasing the odds of criminal acts (trespassing, burglary, destruction of property,
littering). Conservation: creating and connecting trails would inherently require destruction of natural resources and
placing in these untouched areas unnatural structures and the like. To build a trail, one must raze the land. To maintain
a trail, one must continue to raze the land. Littering will become an issue, which will increase the population of critters.
Noise pollution will increase. Trailway necessities (signs, bridges) again mar the natural landscape. There is an
abundance of alternative options: there are plenty of walking/biking trails throughout the city as it already exists. What
are becoming more scarce are the off-the-beaten-path neighborhoods and quiet cul-de-sacs: all of which are enjoyed
by their residents, who do represent a significant part of the city. Again, one moves to such areas for the benefits of
privacy, safety, quiet, natural landscape, and so much more. The trails/pathways can continue to exist where they are
best suited: nearby parks and established mainways. The act of constructing, the act of maintaining, and the act of
actually using trails and bikeways would greatly disturb the land and its residents. Please do not add more.
62
do NOT cut trees down to make bike or ped trails!
8/17/2015 4:25 PM
63
I commute by bike through Brookhaven on Peachtree, usually on the sidewalk. The sector between Kroger and Target
is particularly challenging because of fast traffic, narrow sidewalks, and lots of turning cars. Thanks for considering the
topic.
8/15/2015 10:41 PM
64
Let's do it!
8/13/2015 4:41 PM
65
Don't ruin our neighborhoods to do this
8/12/2015 8:51 AM
66
I would love to see Brookhaven create a trolley system (Dallas, TX has this) where bikers/walkers can jump on board
or bring their bikes on board. The trolley could go to the Retail Areas, Parks, and Schools - connect the main hubs.
The less congested areas can have bike paths/sharrows/trails.
8/11/2015 2:10 PM
67
I think that you have done a great disservice to Dresden Drive by re-paving, then grinding, then putting in a "sharrow"
8/6/2015 6:23 AM
on a street that is clearly overburdoned with vehicular traffic. Plus it indicates SOMEONE SCREWED UP.
68
Higher priority is to solve vehicular traffic problems that will only increase because the city allows more and more high
density residential and commercial building.
7/26/2015 12:47 PM
69
I think this is an important infrastructure project for the future of Brookhaven. It will certainly make Brookhaven more
livable and walkable.
7/20/2015 11:05 PM
70
We need more transit using existing streets and roads ... not goofy things like wider sidewalks and bicycle lanes. Stop
spending my money on expensive things that only benefit a small minority of the population.
7/19/2015 2:43 PM
71
Am pleased with the sidewalk program to fill in numerous gaps (e.g. along Windsor Pkwy), hope it continues; groups
of cyclists are already common on weekends on roads that likely are not large wide enough to add dedicated lanes
needed to improve bicycle safety/vehicular movement; not sure how I feel about golf carts....P'tree City is great, but I'd
7/15/2015 1:35 PM
initially rather have more opportunities to walk/bike with my kids in the community
72
I walk with my small dogs on a daily basis in ashford park and Brookhaven heights neighborhoods. People do not
obey the speed limits at all I'm constantly passed while walking in the street by motorists exceeding 35 mph. Not
comforting.
45 / 48
7/15/2015 9:28 AM
Packet Pg. 117
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
73
As ford dunwoody between peach tree & j ferry desperately needs a proper, consistent sidewalk
7/12/2015 12:25 PM
74
It needs to be safer. The city should organically invite biking and walking
7/9/2015 10:47 PM
75
North of Ashford Dunwoody road sidewalk is almost jungle now.
7/8/2015 1:14 PM
76
Keeping bicycle paths separate from vehicle traffic is very important to many recreational bikers. Broad sidewalks,
such as the PATH trail on the Ashford Dunwoody bridge over W. Nancy Creek is a good example. Also, using existing
7/2/2015 1:55 PM
sewer easements is sensible.

77
I don't actually know what the City of Brookhaven's budget is.
6/25/2015 12:23 PM
78
we have to have means and ways of being proactively more green, we can't expect people to bike that would like to
bike very much while risking their life because there's nowhere safe to ride your bike.
6/25/2015 7:06 AM
79
Incorporate a dedicated bike lane through the commercial and shopping area along peachtree road which will
6/19/2015 12:36 AM
encourage biking and walking

80
There needs to be public service announcements on the media to demonstrate how drivers need to respect
pedestrians and bicyclists.
6/19/2015 12:20 AM
81
I do not like how close the sidewalks are to the street on Osborne. (no grass or anything in between) and the speed of
the cars travelling is dangerous as well as the fact that it's hilly and windy, which make visibility quite poor.
6/18/2015 10:33 PM
82
needs to connect to buckhead 400 path and beltline eventually
6/16/2015 12:30 PM
83
I think it would be most useful to have bicycle paths that connect different parts of atlanta (ie buckhead, midtown,
inman park) and the PATH, Beltline, maybe eventually the Silver Comet trail in Smyrna
6/15/2015 12:32 PM
84
I couldn't even begin to answer question #17 - that would require expertise and knowledge far beyond that needed to
respond to this survey.
6/15/2015 9:36 AM
85
I don't know what percent is being spent now.
6/14/2015 5:26 PM
86
Fix the Peachtree traffic light issue (sync the timing) and the you will eliminate neighborhood cut thru traffic which will
(in effect) make it safer for people to walk.
6/13/2015 12:01 PM
87
Keeping traffic under control is more important than sidewalks and such.
6/10/2015 4:41 PM
88
Most pressing need is for bike lanes along or parallel to Peachtree and Ashford Dunwoody. Not sure of percentage as
I don't know what else the budget covers.
6/10/2015 12:36 PM
89
My main concern is safety. I would like to see speed limits enforced more especially in high traffic areas and school
6/9/2015 11:48 AM
zones. As an example Ashford Dunwoody from Johnson ferry towards Marist School - cars speed during school hours
and posted times.
90
Because there is so much cut through traffic in Brookhaven, measures MUST be taken to slow the traffic down and
keep it out of residential neighborhoods. Then streets would be safer for walking bicycling.
6/8/2015 4:50 PM
91
Safety is a major concern especially on the major roads like Clairmont, Peachtree and Dresden. Clearance of weeds
6/8/2015 4:04 PM
and debris on the sidewalks as well as uneven pavement are also a huge issue.
92
I would walk or bike to work if I felt it was safe - completely shielded from traffic
6/8/2015 3:23 PM
93
I put in 15% for the question above, but I have no idea of the amount of the transportation budget. I would need to
know that information to accurately answer this question. Also, I was trying to select bike lanes, sidewalks, multi-use
trails, and cycle tracks, but I kept getting an error message.
6/8/2015 11:18 AM
94
Interconnectivity in Brookhaven is a HUGE issue. If we could make it a more active community where people have
access to sidewalks and bike paths to get to retail establishments and parks, it would make Brookhaven one of the
better communities in Atlanta - a truly desirable destination to live. Unfortunately we don't have access to the beltline
however, it would be great to at least have a lot of access to and lots of useful connected trails at our parks and
6/7/2015 11:34 PM
sidewalks to retail that isn't too far to get to. Thanks for all you do! Your focus on this initiative is what will make
Brookhaven a flourishing community!
95
right now it's a death trap along the main roads - and these are the only ones which connect. Address problems of no
connections between cul-de-sacs
6/7/2015 12:05 PM
96
Brookhaven is a growing community and I would like to see it evolve into a Virginia Highlands type of environment.
6/7/2015 10:19 AM
97
Police could enforce existing laws and aggressive driving toward cyclist
6/6/2015 11:44 PM
46 / 48
Packet Pg. 118
98
DO NOT ALLOW GOLF CARTS ON SIDEWALKS!!! Read the studies! Make adjacent property owners (including the
railroad at N Druid Hills and Marta) clean up sidewalks n right-of-ways. Lots of overgrown, obstructed areas. Get a
safe route to Brookahven Park-- Peachtree is scary. EVERY renovated or new house should be required to install a
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
6/6/2015 11:09 PM
sidewalk. ALL new commercial business should be built with parking lots in the back, fewer curb cuts, and wider
sidewalks --- apply the Peachtree Overlay streetscape to ALL commercial areas.
99
The vehicle is the death of any urban environment. We need to change our priorities.
6/6/2015 9:52 PM
100
A dedicated walking/Bike trail would be outstanding and would have us walking and riding more!
6/6/2015 9:47 PM
101
Drew Valley and Ashford Park desperately need sidewalks!
6/6/2015 8:35 PM
102
I'm 37, mom of two, and a marathon runner. I'm most interested in sidewalks that would safely connect District One to
the rest of the city. The Ashford Dunwoody and Johnson Ferry intersection is very difficult to navigate as a runner.
6/6/2015 2:50 PM
103
Need a sidewalk along all of Chamblee dunwoody.
6/6/2015 1:44 PM
104
We moved here 2 years ago from Charlotte. We lived close to download Charlotte and used greenways to bike to
shops and restaurants, parks etc and road the booty loop for exercise. Our kids do not bike in Brookhaven so we miss
this access here. Good Luck!
6/6/2015 1:22 PM
105
The reason I voted for cityhood for Brookhaven was because of the increased likelihood we would have better
sidewalks and cycling. I saw other areas that recently became cities and saw the investments in sidewalks and
walkability. We have an opportunity to shake off a history of poor design and neglect. Let's go.
6/6/2015 8:37 AM
106
When I think about the good walking and biking town, I think about Bethesda Maryland. Look at how they connected
their neighborhoods and how they created an environment that is very biker and Walker friendly. Also, consider the
6/6/2015 8:36 AM
trails and how they keep them safe. The biggest struggle for our family is how the neighborhoods aren't connected and
that we live very close to Murphy candler park, as the crow flies, but we have to drive to get there.
107
Brookhaven Heights is a nightmare for biking and walking because of the cut through traffic. My kids and I cannot
6/6/2015 7:42 AM
safely bike the neighborhood and walking can be risky. There's no park in the neighborhood and no safe way to walk
or bike to Briarwood park. Crossing Druid Hills is deadly and the sidewalks on Briarwood are in very poor shape and
much too close to the road where cars zoom by at 50 mph.
108
provide biking and walking paths along stream buffers and try to connect to a path network
6/6/2015 7:16 AM
109
I like the idea of some pedestrian trails, but not if they run adjacent to the creek system and through backyards.
6/6/2015 6:58 AM
Anything that could contribute to flooding in Drew Valley, including having pedestrian trails next to the creek system, is
a bad idea.The Drew Valley Detention Pond and floodplain buyouts were a response to unprecedented flooding in
2003-2004, where 176 homes flooded, many with 5-6 feet of water. This 12 million dollar investment was not built to
withstand pathways next to creeks or over-development upstream.
110
While I don't live in Brookhaven, I do work there. I cycle to work and home and my route can take me through much of
6/6/2015 1:42 AM
brookhaven. It would be nice to have more bike lanes. It would also be nice if on residential streets (single lane each
way with houses on them) had speed limits of 25 mph instead of 35 or 45. Safer for residents, kids, walkers, cyclists.
111
Please make it easier for your Dunwoody neighbors to ride to Brookhaven!
6/6/2015 12:46 AM
112
Please no golf carts
6/5/2015 11:49 PM
113
Please put something on Chamblee Dunwoody road...sidewalk, bike lane something so we can get to the Georgetown
6/5/2015 11:38 PM
area and Murphy candler from Dunwoody Forrest. There is no way to walk or bike that direction at all and traffic is very
fast.
114
Safety is important. No enhancements of sidewalks or trails to MARTA. It would be too easy for would-be criminals to
utilize. Would love more sidewalks in Ashford Park, from Peachtree to St. Martin's, and also a designated community
6/5/2015 11:16 PM
bike/walk trail in a safe part of Brookhaven.

115
I would love to see some of our roads to become only one way. The second lane could become solely a bikepath.
6/5/2015 10:55 PM
116
Something is better than nothing.
6/5/2015 9:59 PM
117
We have to find ways to traverse over, or tunnel under, our CSX/MARTA, Peachtree, and Buford Hwy. They are each
lethal obstacles to people and connectivity of all types.
6/5/2015 9:25 PM
118
A cycletrack or dedicated bike lanes on peachtree are a must.
6/5/2015 9:20 PM
119
We should emulate what is happening with the belt line.
6/5/2015 8:17 PM
120
It will be nice over time but we don't need to break the budget to get them. Improve the parks first. That's what we
6/5/2015 6:48 PM
were promised and they are the best destinations for everyone to enjoy.
47 / 48
Packet Pg. 119

121
Boost the taxes on gasoline to fund roadways. Boost the cost of parking. Limit available parking space. Make driving
E.2.a
SurveyMonkey
6/5/2015 6:46 PM
122
If there is any chance to make bike paths (e.g. beltline) that would be my preference!
6/5/2015 4:16 PM
123
We need trails through neighborhoods so pedestrians don't have to use streets.
6/5/2015 4:04 PM
124
Used to live in Madison, WI, which has an outstanding cycling system in place. Recommend reviewing their models.
6/5/2015 4:04 PM
48 / 48
as inconvenient as possible. Get MARTA trains and buses to run on time.
Packet Pg. 120
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 121
Appendix B
COMMUNITY MEETING #1
E.2.a
BR
KHAVEN
Packet Pg. 122
E.2.a
The public meeting held May 19th, 2015 in the Lynwood Park Community Center served as a kick-off
meeting to engage the general public in the decision making process for the creation of a bicycle,
pedestrian, and trail plan for the City of Brookhaven. Attendance at this meeting was strong, with over 70
people signing in.
PREFERENCE EXERCISES
The meeting began with an open house session during which participants were able to engage with a
number of questions. A series of boards asked participants to select which types of infrastructure they
most preferred, including bicycle boulevards, sharrows, exclusive bike lanes, cycle tracks, multi-use
paths, sidewalks, and an other section, in which participants could add any additional type of
improvement that they would like to see. Participants were able to indicate multiple different investments.
Of these, multi-use trails, exclusive bicycle lanes, and sidewalks were most popular. There was also
community interest in connecting isolated neighborhoods via cul-de-sac trails.
An additional board asked participants Where in Brookhaven do you want to go? and gave participants
the opportunity to indicate their favorite locations within and adjacent to Brookhaven on a single map.
Many locations were heavily favored, but major clusters of interest were indicated at the intersection of
Peachtree Road and North Druid Hills Road (near the Brookhaven MARTA station), Town Brookhaven,
around Blackburn and Murphey Candler Parks, as well as along Buford Highway, both Medical Center
and Chamblee MARTA Stations, the Dunwoody/Perimeter Center area, and other, smaller parks.
Public Meeting 5.19.15 Notes
Packet Pg. 123
E.2.a
FORMAL PRESENTATION
After this open house session, a brief presentation was given by Pond & Company. This presentation
introduced residents to the consulting team and to the planning process that will be used.
VISION EXERCISE
As part of the planning process, participants were introduced to the upcoming tabletop exercise. In this
exercise, facilitators guided six groups of participants through the creation of an overall vision for cycling
and walking in Brookhaven. Each group of participants began by identifying locations popular for travel,
and especially locations that they would like to be able to walk or bike to. From this layout of locations, the
groups identified the primary routes by which they currently get between these locations, creating an
existing, primary transportation network. With this network and these locations in mind, participants were
then asked to create a vision of a walking and biking system for the city. This vision was designed to
connect important destinations with neighborhoods and each other, while considering existing conditions,
upcoming projects, and the feasibility and suitability of different facilities at different locations. At the
conclusion of the meeting, each group shared a few important points of their vision with the other groups,
giving all participants the chance to see what every group had created.
Packet Pg. 124
E.2.a
GROUP 1
Existing Network
This group was interested in travelling to many locations within the city of Brookhaven, including but not
limited to Town Brookhaven, the Brookhaven MARTA station, various grocery stores, city parks
(especially in the northern portion of the city), churches, and schools. The group also indicated locations
adjacent to the city in Chamblee, Dunwoody, and Sandy Springs as well as the Buckhead neighborhood
of Atlanta. The identified network largely followed regionally significant corridors, including Peachtree
Road, Buford Highway, Ashford Dunwoody Road, and North Druid Hills Road as well as local streets
including Dresden Drive, Windsor Parkway, and Donaldson Drive/Harts Mill Road.
Vision
The vision created by this group began with the connection of nearby parks, specifically direct links from
Keswick Park to Murphy Candler Park and Blackburn Park, which would complete a large loop between
the three. Next, a greenway was suggested running from Ashford Dunwoody Road and the existing
Nancy Creek Trail along Nancy Creek
to the west, connecting to both
Osborne Park and Lynwood Park.
Dresden Drive was then also
identified as an active corridor in need
of
pedestrian
and
cycling
improvements. With these segments,
two more stretches were added
from Osborne and Lynwood Parks
south to the Capital City Golf Club,
and Clairmont Rd north from Dresden
Drive through the city of Chamblee
north to Keswick Park. These links
completed a continuous loop around
the city, directly connecting five public
parks, the Brookhaven MARTA
station, and numerous important
corridors. Additional links were added
passing through the loop (Peachtree
Road), extending from the center of
the loop outward (Ashford Dunwoody
Road) and branching from the edge of
the loop (Briarwood Road, and a spur
trail to PATH400). Different segments
were
envisioned
with
different
treatments. Portions of the loop which
follow creeks, cut through parks or
otherwise pass through natural areas
were typically envisioned as multi-use
paths, while existing roadways were
more typically imagined with added
bike lanes and sidewalks.
Packet Pg. 125
E.2.a
GROUP 2
Existing Network
The group spent a few minutes going around the table and identifying destinations that each person felt
were important to connect to with biking and walking facilities. Neighborhood schools were identified as
an important destination, and it was mentioned that a large majority of students at Woodward Elementary
walk to school from the surrounding residences. In addition to schools, the citys parks were singled out
as being desired connection points. One citizen commented that Brookhaven Park on Peachtree Road
would be better served if access from Peachtree Road could be provided. The retail along Dresden Drive
and Peachtree Road, and Town Brookhaven were highlighted as important shopping and dining areas
that would benefit by being connected to a pedestrian/bicycle network. Lastly, the group identified
several desired connections to places outside of the city, such as PATH400, the Beltline Spur to the
southwest, and the redevelopment efforts in Chamblee on New Peachtree Road (Whole Foods),
destinations in downtown Chamblee, and the redevelopment proposed near the Great Gatsby antique
store.
Vision
The connected network that was envisioned in the group exercise revealed a loop system that
encompassed the North Fork Greenway on the south side, a series of sidepaths north along Clairmont
Road and/or creekbeds or parks (Skyland or the linear park north of Dresden near eastern city limit) in
this area of the city. The east side of the loop would extend across Dresden Drive to the north and tie into
the existing path in Chamblee that runs under Peachtree Road. This would create a connection to the
retail of Chamblee that was mentioned as being a key destination. The loop would pass under Peachtree
Road via the existing Chamblee path, into Keswick Park. Keswick Park could be connected to the
terminus of the Nancy Creek Trail via a
bridge (there are steep grade changes in
this area, which would likely require a bridge
structure). The Nancy Creek Trail can be
connected with residential areas to the west
of Ashford Dunwoody Road at West Nancy
Creek Drive, through or near Marist School
property, and along Nancy Creek bed to
Lynwood Park. Connection from Lynwood
back to Peachtree Road could be
accomplished along more creek beds, or
along one of the north-south roads of Mabry
Road, Osborne Road, or Hermance Drive.
Crossing Peachtree Road is a challenge,
but could be accomplished with grade
separation or even with wider, more
pronounced crosswalks at North Druid Hills
Road or Dresden Drive.
Sidewalk/trail
sections along North Druid Hills Road made
sense to citizens considering the MARTA
stops and gaps in sidewalk coverage. This
connection would take trail users back south
to the North Fork Greenway and complete
the loop.
Packet Pg. 126
E.2.a
GROUP 3
Existing Network
This group identified Brookhaven schools as well as connections to adjacent Buckhead, Sandy Springs,
Dunwoody, and Chamblee as important locations as well as many nearby MARTA rail stations and public
parks. These considerations led the group to identify a primary existing network focused on Peachtree
Road, Clairmont Road and Peachtree Dunwoody Road, just west of the city limits. The group also noted
Johnson Ferry Road as a way to get in and out of the city, especially to and from Peachtree Dunwoody
Road and Ashford Dunwoody Road, which is a primary crossing point of Interstate 285.
Vision
This groups vision followed many of
these corridors when laying out a
pedestrian and bicycling vision,
especially Peachtree Dunwoody
Road,
Peachtree
Road,
and
Clairmont Road. It also identified
Windsor Parkway, and three of the
roughly parallel roads it crosses
Mabry Road, Osborne Road and
Woodrow Way as ways into
central neighborhoods. This groups
vision identified Buford Highway as
a candidate corridor for a road diet,
and Ashford Dunwoody Road as a
corridor from the Nancy Creek Trail
south to Peachtree Road. Within the
southern/central portion of the city, a
network of residential streets that
connect from Briarwood Park,
Briarwood Road and the intersection
of Buford Highway and Clairmont
Road north to Peachtree Road and
continuing east into Chamblee
towards the existing Keswick Park
Extension Trail were also called out
as potential walking and cycling
paths.
Packet Pg. 127
E.2.a
GROUP 4
Existing Network
The fourth group identified a wide array of hubs across the city. These include restaurants along Buford
Highway, Village Place on Dresden Drive, schools, retail in Chamblee, public parks, and the Brookhaven
MARTA station. These participants recognized a comprehensive roadway network, with Peachtree
Dunwoody Road, Peachtree Road, Ashford Dunwoody Road, Clairmont Road, Interstate 85, Buford
Highway, North Druid Hills Rd, Roxboro Road, Briarwood Road, Windsor Parkway, Johnson Ferry Rd and
Dresden Drive called out specifically. Special note was made that Ashford Dunwoody Road has very high
speeds and that the Southern Bicycle League has a recreational route between Johnson Ferry Road,
Peachtree Dunwoody road and Peachtree Road, along minor roads. Also, they noted that the MARTA
and freight rail lines which run parallel to Peachtree Road act as a barrier and ways across them would
be useful in connecting the city.
Vision
This groups vision has two primary
hubs. The first is centered on the
Brookhaven Station Shopping center
near the Brookhaven MARTA station,
which includes shopping and dining.
Near this area, additional corridors
are identified along Briarwood Road,
Peachtree Road and Brookhaven
Drive
coming
into
the
hub.
Connection is also made north along
Peachtree
Road
and
Ashford
Dunwoody Road to the second hub,
area near the intersection of Ashford
Dunwoody Road and Johnson Ferry
Road, close to Blackburn Park. From
here, additional corridors were shown
connecting to the neighborhoods to
the west along Windsor Parkway,
schools to the northeast along
Donaldson Drive and Harts Mill Road,
and northwest along Johnson Ferry,
eventually to the PATH400 trail.
Additional notes were made to
connect neighborhoods to major
roads, to connect the new North Fork
trail to a trail in Chamblee, to connect
Peachtree Road to restaurants on
Buford Highway, and to strengthen
pedestrian access and connectivity
between Oglethorpe University and
the nearby MARTA station.
Packet Pg. 128
E.2.a
GROUP 5
Existing Network
This groups existing network includes the regional corridors of Buford Highway, Peachtree Road, Ashford
Dunwoody Road, North Druid Hills Rd, and Roxboro Road, as well as Dresden Drive Briarwood Road,
Windsor Parkway, Osborne Road, and adjacent Chamblee Dunwoody Road. These streets were used to
connect parks, MARTA stations, grocery stores, and the nearby PATH 400 trail. This group made special
note of sidewalks and bike lanes, as well as bike racks, public art, special treatment of shopping areas
and specific street design considerations for cyclists.
Vision
The vision created by this group is similar to that of Group 1 in that creates a ring around the city, with
various spires reaching inwards or outwards. This groups ring follows Clairmont Road, utilizes
Chamblees Keswick Park Extension
Trail under Peachtree Road to reach
Blackburn
Park,
then
follows
Johnson Ferry Road until it turns
south to pass through Osborne and
Linwood Parks, then connecting
down Osborne Road to the
Brookhaven MARTA station area,
and using Dresden Drive to
complete the loop. Peachtree Road
is both an inward and an outward
spire, connecting Buckhead and
Chamblee to Oglethorpe University
and Ashford Dunwoody Road, which
acts as another spire reaching north
to the loop at Blackburn Park and
continuing north along the Nancy
Creek Trail to Murphy Candler Park
and along North Fork Nancy Creek
across Interstate 285. Spires along
Nancy Creek, and Windsor Parkway
in addition to the aforementioned
Peachtree Road all connect the loop
to Peachtree Dunwoody Road.
Southern corridors extending from
the MARTA station to the west and
along Clairmont Road to the east
connect to Buford Highway and to
the planned North Fork Peachtree
Creek Trail.
Packet Pg. 129
E.2.a
GROUP 6
Existing Network
This group sought to connect schools, restaurants, parks, community centers, and shopping centers
within Brookhaven. These notably included the Brookhaven MARTA station, the YMCA, Childrens
Healthcare of Atlanta, the Brookhaven Library, post offices, and Kroger. This group especially noted that
Post Brookhaven apartments are disconnected from commercial activity by the rail lines, and how pizza
restaurants (including Mellow Mushroom, Avelinos, and Corner Pizza) are family-friendly activity nodes
that would be well served by pedestrian connections. They also identified a number of locations outside of
the city limits, including Lenox Mall in Buckhead Atlanta to the southwest, Perimeter Mall to the north,
PATH400 to the west, three adjacent MARTA stations (Chamblee, Dunwoody, and Medical Center), and
various nearby bike projects in neighboring jurisdictions.
Vision
The vision created by this group
includes a special note of the
Peachtree Road corridor and need for
improvements along the full length of
the street. In addition, it includes
connections north and south from the
Brookhaven MARTA station area,
through neighborhoods from Murphy
Candler Park south to Interstate 85
via the Marist School and Silver Lake.
The
area
near
Montgomery
Elementary School and Murphy
Candler Park serves as a hub of
access to nearby neighborhoods,
parks and schools. South of
Peachtree Road, a connection was
envisioned from Peachtree, via
Ashford Park Elementary School
through a residential neighborhood to
Skyland Park before turning to
Briarwood
Park.
Additional
connections were included from this
corridor south to Montclair Elementary
School, north to Village Place on
Dresden Drive and west connecting
across North Druid Hills Road to
Roxboro Road. South of Briarwood
Park, links were included across
Buford Highway to the planned North
Fork trail, and across I-85. Additional
interstate crossings were envisioned
near the North Druid Hills Road
interchange, providing access to the
southernmost part of the city.
Packet Pg. 130
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 131
Appendix C
E.2.a
BR
KHAVEN
Packet Pg. 132
E.2.a
Public Meeting #2
September 30, 2015
Study Team Attendees
Richard Meehan (City of Brookhaven)
Richard Fangmann (Pond & Company)
Eric Lusher (Pond & Company)
Graham Malone (Pond & Company)
Andrew Babb (Pond & Company)
Niwana Ray (Pond & Company)
Meeting Notes
This public meeting was held at Lynwood Park Community Center to discuss progress on the
planning efforts and receive direction from the general public regarding initial draft
recommendations. Over 34 people attended the meeting. The meeting had three distinct
phases:
1. Open House Discussion
2. Formal Presentation
3. Group Discussions
Open House Discussion
The first half hour of the meeting
was set up informally to allow
attendees to arrive at their own
pace. During this period of time,
maps of the pedestrian, bicycle,
and trail visions (see attachments)
were available for discussion with
study team members. These
visions were updated to
incorporate stakeholder group
comments from a previous
meeting. During these
discussions, overall reaction to the
plan was positive but general
concerns were voiced about the
impacts of multi-use trails on
residential streets.
Additionally, attendees were asked
to indicate preferences for
overarching goals developed to
guide further planning efforts.
Attendees were given a total of five
votes (via five dots) and were
allowed to distribute as many of
their votes to any goal they
thought appropriate. In effect, an
attendee could place all five votes
for one goal or spread all five of
their votes evenly through the goal
categories. The results are
indicated to the right.
right
BR
KHAVEN
Bicycle, Pedestrian, & Trail Plan 2015
Packet Pg. 133
E.2.a
Formal Presentation
A formal presentation was conducted to educate meeting attendees on the planning process
and efforts to date.
Group Discussions
Meeting attendees split into three groups, with each group conducting the same table top
exercise to discuss the pedestrian, bicycle, and trail visions and indicate the projects that
appeared to be the most critical as indicated on the table below.
below Areas of commonality
amongst the groups are indicated within the same rows showing large interest in various
connections along the Spine concept (a north-south trail network along Druid Hills Road,
Druid Hills Road, and a vital connection across and along Peachtree Road), and the
connections to Keswick Park in Chamblee.
GROUP 1
Connection across Peachtree
Road
between Blackburn and
Murphey Candler Parks
Peachtree Road
Dresden Road
GROUP 2
Corridors on the spine
including Ashford-Dunwoody
Road, the connection across
Peachtree Road and Druid Hill
Roads.
Connection to Keswick Park
Connection to Keswick Park
GROUP 3
Corridors on the spine
including Ashford-Dunwoody
Road, the connection across
Peachtree Road and Druid Hill
Roads.
Dresden Road, with emphasis
on the more developed area
Osborne Road

Caldwell Road
Nancy Creek Trail
Nancy Creek Trail

North Fork Trail
Clairmont Road
Additionally, attendees were encouraged to provide any additional handwritten comments or

thoughts. These are provided in the attachments.
attachments
ATTACHMENTS
Sign-in Sheet
Bike/Ped/Trail Vision Maps
Formal Presentation
Comments Received
BR
KHAVEN
Packet Pg. 134
Packet Pg. 135
E.2.a
Attachment: Brookhaven Bike Ped Trail Draft 12-30-15_RJM Comments (2265 : Brookhaven Bicycle,
Packet Pg. 136
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 137

These project
descriptions were
presented at the public
meeting on 9/30/15 for
discussion purposes.
Therefore, they do not
represent the final
recommendations of the
planning effort.
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 138

These project
descriptions were
represent the final
planning effort.
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 139

These project
descriptions were
represent the final
planning effort.
E.2.a
BR
KHAVEN
BR
KHAVEN
Public Meeting #2
September 30, 2015
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 140
Public Meeting #2
September 30, 2015
WHAT IS THE PLAN?
BR
KHAVEN
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 141
Public Meeting #2
September 30, 2015
GENERAL PROCESS
SPRING 2015
BR
KHAVEN
SUMMER 2015
FALL 2015
EXISTING CONDITIONS
SYSTEM APPRAISAL
NETWORK DEVELOPMENT
Field Inventory

RECOMMENDATIONS
Prioritization
Cost Estimates
Funding
Documentation
WE ARE HERE
PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 142
Public Meeting #2
September 30, 2015
GENERAL PROCESS
FEASIBILITY
INPUT
SUITABILITY
BR
KHAVEN
PRIORITIZATION
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 143
Public Meeting #2
September 30, 2015
285
H
NS
D
OR
BL
EE
EA
NP
R
REE
D
YR
T
CH
WO O D
RD
UN
R
REE
D
YR
T
CH
EA
NP
WO O D
RD
UN
ST
RI
A
DU
IN
HT
RE
E
DU
IN
HT
RE
E
C
C
PE
A
OR
PE
A
HF
OR
HTREE RD
AS
HTREE RD
HF
D
DU
BU
FO
RD
Y RD
Y RD
CHAMBLEE TUCKER RD
CHAMBLEE TUCKER RD
141
141
RD
AL
RD
HT
RE
E
DR
HW
RD
FO
BU
141
TR
D
ON
CLA I RM
ON
TR
D
E
HIL LS R D N
85
RO
RO
XB
XB
ND
RD
E
ID
LI
Public Meeting #2
September 30, 2015
RC
IA
BR
RU
SR
SR
FF
I LL
I LL
RD
BR IA R C L I
155
FF
RD
NE
FF
NE
ID
RD
RD N
RD N
RU
FF
RO
RO
BRIA R C L I
ND
RC
IA
BR
LI
155
S TA R D
LAVI
13
TA R D
LAVIS
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 144
13
Y
HW
RD
FO
BU
85
CLA I RM
141
R UID
ND
E
HIL LS R D N
R UID
ND
S DE
PE
PE
13
RE
RE
DR
AC
RD
HT
RE
E
AC
23
NE
NE
23
13
S DE
Attraction Analysis
Demand Analysis
Character Analysis
SH
SH
AL
LO
LO
WF
O RD
WY
S O R PK
O RD
WIN D
RD
WY
S O R PK
WF
WIN D
HW
Y
OD
OD
HW
Y
BICYCLE
SUITABILITY
NW
NW
N SO N FER R Y RD
RD
DU
JO
H
PEDESTRIAN
SUITABILITY
BU
FO
N SO N FER R Y RD
N PEAC
N PEAC
ST
RI
A
LB
LV
LB
LV
AS
JO
H
BR
KHAVEN
RD
FO
WF
A
M
OW
LO
BL
EE
LL
AL
A
M
285
C
H
HA
NS
C
H
GENERAL PROCESS
FEASIBILITY
INPUT
SUITABILITY
BR
KHAVEN
PRIORITIZATION
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 145
Public Meeting #2
September 30, 2015
INPUT Web Survey
BR
KHAVEN
247 responses
90% of respondents are
Brookhaven residents
94% of respondents
advocate for more
pedestrian facilities
89% of respondents
advocate for more
bicycling facilities
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 146
Public Meeting #2
September 30, 2015
INPUT Public Meeting
BR
KHAVEN
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 147
Public Meeting #2
September 30, 2015
Murphey Candler
Park
Murphey Candler
Park
Blackburn Park
Blackburn Park
Town Brookhaven
Town Brookhaven
MARTA TOD
Briarwood Park
Northfork Connections
BR
KHAVEN
MARTA TOD
Briarwood Park
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 148
Public Meeting #2
September 30, 2015
A S H FO
Dunwoody
285
AL
BL
EE
EA
NP
CH
il
TRE
D
YR
E RD
Tra
WO O D
RD
k
ee
RD
UN
Montgomery
Elementary School
RD
OD
Murphey Candler
Park
BR
KHAVEN
O
WF
LO
WO
Murphey Candler Park
Kittredge
Magnet School
Medical Center
H
NS
N
DU
RD
C
H
LB
PE
A
HT
RE
E
HTREE RD
IN
US
TR
N PEAC
IA
Blackburn Park
n
Marist School
Blackburn
Park
Keswick Park
H NS O N FER RY RD
FO
R
DH
WY
JO
INPUT
SUITABILITY
LV
D
r
C
y
nc
Na
Perimeter Trail
Park
BU
Osborne
Park
Lynwood
Park
Chamblee
n
Our Lady of
the Assumption
141
RD
W
S O R PK
Peachtree Golf Club
O RD
WIN D
CHAMBLEE TUCKER RD
Town Brookhaven
LO
WF
St. Martin's
Episcopal School
SH
AL
Oglethorpe University
Seigakuin Atlanta
International
23
13
HT
RE
E
RD
NE
Ashford Park
Elementary School
RE
AC
MARTA TOD
DR
PE
Capital City Golf Club
S DE
Dresden Park
Brookhaven
Park
Skyland
Park
RD
Briarwood Park
BU
FO
Brookhaven
85
CL A
IR M
ON
RD
141
Briarwood
Park
n
Montclair Elementary School
n
Cross Keys High School
n
Woodward Elementary School
BRIA R C L I
FF
RD
NE
H
RD
RD
E
BR
RC
IA
LI
155
S TA R D
LAVI
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 149
13
ID
Shady Valley Park
RU
L
IL
Public Meeting #2
September 30, 2015
FF
ND
GENERAL PROCESS
FEASIBILITY
INPUT
SUITABILITY
BR
KHAVEN
PRIORITIZATION
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 150
Public Meeting #2
September 30, 2015
A S H FO
Dunwoody
285
N
DU
RD
C
H
WO
UN
OD
Tra
D
YR
k
ee
WO O D
RD
n
Montgomery
Elementary School
BR
KHAVEN
BL
EE
Murphey Candler
Park
Medical Center
n
Kittredge
Magnet School
il
r
C
y
nc
Na
Perimeter Trail
Park
n
Marist School
Blackburn
Park
JO
Keswick Park
H NS O N FER RY RD
Osborne
Park
Lynwood
Park
Chamblee
n
Our Lady of
the Assumption
WIN D
Peachtree Golf Club
141
Y
PK W
SOR
n
St. Martin's
Episcopal School
Seigakuin Atlanta
International
PE
AC
HT
RE
E
RD
NE
Ashford Park
Elementary School
Brookhaven
Park
Skyland
Park
RD
BU
FO
Brookhaven
CL A
IRM
ON
RD
141
Briarwood
Park
n
n
n
ND
RU
ID
H
L
IL
RD
FF
Public Meeting #2 VISION

September 30, 2015
RD
Shady Valley Park
BR
RC
IA
LI
TRAILS
BIKE
PED
155
Packet Pg. 151
13
E.2.a
NEXT STEP
BR
KHAVEN
FEASIBILITY
INPUT
SUITABILITY
PRIORITIZATION
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 152
Public Meeting #2
September 30, 2015
BR
KHAVEN
WEBSITE
http://www.brookhavenga.gov/citydepartments/public-works/bicycle-pedestriantrail-plan
EMAIL CONTACT
bikepedtrailplan@brookhavenga.gov
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 153
Public Meeting #2
September 30, 2015
Packet Pg. 154
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 155
E.2.a
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 156
Appendix D
E.2.a
BR
KHAVEN
Packet Pg. 157
Packet Pg. 158
E.2.a
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 159
Packet Pg. 160
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 161
E.2.a
Appendix E
PUBLIC COMMENTS
E.2.a
BR
KHAVEN
Packet Pg. 162
E.2.a
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Bike Ped Trail Plan <bikepedtrailplan@brookhavenga.gov>

Thursday, December 17, 2015 11:07 AM
Lusher, Eric
FW: BikePed Plan thought
-Ann Marie Quill

Communications Manager | City of Brookhaven, GA | 404-637-0508 BrookhavenGa.gov
Email messages sent to and from the City of Brookhaven may be subject to disclosure under the Georgia Public Records
Act.
-----Original Message----From: Jack Honderd [mailto:jkhonderd@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2015 10:46 AM
To: Bike Ped Trail Plan <bikepedtrailplan@brookhavenga.gov>
Cc: Richard Meehan <richard.meehan@brookhavenga.gov>; Christian Cherniak
<Christian.Cherniak@morganstanley.com>; Bill Cox <whc281@yahoo.com>
Subject: BikePed Plan thought
I am on the BikePed plan steering committee and would like to pass on a couple additional thoughts re. the final draft of
the plan. [BTW, I admire the thoroughness of your approach to the mapping of bikeped facilities in Brookhaven, as well
as the detailed report containing costs and priorities.]
In thinking about implementation, it seems to me it would be very useful to have a permanent citizens steering
committee, appointed by the mayor and council, to oversee plan implementation. The committees role could include:
1) recommendation/analysis for annual funding in the city budget
2) assisting public works personnel with ongoing evaluation of priorities
3) overseeing public education initiatives, such as bike safety and urban riding classes, organizing bicycle-friendly
businesses, defining safe bike routes and making them available to the public, organizing bike-trains to schools, etc.
4) cooperating with and maintaining awareness of bike initiatives in surrounding jurisdictions so Brookhaven works
efficiently with the metro-area bike network
5) tracking and educating Brookhaven on progress toward meeting Bicycle-Friendly Community status per League of
American Bicyclists
In discussing this with Richard Meehan, he suggested this could be done through the permanent Transportation
Advisory Committee which is called for in the Comp Transportation Plan but hasnt yet been set up by the
mayor/council. This has some advantages as it would help monitor a Complete Streets approach to transportation and a
coordinated approach to the overall transportation budget. However, bikeped advocates could also potentially get
marginalized, depending on the makeup of the committee. Perhaps a hybrid approach, with a specific bike-ped
steering/advisory committee to inform city decisions on bike-ped-specific measures, with 2 of the members also serving
on the overall Trans. Advis. Committee, would be a sound approach.
Please consider these ideas for possible recommendation in the final version of the BikePed Plan.
Lusher, Eric
Packet Pg. 163
E.2.a
Jack Honderd
404-456-6323
________________________________
This e-mail message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain
confidential and privileged information. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message (including any attachments) is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender and destroy all copies of the original message
(including attachments). The City of Brookhaven is a public entity subject to the Official Code of Georgia Annotated
50-18-70 to 50-18-76 concerning public records. Email is covered under such laws and thus may be subject to disclosure.
Thanks,
Packet Pg. 164
E.2.a
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Sean Pharr <seanpharr@gmail.com>

Friday, October 16, 2015 2:02 PM
bikepedtrailplan@brookhavenga.gov; Richard Meehan; Lusher, Eric
Comments on trail segments 121,171,122
Related to Trail 121, 173, and 122 and Pedestrian segment 125;
Consider alternative which uses Mill Creek Rd @ back of County/City owned park to Johnson Ferry Rd. Look
into highlighted parcel below, if this is non develop-able, the only small easement would be required to get to
W. Nancy Creek. Consider enhanced crossing at Mill Creek andJohnson Ferry into MUP for short distance
along Johnson Ferry to new trail connection to W. Nancy Creek.
Lusher, Eric
Packet Pg. 165
E.2.a
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Richard Meehan <richard.meehan@brookhavenga.gov>

Thursday, October 15, 2015 4:18 PM
'Pharr, Sean'
Fangmann, Richard; Lusher, Eric; Bike Ped Trail Plan; Jennifer Harper
FW: Bike/Ped Information/connection to PATH 400 @ PCID
We will be updating the website soon. I have copied Pond and they may be able to send the information directly to
you. I have also passed your comment on to them so that they can incorporate into the plan.
Thanks
Richard J. Meehan, PE
City of Brookhaven
4362 Peachtree Road
Brookhaven, Georgia 30319
Main: 404-637-0500
Direct: 404-637-0520
Fax: 404-637-0501
richard.meehan@brookhavenga.gov
This email message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. If
the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message (including
any attachments) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender and destroy all copies of the original
message (including attachments). The City of Brookhaven is a public entity subject to the Official Code of Georgia Annotated 50-18-70 to 50-18-76
concerning public records. Email is covered under such laws and thus may be subject to disclosure.
From: Sean Pharr [mailto:seanpharr@gmail.com]

Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2015 4:11 PM
To: Richard Meehan <richard.meehan@brookhavenga.gov>; Jennifer Harper <jharper@perimetercid.org>
Subject: Bike/Ped Information/connection to PATH 400 @ PCID
I didn't get a copy of the latest prioritized list of Bike/Ped projects, was this available at the public meeting and
can you send or get the latest list and maps uploaded to the City webpage.
Also, since PATH400 is now a real project terminating at the intersection of Johnson Ferry and Peachtree
Dunwoody;
http://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/morning_call/2015/10/path400-trail-to-extend-from-buckhead-toperimeter.html?ana=e_du_pap&s=article_du&ed=2015-1015&u=X6585RGF3IxcQwfIl%2BFzUg0f6917f3&t=1444937935
One of the top tiered projects should be to extend a sidepath 1000-feet from that intersection south on Johnson
Ferry to Old Johnson Ferry Road.
Lusher, Eric
Packet Pg. 166
E.2.a
Sean
On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 7:58 AM, Sean Pharr <seanpharr@gmail.com> wrote:
I stopped by Mill Creek, that's pretty interesting back there. Would be a short easy bridge to do and old
Johnson ferry roadbed could be converted to trail to head back to Lynwood park rec center.
On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 5:26 PM Richard Meehan <richard.meehan@brookhavenga.gov> wrote:
The road r/w does extend across the creek, but not sure the road bed does. The ep level on our GIS taken from actual
mapping shows the road turning parallel to the creek to give driveway access that last property (the road there looks
more like a driveway on street view than a road). As for a bridge, there may be one there, I haven't had a need to go
back there and look. But for planning purposes, it definitely is a place where connectivity can occur. I believe Pond is
already showing that in their study.
City of Brookhaven Public Works
4362 Peachtree Road
Main: 404-637-0500
Direct: 404-637-0520
Fax:
404-637-0501
From: Sean Pharr <seanpharr@gmail.com>

Sent: Monday, October 12, 2015 5:01 PM
To: Richard Meehan
Subject: Re: 30319 Real Estate - 377 Homes For Sale | Zillow
Actually, looks to me the road rw does extend over the creek, and the old roadbed(I assume of Johnson Ferry) goes
right through there.
Look on google map street view, appears there is a trail head already down there.
Residents told me there used to be a little bridge down the too.
Sean
On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 4:56 PM Sean Pharr <seanpharr@gmail.com> wrote:
Thanks,
Packet Pg. 167
E.2.a
From DeKalbs GIS,that parcel does extend all the way up to the Mill Creek Road R/w. However, because of the
creek, Mill Creek Road itself does not extend all the way to the parcel
City of Brookhaven Public Works
4362 Peachtree Road
Main: 404-637-0500
Direct: 404-637-0520
Fax:
404-637-0501
From: seanpharr@gmail.com <no-reply@evernote.com>

To: Richard Meehan
Subject: 30319 Real Estate - 377 Homes For Sale | Zillow
Richard, this is the Park area across from the Lynwood Rec Center, can you check the GIS data and see if the
parcel map actually extends up to Mill Creek Rd? it looks like a trail head there as well (from the road).
Sean
30319 Real Estate - 377 Homes For Sale | Zillow
So small easement needed/bridge over creek to connect to park....

On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 4:54 PM Richard Meehan <richard.meehan@brookhavenga.gov> wrote:
Packet Pg. 168
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 169
Evernote helps you remember everything and get organized effortlessly. Download Evernote.
This e-mail message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information.
If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message
(including any attachments) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender and destroy all copies of the
original message (including attachments). The City of Brookhaven is a public entity subject to the Official Code of Georgia Annotated 50-18-70 to 5018-76 concerning public records. Email is covered under such laws and thus may be subject to disclosure.
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 170
E.2.a
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Wednesday, October 14, 2015 2:23 PM
Lusher, Eric
FW: Concerns regarding the proposed Trail Plan
-Ann Marie Quill

Communications Manager | City of Brookhaven, GA | 404-637-0508
BrookhavenGa.gov
Email messages sent to and from the City of Brookhaven may be subject to disclosure under the Georgia Public Records Act.
From: Rebecca Oertell [mailto:roertell@comcast.net]

Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2015 10:22 AM
Subject: Concerns regarding the proposed Trail Plan
To whom it may concern,
My family is building a home in the Brittany neighborhood of Zone 2 in Brookhaven. It has come to my attention that the
neighborhood currently has serious safety concerns due to high numbers of bikers riding through the neighborhood streets in
large numbers, at excessive speeds and without obeying traffic signs. Some pedestrians have been knocked into bushes, and
cars and bikes have been hit on numerous occasions. The Brittany neighborhood has many blind curves. Not only do may
adults walk, run or walk their pets on the neighborhood streets, but many young children scooter and ride bikes in the
Brittany neighborhood which also has an active swim/tennis club. It is only a matter of time before someone is seriously
injured.
We are completely in favor of adding safe paths for biking, running and walking in Brookhaven; but, we have serious concerns
that if these paths are wide enough to accommodate more than two bikes riding in a group, they will (1) become over run by
large biking clubs and therefore rendered unsafe for pedestrians and children; and (2) encourage more cyclist traffic through
our neighborhood streets which are already unsafe due to the numbers of bikes coming through in the area in large numbers
at excessive speeds.
Please take into consideration the size of the paths and the impact they may have on neighborhood streets, especially
pertaining to the target connections, and the safety of children in particular. Consider limiting the width of the path, having
posted speed limits monitored by authorities, or posted hours where speeds and use can vary so that parents can keep their
children safe on the trail. In addition, adding sidewalks in those neighborhoods that are impacted by the larger trail plan,
especially those that are identified as target connections (such as the Brittany neighborhood), should be included in the
Trail Plan so that pedestrians and children have a safe place to walk if neighborhood streets have to absorb large groups of
cyclists making connections to the trail.
Regards,
Lusher, Eric
Packet Pg. 171
Rebecca Oertell
Roertell@comcast.net
404-915-1291
This e-mail message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. If the
reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message (including any
attachments) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender and destroy all copies of the original message
(including attachments). The City of Brookhaven is a public entity subject to the Official Code of Georgia Annotated 50-18-70 to 50-18-76 concerning public
records. Email is covered under such laws and thus may be subject to disclosure.
E.2.a
10
Packet Pg. 172
E.2.a
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Monday, October 12, 2015 2:38 PM
Lusher, Eric
FW: Draft Plan
-Ann Marie Quill

Communications Manager | City of Brookhaven, GA | 404-637-0508 BrookhavenGa.gov
Act.
-----Original Message----From: Sitton, Larry E. [mailto:LESITTON@southernco.com]
Subject: Draft Plan
Yes - I have completed the survey, but feel compelled to respond to the current draft "proposal" or "plan" - yes, I
recognize it is not yet a recommendation.
For decades, I wanted to move inside the perimeter to Brookhaven and finally did so about 3 years ago, building a home
on a previously undeveloped lot on Oglethorpe.
The constraints of the lot (including limitations of a 50 foot frontage) significantly impacted what we could build, but we
did what we had to do.
While I embrace the objective of providing transportation options for bicyclists, pedestrians, etc. in our community, I
encourage you to do so without potentially wiping out a significant amount of yard frontage with a 10 foot sidewalk.
Let's get creative - I would be supportive if you wanted to make Oglethorpe Avenue "one way" - I believe that would
ease the traffic constriction created by parked cars as well as providing ample room for a bicycle lane without
confiscating lawns.
Be glad to discuss further Larry Sitton
1151 Oglethorpe Avenue NE
Brookhaven GA 30319
404-625-2330
lesitton@southernco.com<mailto:lesitton@southernco.com>
________________________________
Lusher, Eric
11
Packet Pg. 173
E.2.a
12
Packet Pg. 174
E.2.a
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Thursday, October 01, 2015 10:16 AM
Lusher, Eric
FW: Murphey Candler Park - Path Planning
-Ann Marie Quill

BrookhavenGa.gov
From: Bob kruer [mailto:Bob@innovativeroofing.net]

Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 11:36 AM
Cc: Linley Jones <linley.jones@brookhavenga.gov>; Rebecca C. Williams <rebecca.williams@brookhavenga.gov>; 'Vivian
Kruer' <vkruer@mindspring.com>
Subject: Murphey Candler Park - Path Planning
I have reviewed the information on the website and I am very concerned about some of the plans I see as regards to
Murphey Candler Park. Looks as if I will not be able to attend tonights meeting but would like to go on record. Also, is
there a email list or other communication that I can sign up for future notifications?
Generally I favor development of paths and walking trails inside parks for recreational use only. The plans shown
included paths or trails that would serve to allow a cross flow of traffic through the parks and allow trail access from
multiple points. For instance the plans to cross Murphey Candler at the north end and to provide access across (under?)
285. Both would destroy the existing natural state / wilderness appeal of the park and existing trail. There is plenty of
access across the north end now by way of two small pedestrian bridges.
Roads and paths to the park can be improved, but I do not support changes inside the park.
Unfortunately, it has been my experience that outside engineers and consultants are predisposed to building bigger,
better, more as that is their business. They can slant surveys and reports to justify their findings. They never present no
build options.
Our parks need better maintenance and small improvements, not wholesale change. Murphey Candler is a unique park
and provides a combination of a wooded area with athletic fields to the south. The natural area needs to be protected.
Lusher, Eric
13
Packet Pg. 175
Bob Kruer
4151 Brawley Dr
Brookhaven, Ga. 30319-1716
404 405 6558 (C)
bob@innovativeroofing.net
E.2.a
14
Packet Pg. 176
E.2.a
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Monday, September 21, 2015 9:42 AM
Lusher, Eric
FW: new ashford-dunwoody connector
-Ann Marie Quill

BrookhavenGa.gov
From: Ann Marie Quill

Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 9:39 AM
Subject: FW: new ashford-dunwoody connector
-Ann Marie Quill

BrookhavenGa.gov
From: jxh [mailto:jxhughes@gmail.com]

Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 5:59 PM
To: COB-News <news@brookhavenga.gov>
Subject: new ashford-dunwoody connector
Is Brookhaven/Dunwoody working with transportation for a pedestrian option on

the new connector?
Lusher, Eric
15
Packet Pg. 177
E.2.a
http://www.myajc.com/news/news/local/new-dunwoody-connector-road-plannedto-relieve-con/nngYf/
16
Packet Pg. 178
E.2.a
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Lusher, Eric
FW: Brookhaven to hold second public meeting on Bike, Pedestrian & Trail Plan
-Ann Marie Quill

BrookhavenGa.gov
From: Ann Marie Quill

Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 9:41 AM
Subject: FW: Brookhaven to hold second public meeting on Bike, Pedestrian & Trail Plan
-Ann Marie Quill

BrookhavenGa.gov
From: Brian Fenner [mailto:bfenner24@att.net]

Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 2:45 PM
Subject: Re: Brookhaven to hold second public meeting on Bike, Pedestrian & Trail Plan
Hi Ms. Quill,
Thanks for returning my call. After looking at the Brookhaven Bicycle, Pedestrian, Trail Plan target
corridor map I was thinking that the north end of Brookhaven that borders with Sandy Springs and the
medical arts center station would be a great place to extend the target corridor to make it friendly for
bicycles and pedestrians. Turning Old Johnson Ferry into the a dead end street where it flows into
Lusher, Eric
17
Packet Pg. 179
the traffic circle, except for access by emergency and police vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians, this
would make the neighborhoods along West Nancy Creek (west and east of Ashford Dunwoody) a
safer and more desirable area for non-motorized and foot traffic. Another benefit of turning Old
Johnson Ferry into a dead end would be the increased use of the MARTA Medical Arts Station by
bicyclists and pedestrians due to its close vicinity to the traffic circle at Old Johnson Ferry and the
increase safety with the decrease in traffic. Medical Arts Station may provide a better connection to
other trails located near MARTA and PATH Atlanta (Belt-line, Stone Mountain, etc.) thus increasing
the use of both. Please pass my suggestions onto the consultants. Thanks for your cooperation in
this matter.
Sincerely,
Brian T. Fenner
404-790-3437
On Friday, September 18, 2015 9:34 AM, City of Brookhaven <news@brookhavenga.gov> wrote:
Right-click here to download pictures. To help protect y our priv acy , Outlook prev ented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Brookhaven to hold second public meeting on Bike, Pedestrian &
Trail Plan
Brookhaven, GA, Sept. 18, 2015 The City of Brookhaven continues to work on its first Bicycle, Pedestrian,
and Trail Plan. This important effort will help develop a vision for a future
bicycle, pedestrian and trail network to be enjoyed by all residents and
visitors to the city.
The plan effort is scheduled to conclude in early 2016 and includes an
initial analysis of existing conditions, a determination of future needs, and
an implementation plan to guide the city in future decision making.
E.2.a
18
Packet Pg. 180
There will be several opportunities for residents to participate in the

development of this plan, including the second public meeting to be held
Wednesday, Sept. 30, from 6 to 8 p.m. at the Lynwood Park Community
Center (3360 Osborne Road). This will be the second of three planned
meetings throughout the planning effort.
This meeting will include the following topics:
6-6:30 p.m.: An open house where attendees can view initial

recommendations developed as part of the planning effort.
6:30-7 p.m.: A formal presentation regarding the plan development
7-8 p.m.: An interactive exercise to discuss initial
recommendations and priorities for the community.
Click here for more information on the planning efforts.

###
Media Contact:
Ann Marie Quill
404-637-0508
news@brookhavenga.gov
Spread the word!

The City of Brookhaven is working hard to keep residents up to speed with what's going
on in their city. Please take a moment to forward this email to anyone you know who
wants to stay up-to-date with Brookhaven's happenings and let them know they
can sign up here
Thanks!
Right-click here to download pictures. To help p ro tect y our priv acy , Outlook prev ented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
STAY CONNECTED
Lik e us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
Forward this email

Right-click
here to
download
pictures. To
help protect
y our priv acy ,
Outlo ok
prev ented
auto matic
download of
this pictu re
from the
In ternet.
E.2.a
19
Packet Pg. 181
E.2.a
Right-click
here to
download
pictures. To
help protect
y our priv acy ,
Outlo ok
prev ented
auto matic
download of
this pictu re
from the
In ternet.
City of Brookhaven | 4362 Peachtree Rd | Brookhaven | GA | 30319
This email was sent to bfenner24@att.net by news@brookhavenga.gov |

Update Profile/Email Address | Rapid removal with SafeUnsubscribe | About our service provider.
20
Packet Pg. 182
E.2.a
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Lusher, Eric
FW: Speed bumps on Cates Ave
-Ann Marie Quill

BrookhavenGa.gov
From: Glianny Fagundo [mailto:glianny@gmail.com]

Sent: Saturday, September 12, 2015 3:18 PM
Subject: Fwd: Speed bumps on Cates Ave
Glad to hear that the City is seeking input from its residents re: the bike and other paths. A quick drive around
our city on a Saturday morning shows that we're an active, healthy City, where residents walk, run, and bike on
a regular basis. There are some areas, however, in which these activities are dangerous due to narrow roads,
limited visibility, or poor sidewalks. The idea of building paths is an excellent one. I hope we can get multi-use
paths like the ones on Silver Comet and the Beltline. Given that the user traffic would be less than at the
Beltline, 10 foot paths would be more than enough. I heard a rumor that a handful of residents are clamoring
for separate paths for pedestrians and cyclists, but that seems silly and unnecessary. First, it would not be fair
to the businesses and homeowners losing property due to eminent domain. Second, the traffic/use would not
merit it. Third, such plan would be unnecessarily expensive. I nonetheless agree that road-level bike lanes that
are merely separated by road lines would be unnecessarily dangerous and would force families who are cycling
or recreational cyclists to run on sidewalks. (See e.g. Buckhead bike lanes.) Hence, please consider paths that
are separate from traffic lanes.
Finally, as our area (Brookhaven and beyond) continues to develop, please, please, please consider building the
first paths up and down the Peachtree corridor. I'd love for residents and visitors to be able to ride bikes to
Town Brookhaven, Oglethorpe, MARTA, and visit the new stores being built in Chamblee.
Thank you for considering the information here and working on this worthy project.
Glianny
---------- Forwarded message ---------From: Nextdoor Lynwood Park <reply@rs.email.nextdoor.com>
Date: Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 8:19 PM
Lusher, Eric
21
Packet Pg. 183
E.2.a
Sean Pharr, Lynwood Park

The city is currently seeking input from the community for pedestrian and bicycle accommodations;
http://www.brookhavenga.gov/city-departm...
Email concerns to the email address;
Sean
Original post by Corey Alison from Lynwood Park (62 replies):
To all those on Cates Ave I know there have been discussions before about speed bumps on Cates and surrounding areas. We sadly lost
our sweet Cavalier last night after being struck by a truck...
Apr 15 in Crime & Safety to 1 neighborhood
View or reply
Thank Private message
You can also reply to this email or use Nextdoor for iPhone or Android
You received this email because you thanked/replied to this post. Not interested in future updates? Stop receiving immediate updates on
this post
This message is intended for glianny@gmail.com.
Unsubscribe or adjust your email settings
Nextdoor, Inc. 760 Market St., Suite 300, San Francisco, CA 94102
Subject: Re: Speed bumps on Cates Ave

To: glianny@gmail.com
22
Packet Pg. 184
E.2.a
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Lusher, Eric
FW: Buford Hwy
-Ann Marie Quill

BrookhavenGa.gov
From: Michael.Diaz@ch2m.com [mailto:Michael.Diaz@ch2m.com]

Sent: Saturday, September 12, 2015 3:07 PM
Cc: DSchaefer@thelaa.org; seanpharr@gmail.com
Subject: Buford Hwy
Dear Bike and Pedestrian Committee, I was driving Buford Hwy the other day and noticed there are no
sidewalks as you get closer to Clairmont near the Kroger. Please add to your list of items. I am afraid the
community in that corridor is the one that needs it the most but yet will not provide feedback. Thanks.
Michael Diaz
Lusher, Eric
23
Packet Pg. 185
E.2.a
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Monday, August 17, 2015 10:25 AM
Lusher, Eric
FW: Sidewalks for students!
-----Original Message----From: Amy Henry [mailto:amyhenrynutrition@gmail.com]

Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 6:21 PM
Subject: Sidewalks for students!
Hi! I can't make the meetings but would love to have side walks put in on Lanier Drive between St Martins and Our Lady
of Assumption. A great deal of students walk that street and there are no side walks and a lot of cars going to and from
both schools. There is a middle strip on that road that would be easy to use for side walks to ensure the safety of the
kids walking.
Thank you for considering.
Amy Henry
Sent from my iPhone
________________________________
Lusher, Eric
24
Packet Pg. 186
E.2.a
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Malone, Graham
Lusher, Eric; Fangmann, Richard
FW: path ideas
Brookhaven Path ideas.docx
John Park is the City Councilman for District 2 in Brookhaven. He sent this document to me which has some very good
information regarding his districts desires and overall feasibility of creating a connection from the Peachtree-DeKalb
Airport area down to the North Fork and along Dresden Drive.
Graham Malone, P.E.
Transportation Engineer II
Pond & Company

Architects Engineers Planners
3500 Parkway Lane, Suite 600 | Norcross, GA 30092 | www.pondco.com
p 678.336.7740 | f 678.336.7744 | e MaloneG@pondco.com | direct 404.748.4835
From: John Park [mailto:john.park@brookhavenga.gov]

Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2015 6:17 PM
To: Malone, Graham
Subject: path ideas
Graham,
It was a pleasure meeting you back in may at the public input session. As promised, here is a list of path ideas for my
district here in Brookhaven. I hope you find it useful.
Please feel free to call me with any questions. My cell number is 404 822 7059.
Regards,
John Park
City council District 2
Brookhaven City Hall
4362 Peachtree Road
Brookhaven, GA. 30319
Office: 404-637-0714
Cell: 404-822-7059
Lusher, Eric
25
Packet Pg. 187
E.2.a
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Wednesday, August 05, 2015 9:29 AM
Lusher, Eric
FW: Need Cross Walk on corner of Cates and Osborne
-Ann Marie Quill

BrookhavenGa.gov
From: Corey Alison [mailto:Corey.Alison@amwins.com]

Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2015 4:36 PM
Subject: Need Cross Walk on corner of Cates and Osborne
I previously sent an email about possible sidewalks on Cates. However, due to the narrowness of the streets, I realize
that may not be feasible. On a much smaller scale is a need for a cross walk to allow people to cross over from Cates to
get onto the sidewalk on Osborne. As it stands now, for my family to go to Lynwood Park, we must cross over Osborne,
which is a busy street, to get to the sidewalk. There is no stop sign or cross walk to help ensure a safe crossing of the
street. Since we want to encourage people to come to Lynwood Park, I feel that safe ways to get to the sidewalks is
imperative.
Thank you,
Corey T. Alison, ARM
Senior Vice President - Casualty | AmWINS Brokerage of Georgia, LLC
T 404.920.3760 | M 678-481-9481 | corey.alison@amwins.com
3630 Peachtree Road NE, Suite 1700 | Atlanta, GA 30326 | amwins.com
In California: AmWINS Brokerage of Georgia Insurance Services, LLC | License #0F56593
Traditional wholesale is a thing of the past. Learn more at therightwholesaler.com
Tue Aug 04 2015 16:35:55 "Corey Alison" <Corey.Alison@amwins.com>

This e-mail and any attachments may contain information that is privileged or confidential and is meant solely for the use of the
person(s) to whom it was intended to be addressed. If you have received this e-mail by mistake, or you are not the intended
recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, keep, copy or distribute this message, attachments, or any part of the same. If you
Lusher, Eric
26
Packet Pg. 188
E.2.a
have received this email in error, please immediately inform the author and permanently delete the original, all copies and any
attachments of this email from your computer. Thank you.
27
Packet Pg. 189
E.2.a
Shane Day Boyer <sdayboyer@gmail.com>

Monday, August 03, 2015 7:43 PM
Gloria Goins
Lusher, Eric; BRushing@atlantaregional.com; pbradshaw@atlantaregional.com
Re: Bike Ped Trail Plan Stakeholders Meeting
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Pond & Co Reps,

I enjoyed the meeting the other night but want to point out a couple of things. First of all, we have worked very
hard to get the word out to use the phrase "Murphey Candler Park" instead of a shortened version of Murphey
Candler that was used in the mapping presentation at the meeting. There is a Murphey Candler Elementary in
Dekalb and we want it to be known moving forward by the three words of Murphey Candler Park to avoid
confusion and to showcase the largest park in the City of Brookhaven.
The other point I want to make is on Chamblee Dunwoody Road. The lack of bike lanes and even basic
sidewalks prohibits people from using this corridor especially down the Chamblee Methodist for exercise. I just
ran it and was almost run over twice by speeding motorists on the curve. My understanding is the City of
Chamblee took most of the right of way when they annexed Gainsborough East and Huntley Hills before
Brookhaven was a city. If that is the case can they give us back our half of the right of way so we can build
appropriate sidewalks. Otherwise, when you talk with Chamblee can you ask they consider installing curbing
and sidewalks along the entire stretch. It would be very appealing to have that in the plans.
Thanks for all you are dong.
Best,
Shane
c)404-966-7740
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 10, 2015, at 2:27 PM, Gloria Goins <gloria.goins@brookhavenga.gov> wrote:
________________________________
This e-mail message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and
privileged information. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copying of this message (including any attachments) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error,
please contact the sender and destroy all copies of the original message (including attachments). The City of Brookhaven is a public
entity subject to the Official Code of Georgia Annotated 50-18-70 to 50-18-76 concerning public records. Email is covered under such
laws and thus may be subject to disclosure.
<mime-attachment.ics>
Lusher, Eric
28
Packet Pg. 190
E.2.a
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Lusher, Eric
FW: Brookhaven Fields Sidewalk Input
-Ann Marie Quill

BrookhavenGa.gov
From: J S [mailto:bizjs@outlook.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2015 4:31 PM
Cc: Richard Meehan <richard.meehan@brookhavenga.gov>; alishawist@yahoo.com
Subject: Brookhaven Fields Sidewalk Input
Hello,
Per request from Richard Meehan, I am submitting the following sidewalk input on behalf of the Board of the
Brookhaven Fields Civic Association (BFCA).
1. Complete sidewalks on the patches that are missing on the entire length of Ellijay/Coosawattee from
Dresden to Briarwood.
Note: there are only a few areas along this stretch, most critical being the western side of Coosawattee on the
hill near Noel.
2. Cartecay from Fernwood Circle/Sylvan Circle to Clack's Corner.
Lusher, Eric
29
Packet Pg. 191
E.2.a
3. Appalachee from Canoochee to Cartecay.
Note: An alternative (or perhaps addition) is to include stop signs at Canoochee and Etowah to slow the
north/south traffic on Appalachee. If this is more viable/practical, please let me know the approach to get this
done (who I should speak with, how to get it on a list, etc.)
Please let me know if additional information or clarification is necessary.
Thanks,
Josh
Note: this recommendation extends the city's initial proposal past Ellijay and continues to Appalachee.
30
Packet Pg. 192
E.2.a
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Tuesday, July 07, 2015 4:06 PM
Lusher, Eric
FW: Sidewalk for Brookhaven side of Harts Mill
-Ann Marie Quill

BrookhavenGa.gov
From: Richard Meehan

Sent: Monday, July 06, 2015 4:47 PM
To: 'Ann Council'
Cc: Rebecca C. Williams; Bike Ped Trail Plan
Subject: RE: Sidewalk for Brookhaven side of Harts Mill
Ann,
We have not had direct talks with Chamblee about the Harts Mill Sidewalk yet. However, these discussions and analysis
of a need for a sidewalk along Harts Mill will be discussed with Chamblee as part of our coordination with them on the
Bike Ped Plan that is currently underway. The consultant working on the plan is aware of the input from residents about
the need for this sidewalk. They are currently in the process of evaluating the initial input received from all residents
and will be ready for another round of Public Meeting on the plan in August. The plan is scheduled to be completed
later this year and there will be another final round of public meeting for review and comment in the fall before the final
plan is presented to City Council for adoption.
Thanks
City of Brookhaven
4362 Peachtree Road
Main: 404-637-0500
Direct: 404-637-0520
Fax: 404-637-0501
Lusher, Eric
31
Packet Pg. 193
From: Ann Council [mailto:anncouncil@gmail.com]

Sent: Monday, July 06, 2015 4:03 PM
To: Richard Meehan
Cc: Rebecca C. Williams; Bike Ped Trail Plan
Subject: Re: Sidewalk for Brookhaven side of Harts Mill
Hello Richard,
I wanted to follow-up about the sidewalk situation on Harts Mill. Has any more thought or conversation
happened along these lines? You mentioned it would require working with the City of Chamblee - how could
that play out?
Any input or suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Ann
On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 12:33 PM, Richard Meehan <richard.meehan@brookhavenga.gov> wrote:
Ann,
We have just started work on our citywide Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Trail Plan and I have forwarded your comments to
our consultant so we can include this area in our plan. Part of that plan will be to coordinate with the adjacent cities,
including Chamblee, to allow for the continuation of our sidewalk network.
Please be aware that Harts Mill Road itself from Flowerland to Chamblee Dunwoody Road is entirely within the City of
Chamblee even though the properties on the north side of the road are in Brookhaven. As such, Brookhaven cannot
construct the sidewalk on this section of Hart Mill, but would need to work with Chamblee to get them to include it in
their plans. We would be able to construct the section from Watkins Pl to just past Flowerland.
Thanks
City of Brookhaven
E.2.a
32
Packet Pg. 194
E.2.a

Main: 404-637-0500
Direct: 404-637-0520
Fax:
404-637-0501
This email message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information.
If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message
(including any attachments) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender and destroy all copies of the
original message (including attachments). The City of Brookhaven is a public entity subject to the Official Code of Georgia Annotated 50-18-70 to 5018-76 concerning public records. Email is covered under such laws and thus may be subject to disclosure.
From: Rebecca C. Williams

Sent: Monday, May 18, 2015 10:14 AM
To: Ann Council; Richard Meehan
Hi Ann
Thanks for your good suggestion. Safe sidewalks to schools are indeed a priority. I'm forwarding this to our
public works director to get his comment on your suggestion. Chamblee controls the right of way on Chamblee
Dunwoody so we would have to work with them as well. Thanks for your input.
Best regards
Rebecca
4362 Peachtree Road
33
Packet Pg. 195
E.2.a

4362 Peachtree Road
Main: 404-637-0500
Cell: 770-314-0730
On May 17, 2015, at 10:24 PM, Ann Council <anncouncil@gmail.com> wrote:

Hello Rebecca,
I am a Brookhaven resident who lives on Granger Dr. off of Harts Mill Rd.
I have seen recent publications from the city of Brookhaven regarding the emphasis of creating
a pedestrian friendly community. I think this is a wonderful initiative and would like to bring
one area of our community that I believe needs improvement.
The Brookhaven side of Harts Mill running from the Mendenhall neighborhood to the corner of
Watkins Pl. does not have a sidewalk. In addition, the only locations to safely cross Harts Mill
is at the corner of Chamblee-Dunwoody and the new pedestrian cross walk located
near Watkins Pl.
For our family, the lack of safe passage across Harts Mill has become more of a concern this
year as our eldest son now attends Chamblee Middle School. If he were to safely walk home
from the middle school today, he would have to walk up to the corner of Chamblee-Dunwoody
and then head back down Harts Mill. The second challenge is that the sidewalk ends at the end
of the Mendenhall neighborhood.
This is an issue for all middle school and high school students choosing to walk to school and
live on the Brookhaven side of Harts Mill down to Watkins Pl.
Rebecca Chase Williams
34
Packet Pg. 196
E.2.a
I would greatly appreciate if the City Council would consider making Harts Mill a more
pedestrian friendly street for the residents of Brookhaven, mostly importantly the children
seeking a safe path to school.
I am starting my contacting you. Please advise if there are additional government officials that I
should contact or other steps I should take to have this issue consider by the city of Brookhaven.
Thank you,
Ann Council
3956 Granger Dr.
770-452-8428
---------- Forwarded message ---------From: City of Brookhaven <news@brookhavenga.gov>

Date: Fri, May 8, 2015 at 6:04 PM
Subject: City of Brookhaven Updates
To: anncouncil@gmail.com
As I am sure you are aware, it is not only students who walk along Harts Mill, but much of our
community uses Harts Mill as a path for exercise.
35
Packet Pg. 197
Brookhaven to hold public meeting on Bike, Pedestrian & Trail Plan
E.2.a
The City of Brookhaven has begun work on its first Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Trail Plan.
This important effort will help develop a vision for a future bicycle, pedestrian and trail
network to be enjoyed by all residents and visitors to the city.
The plan effort is scheduled to conclude in early 2016 and includes an initial analysis
of existing conditions, a determination of future needs, and an implementation plan to
guide the city in future decision making.
There will be several opportunities for residents to participate in the development of
this plan, including the first public meeting to be held Tuesday, May 19, from 5:30 to
7:30 p.m. at the Lynwood Park Community Center (3360 Osborne Road). This will be
the first of three planned meetings throughout the planning effort. This initial meeting
will include the following topics:
5:30-6:00 PM: A community preference exercise to determine community

preferences for different types of bicycle, pedestrian, and trail improvements
6:00-6:20 PM: A formal presentation regarding the plan development
6:20-7:30 PM: An interactive exercise to craft an overall vision for a bicycle,
pedestrian, and trail network
Click here for more information.

En Espanol.
We hope to see you there!
36
Packet Pg. 198
New turning lane on Ashford Dunwoody
E.2.a
37
Packet Pg. 199
In collaboration with the Perimeter Community Improvement District, Brookhaven's

Public Works Department recently restriped a section of Ashford Dunwoody Road in
front of Montgomery Elementary School to add a southbound left turn lane into the
school.
The lane was needed so that southbound vehicles wanting to turn left into the school,
including school buses, would not hold up southbound through traffic while waiting to
make the turn.
The change will help with relieving some of the congestion that occurs at
Montgomery Elementary at both the arrival and dismissal times and make it safer for
those drivers turning left into the school.
E.2.a
38
Packet Pg. 200
Brookhaven Bolt returns May 16
The Brookhaven Bolt 5K returns Saturday, May 16, with 100 percent of proceeds
donated directly to Ashford Park Elementary School. The City of Brookhaven is a
proud sponsor of the race. Visit www.brookhavenbolt.com for information on
registering, road closures and volunteering.
E.2.a
39
Packet Pg. 201
Volunteers pitch in during city's first annual stream cleanup
About 30 volunteers, including Girl Scouts, local students and city employees,
pitched in when the City of Brookhaven's Stormwater Division hosted its inaugural
Stream Cleanup on May 2 at a tributary of West Nancy Creek.
Volunteers pulled out 24 tires and many bags of trash along the way.
The event was held in recognition of Water Appreciation Day, a full-day
celebration of water cleanups around the metro Atlanta area.
Brookhaven celebrates Community Day at Lynwood Park
E.2.a
40
Packet Pg. 202
E.2.a
The city continued a 40-year tradition when it celebrated Brookhaven Community

Day in Lynwood Park on May 2 with a parade, music, cookout, children's activities
and special guests, including comedian George Wallace, a native of the
neighborhood.
Spread the word!
can sign up here
Thanks!
41
Packet Pg. 203
STAY CONNECTED
Forward this email
This email was sent to anncouncil@gmail.com by news@brookhavenga.gov |

Update Profile/Email Address | Rapid removal with SafeUnsubscribe | Privacy Policy.
E.2.a
42
Packet Pg. 204
This e-mail message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. If
any attachments) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender and destroy all copies of the original message
(including attachments). The City of Brookhaven is a public entity subject to the Official Code of Georgia Annotated 50-18-70 to 50-18-76 concerning
public records. Email is covered under such laws and thus may be subject to disclosure.
E.2.a
43
Packet Pg. 205
E.2.a
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:

Thursday, June 11, 2015 4:30 PM
Lusher, Eric
FW: Suggestion for trail on Clairmont Road
Clairmont Road Today.pdf
-Ann Marie Quill

Electronic Communications Manager | City of Brookhaven, GA | 404-637-0508 | M: 404-205-3832 | BrookhavenGa.gov
From: Blair Belton [mailto:blair.belton@gmail.com]

Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 4:28 PM
To: Bike Ped Trail Plan
Subject: Suggestion for trail on Clairmont Road
Here is a flyer for a trail on Clairmont. Part of it could use right of way around the periphery of the airport.
Thanks
Lusher, Eric
44
Packet Pg. 206
E.2.a
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Bates Mattison <bates.mattison@brookhavenga.gov>

Wednesday, June 03, 2015 7:06 PM
FJM
Bennett White; Richard Meehan; Fangmann, Richard; Lusher, Eric;
atlantapm@yahoo.com
Re: Follow-Up to Public Meeting on Bike, Pedestrian and Trail Plan
Thank you for your email. It is very helpful to understand your position and Im glad our consultants were
copied on this email so that they are also aware.
Sincerely,
Bates
Bates Mattison, Brookhaven City Council District 3
City of Brookhaven
4362 Peachtree Rd, NE
Office: 404-637-0716
Direct: 678-390-3424
Fax: 404-637-0501
bates.mattison@brookhavenga.gov
On Jun 3, 2015, at 5:38 PM, FJM <fjmc7272@gmail.com> wrote:

As a participant at the May 19th public meeting, I wanted to follow-up and thank you for
facilitating a very informative and interactive session. I know you received excellent feedback on
ideas that will eventually make the BPTP special.
It was also a pleasure and important to speak with each of you individually about not allowing
any consideration of a proposed BPTP connecting Colonial Drive and Lenox Park to come up. In
order for a BPTP to exist at this location, the city would have to confiscate private property from
multiple homeowners.
Fortunately the clear message I heard from each of you was the city is not interested in taking
homeowner property and would not even consider a BPTP location where private property
owners adamantly opposed the plan. That would assuredly be the case with this location. In
addition to my property at 2260 Colonial Drive, the Weathers Creek Town Homes HOA,
individual residents of Weathers Creek, and many other residents in Brookhaven Heights who
live on Colonial and near the location where a few well meaning but grossly uninformed
residents have suggested, would all vigorously oppose any trespassing or public access to our
collective private property; this is a non-negotiable stance.
Lusher, Eric
45
Packet Pg. 207
Since the city and Pond & Company are still in the information gathering phase of the project
study and timeline, my invitation still stands in having any or all of you to meet with me, Paul
Melita, a director with WCTHA who is copied on this e-mail, and other concerned citizens to
express not only opposition but provide an on-the-ground review of the dangerous topography of
the site. Even if no opposition existed, this is unquestionably a terrible location for any proposed
BPTP that carries definite liability risk for two HOAs and multiple homeowners...here is why.
In addition to environmental restrictions preventing land disturbance around two creek located
on the property, these streams quickly swell to powerful rapids with just moderate rainfalls. I
even shared with you at the May 19th meeting an IPhone video of a recent rainfall and the
dramatic shift, volume and force of water that transformed these streams into an extremely
hazardous situation for anyone standing nearby. There is also an extensive flood plan in the
wooded area behind the Weathers Creek Town Homes, along with an assortment of natural
hazards such as snakes, bees, poison ivy, sinkholes, slippery rocks, and a very deep slope that
runs along the fence line of the Arbor Trace gated community and above a Lenox Park retention
pond. When combined with an unforgiving public invasion and violation of long established and
cared for homes and backyards, this location should not even see the light of day as a reasonably
legitimate BPTP option.
Thank you for your attention, understanding the litany of concerns presented and agreeing that
the Colonial-Lenox Park BPTP is off the board. Please feel free to contact me with questions or
arranging a time to meet. In the meantime, I look forward to future public meetings and the
opportunity to once again participate in the BPTP process.
Frank McCloskey
E.2.a
46
Packet Pg. 208
E.2.a
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
FJM <fjmc7272@gmail.com>
Brookhaven District 3 Bates Mattison; Brookhaven Land Development Mgt./Engr.
Bennett White; Brookhaven Public Works Richard Meehan; Fangmann, Richard; Lusher,
Eric; atlantapm@yahoo.com
Follow-Up to Public Meeting on Bike, Pedestrian and Trail Plan
As a participant at the May 19th public meeting, I wanted to follow-up and thank you for facilitating a very informative
and interactive session. I know you received excellent feedback on ideas that will eventually make the BPTP special.
It was also a pleasure and important to speak with each of you individually about not allowing any consideration of a
proposed BPTP connecting Colonial Drive and Lenox Park to come up. In order for a BPTP to exist at this location, the city
would have to confiscate private property from multiple homeowners.
Fortunately the clear message I heard from each of you was the city is not interested in taking homeowner property and
would not even consider a BPTP location where private property owners adamantly opposed the plan. That would
assuredly be the case with this location. In addition to my property at 2260 Colonial Drive, the Weathers Creek Town
Homes HOA, individual residents of Weathers Creek, and many other residents in Brookhaven Heights who live on
Colonial and near the location where a few well meaning but grossly uninformed residents have suggested, would all
vigorously oppose any trespassing or public access to our collective private property; this is a non-negotiable stance.
Since the city and Pond & Company are still in the information gathering phase of the project study and timeline, my
invitation still stands in having any or all of you to meet with me, Paul Melita, a director with WCTHA who is copied on
this e-mail, and other concerned citizens to express not only opposition but provide an on-the-ground review of the
dangerous topography of the site. Even if no opposition existed, this is unquestionably a terrible location for any
proposed BPTP that carries definite liability risk for two HOAs and multiple homeowners...here is why.
In addition to environmental restrictions preventing land disturbance around two creek located on the property, these
streams quickly swell to powerful rapids with just moderate rainfalls. I even shared with you at the May 19th meeting an
IPhone video of a recent rainfall and the dramatic shift, volume and force of water that transformed these streams into
an extremely hazardous situation for anyone standing nearby. There is also an extensive flood plan in the wooded area
behind the Weathers Creek Town Homes, along with an assortment of natural hazards such as snakes, bees, poison ivy,
sinkholes, slippery rocks, and a very deep slope that runs along the fence line of the Arbor Trace gated community and
above a Lenox Park retention pond. When combined with an unforgiving public invasion and violation of long
established and cared for homes and backyards, this location should not even see the light of day as a reasonably
legitimate BPTP option.
Thank you for your attention, understanding the litany of concerns presented and agreeing that the Colonial-Lenox Park
BPTP is off the board. Please feel free to contact me with questions or arranging a time to meet. In the meantime, I look
forward to future public meetings and the opportunity to once again participate in the BPTP process.
Frank McCloskey
Lusher, Eric
47
Packet Pg. 209
E.2.a
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Lusher, Eric
FW: Sidewalks on Cates Ave
-Ann Marie Quill

From: Corey Alison [mailto:Corey.Alison@amwins.com]

Sent: Wednesday, June 03, 2015 4:02 PM
Subject: Sidewalks on Cates Ave
Richard Meehan had suggested I email here to request that sidewalks on Cates Avenue be added to the Bike Ped Trail
Plan. Please let me know if you need anything further from me. Cates Ave is narrow, so if sidewalks would be
considered, we obviously would need to evaluate the amount of front yard that would have to be taken out before
proceeding.
Thank you,
Corey T. Alison, ARM
Senior Vice President - Casualty | AmWINS Brokerage of Georgia, LLC
T 404.920.3760 | M 678-481-9481 | corey.alison@amwins.com
3630 Peachtree Road NE, Suite 1700 | Atlanta, GA 30326 | amwins.com
In California: AmWINS Brokerage of Georgia Insurance Services, LLC | License #0F56593
Traditional wholesale is a thing of the past. Learn more at therightwholesaler.com
Wed Jun 03 2015 16:02:03 "Corey Alison" <Corey.Alison@amwins.com>

This e-mail and any attachments may contain information that is privileged or confidential and is meant solely for the use of the
person(s) to whom it was intended to be addressed. If you have received this e-mail by mistake, or you are not the intended
recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, keep, copy or distribute this message, attachments, or any part of the same. If you
have received this email in error, please immediately inform the author and permanently delete the original, all copies and any
attachments of this email from your computer. Thank you.
Lusher, Eric
48
Packet Pg. 210
E.2.a
49
Packet Pg. 211
E.2.a
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Fangmann, Richard
Tuesday, June 02, 2015 1:43 PM
Richard Meehan
Lusher, Eric
Re: Meeting recap
Richard
We are aware of the ARC project and will be coordinating with them as we work on the city's plan. We are
working this week to get the results of the recent public meeting on your website along with a questionnaire so
that we can get additional information from the public.
Our next steps will be coordination with the adjacent cities and CIDs regarding their plans, as well as ARC. We
will also want to meet soon with the stakeholder advisory committee you're preparing and other stakeholders as
necessary.
I am out of the office this week, but will plan to coordinate with you next week regarding these items and next
steps. Feel free to contact Eric Lusher this week if there are specific items you want to discuss prior to my
return.
Richard Fangmann
Pond
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 1, 2015, at 3:02 PM, Richard Meehan <richard.meehan@brookhavenga.gov> wrote:
Richard,
Wanted to make sure you were aware of this meeting that occurred with ARC. We do need to make
sure we are coordinating our plan with their regional Bike Ped Update. Im sure you were already
planning on doing that.
Thanks
City of Brookhaven
4362 Peachtree Road
Main: 404-637-0500
Direct: 404-637-0520
Fax: 404-637-0501
<image001.png>
Lusher, Eric
50
Packet Pg. 212
This email message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and
entity subject to the Official Code of Georgia Annotated 50-18-70 to 50-18-76 concerning public records. Email is covered under
such laws and thus may be subject to disclosure.
From: Jack Honderd [mailto:jkhonderd@gmail.com]

Sent: Sunday, May 31, 2015 2:06 PM
To: Marie Garrett; Rebecca C. Williams; Joe Gebbia
Cc: Betsy Eggers; Richard Meehan; Bates Mattison; John Park; Bennett White; Ben Song
Subject: Meeting recap
Hi Rebecca, Joe and Marie,

I see you arent followers of our WalkRunBike Brookhaven FB page so Im forwarding my
recent posts that summarize Fridays meeting at ARC. Hope you find this informative and useful
for our goals for Brookhaven!
Jack
Betsy and I attended the Walk-Friendly + Bike-Friendly Communities Forum put on by the ARC
on Friday. Mia Birk, former Bicycle Coordinator for Portland, OR, was the keynote speaker.
Her firm, ALTA Design, has been retained by ARC to create a regional bike-ped plan. Here are
some highlights from her keynote:
-polls across the country pretty consistently show the following:
32% of people are NOT interested in cycling
1% are "fearless cyclists"--that's us--who will bike no matter what
7% are "enthused and confident," and will start as soon as there are reasonable bike facilities
60% are "interested but concerned"--primarily about safety
THEREFORE, PROTECTED, COMFORTABLE BIKE/WALK NETWORKS ARE
ESSENTIAL IF WE WANT MANY MORE PEOPLE TO PARTICIPATE. Can shift 10-13% of
the 60% pretty readily with education and outreach.
-multi-use trails are "catalytic projects" that have a much bigger economic and social impact than
just allowing people to ride bikes. Important element in business and personal relocations
communities are using/needing them to compete.
-3 key human roles to implementation. Need all 3 working for success:
a) political vision and leadership--need elected official champions
b) dedicated community advocates (that's us again)
c) trained, supported staff--especially transportation engineers (Richard Meehan, e.g.)
-gov't transp. engineers are KEY! Need to educate, work closely with them. Essential to get
them to experience cycling, walking in community first-hand. Reframe focus from "getting
people in cars where they need to go" to "improve mobility options for everyone."
-20% of all trips are commuting to work, 80% are other. Don't just focus on work commuting,
which may have limited options for most people. Focus on using bikes for OTHER trips. Any
E.2.a
51
Packet Pg. 213
E.2.a
2nd post:
ARC Plan
ARC, with consultants, ALTA Design, will be working on this regional plan for bike-ped
connectivity for the remainder of the year. There will be a public forum or other review of the
work approximately monthly, and metro governments are encouraged to participate throughout.
(Planners from Woodstock, John's Creek, Alpharetta, Roswell, Sandy Springs, and Dunwoody
were in my "breakout" session; I assume many other jurisdictions were represented in other
breakout groups.)
The main value of this regional plan is that it will provide a framework and blueprint for metro
jurisdictions to apply for ARC implementation funds. Be part of the plan, follow the rules, and
YOU GET MONEY to build bike lanes and trails!
reduction of car trips is positive. BTW, Atlanta average trip length is much longer than most
places.
52
Packet Pg. 214
E.2.a
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Monday, June 01, 2015 4:04 PM
Lusher, Eric
FW: Meeting recap
-Ann Marie Quill


Sent: Monday, June 01, 2015 3:01 PM
Subject: FW: Meeting recap
City of Brookhaven
4362 Peachtree Road
Main: 404-637-0500
Direct: 404-637-0520
Fax: 404-637-0501
From: Jack Honderd [mailto:jkhonderd@gmail.com]

Sent: Sunday, May 31, 2015 2:06 PM
To: Marie Garrett; Rebecca C. Williams; Joe Gebbia
Lusher, Eric
53
Packet Pg. 215
E.2.a
Hi Rebecca, Joe and Marie,

I see you arent followers of our WalkRunBike Brookhaven FB page so Im forwarding my recent posts that
summarize Fridays meeting at ARC. Hope you find this informative and useful for our goals for Brookhaven!
Jack
Betsy and I attended the Walk-Friendly + Bike-Friendly Communities Forum put on by the ARC on
Friday. Mia Birk, former Bicycle Coordinator for Portland, OR, was the keynote speaker. Her firm, ALTA
Design, has been retained by ARC to create a regional bike-ped plan. Here are some highlights from her
keynote:
-polls across the country pretty consistently show the following:
32% of people are NOT interested in cycling
1% are "fearless cyclists"--that's us--who will bike no matter what
7% are "enthused and confident," and will start as soon as there are reasonable bike facilities
60% are "interested but concerned"--primarily about safety
THEREFORE, PROTECTED, COMFORTABLE BIKE/WALK NETWORKS ARE ESSENTIAL IF WE
WANT MANY MORE PEOPLE TO PARTICIPATE. Can shift 10-13% of the 60% pretty readily with
education and outreach.
-multi-use trails are "catalytic projects" that have a much bigger economic and social impact than just allowing
people to ride bikes. Important element in business and personal relocationscommunities are using/needing
them to compete.
-3 key human roles to implementation. Need all 3 working for success:
a) political vision and leadership--need elected official champions
b) dedicated community advocates (that's us again)
c) trained, supported staff--especially transportation engineers (Richard Meehan, e.g.)
-gov't transp. engineers are KEY! Need to educate, work closely with them. Essential to get them to experience
cycling, walking in community first-hand. Reframe focus from "getting people in cars where they need to go"
to "improve mobility options for everyone."
-20% of all trips are commuting to work, 80% are other. Don't just focus on work commuting, which may have
limited options for most people. Focus on using bikes for OTHER trips. Any reduction of car trips is
positive. BTW, Atlanta average trip length is much longer than most places.
2nd post:
ARC Plan
ARC, with consultants, ALTA Design, will be working on this regional plan for bike-ped connectivity for the
remainder of the year. There will be a public forum or other review of the work approximately monthly, and
metro governments are encouraged to participate throughout. (Planners from Woodstock, John's Creek,
Cc: Betsy Eggers; Richard Meehan; Bates Mattison; John Park; Bennett White; Ben Song
Subject: Meeting recap
54
Packet Pg. 216
E.2.a
The main value of this regional plan is that it will provide a framework and blueprint for metro jurisdictions
to apply for ARC implementation funds. Be part of the plan, follow the rules, and YOU GET MONEY to build
bike lanes and trails!
Alpharetta, Roswell, Sandy Springs, and Dunwoody were in my "breakout" session; I assume many other
jurisdictions were represented in other breakout groups.)
55
Packet Pg. 217
E.2.a
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Monday, June 01, 2015 4:03 PM
Lusher, Eric
FW: Crosswalk on Hermance / Crosswycke Forest Drive
-Ann Marie Quill

Act.
-----Original Message----From: Richard Meehan
Sent: Monday, June 01, 2015 10:55 AM
To: Marie Garrett; Dina Molaison; J. Max Davis
Cc: Bennett White; Bike Ped Trail Plan
Subject: RE: Crosswalk on Hermance / Crosswycke Forest Drive
We will look at this and add the appropriate school crosswalk signage as well as a "State Law Stop for Pedestrians" sign.
As for the speed hump, if there was one there, it was removed by DeKalb before we became a city and replaced by the
island. The island itself is a traffic calming measure and does help provide a safe refuge for pedestrians looking to cross.
As part of the Bike Ped Trail plan that is currently underway, we will be evaluating these crossing locations and
developing standards for enhancement. Also this location on Hermance is on our list of needed sidewalks to complete
the sidewalk on both sides of Hermance up to Windsor Parkway.
Thanks
City of Brookhaven
4362 Peachtree Road
Main: 404-637-0500
Direct: 404-637-0520
Fax: 404-637-0501
This email message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain
Lusher, Eric
56
Packet Pg. 218
E.2.a
-----Original Message----From: Marie Garrett

Sent: Monday, June 01, 2015 10:12 AM
To: Dina Molaison; J. Max Davis
Cc: Bennett White; Richard Meehan
Subject: Re: Crosswalk on Hermance / Crosswycke Forest Drive
Richard and Bennett:
Please advise.
Thank you
Marie L. Garrett
City Manager
4362 Peachtree Rd
Atlanta, GA 30319
404-637-0500
On 6/1/15, 9:13 AM, "Dina Molaison" <Dina.Molaison@trade.gov> wrote:

>Thank you very much!
>
>Dina
>
>-----Original Message---->From: J. Max Davis [mailto:jmax.davis@brookhavenga.gov]
>Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2015 12:55 AM
>To: Dina Molaison
>Cc: Bennett White; Richard Meehan; Marie Garrett
>Subject: Re: Crosswalk on Hermance / Crosswycke Forest Drive
>
>Thank you Ms. Molaison for your email. I have forwarded to appropriate
>staff. You should hear something back next week.
>Sincerely,
>J. Max Davis
>
>Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On May 29, 2015, at 3:41 PM, Dina Molaison <Dina.Molaison@trade.gov>
>>wrote:
>>
>> Hello Mayor Davis,
>>
>>
>> It was a pleasure meeting you and your family at the Brookhaven
(including attachments). The City of Brookhaven is a public entity subject to the Official Code of Georgia Annotated 5018-70 to 50-18-76 concerning public records. Email is covered under such laws and thus may be subject to disclosure.
57
Packet Pg. 219
>>Farmers Market a couple of weeks ago. Many thanks for offering to take
>>a look into our crosswalk issue. Frankly, I never use the crosswalk at
>>the edge of my street because no one ever stops. My guess is that most
>>folks just don't know what the white markings indicate?? (photo
>>attached)
>>
>>
>>
>> Also, there is a school (DeKalb PATH Academy) located across the
>>street from Crosswycke, so I'd suggest putting "pedestrian crossing"
>>and "school zone" signs on the divider sign post. (There is currently
>>a sign with 2 children holding hands a good way north of the school,
>>but it's covered by tree limbs and has no "school" indication.)
>>
>>
>>
>> Another option would be a speed bump, which we once had but was
>>removed for some unknown reason. Because of Town Brookhaven, folks
>>speed directly in front of our street at Crosswycke and the PATH Academy.
>>Anything you can suggest or implement is greatly appreciated, Mayor
>>Davis. Thank you.
>>
>>
>>
>> Very best regards,
>>
>>
>> Dina Molaison
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> <Crosswalk at Hermance and Crosswycke.jpg>
>________________________________
>
>
>This e-mail message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of
>the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged
>information. If the reader of this message is not the intended
>recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution
>or copying of this message (including any attachments) is strictly
>prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please contact
>the sender and destroy all copies of the original message (including
>attachments). The City of Brookhaven is a public entity subject to the
>Official Code of Georgia Annotated 50-18-70 to 50-18-76 concerning public records.
>Email is covered under such laws and thus may be subject to disclosure.
E.2.a
58
Packet Pg. 220
E.2.a
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Tuesday, May 26, 2015 11:48 AM
Lusher, Eric
FW: Suggestions
-Ann Marie Quill

From: Kim Rizik [mailto:kimberly.s.rizik@gmail.com]

Sent: Saturday, May 23, 2015 6:06 AM
Subject: Suggestions
2 suggestions:
1. Please consider doing everything possible to keep bicyclists off Windsor Parkway.
They pose a hazard to themselves, pedestrians, and motorists.
2. Our children NEED sidewalks and crosswalks in the area of OLA and St. Martin's.
Please consider making a priority the installation of sidewalks down Lanier Drive and a
crosswalk from Hearst/Humility to Lanier.
Lusher, Eric
59
Packet Pg. 221
E.2.a
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Friday, May 22, 2015 3:58 PM
Lusher, Eric
FW: bike plan suggestion
-Ann Marie Quill

Act.
-----Original Message----From: Richard Meehan
Sent: Friday, May 22, 2015 3:38 PM
Subject: FW: Delivery Status Notification (Failure)
City of Brookhaven
4362 Peachtree Road
Main: 404-637-0500
Direct: 404-637-0520
Fax: 404-637-0501
This email message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain
(including attachments). The City of Brookhaven is a public entity subject to the Official Code of Georgia Annotated 5018-70 to 50-18-76 concerning public records. Email is covered under such laws and thus may be subject to disclosure.
-----Original Message----From: Marie Garrett

To: McCall Ginsberg
Cc: Jerry Kinsey; Bennett White; Richard Meehan
Lusher, Eric
60
Packet Pg. 222
E.2.a
Thank you so much. I will have your comments sent to our Parks/Rec and Public Works Departments.
Thank you
Marie L. Garrett
City Manager
4362 Peachtree Rd
Atlanta, GA 30319
404-637-0500
On 5/19/15, 7:39 AM, "McCall Ginsberg" <mccall.ginsberg@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>>> Good morning,
>>> Due to an unavoidable scheduling conflict, I will not be able to
>>>attend the meeting tonight, but I would like to provide input. I
>>>live in Pine Hills, and I would like to see bicycle connectivity to
>>>the Dresden Mixed Use, preferably in the form of a wider protected
>>>bike lane (with some sort of barrier) if it is on a busy road.
>>>
>>> I would also like to see a protected bike lane on North Druid that
>>>goes across the interstate over to Briarcliff (and its bike lanes).
>>>There is quite a bit of traffic at rush hour, and a protected bike
>>>lane would provide a way to get over to the Brighton Square shopping,
>>>Fresh Market, and restaurants. Brighton Square is also lacking in
>>>parking, and bike connectivity would help with this issue. I would
>>>advocate for a wider protected bike lane (with some sort of barrier)
>>>for North Druid because of the traffic. This would also have a bonus
>>>of connecting to the new linear park when it becomes a reality.
>Sincerely,
>McCall Ginsberg
>>>
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
________________________________
Subject: Re: Delivery Status Notification (Failure)
61
Packet Pg. 223
E.2.a
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Friday, May 22, 2015 12:34 PM
Lusher, Eric
FW: Additional observation
-Ann Marie Quill

From: Cortlandt Minnich [mailto:cortlandtm@gmail.com]

Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2015 10:29 PM
Subject: Additional observation
Nancy Creek and/or the Colonial Pipeline could make an interesting corridor that would connect PATH 400 to
the new GM planned facility - or to Dunwoody.
--
Cortlandt Minnich
404-578-5861
Lusher, Eric
62
Packet Pg. 224
E.2.a
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Fangmann, Richard
Wednesday, May 20, 2015 3:36 PM
Lusher, Eric
FW: Message Notification from VPS, 18049829829, Wells Erika
18049829829_rcvm4737_2015052012005300.wav
Eric,
Please see the attached. I think we should follow up with the City before responding, but it may be good to let them
know we got input from 6 groups regarding a vision for the plan.
Richard Fangmann, P.E., PTOE
Director of Transportation Planning | Associate D Pond & Company Architects ( Engineers ( Planners
p 678.336.7740 | f 678.336.7744 | e FangmannR@pondco.com | direct 404.748.4737 | mobile 770.598.1142
-----Original Message----From: Voice Mail [mailto:VoiceMail@pondco.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2015 12:00 PM
To: Fangmann, Richard
Subject: Message Notification from VPS, 18049829829, Wells Erika
A voice message was left from 18049829829 Wells Erika at 12:00 PM on May 20, of 32 seconds length. New:3, Old:0.
Lusher, Eric
63
Packet Pg. 225
E.2.a
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:

Wednesday, May 20, 2015 11:14 AM
Lusher, Eric
FW: Past activities related to the Brookhaven Bike Ped Plan
2015-01-08 10.54.45.jpg
-Ann Marie Quill

From: Michael Clifford [mailto:mjclifford@hotmail.com]

Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2015 9:04 AM
Cc: 'Cherniak, Christian'
Subject: Past activities related to the Brookhaven Bike Ped Plan
To the Pond staff:
Thanks for the opportunity to involve us in the planning of trails around Brookhaven. It was a pleasurable experience
(except for bicycling in the rain over to the meeting).
Richard Meehan suggested that I update the Pond staff on the activities some of us residents have already accomplished
related to the Brookhaven planning for biking and walking.
A few of the people last year bicycled around town with police escort and ended up at the Town Hall to meet the press (
I met them there). We followed up with a number of planning meetings. During the last (January 8), we also conducted a
Blue Sky mapping activity like the one conducted last night (see attachment). We also met with Richard on the striping
along Dresden and other areas.
We also started the Walk Run Bike Brookhaven public group on Facebook (see
https://www.facebook.com/groups/WalkRunBikeBrookhaven/). We used it to notify a number of people who ultimately
attended last night. Active members include Bill Cox, Jack Honderd, and Christian Cherniak. By the way, I believe that
Christian has the large maps on which we worked during the January meeting.
I think I can speak for the above people and others and say we are ready and eager to assist in this effort in any way
possible. Please dont hesitate to contact us (some via Facebook) for any assistance you may need.
Regards,
Lusher, Eric
64
Packet Pg. 226
E.2.a
Michael Clifford
65
Packet Pg. 227
E.2.a
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Wednesday, May 20, 2015 11:13 AM
Lusher, Eric
FW: Input from Workshop - May 19th - Brookhaven Bike/Ped/Trail Plan
-Ann Marie Quill

From: Sean Pharr [mailto:seanpharr@gmail.com]

Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2015 10:47 PM
Subject: Fwd: Input from Workshop - May 19th - Brookhaven Bike/Ped/Trail Plan
Subject: Input from Workshop - May 19th - Brookhaven Bike/Ped/Trail Plan

To: bikpedtrailplan@brookhavenga.gov, rebecca.williams@brookhavenga.gov
Enjoyed the meeting, very informative and I met a wonderful cross sections of people! Here is summary of
takeaway's from my table's inputs;
1. Peachtree Road should serve as a principle signature multi-modal street with first class bike/ped
accommodations. Tree lined boulevard/economic engine of Brookhaven
2. Ashford Dunwoody Road should accommodate ped and bike traffic through combination of sidewalks
and extension of PATH's MUT along it's length through the City.
3. Dresden Drive should at a minimum provide buffered sidewalks and in-road bike accommodations for
it's length
4. Windsor Parkway should accommodate bike and pedestrian traffic to Peachtree Dunwoody Road and
connect to future GA 400 trail extensions to make a regional connection to Dunwoody, Buckhead,
Sandy Springs, and the future Beltline(via Buckehad CID PATH 400 trail).
5. From Lynwood Park/Osborn Park provide off roadway network system of trails which use Nancy Creek
and tributaries to connect to Marist/Ashford Dunwoody to W. Nancy Creek Drive where low volume
traffic roadway network connects to Medical Center Station (study recommendations for enhancement
to these roadway segments). This connection would provide entire District 1 essential access to
Dunwoody MARTA line (along with future expansion of MARTA to Alpharetta)
6. Complete Blackburn Park to Keswick Park trail segment, work with Chamblee to better connect PATH
trail under Clairmont to MARTA (this should be part of ongoing development in the area anyway verify)
Lusher, Eric
66
Packet Pg. 228
7. Study viability of alternate MUP route from new mixed use Coro property at Ashford/Johnson Ferry to
Lynwood Park - coordinate with Silver Lake for possibility of enhancement to a "portion" of their
northern trail segment to Silver Lake to better connect both the Brittany/Lynwood Park neighborhood to
grocery, shopping etc
8. Enhance Osborne Road with MUP, buffered sidewalks, or combination of both to connect Lynwood
Park to Brookhaven Park, as well as entire northern portion of Brookhaven to transit(Brookhaven
MARTA Station).
9. Study best route to connect from Chamblee MARTA stations to Skyland Park, and then best route
through Ashford Park to Briarwood Park.
10. Enhance Briarwood Road for multi-modal accommodations (side path), Briarwood Rd will then
connect to North Fork Peachtree Creek, and provide connection to Southfork Peachtree Creed and
ultimately Beltline.
In summary, the above recommendations create the following;
Both on and off system intercity ring of mulit-modal accommodations connecting parks, commercial,
residential, institutional, religious, educational and transit hubs.
East-west connections to multi-modal ring noted above, provided on Peachtree Corridor, Dresden, and
Windsor.
North-South Connections created on Osborne, Ashford Duwnoody and Briarwood Road.
The above is an enhanced description of what my table was fortunate enough to discuss and put on paper. We
really keyed in on providing all our residents and neighborhoods vital connections that reduce vehicle trips, and
if appropriately implemented will make Brookhaven a regional example of providing first class mutli-modal
travel accomodations to it's citizens for generations to come.
Thanks,
Sean H. Pharr, PE
Lynwood Park
1152 Victoria Street, 30319
sean.pharr@aecom.com | seanpharr@gmail.com
E.2.a
67
Packet Pg. 229
E.2.a
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Tuesday, May 19, 2015 9:36 AM
Lusher, Eric
FW: Sidewalk for Brookhaven side of Harts Mill
Eric, heres the first email suggestion weve gotten from the public. Should I be forwarding them to you?
Looking forward to the open house tonight!
-Ann Marie Quill


Sent: Monday, May 18, 2015 12:34 PM
To: Rebecca C. Williams; Ann Council
Cc: Bike Ped Trail Plan
Subject: RE: Sidewalk for Brookhaven side of Harts Mill
Ann,
We have just started work on our citywide Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Trail Plan and I have forwarded your comments to
our consultant so we can include this area in our plan. Part of that plan will be to coordinate with the adjacent cities,
including Chamblee, to allow for the continuation of our sidewalk network.
Please be aware that Harts Mill Road itself from Flowerland to Chamblee Dunwoody Road is entirely within the City of
Chamblee even though the properties on the north side of the road are in Brookhaven. As such, Brookhaven cannot
construct the sidewalk on this section of Hart Mill, but would need to work with Chamblee to get them to include it in
their plans. We would be able to construct the section from Watkins Pl to just past Flowerland.
Thanks
City of Brookhaven
4362 Peachtree Road
Main: 404-637-0500
Direct: 404-637-0520
Fax: 404-637-0501
Lusher, Eric
68
Packet Pg. 230
From: Rebecca C. Williams

To: Ann Council; Richard Meehan
Hi Ann
Thanks for your good suggestion. Safe sidewalks to schools are indeed a priority. I'm forwarding this to our
public works director to get his comment on your suggestion. Chamblee controls the right of way on Chamblee
Dunwoody so we would have to work with them as well. Thanks for your input.
Best regards
Rebecca
Rebecca Chase Williams
4362 Peachtree Road
Main: 404-637-0500
Cell: 770-314-0730
On May 17, 2015, at 10:24 PM, Ann Council <anncouncil@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello Rebecca,
I am a Brookhaven resident who lives on Granger Dr. off of Harts Mill Rd.
I have seen recent publications from the city of Brookhaven regarding the emphasis of creating a
pedestrian friendly community. I think this is a wonderful initiative and would like to bring one
area of our community that I believe needs improvement.
The Brookhaven side of Harts Mill running from the Mendenhall neighborhood to the corner of
Watkins Pl. does not have a sidewalk. In addition, the only locations to safely cross Harts Mill is
at the corner of Chamblee-Dunwoody and the new pedestrian cross walk located near Watkins
Pl.
For our family, the lack of safe passage across Harts Mill has become more of a concern this
year as our eldest son now attends Chamblee Middle School. If he were to safely walk home
from the middle school today, he would have to walk up to the corner of Chamblee-Dunwoody
E.2.a
69
Packet Pg. 231
E.2.a
This is an issue for all middle school and high school students choosing to walk to school and
live on the Brookhaven side of Harts Mill down to Watkins Pl.
As I am sure you are aware, it is not only students who walk along Harts Mill, but much of our
community uses Harts Mill as a path for exercise.
I would greatly appreciate if the City Council would consider making Harts Mill a more
pedestrian friendly street for the residents of Brookhaven, mostly importantly the children
seeking a safe path to school.
I am starting my contacting you. Please advise if there are additional government officials that I
should contact or other steps I should take to have this issue consider by the city of Brookhaven.
Thank you,
Ann Council
3956 Granger Dr.
770-452-8428
---------- Forwarded message ---------From: City of Brookhaven <news@brookhavenga.gov>

Date: Fri, May 8, 2015 at 6:04 PM
Subject: City of Brookhaven Updates
To: anncouncil@gmail.com
h ttp : / / files.ctctcdn.com/c2e37fbe201/6352e54f-2a46-40b5-a6ba-a531f8fa9421.jpg
Brookhaven to hold public meeting on Bike, Pedestrian & Trail Plan

The City of Brookhaven has begun work on its first Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Trail Plan.
This important effort will help develop a vision for a future bicycle, pedestrian and trail
network to be enjoyed by all residents and visitors to the city.
and then head back down Harts Mill. The second challenge is that the sidewalk ends at the end
of the Mendenhall neighborhood.
70
Packet Pg. 232
The plan effort is scheduled to conclude in early 2016 and includes an initial analysis
of existing conditions, a determination of future needs, and an implementation plan to
guide the city in future decision making.
There will be several opportunities for residents to participate in the development of
this plan, including the first public meeting to be held Tuesday, May 19, from 5:30 to
7:30 p.m. at the Lynwood Park Community Center (3360 Osborne Road). This will be
the first of three planned meetings throughout the planning effort. This initial meeting
will include the following topics:
5:30-6:00 PM: A community preference exercise to determine community

preferences for different types of bicycle, pedestrian, and trail improvements
6:00-6:20 PM: A formal presentation regarding the plan development
6:20-7:30 PM: An interactive exercise to craft an overall vision for a bicycle,
pedestrian, and trail network
Click here for more information.

En Espanol.
We hope to see you there!
E.2.a
71
Packet Pg. 233
E.2.a
New turning lane on Ashford Dunwoody

In collaboration with the Perimeter Community Improvement District, Brookhaven's
Public Works Department recently restriped a section of Ashford Dunwoody Road in
front of Montgomery Elementary School to add a southbound left turn lane into the
school.
The lane was needed so that southbound vehicles wanting to turn left into the school,
including school buses, would not hold up southbound through traffic while waiting to
make the turn.
h ttp : //files.ctctcdn.com/c2e37fbe201/eb9d950d-3b9e-4b47-a9c2-2c2bf8258a28.jpg
72
Packet Pg. 234
The change will help with relieving some of the congestion that occurs at
Montgomery Elementary at both the arrival and dismissal times and make it safer for
those drivers turning left into the school.
h ttp://files.ctctcdn.com/c2e37fbe201/fbd2bf3e-cc8e-42b3-83b2-db48b339570a.jpg
Brookhaven Bolt returns May 16

The Brookhaven Bolt 5K returns Saturday, May 16, with 100 percent of proceeds
donated directly to Ashford Park Elementary School. The City of Brookhaven is a
proud sponsor of the race. Visit www.brookhavenbolt.com for information on
registering, road closures and volunteering.
Volunteers pitch in during city's first annual stream cleanup
E.2.a
73
Packet Pg. 235
h ttp : //files.ctctcdn.com/c2e37fbe201/1dd6b45c-847e-445d-825d-f7982ca90b69.jpg
About 30 volunteers, including Girl Scouts, local students and city employees,
pitched in when the City of Brookhaven's Stormwater Division hosted its inaugural
Stream Cleanup on May 2 at a tributary of West Nancy Creek.
Volunteers pulled out 24 tires and many bags of trash along the way.
The event was held in recognition of Water Appreciation Day, a full-day celebration
of water cleanups around the metro Atlanta area.
Brookhaven celebrates Community Day at Lynwood Park
h ttp : / / files.ctctcdn.com/c2e37fbe201/d8d57594-51a6-42e4-95d0-17d908955db4.jpg
E.2.a
74
Packet Pg. 236
The city continued a 40-year tradition when it celebrated Brookhaven Community

Day in Lynwood Park on May 2 with a parade, music, cookout, children's activities
and special guests, including comedian George Wallace, a native of the
neighborhood.
Spread the word!

can sign up here
Thanks!
h ttp ://img.constantcontact.com/letters/images/1101116784221/PM_B2C RFF_PaperC ornerBottom_v 2.png
STAY CONNECTED
Lik e us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
Forward this email

Right-click
here to
download
pictures. To
help protect
y our priv acy ,
Outlo ok
prev ented
auto matic
download of
this pictu re
from the
In ternet.
http://img.co
nstantcontact
.co m/letters
This email was sent to anncouncil@gmail.com by news@brookhavenga.gov |

Update Profile/Email Address | Rapid removal with SafeUnsubscribe | Privacy Policy.
Right-click
here to
download
pictures. To
help protect
y our priv acy ,
Outlo ok
prev ented
auto matic
download of
this pictu re
from the
In ternet.
E.2.a
75
Packet Pg. 237
E.2.a
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Fangmann, Richard
Tuesday, May 12, 2015 2:42 PM
Bennett White
Lusher, Eric
RE: Brookhaven Bike Ped Plan FW: Brookhaven Heights and Lenox Park Connector
Bennett,
Thank you for forwarding this comment. We will consider this connection.
As this email shows, there is a lot of desire to implement trails to provide connectivity between residential areas, but
there also can be resistance based on the location of the connection and anticipated number of trail users.
Director of Transportation Planning | Associate
Pond & Company

From: Bennett White [mailto:bennett.white@brookhavenga.gov]

Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2015 9:23 AM
Subject: Brookhaven Bike Ped Plan FW: Brookhaven Heights and Lenox Park Connector
Richard:
Please see below.
Councilman Mattison forwarded some resident input regarding connectivity.
I am forwarding on to you for your information.
Thanks,
J. Bennett White, PE
Director of Public Works / City Engineer
City of Brookhaven
4362 Peachtree Road
Phone: 404-637-0576
Cell: 770-853-4720
bennett.white@brookhavenga.gov
From: Bates Mattison
Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2015 6:57 AM
Lusher, Eric
76
Packet Pg. 238
E.2.a
Did I forward you this email with the proposed trail? Just FYI for Bike/Ped planning, but connectivity between
Brookhaven Heights & Lenox Park would be a great asset.
Bates Mattison, Brookhaven City Council District 3
City of Brookhaven
4362 Peachtree Rd, NE
Office: 404-637-0716
Direct: 678-390-3424
Fax: 404-637-0501
bates.mattison@brookhavenga.gov
Begin forwarded message:

From: Giles Stevens <gstevens@lee-associates.com>
Subject: RE: Brookhaven Heights and Lenox Park Connector
Date: May 11, 2015 at 5:32:21 PM EDT
To: Roman Brilman <rbrilman@MeridianInvestments.com>, Bates Mattison
<bates.mattison@brookhavenga.gov>
Bates/Roman,
While I am not opposed to this connectivity and could see the benefit I will tell you the neighbor (Frank
McCluskey, BHCA Secretary) whos land would have to cross over is VERY VERY opposed to this. Just an
FYI. He is on the board with me and is support of our traffic calming efforts. While I am the
neighborhood president, I would like to sit this one out for now and have you deal directly with each
other/him, as I need his support for our traffic calming efforts.
Sincerely,
-Giles Stevens | Director, CCIM
Lee & Associates | Atlanta
3500 Lenox Road, NE

Suite 200
Atlanta, GA 30326
Phone: 404.442.2402
Mobile: 404.918.0331
GStevens@Lee-Associates.com www.Lee-Associates.com Bio
There may be information in this e-mail or documents attached from a seller, lessor or other outside sources. While the
information is deemed reliable, no warranty is expressed or implied. Any information important to you or another party should
be independently confirmed. The information contained in this email or documents attached are provided for general
information purposes only and is not intended to be a legal opinion, legal advice or a complete discussion of the issues related
to the area discussed in the email or documents attached. You should seek independent legal advice from a licensed attorney
familiar with the laws of your state or locality regarding lease review, contract review, confidentiality agreements, commission
agreements, etc. discussed herein.
To: Bennett White; Richard Meehan

Subject: Fwd: Brookhaven Heights and Lenox Park Connector
77
Packet Pg. 239
From: Roman Brilman [mailto:rbrilman@MeridianInvestments.com]

To: Bates Mattison
Cc: Giles Stevens; Richard Meehan; Bennett White
Subject: RE: Brookhaven Hights and Lenox Park Connector
Bates,
Thank you for passing on the information and getting the city staff involved.
As you have heard at the last weeks Brookhaven Heights Community Association meeting, there were
quite a few residents who feel very strongly about the benefits of such connector.
Needless to say, a pedestrian walk connecting to Lenox park will not only benefit the residents of
Brookhaven Heights but also other neighboring Brookhaven communities. Currently these communities
do not have access to any parks that can be accessed on foot, this side of Peachtree Rd.
I think the location proposed below may work best as the property backs directly into one of the Lenox
parks entrances.
Please let me know if I can be of any help.
Best,
Roman Brilman
From: Bates Mattison [mailto:bates.mattison@brookhavenga.gov]

To: Roman Brilman
Cc: Giles Stevens; Richard Meehan; Bennett White
Subject: Re: Brookhaven Hights and Lenox Park Connector
Thanks for your email. I received the email info below from your neighbor regarding the
property mentioned to connect to Lenox Park. Ive forwarded it to our city staff to see how we
can add this to our planning.
Sincerely,
Bates
On May 6, 2015, at 10:18 PM, Gerry Polk <gpolk@polkcis.com> wrote:
Bates,
It was great to see you at our neighborhood meeting. Thanks for all of
your information.
The land that I was thinking of is owned by Weathers Creek Townhouses.
Please see attached. It would be easy to put a walking path through there.
E.2.a
78
Packet Pg. 240
E.2.a
Gerry Polk
<2324 Colonial.pdf><2324 Colonial Additional.pdf><2324 Colonial Map.png>
This e-mail message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and
entity subject to the Official Code of Georgia Annotated 50-18-70 to 50-18-76 concerning public records. Email is covered under such
laws and thus may be subject to disclosure.
Thanks for looking into this.
79
Packet Pg. 241
E.2.a
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Fangmann, Richard
Tuesday, May 12, 2015 2:29 PM
Bennett White
Lusher, Eric
RE: Brookhaven Sidewalk and Trail planning meetings
Bennett,
Thank you for forwarding this information. The use of golf carts on public streets is a complex issue. One of the
challenges is crossing state routes with Golf Carts. We are on call transportation engineers for the City of Peachtree City,
where golf cart use is prevalent and a well-developed trail system for golf carts is in place. We are working with them
and GDOT to develop criteria for designating at-grade golf cart crossings of state routes at signalized intersections. We
will let you know more regarding this topic after we meet with the City and GDOT this Friday.
As we move forward with the Brookhaven Plan, we will need to know to what degree you want to consider this mode in
developing your trail system. Since you are likely to have significant bike and pedestrian traffic on streets and side trails,
you may want to address the use of golf carts only on low volume side streets and at signalized crossings connecting
these streets.
Director of Transportation Planning | Associate
Pond & Company

From: Bennett White [mailto:bennett.white@brookhavenga.gov]

Sent: Thursday, May 7, 2015 9:44 AM
Subject: FW: Brookhaven Sidewalk and Trail planning meetings
Richard:
See below for some input from a resident.
J. Bennett White, PE
Director of Public Works / City Engineer
City of Brookhaven
4362 Peachtree Road
Phone: 404-637-0576
Cell: 770-853-4720
bennett.white@brookhavenga.gov
From: Ben Song
To: Bennett White
Lusher, Eric
80
Packet Pg. 242
E.2.a
FYI
Ben Song
Director of Community Development
City of Brookhaven | www.brookhavenga.gov
O: 404-637-0536
F: 404-637-0537
From: Bob Kruer [mailto:bob@innovativeroofing.net]

To: J. Max Davis; Rebecca C. Williams; Ben Song
Cc: 'Vivian Kruer'
Subject: Brookhaven Sidewalk and Trail planning meetings
I noticed this morning an article about planning sessions to work on trail and sidewalk development. Seems like I rarely
have the opportunity to attend the public meetings so I wanted to present my opinion directly.
Expanding sidewalks and trails is a great idea especially in an intown setting such as Brookhaven. However, I would like
to offer an additional component. Many communities, neighborhoods, and residents are taking advantage of Georgias
new Personal Transportation Vehicle (golf cart) ordinance. They are a great alternative to traditional vehicle use and
would certainly help the connectivity of our neighborhoods. Look at what has been done in Peachtree City and on St
Simons Island. Both are very cart friendly.
Imagine being able to take your kids to Murphey Candler Park for sports by golf cart! Or taking in the tennis or events at
Blackburn Park by golf cart! How about back roads to Montgomery School? Or going to Publix or Kroger and other
restaurants and shops without taking your car! Parking and traffic at Murphey Candler and Blackburn for events are
problems that PTVs can mitigate.
As I understand it, golf carts are now legal for street use if they meet certain criteria and stay on streets with speed
limits below 25 MPH. There are wide areas such as our neighborhood around Murphey Candler (Gainesborough, Nancy
Creek Heights) that are already viable for PTVs. A few crossings at Ashford Dunwoody Road and at the bridge at Nancy
Creek would connect large areas of the community. Cross Johnson Ferry near Cambridge and you have added the Silver
Lake neighborhood to the plan.
I am sure this would be controversial and would required additional expense, but I think long term it would add both
practicality and uniqueness to our neighborhoods. I hope you would consider adding this to the planning agenda for
study.
Bob Kruer
(404) 405 6558
4151 Brawley Drive
Brookhaven, Ga 30319
Cc: Richard Meehan

Subject: FW: Brookhaven Sidewalk and Trail planning meetings
81
Packet Pg. 243
Appendix F
STAKEHOLDER COMMITTEE
MEETINGS
E.2.a
BR
KHAVEN
Packet Pg. 244
KHAVEN
BR
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 245
KHAVEN
BR
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 246
KHAVEN
BR
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 247
KHAVEN
From: Michael Lennon

Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2015 1:47 PM
Cc: John Park; Richard Meehan
Subject: Bike / Ped Planning for Brookhaven
Thank you Richard for a very productive meeting last night.
I was very encouraged with your thought of a "spine" for the trails through Brookhaven, and it seems
that a continuation of the Blackburn Park Trail running down the east side of Ashford Dunwoody Road
all the way to Peachtree Rd is the best "bang for the buck" that we could get to get this trail system
started.
I like the idea of running behind the Publix, and crossing Johnson Ferry Road at that new traffic light at
Blair Circle. The short span of sidewalk between Ashford Dunwoody and Redding Road is already
wide enough for a trail along Peachtree for that one block. The traffic light at Redding Road provides
an excellent crossing, and puts the trail under the Marta tracks.
Redding & Caldwell should start the E-W "spine" for Brookhaven and could link to what seemed the
most desired destination: the Brookhaven Marta station, and the business cluster on Dresden Drive at
Caldwell. The north side of Caldwell has great space for a full size multi-use trail, though the short
section with houses may have to be a mix of trail and bike lane.
East of Redding on Caldwell already has bike lanes on both sides and would be an excellent start to
tie into the Ashford Forest green Space off Skyland, Georgian Hills Park, Skyland Park, and eventually
all the way down to Briarwood park; in other words our vision of the PATH proposed "Skyland Trail"
This would also be a great tie-in point to the Chamblee trails at Bragg & Clairmont.
Crossing Peachtree again from the Brookhaven Marta station at Dresden/Brookhaven Drive seems the
shortest route to drive our trail towards the Mountain Way Common in Buckhead and the trailhead of
the PATH400 Trail. I know dealing with the Capital City Country Club might be difficult, but running a
trail along their property up Brookhaven Drive and coming out on Peachtree Dunwoody right at the
Little Nancy Creek Park puts us very close to linking to PATH400. I hope we can work with
Atlanta/Fulton on this.
The Ashford Dunwoody and Caldwell trails alone would be a huge boost for Brookhaven and a great
basis for the start of a Brookhaven-wide trail system.
Thank you again and look forward to our next meeting.
Michael Lennon
BR
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 248
E.2.a
Stakeholder
Stakeholder Advisory Group Meeting #2
September 17, 2015
Stakeholder Advisory Group Attendees
Patrick Bradshaw
Jennifer Harper
Jack Honderd
Michael Lennon
Sean Pharr
Gerri Vereen
Study Team Attendees
Richard Meehan (City of Brookhaven)
Richard Fangmann (Pond & Company)
Eric Lusher (Pond & Company)
Heather Alhadeff (Center Forward)
Meeting Notes
Following a short presentation, stakeholders were presented with preliminary lists of trail,
pedestrian, and bike projects. Boards were presented showing the envisioned networks,
including proposed projects and existing facilities. Attendees were given a handout detailing
each individual corridor. This handout presented the projects alignment and limits, as well as
the existing conditions and proposed changes. With these tools, participants reviewed the
preliminary project list and the network it would create.
The stakeholder group was asked to choose which corridors which they would like to see
developed more fully in the report. On the whole, this group chose the following:
Dresden Drive
North Druid Hills Road
Caldwell Road
Osborne Road
Harts Mill Road
Windsor Parkway
Buford Highway
Both Ashford Dunwoody Road and Peachtree Road were cited as important corridors, but
separate projects dedicated to the development of concepts for these corridors are being
undertaken by the city. The visions created as part of those processes will be used to guide
any specific future improvements along these roads.
Additionally, a discussion was held on how far-reaching the plan should be. Many proposed
projects included sharrows which were developed with sensitivity to right-of-way and
community impacts (such as avoiding established homeowner landscaping). However, the
stakeholder committee advised the study team make some corridor recommendations more
ambitious so that such corridors would have instead multi-use trails, buffered bike lanes,
dedicated sidewalks, etc.
The stakeholder group was also asked for opinions about goals that the plan should aspire
towards. After discussion, following factors were created:
1. Create a viable spine, focusing on trails
2. Leverage connections beyond city
BR
KHAVEN
Packet Pg. 249
E.2.a
3. Connections to schools
4. Local connectivity
5. Safety of existing facilities
The study team lead a discussion of policies that affect bicycle, pedestrian, and trail
infrastructure. Specific discussions included zoning policies, sidewalk maintenance, complete
streets policies, and Safe Routes to Schools programs. Collaboration with other departments
to incorporate public art and amenities from stormwater features were also mentioned as ways
to enhance projects.
Members of the stakeholder advisory group were also encouraged to indicate any other
thoughts or comments on provided index cards. Responses included:
Preference for a trail within the neighborhood to the west of Clairmont Road instead of
along Clairmont Road
Special attention to connections to PATH 400
Encouragement for adoption of a complete streets policy
ATTACHMENTS
Sign-in sheet
Presentation
Draft Project Handout
Draft Vision Maps
BR
KHAVEN
Packet Pg. 250
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 251
BR
KHAVEN
BR
KHAVEN
Stakeholder Advisory Committee Meeting #2

September 17, 2015
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 252

September 17, 2015
TODAYS AGENDA
BR
KHAVEN
Quick Recap
(1 hour) General Discussion of Projects
(30 minutes) Discussion about Prioritization
(30 minutes) Discussion about Policy
Next Steps
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 253

September 17, 2015
QUICK RECAP
BR
KHAVEN
SUMMER 2015
SPRING 2015
EXISTING CONDITIONS
SYSTEM APPRAISAL
NETWORK DEVELOPMENT
Field Inventory

FALL 2015
RECOMMENDATIONS
Prioritization
Cost Estimates
Funding
Documentation
WE ARE HERE
PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 254

September 17, 2015
QUICK RECAP
BR
KHAVEN
FEASIBILITY
INPUT
SUITABILITY
PRIORITIZATION
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 255

September 17, 2015
GROUP DISCUSSION
BR
KHAVEN
General Discussion of Project Recommendations

Overall Plan What are the highest priorities?
Typical sections separation of uses
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 256

September 17, 2015
GROUP DISCUSSION
BR
KHAVEN
Potential Prioritization Factors

Suitability Ratings
Areas of Demand, Attraction, or Appropriate Character

Network continuity
General Community Connectivity

Cost
R-O-W
Community Support
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 257

September 17, 2015
GROUP DISCUSSION
BR
KHAVEN
Potential Policy and Code Considerations

Complete Streets
Development Regulations
Other regulatory considerations
Personal Transportation Vehicles
Enforcement
Bike Sharing Programs
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 258

September 17, 2015
NEXT STEPS
BR
KHAVEN
SUMMER 2015
SPRING 2015
FALL 2015
COMPLETE
EXISTING CONDITIONS
SYSTEM APPRAISAL
NETWORK DEVELOPMENT
Field Inventory

RECOMMENDATIONS
Prioritization
Cost Estimates
Funding
Documentation
PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 259

September 17, 2015
BR
KHAVEN
WEBSITE
http://www.brookhavenga.gov/citydepartments/public-works/bicycle-pedestriantrail-plan
EMAIL CONTACT
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 260

September 17, 2015
Bike, Pedestrian, & Trail Plan

Project ID
100
101
Street Name(s)
Buford Highway
Victor Road
Map
Opportunities
Limitations
Existing
Conditions*
Proposed
Conditions*
DRAFT
E.2.a
Improvement
Description
Project Type
(Bike/Ped/Trail)
Recent pedestrian improvements

Large transit-dependant population
State maintained, limited ROW

Heavily travelled corridor
Little room for improvements in
road
Fill in sidewalk gaps

Addition of bus and bike only lane
Identify locations for future HAWK crossings
B P
Near North Fork Creek

Connection to PATH 400
Private property
Extends outside of city limits
Utilities to south
Add sidewalks and sharrows
B P
Add sidewalks on Goodwin Road

Add sharrows
Crossing improvements
B P
Extends outside of city limits

Utilities on both sides of road
Parking on road common
Significant slope on sides
Four lane section south of project
limits
Utilities on both sides, close on
west
102
Shady Valley Drive

Goodwin Road
Wide travel lanes

Low speed, low volume road
Could lead to connections through
Atlanta
103
Roxboro Road
Connection to Buckhead
Various width path on either side in
some segments
Roughly parallel to Buford Highway

Connection to Cross Keys High
MARTA bus and rail connections
Complicated intersection with

Roxboro Road
Nearby obstacles (mailboxes,
trees, utility poles, etc.)
Sidewalk to west
Multi-use path along east
105
Connection between Cross Key High

School and MARTA/Dresden area
MARTA bus and rail connections
Frequent residential driveways to

east, utilities to west
Busy vehicular corridor
Fill gaps in sidewalk to west

Expand sidewalk to multi-use path along east
106
Curtis Drive
Corporate Boulevard
107
Nancy Creek/
Lynwood Park
connection
108
Colonial Drive
Oglethorpe Avenue
104
109
110
Multi-use path along east to Goodwin Road

(Connection to Project #102)
Connection between Cross Keys High Steep slopes

and North Fork/Buford Hwy
Coordination with Cross Keys High
Space to widen sidewalk and buffer
School
Fill gaps and expand to multi-use path along

east
Off-road connection between nearby

but disconnected neighborhoods
to Lynwood Park and other Nancy
Creek projects
Private property
Nearby obstacles (mailboxes,
trees, utility poles, etc.)
Multi-use path along creekbed, with

neighborhood connections according to
resident demand
Existing railway overpass

Connection to Peachtree Road
Existing traffic calming
Offset-T intersection at east

Landscaping, trees, and utilities
near roadway
Add sharrows
Briarwood Road
Connection between Buford Highway

and North Druid Hills Rd
Existing shoulder
Offset-T intersection at west

Utilities along north/east
Fill gaps and widen to multi-use path to

south/west
Briarwood Road
Connection to North Fork Creek,

Buford Highway, existing I-85
crossing
Existing shoulder
Congested and constrained

intersections
Add bike lanes
*Symbols are not intended to display the actual section (widths, number of lanes, presence or absence of buffers, etc.). They are provided to help indicate the overall nature of bike, pedestrian, and/or trail improvements proposed.
B
T
B
These project descriptions were presented to the project

stakeholder committee on 9/17/15 for discussion purposes.
Therefore, they do not represent the final recommendations of
the planning effort.
Packet Pg. 261

Project ID
Street Name(s)
Map
Opportunities
Limitations
Existing
Conditions*
Proposed
Conditions*
DRAFT
E.2.a
Improvement
Description
Project Type
(Bike/Ped/Trail)
Sylvan Circle
Adjacent greenspace to north

Connection to Brookhaven MARTA
Some existing sidewalks
Need for signage along complex

corridor (Projects #185, #186)
Constrained pavement due to
landscaping, trees, etc.
Add multi-use path in greenspace near

Sylvan Circle
Apple Valley Road
Connections to Brookhaven MARTA

Could connect to rail crossing at
Osborne
Northern end is sparsely occupied

industrial
Limited space
Add multi-use path to north/west
Access to Peachtree Road
Residential and golf course uses

nearby
Constrained intersection at
Peachtree Road
Add sharrows
Connection from Brookhaven Village

and Peachtree Road to eastern city
limits
Utility lines on both sides of road
Fill in gaps and widen to multi-use path on

south
Connection to Brookhaven Park,

Town Brookhaven, Oglethorpe
University, rail overpass
Some existing paths
Rail line along south/east
Fill in gaps and widen to multi-use path to

north
Caldwell Road
Parallel to Peachtree Road

Connection to Chamblee
Existing bike and ped infrastructure
Offset-T intersection at Redding

Road
Utilities along west/north
Multi-use trail to west/north
117
Osborne Road
Connection from Peachtree Road to

Lynwood and Osborne Parks
North-south connection in west
Narrow sections
Horizontal and vertical curves
Utilities on alternating sides

Add sharrows
Add road calming
B P
118
Lanier Drive
Hearst Drive
Humility Lane
Alternative to Ashford-Dunwoody
Road
Excess pavement width
Steep slopes on side

Steep driveways; on-street parking
Landscaping and trees
B P
Windsor Parkway
Connection to Sandy Springs

One of few opportunities for eastwest connection in north part of city
Roadway curves, high vehicular

volumea and speeds

Add sharrows
Add road calming
B P
Hermance Drive
Connections to PATH Academy and

Peachtree Road near Oglethorpe
University and Town Brookhaven
Roundabout at Town Brookhaven

Limited network connectivity
Add sharrows
Nancy Creek
(west)
Off-road connection between nearby

but disconnected neighborhoods
to Lynwood Park and other Nancy
Creek projects
Private property
Limited space
Existing bridges may not be wide
enough
Multi-use path along creekbed, with

neighborhood connections according to
resident demand
111
112
113
Brookhaven Drive
114
Dresden Drive
(east)
115
116
119
120
121
Peachtree Road

Packet Pg. 262
DRAFT

Project Type
(Bike/Ped/Trail)
Nancy Creek
(center)
Off-road connection
Connection to Ashford-Dunwoody
Road, Marist School
Private property
Creek travels through Marist/
YMCA property
Multi-use path along creekbed with

connections to nearby facilities
123
Nancy Creek
(east)
Off-road connection
Connection to Ashford-Dunwoody
Road, Murphy Candler Park, and
Chamblee-Dunwoody Road
Private property
Existing bridges may not be wide
enough
Multi-use path along creekbed with

connections to nearby facilities
124
Nancy Creek Drive

Ashentree Drive
Connection to Murphy Candler Park

Already a low-speed bike and
pedestrian friendly environment
Need signage to guide users along

complex route
B P
125
Nancy Creek Drive
Connection to creek project (project

#121)
Existing sidewalk along portion of
north side of road
Mailboxes and landscaping built

up to curb
Extend sidewalk
Add sharrows
B P
126
Old Johnson Ferry Road

Saint Joseph Hospital
Connection to Medical Center MARTA

Roundabout
paralel corridor to Johnson Ferry/
Constrained section at hospital
Peachtree Dunwoody Road
Extend and complete sidewalks

Add sharrows
B P
127
Major north-south connection

Connection to Perimeter Center area
Busy interchange with no space

for bikes to north
Multi-use path along east

Connection to Marist School, Murphy
Candler Park
Existing narrow PATH facility
Constrained, congested roadway
Improve, widen, and brand multi-use path

along east
Connects to Blackburn Park

May be private land/roadway
without passing through AshfordDifficult to link southern end to
Dunwoody Road/Johnson Ferry Road
network
intersection
Improve, widen, and brand multi-use path

along both sides
Connections to Chamblee, Chamblee

schools
Mostly complete sidewalks now
Very narrow, constrained ROW
Coordinate with Chamblee to improve and

connect sidewalks
Add sharrows
B P
Network connections for segments

which end on eastern end of city
High-traffic roadway
Steep slopes on sides
Coordinate with Chamblee to improve and

connect sidewalks
Connection to Murphy Candler Park,

Kittredge Magnet School
Existing park access
Utilities on north side of road
Fill in sidewalk gaps and extend sidewalk

Add sharrows
Blair Circle
130
Donaldson Drive
Harts Mill Road
131
Chamblee-Dunwoody
Road
132
East Nancy Creek Drive
Limitations
Improvement
Description
122
129
Opportunities
Proposed
Conditions*
Street Name(s)
128
Map
Existing
Conditions*
Project ID
B P
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 263
DRAFT


Map
Opportunities
Limitations
Existing
Conditions*
Proposed
Conditions*
Improvement
Description
Project Type
(Bike/Ped/Trail)
Project ID
Street Name(s)
133
Ashwoody Court
Ashwoody Trail
East-west connection in north part of

city
Would need signage to guide

users along complex corridor
Trees, landscaping, steep slopes
on side of streets
134
Perimeter Summit
Parkway
Existing bike lanes and sidewalks
Many horizontal curves
Midblock crossing at offices
135
Fenwood Circle
Connectivity into urban section of

Dresden Drive
Narrow, constrained street
Complete sidewalk
Add sharrows
B P
136
Lake Hearn Drive
Connection from Perimeter Summit

Parkway into Medical Center
High-volume roadway with many

existing transitions
Add sharrows
137
Redding Road
Existing crossing of railway

Connection between Peachtree
Road, Caldwell Road, Ashford Park
Constricting rail underpass
Expand sidewalk to west of road; tie into park
138
Drew Valley Road
Roughly parallel to Buford Highway

and Dresden Drive
Houses built near road

Utilities on both sides
Fill sidewalk gaps

Add sharrows

Partially outside of city limits
Utilities to west
Utilities to west
Busy interchange to south
B P
P
T
B P
139
Clairmont Road
(north)
Network connection for all segments

which end on east
Connection to Plaza Fiesta and
former runway protection zone
140
Clairmont Road
(center)

which end to east
Connection to Plaza Fiesta
Clairmont Road
(south)

which end to east
Connection to Buford Highway and
I-85
Brookhaven Drive
Access to Peachtree Road

Part of path around Peachtree Road/
Dresden Drive intersection
Residential and golf course uses

nearby
Add sharrows
Drew Valley Road
Connection between Drew Valley

neighborhood and Buford Highway
corridor
Intersection with Buford Highway is

stop-controlled, has no crossings,
and is constrained
Connect sidewalks
Improve crossings
Add sharrows
B P
141
142
143
Widen western sidewalk to multi-use path
Widen western sidewalk to multi-use path
Widen western sidewalk to multi-use path, as

possible
Trailhead at North Fork Trail
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 264
Improvement
Description
Project Type
(Bike/Ped/Trail)
144
Keswick Park Connection
Connection to (Chamblees) Keswick

Park, and thus to trail with access to
downtown Chamblee
Challenging terrain
Extend trail from Durden Road to park
Nancy Creek (North Fork)
Off-road connection
Crossing I-285
Connection to Perimeter Center
Connection points to north are

isolated and not walkable
Multi-use path along creekbed

Due to golf course, no driveways to
east
Golf course bounds roadway

High volume
Vertical and horizontal curves
Multi-use trail to east
Private owners and power

companies for some segments
Multi-use path through park/former runway

protection zone
Complex corridor; needs signage

Limited ROW
Complete sidewalks
Add sharrows
Utilities on east side

Landscaping to edge of road
Multi-use trail along Popular Springs Drive,

then through FEMA lots
147
Ashford Park/former
runway protection zone
148
Tobey Road
Parkridge Drive
Cravenridge Drive
149
Poplar Springs Drive
150
Clairmont Way
151
North Druid
Hills Road
Major green space, existing creek

Connection to Ashford Park
Elementary
Connect to Projects #187, #148
Existing path between Parkridge and
Cravenridge
Connection to Ashford Park
Elementary and Caldwell Road
FEMA lots provide off-road path
space
Limitations
Proposed
Conditions*
Street Name(s)
146
Opportunities
Existing
Conditions*
Project ID
145
Map
DRAFT
E.2.a
Connects multifamily residences to

Connection to North Fork
Relatively few driveways or
intersections
Add sharrows
B P
T
B
Widen eastern sidewalk to multi-use path
Planned construction of trail in

creekbed along North Fork Peachtree
Creek
Multi-use path on east side, connect to

Project #106
Multi-use path extending airport trail
152
North Fork Creek
153
Corporate Boulevard
Well shaded
Access to Corporate Square offices
154
Bragg Street
Tobey Road
East-west connection from Skyland

Drive and Project #147 to potential
southern airport trail
High vehicular speed and volume
Narrow, constrained residential

street
Limited usefulness without
southern airport trail

Packet Pg. 265

Project ID
Street Name(s)
Map
Opportunities
Limitations
155
Ellijay Drive
Coosawattie Drive
Useful north-south connection

between Briarwood into urban section Narrow, constrained street
Dresden
156
Cheshire Way
Vavedere Drive
Thompson Road
Connection from potential rail

crossing
Existing
Conditions*
Proposed
Conditions*
DRAFT
E.2.a
Improvement
Description
Project Type
(Bike/Ped/Trail)

Add sharrows
B P
Narrow roads, no existing space

Limited usefulness if rail crossing
not built near Town Brookhaven
Add sidewalk to west/south

Add sharrows
B P
Major redevelopment in progress;

unclear how this may impact
roadway
Add sharrows
157
Skyland Drive
Connection from Skyland Park to

Drew Valley and Buford Highway
158
Executive Park Drive
Connectivity between major office

parks
Local alternative to Briarcliff Road
Narrow segments
Limited need for connectivity

Add sharrows
B P
Link between Project #156 and

Project #149
Narrow street
Offset-T intersection to north,
disjointed from Project #149
Add sidewalk to west

Add sharrows
B P
Connections to Brookhaven MARTA,

Brookhaven Village
Some existing sections of multi-use
path
Transmission power lines along

segment
Multi-use path along south side

Bike lanes (as width allows)
Access to Murphy Candler Park

Segment in an existing low-speed,
low-volume area
Improve/widen existing path on south side to

full width
Direct link from Blair Circle to AshfordDunwoody Park to north

Park facilities limit alignment
options
Alternative to facilities on AshfordDunwoody Road
Modify existing paths and/or add paths to

create a more direct link between the two
points
T
T
159
160
161
Thompson Road
Dresden Drive
(west)
Nancy Creek Drive
162
Blackburn Park
163
Frontage Road (north)
Crossing of I-85 with Project #164
High-speed, high-volume, one-way

road with access to/from interstate
Multi-use path on north side, crossing I-85 at

underpass
164
Tullie Road
Tullie Circle
Integration with Project #163 and

#165 to cross I-85
Space beyond existing pavement

is constrained

Improve roadway marking, formalize onstreet parking
165
Frontage Road (south)
Crossing of I-85 with Project #164
High-speed, high-volume, one-way

road with access to/from interstate
Multi-use path on southern side
B P
T

Packet Pg. 266

Map
Opportunities
Limitations
Existing
Conditions*
Proposed
Conditions*
DRAFT
E.2.a
Improvement
Description
Project Type
(Bike/Ped/Trail)
Project ID
Street Name(s)
166
Skyland Drive
Tobey Road
Connection from Project #147 and

Project #153 to Dresden Drive
Utilities to south
Complete sidewalks
Add sharrows
167
Rail Overpass
(Town Brookhaven)
Connection over rail line between

Redding Road and North Druid Hills
Road
Expensive, large structure
Add multi-use path bridge over rail,

connection Caldwell Road with Town
Brookhaven
Private ownership
Add path connecting park with

cul-de-sacs
168
Brookhaven Park
Link Brookhaven Park (and thus

Peachtree Road) with nearby, but
disconnected neighbors
169
East Osborne Road

Green Meadows Lane
Connection from Caldwell Road to

Brookhaven Village

Add sharrows
170
Drew Valley Stormwater

Trail
Existing connection between

otherwise disconnected
neighborhoods
Existing fences built by adjacent

property owners
Improve (including potential paving) and

widen existing trail, ideally to full 10
B P
B P
T
171
Skyland Drive
Bike and pedestrian connection

at intersection where vehicles are
resitricted
172
Osborne Park
North-south connection in west part

of city
Private ownership
Multi-use path connecting to Nancy Creek

projects (Project #121)
173
Nancy Creek Access Trail
Access to Nancy Creek projects

(Projects #121, #122) for residents
Separate crossing of Johnson Ferry
Road
Private ownership
Multi-use path connecting to Nancy Creek

projects (Projects #121, #122) and adjacent
cul-de-sacs
174
Murphy Candler Park

Access
Access into Murphy Candler Park for

residents
Parkland
New access point would have
limitations
New access point to Murphy Candler Park

and multi-use path connecting to existing
paths
Private ownership by golf course

and Publix
Unininviting space for cyclists and
pedestrians
Multi-use path on golf courses northern

property line
Narrow street, no space to widen
Multi-use path on undeveloped parcel, then

sharrows on street
175
Publix Connection
Access around Ashford-Dunwoody

Road/Johnson Ferry Road
intersections
176
Oglethorpe Connection
Connection between Osborne

Road and Hermance Drive through
undeveloped parcel
Add sidewalks and sharrows to road, extend

bike/ped mobility to Buford Highway
B P

Packet Pg. 267
Improvement
Description
177
Matthews Street
Connection to existing rail overpass

and Project #178

Existing landscaping, mailboxes,
etc. near roadway
Matthews-Park Vista
Connection
Connection between cul-de-sacs on

undeveloped land
Part of connection between Lenox
Park Boulevard and Peachtree Road
Private ownership
Multi-use path
Existing sections of sidewalk

etc. near roadway
Complete sidewalk
Add sharrows
Colonial Drive
Limitations
Proposed
Conditions*
Street Name(s)
179
Opportunities
Existing
Conditions*
Project ID
178
Map
DRAFT
E.2.a
Complement existing pedestrian

facilities
Improved access to AT&T and
Buckhead
Project Type
(Bike/Ped/Trail)
P
T
P
Add sharrows
Complete sidewalks
Add sharrows
Connect northern sidealks
180
181
Mabry Road
Alternative to Osborne Road for

north-south corridor in west pat of
city
182
Harts Mill Road
Increased connection to Chamblee

and Nany Creek Trails
183
Johnson Ferry Road
Existing 8 sidepath along north

segment of road
Increase connectivity to Chamblee
184
Cartecay Drive
East-west connection (Projects #111,

#185)
Narrow, constrained Street
Add sharrows
185
Standard Drive
East-west connection (Projects #111,

#184)
Narrow, constrained Street
Add sharrows
186
Peachtree Creek
Connection between neighborhoods

across Buford Highway
Link Projects #149, #150
Crossing Buford Highway via

existing culvert (Project #186)
187
Creek Parallel to Skyland

Drive, power easement
Connection between Projects #147,

#148, #154 and #166
Multi-use path along creekbed and along

power easment
Improve and brand existing multi-use path

Coordinate with Chamblee to improve intercity connectivity

Packet Pg. 268

Project ID
Street Name(s)
188
Etowah Drive
Oostanaula Drive
189
Woodrow Way
Map
Opportunities
Improve access between Dresden
Drive corridor and Drew Valley via
Drew Valley stormwater path
Woodrow Way has mostly complete
sidewalk already; sidewalk ends just
west of Lanier Drive
Network connectivity
Limitations
Narrow, constrained streets
etc. near roadways
Existing
Conditions*
Proposed
Conditions*
DRAFT
E.2.a
Improvement
Description
Add sidewalk along one side of each
roadway
Finish sidewalk connecting to Lanier Drive
Project Type
(Bike/Ped/Trail)
P
T

Packet Pg. 269
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 270

These project
descriptions were
presented to the project
stakeholder committee
on 9/17/15 for
represent the final
planning effort.
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 271

These project
descriptions were
on 9/17/15 for
represent the final
planning effort.
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 272

These project
descriptions were
on 9/17/15 for
represent the final
planning effort.
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 273
Appendix G
EXISTING
BROOKHAVEN POLICIES
E.2.a
BR
KHAVEN
Packet Pg. 274
Brookhaven Documents Summary:

Chapter 17- Motor Vehicles and Traffic
Sec. 17-43. - Designation of crosswalks; establishment of safety zones; marking of traffic
lanes.
The public works department may, upon approval of the City Council:
(1) Designate and maintain, by appropriate devices, marks or lines upon the surface of the
roadway, crosswalks at intersections where there is particular danger to pedestrians crossing the
roadway and at such other places as deemed necessary. The city shall make proper studies of all
existing crosswalks not at roadway intersections and shall abolish those which are unnecessary.
(2) Establish safety zones of such kind and character and at such places as necessary for the
protection of pedestrians.
(3) Mark lanes for traffic on street pavements at places consistent with this chapter and other
traffic ordinances of the city.
Sec. 17-87. - Vehicles propelled by human or animal power prohibited on limited-access
highways.
It shall be unlawful for any person to push or drive any vehicle upon the limited-access highways
of the city which is propelled by human or animal power, including any bicycle, tricycle,
pushcart, animal drawn vehicle of any kind and any vehicle incapable of a speed of at least fortyfive (45) miles per hour.
Sec. 17-124. - The affected area and the traffic-calming plan.
(a) Where a traffic study is warranted it will be conducted at a time to be determined by, and
within the sole discretion of, the department.
(b) Upon completion of a traffic study, the department shall make a determination as to whether
the results clearly demonstrate that the installation of traffic-calming measures are warranted
based upon the criteria established in the traffic-calming program guidelines.
(c) When considering traffic-calming program guidelines relating to speeding, the determination
regarding whether the established criteria for traffic-calming measures have been met will be
based on a comparison of actual study speeds obtained to the posted speed limit. When
considering the criteria in traffic-calming program guidelines that relate to cut-through, the
determination will include a comparison of cut-through traffic volumes obtained in a study to
allowable volumes of cut-through traffic established in those guidelines.
Sec. 17-148. - Bus stops.
(a) A no parking zone of eighty (80) feet shall be created at all bus stops for the purpose of
loading and unloading passengers.
(b) These no parking zones shall be marked by signs and, in addition, these zones in all congested
areas shall have the curbs painted yellow. This proper marking of zones shall be maintained by
the companies operating buses in and out of these zones.
(c) Buses or any vehicles parked in these zones for the purpose of loading and unloading
passengers shall pull as close to the curb as possible.
(d) This section does not prohibit buses from loading and unloading at platforms at loading zones
where they are provided for that purpose in the street.
Sec. 17-171. - Use of crosswalks.
Pedestrians shall not cross any street or roadway in a business district or any designated streets or
highways except in a crosswalk.
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 275
Sec. 17-172. - Crossing at right angles.

No pedestrian shall cross a roadway at any place other than by a route at right angles to the curb
or by the shortest route to the opposite curb, except in a crosswalk.
Bicycles
Sec. 17-191. - Method of parking.
No person shall park a bicycle upon a street other than upon the roadway against the curb or upon
the sidewalk in a rack to support the bicycle or against a building or at a curb, in such manner as
to afford the least obstruction to pedestrian traffic.
Sec. 17-192. - Operation on roadways and paths.
(a) The operator of a bicycle, upon entering a bicycle lane or path, shall yield the right-of-way to
all bicycles approaching upon the lane or path and, upon entering the roadway, shall yield the
right-of-way to all vehicles and bicycles in the roadway.
(b) Any bicycle being operated on a public roadway shall yield to the right following an audible
signal when overtaken by another vehicle. The driver of a vehicle overtaking a bicycle
proceeding in the same direction shall pass to the left thereof at a safe distance, and shall not
again drive to the right side of the roadway until safely clear of the overtaken bicycle.
(c) No person shall ride or operate a bicycle upon a roadway adjacent to which or upon which
bicycle lanes have been designated, except within this bicycle lane or except as otherwise
permitted by the provisions of this chapter. No person shall ride or operate a bicycle upon a
roadway adjacent to which there is a bicycle path which is less than seventy-five (75) feet from
the roadway and which is in a safe condition for bicycle riding.
(d) When a roadway is determined to be unsafe for bicycling by the city, bicycle users may be
restricted from the roadway by the erection of a sign prohibiting bicycle use and directing bicycle
users to a suitable alternative route similar in directness and surface quality to the roadway.
Sec. 17-193. - Turning movements.
(a) When completing a left turn on two-way roadways, bicyclists shall merge to the portion of the
roadway nearest the centerline thereof and shall negotiate the left turn so as to enter the
intersecting roadway near the right side of the centerline, giving right-of-way to all vehicles
proceeding through the intersection in the opposite direction.
(b) When completing a right turn, motor vehicles shall yield the right-of-way to bicycles crossing
the intersecting roadway or completing a right turn.
(c) All vehicles or bicycles making turns at intersections shall not proceed into the intersection
nor make this turn without first yielding the right-of-way to all bicycles or other vehicles within
or approaching the intersection and shall proceed only when it is safe to do so.
(d) A bicyclist may also negotiate a left turn by dismounting the bicycle and crossing as a
pedestrian, leading the bicycle to the other side of the intersecting roadway, and hence to the
other side of the traffic roadway. When the person dismounts from a bicycle, such person shall
then obey the regulations applicable to pedestrians.
(e) When a bicycle "ride" control signal is shown, the bicyclist may proceed across the roadway
in the direction of the signal and while so proceeding across the roadway has the right-of-way
over other vehicles. When a bicycle "wait" control signal is shown:
(1) The bicyclist facing the signal shall not commence to cross the roadway until bicycle
ride control signal is shown.
(2) A bicyclist proceeding across the roadway when a wait signal is shown after the
bicyclist has entered the roadway shall quickly proceed across the roadway and has the
right-of-way for that purpose over other vehicles.
Sec. 17-194. - Acrobatic or fancy riding; racing.
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 276
No rider of any bicycle shall remove both hands from the handlebars, or feet from the
pedals, or practice any acrobatic or fancy riding on any street. No person operating a
bicycle upon a street shall participate in any race or speed or endurance contest with any
other bicycle or vehicle, unless the street has been temporarily set aside for such purposes.
Sec. 17-262. - Play streetsAuthority to establish; signing.
The city may declare any street or part thereof a play street and place appropriate signs or
devices in the roadway indicating and helping to protect it.
Sec. 17-263. - SameDriving on; speed limit.
Whenever authorized signs are erected indicating any street or part thereof as a play street, no
person shall drive a vehicle upon such street or portion thereof except drivers of vehicles having
business or whose residences are within such closed area, and then the driver shall exercise the
highest degree of care in driving upon such street or portion thereof, and at no time shall the
driver's speed exceed five (5) miles per hour.
Sec. 17-264. - Roller skates, coasters, etc.
(a) No person upon roller skates, or riding in or by means of any coasters, toy vehicles or
similar devices, shall go upon any roadway except while crossing a street on a crosswalk, and
when so coasting such person shall be granted all of the rights and shall be subject to all of the
duties applicable to pedestrians. This section shall not apply upon any street while set aside as a
play street.
(b) It shall be unlawful for persons so skating or riding to gather in crowds, or to create noise or
be guilty of any disorderly conduct, or to take hold of or hang onto any automobile or other
vehicle, or in any way to interfere with the natural progress of automobiles or other vehicles
along and in the streets of the city, or for two (2) or more persons to join hands while skating
on the sidewalk. Any person so skating or riding shall give right-of-way to, and in no way
interfere with, persons walking on the sidewalks.
(c) Any person violating any provision of this section shall be subject to the penalties
provided for violation of this chapter; provided, however, that an offender under the age of
seventeen (17) years shall be dealt with as provided by O.C.G.A. tit. 15, ch. 11 [ 15-11-1 et
seq.]. The parent of any child and the guardian of the person or any ward shall not authorize
or knowingly permit such child or violate any of the provisions of this section.
Sec. 17-268. - Motor vehicles using bike lanes or paths.
(b) No motor vehicle or motorcycle shall be operated on any bicycle lane or path for any
purpose including parking, passing or turning unless otherwise permitted by the provisions of
this chapter.
(c) No person shall at any time drive, stop or park any vehicle except an emergency vehicle
within a bike lane or bike path.
(d) No person shall drive upon or across a bicycle lane except after giving the right-of-way to all
bicycles within the lane.
Chapter 23- Streets and Sidewalks
Sec. 23-5. - Public transportation carrier transit bus stop shelters.
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 277
Bus stop shelters may be erected on private property, public streets, public property, or public
rights- of-way by a public transportation carrier or as authorized by a public transportation
carrier, subject to the following conditions:
(b) Plans and specifications for the proposed installations shall be submitted and approved by
the city in accordance with city requirements.
(c) Bus stop shelters may be erected at any bus stop utilized by a public transportation carrier.
(d) The owner or constructor of the bus stop shelter shall be responsible for the maintenance of
the structure.
(e) Bus stop shelter may be erected only at bus stops identified by a public transportation carrier
providing service to that location. The public transportation carrier may contract with
appropriate subcontractors to provide and maintain bus stop shelters at various locations.
(f) Bus stop shelters may carry advertising placed upon them, subject to the following rules or
regulations:
(1) Such advertising matter must be attached to the shelter and not extend
out beyond the parameters of the shelter;
(2) Bus stop shelters carrying advertising matter must be constructed so as
not to obstruct vision triangles at intersecting driveways and rights-of-way;
(3) Advertising shall not violate ordinances or state law obscenity provisions;
(4) Advertising shall not contain flashing lights or lights that would interfere
with motorists on the roadway.
(5) Comply with all city, state and federal regulations.
(6) A bus stop shelter must conform to the reasonable rules and regulations established under
this section, including the following:
(b) Bus stop shelters should be at least forty-eight (48) inches from the curb, where no
curb or gutter is present the front of the bus shelter shall be at least ten (10) feet
from the edge of the main traveled roadway;
(c) Bus stop shelters shall permit a clearance of at least forty-eight (48) inches on
pedestrian paths, driveways, sidewalks, drainage structures, etc.;
(d) Sides and/or internal dividers in shelters shall be constructed to provide visibility of
waiting passengers to the oncoming traffic flow on the road, highway or street on
which the shelter is located, provided, however, one double-faced panel
containing advertising may be attached to the end of the shelter farthest from the
traffic flow on the side of the street on which the shelter is located;
(e) Each bus stop shelter shall be properly lighted to ensure public safety and
provide complete visibility of the shelter from the abutting roadway.
(f) Comply with all city, state and federal regulations.
(7) On application by a public transportation carrier or a contractor authorized by a
public transportation carrier to provide bus stop shelters to a public transportation

carrier, a permit shall be issued to build a shelter and allow advertising thereon unless
there is adequate reason for denying the permit.
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 278
(8) Any public transportation carrier which provides more than one (1) bus stop shelter shall
make for a permit to cover each of its various locations.

(9) An application for a building permit for construction of a bus shelter shall be submitted
and accompanied by the following:
(g) Authorization and approval of the public transportation carrier and the Georgia
Department of Transportation.
(h) Plans and specifications for the proposed installation.
(i)
If a bus shelter is to be erected or maintained on property other than the right-ofway of a public road or street, an authorization of the owner of the property.
(9) The public transportation carrier shall remove the shelter upon the request of the city
upon the city showing that such shelter poses a traffic hazard, impediment to pedestrian
traffic or other reasonable cause.
(10) Notwithstanding any other ordinance or part of ordinance prohibited the construction of
bus stop shelters or commercial advertising on public rights-of-way, a bus stop shelter
complying with the provisions of this section may be constructed on public rights-ofway and have commercial advertising placed thereon and the provisions of this section
shall control such construction and advertisement.
Sec. 23-90. - Program established.

There is established a residential sidewalk district program whereby eligible residential
areas may petition the city to install sidewalks within their neighborhood.
Sec. 23-91. - Sidewalk district requirements.
(b) A sidewalk district can only be established in residentially zoned districts where the
streets or roads within the proposed sidewalk district have been accepted by the city for
perpetual maintenance.
Sidewalk construction must begin and end at existing sidewalks or public road
intersections, or immediately across from public road intersections, but may extend past a
public road intersection to complete the frontage adjoining the proposed sidewalk
construction.
Sec. 23-92. - Application and petition.
(j) Application. Anyone who desires to have a sidewalk district created shall submit an
application to the director of public works or designee. Said application shall be made on
forms made available by the public works department and shall at a minimum contain a
plat showing the area of the proposed sidewalk district and the location of the proposed
sidewalks.
(c)
(k) Estimate of costs.
Based upon the plat submitted with the application, the director of public
works or designee shall prepare an estimate of the total project cost and pro rata cost
per property owner for the creation of the proposed sidewalk district, including
the costs for the design, contracting, acquisition of rights-of-way, and
inspection for sidewalk construction funded by the sidewalk district. The
director of public works' estimate may not establish a limit on the amount of the
project costs and may not limit the amount that may be assessed against the property
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 279
owners.
If the application is incomplete or does not contain information sufficient for the
director of public works to prepare the estimate, then the director of public works
shall return the application to the applicant within thirty (30) days of receipt
indicating the additional information required. Otherwise, the director of public
works shall prepare the estimate of costs and send the estimate to the applicant
within ninety (90) days of receipt of a complete application.
(c) Petition.
(11) Circulation. The applicant shall be responsible for gaining the required signatures on
a sidewalk district petition from property owners within the proposed sidewalk
district.
(12) Contents. The petition shall contain the name, property address within the
proposed sidewalk district, mailing address, and phone number of all property
owners who sign the petition. If the property owner does not reside at the property
within the sidewalk district, then the petition shall contain both the property address
within the district and the property owner's actual address outside the district.
(13) Plat. The petition shall have attached to it a copy of the plat submitted to the
director of public works showing the boundaries of the proposed sidewalk district
and a copy of the director of public works' estimate of the total project cost and the
pro rata cost per property owner.
Sec. 23-93. - Procedure.
(b) Return of petition. The petition for creation of the proposed sidewalk district must be
returned to the director of public works within ninety (90) days after the director of public
works notifies the applicant that the preparation of the estimate of costs and pro rata costs
for the project is complete; however, the director of public works has the discretion, for
good cause shown, to extend the time for the return of the petition an additional thirty
(30) days, for a total of one hundred twenty (120) days, when a request for such
extension is made by the applicant to the director of public works before the
expiration of the original ninety-day period.
(c)
Signatures. No assessment shall be made against abutting property, unless the same is
consented to in writing by the owners of fifty-one (51) percent of the property abutting
such improvements. Said consent shall be deemed to have been given if the requisite
number of signatures of such abutting property owner(s) is included in the petition
requesting the proposed sidewalks and the creation of the assessment district.
(d) Notice. Upon the timely receipt of a petition containing the required number of
signatures, the director of public works shall cause the matter to be placed upon the
City Councils public hearing agenda for a hearing on the creation of the proposed
sidewalk district. The director of public works or designee shall cause a notice to be
published in the citys legal organ or a newspaper of general circulation in which the
sheriff's advertisements are published at least once ten (10) days prior to the date of said
hearing, which notice shall give a brief description of the subdivision in which the work is
to be done, the nature of the improvements to be made and the beginning and terminus
of the road or street upon which such improvements are to be made and such notice shall
set forth the time and place of the hearing.
(e) Notification of decision. Within sixty (60) days of a final decision on the petition by the
City Council, the director of public works or designee shall notify by certified mail,
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 280
return receipt requested, each affected property owner of the decision of the City
Council. If the final decision is an approval of the petition, then the public works
director shall notify each affected property owner by certified mail, return receipt
requested, of a good faith estimate of the individual assessment. A final decision
approval or denial of the petition by the City Council.
Sec. 23-94. - Funding.
(b) Assessment. Each owner of property abutting the sidewalks shall be assessed a share of
the cost to be funded by the district, which cost shall be added to the ad valorem property
taxes for each owner as provided in this section. No assessment shall be made against
abutting property, unless the same is consented to in writing by the owners of fiftyone (51) percent of the property abutting such improvements. Abutting shall mean
adjacent to, contiguous with, or adjoining.
(c)
Pro rata costs. Each property owner's share of the cost shall be determined as follows:
The total cost of the project shall be calculated by the city, and the figure so derived
shall be known as the total project cost. The city shall next determine the linear feet of
sidewalk that was constructed. The total cost shall then be divided by the total linear feet
of sidewalk to derive the cost per foot. Each property owner abutting the sidewalks shall
then be assessed an amount that equals the linear feet of street frontage the property
owner has multiplied by the cost per foot.
(d) Payment. The sidewalk tax assessment shall be paid by one (1) of two (2) options, as
follows:
Option one. The assessment may be paid in cash by the property owner within ninety
(90) days of the assessment by the city. If paid under this option, the assessment
will not of the assessment by the city. If paid under this option, the assessment
will not bear an administrative fee and no lien shall be recorded against the
property. Payment shall be made to "City of Brookhaven" and delivered to the
public works department. If payment is not made in full within ninety (90) days of
the citys initial billing of the assessment, then payment option two shall
automatically take effect. Once option two is in effect, the payment via option two
shall be the property owner's sole option until all assessment payments are satisfied.
(2) Option two. The assessment shall be paid in five (5) equal annual
installments. Payment of each such assessment shall be due and payable within
sixty (60) days from the mailing by regular mail of a bill from the tax
commissioner. In the event option two is selected, the cost of processing,
administration, recording the lien, and satisfaction of such lien shall be added to the
assessment.
(l)
The property owner shall advise any purchaser of its property within the sidewalk
district of the assessment. The property owner may conduct a proration of the
assessment with the purchaser. The city shall not be responsible for the proration
of the assessments between sellers and purchasers nor shall the city be under any duty
to notify any purchaser of the existence or liability for the assessment.
(m) If the assessment is not paid when due, the assessment shall be collected in the same
manner as delinquent ad valorem taxes and shall be subject to the same interest and
penalties.
(n) The assessment shall constitute a lien against the property and shall be recorded by
the tax commissioner in the lien records of the clerk of the county superior court.
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 281
(o) The fee for processing and administration of this option shall be established by the
public works department and approved by the City Council.
Chapter 27- Zoning
Sec. 27-464. - Additional standards and factors to be considered.

The city may approve or may approve with modifications or conditions an application for
Traditional Neighborhood Development District designation if, in addition to meeting all of
the criteria contained in Article V, Division 1, the applicant meets each of the following
standards:
(p) That the proposed Traditional Neighborhood Development District accomplishes, by
the use of permitted flexibility and variation in design, a development that has a
greater net benefit to the city than that resulting from development under the land
subdivision regulations. Net benefit to the city may be demonstrated by one (1) or
more of the following factors:
Creation of a community of compact scale and design which encourages

pedestrian circulation;
Creation of a design in which the village center or other authorized accessory

commercial use is so located as to be accessible to residents of the
community within a five-minute walk.
Interconnected usable open space;
Recreation facilities;
Other public facilities;
Conservation of natural, archaeological, or historic resources;
Aesthetic features and harmonious design; or
Energy efficient site design or building features.

That the Traditional Neighborhood Development District results in no greater burden on present
and projected public services and utilities than would result from subdivision development and
that the Traditional Neighborhood Development District will be served by adequate facilities
including public streets, public fire protection, and public and private utilities.
(b) That the front yard setback(s) of buildings along any existing street is consistent
with the setback of buildings on adjoining properties.

(c)
That the buffer surrounding all side and rear yards is equal in depth to the required
rear yard of adjoining districts.
(d) That at least one (1) major circulation point is functionally connected to an existing
public street.
(e) That open space within the Traditional Neighborhood Development District is an
integrated part of the project rather than an isolated element of the project.
(f)
That all public streets serving the development, both existing and proposed, are
suitable in design and adequate to carry the anticipated traffic within the
proposed project and in the vicinity of the proposed project.
Sec. 27-465. - Design and development standards.
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 282
The following design and development standards shall apply to each Traditional
Neighborhood Development District hereafter established by the city council:
Density. The density of the proposed development shall be as approved by the city
council and shall be consistent with the comprehensive plan and with the
surrounding area. The density of each Traditional Neighborhood Development
District shall be established by the city council at the time of approval of any such
application.
Public streets required. All streets within Traditional Neighborhood Development

Districts shall be public streets and the design and construction of said streets shall
comply in all respects with the requirements of Chapter 14, Chapter 27, and any
other applicable provision of the Code.
Sidewalk requirements. Five-foot sidewalks with a four-foot street tree planting

zone between the sidewalk and the back of curb shall be provided on each
street contained within any Traditional Neighborhood Development District.
Maintenance and protection of land held in common. Each applicant shall present
as a part of the application for the TND zoning designation a legal mechanism
under which all land to be held in common and used for open space purposes shall
be protected in perpetuity. Such legal mechanism may include deed restrictions,
homeowner associations, common areas held in common ownership or control,
or any other legal mechanism, provided that said legal mechanism shall be
approved by the Community Development Department as assuring each of the
following mandatory requirements:
That all land held in common shall remain undivided and shall not be
subdivided or developed in perpetuity;
That all subsequent property owners in perpetuity within said Traditional

Neighborhood Development District be placed on notice of this development
restriction through the deed records of DeKalb County Superior Court;
That all land held in common will be properly maintained and insured with
no liability or maintenance responsibilities accruing to the city;
That a legal mechanism exists for notice of deficiencies in maintenance of the

land held in common, correction of these deficiencies, and assessment and liens
against the properties for the cost of the correction of these deficiencies by a
third party or the city;
(q) That the legal mechanism be created and implemented prior to the sale of any
individual properties within the Traditional Neighborhood Development District; and
(r) That all requirements of the legal mechanism chosen by the applicant and approved
by the Community Development Department shall be specified on the final plan and
recorded with the Clerk of Superior Court of DeKalb County.
(14) When an applicant for a Traditional Neighborhood Development District chooses to
utilize a homeowners association in order to comply with the requirements of subsection

(d) above, the applicant, in addition to meeting all of said requirements, shall provide for
all of the following:
Mandatory and automatic membership in the homeowners association as a
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 283
requirement of dwelling unit ownership;
All owners shall have equal access and right of use to all common and shared
facilities;
A fair and uniform method of assessment for dues, maintenance and related costs;
Where appropriate, party wall maintenance and restoration in the event of

damage or destruction;
Perpetual and continued maintenance of land held in common and liability through
the use of liens or other means in the case of default; and
That all required covenants, declarations and restrictions shall be filed with the Clerk
of the Superior Court of DeKalb County.
Recreation facilities including swimming pools, tennis courts, outdoor play areas, bikeways,
walking trails, picnic pavilions, clubhouses, and similar recreation facilities designed for and
used principally by the residents of the TND (Traditional Neighborhood Development) District;
Sec. 27-482.4. - Calculation and design of greenspace.
The following standards shall govern the calculation and design of greenspace:
(b) The allotted greenspace in an R-NC district shall comprise at least thirty (30) percent of
the total land area excluding the undevelopable areas as identified in subsection 27482.5(d). No part of any single-family detached residential lot, private street, private
drive, or street right-of-way, front yard setback, nor any area utilized for side-to-side
building separation except when used for a path or sidewalk connection to greenspace,
shall count towards greenspace.
(c)
For properties ten (10) acres or less, at least fifty (50) percent of the allotted greenspace
shall be in an area or areas that each measure a minimum two hundred (200)
square feet. For properties greater than ten (10) acres, at least fifty (50) percent of the
allotted greenspace shall be contiguous and shall be a minimum width of fifty (50) feet.
(d) Paths, bike paths and trails do not have to comply with the minimum width requirements
set forth in subsection 27-482.4(b).

(e) No impervious surface, except (1) areas used for active recreation, (2) historic building(s)
or historic site(s), and (3) asphalt or concrete bike paths and paths with a maximum width
of eight (8) feet may be considered in the greenspace calculation. Paths that require
grading must not damage critical root zones of specimen trees.
(f)
Preserved historic buildings or sites may be included in greenspace if intended to be for

the common use and benefit of all residents of the subdivision.
(g) All dwelling units shall be provided with safe, convenient access to all greenspaces
throughout the development in the form of a pedestrian circulation system consisting

of structurally improved pedestrian path(s) and/or sidewalk(s). Pedestrian path(s) and
sidewalk(s) shall be a minimum width of five (5) feet. Pedestrian paths and sidewalks
shall be connected so that there are no breaks in the walkable surface of the pedestrian
circulation system, except where the path or sidewalk connects to a greenspace.
(h) Greenspace shall connect with other greenspace areas and trails on adjacent
property where possible.

(i)
Active recreation areas may be included in greenspace and shall be required in any RNC district that contains one hundred (100) or more units. In an R-NC district that
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 284
contains between one hundred (100) and two hundred (200) units, the active
recreational area(s) shall be a minimum of one (1) acre in size. In any R-NC district that
contains more than two hundred (200) units, the active recreation area(s) shall be a
minimum of two (2) acres in size or there must be a minimum of two (2) active recreation
areas that are each one (1) acre in size. However, no active recreation area may be located
within any wetland, stream buffer, or rock outcropping.
(j)
All greenspaces shall have a minimum of two points of pedestrian access.
Sec. 27-482.5. - Development standards and permitted uses.

(b) Property within a Residential Neighborhood Conservation district shall have a minimum
of seven (7) acres and shall comply with all applicable provisions of this Code, and the
city arborist. Specimen trees located outside of the buildable area of a lot shall be
preserved subject to the review of the city arborist. Active recreation area, greenspace,
storm water management facilities, trails, bikeways, and paths as approved shall be
installed prior to the recording of the conservation subdivision final plat.
(c)
Greenspace may consist of and be designed for the following uses only:
Natural undisturbed areas;
Active recreation areas;
Community gathering places;
Trails and greenways;
Bikeways and paths;
Asphalt or concrete bikeways and paths with a maximum width of eight (8) feet;
Landscaped stormwater management facilities, which are constructed as part of

an on-site stormwater mitigation site design feature, and which are graded such that
no safety fencing is required.
Mature wooded areas; or
Specimen trees as defined in chapter 14 of this Code.
For detached condominiums located in R-NCD:

(6) Sidewalks shall be provided on both sides of private drive(s) or private
street(s) that are internal to the development, as provided for in section 14383. Street trees shall be those species that cause minimal interference with
underground utilities, subject to approval by the city arborist.
Sec. 27-650.2. - Statement of purpose and intent.
The purpose and intent of PC-2 District regulations are to encourage the development
of comprehensively planned, pedestrian-oriented, and human-scaled places. The PC-2 District
is to permit the flexible and compatible arrangement of residential, commercial, office,
institutional, and civic uses, while preserving the significant and valuable features of the
natural and artificial environment. The development of a PC-2 District should achieve the
following public objectives:
(s) To maintain harmony of scale, intensity, and design with surrounding development;
(t)
To provide for a variety of housing types and styles within a residential component;
(u) To facilitate easy and pedestrian-friendly access to compatible and neighboring
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 285
commercial, civic, recreational, and institutional uses;

(v) To design and arrange structures, buildings, streets and open spaces to create an
inviting, walkable, human-scale environment;
(w) To incorporate the significant and valuable environmental, historic, and archeological
features of the zoning district into design of the pedestrian-community;
(x) To provide the efficient and effective use of land within the pedestrian-community;
(y) To strengthen the diversity and sense of residential harmony within the pedestriancommunity;
(z) To provide for connectivity of streets and communities and reduce the
dependence on automobile uses by increasing the ease of movement and
opportunities for alternative modes of travel; and
(aa) To encourage a proportional relationship of surrounding buildings with respect to the
general spacing of structures, building mass and scale, and street frontage by
using techniques to achieve compatibility, such as:
Use of building silhouette: pitch and scale of rooflines;
Use of additional facade detail: proportion of facade elements, doorways,

projections and insets; window scale and pattern; creation of strong shadow lines
as decorative elements;
Use of unified setbacks from property lines;
Use of landscaping to unify buildings and define space; and
Use of compatible building materials.
Sec. 27-650.8. - Design requirements.

(bb) The front facades of all principal residential and non-residential structures shall be
oriented to a public street and sidewalk.
(cc) The front facades of non-residential structures shall not be oriented toward a parking lot.
(dd) Non-residential structures shall use doorways, windows, and other openings in the
facade of the building to break up the mass of each building.
(ee) Non-residential structures shall provide fenestration for a minimum of seventy-five (75)
percent of the length of the building frontage along the sidewalk, beginning at a point not
more than three (3) feet above the public sidewalk and for a height not less than ten (10)
feet above the sidewalk.
(ff) Non-residential structures shall not exceed a maximum continuous length of ten (10)
feet of facade without fenestration.
(gg) New residential structures and new non-residential structures shall maintain the
architectural character of the places, districts, sites, buildings, structures, objects, or
works of art, or historic properties or districts designated, in accordance with the
provisions of Chapter 13.5 of this Code.
Sec. 27-650.9. - Streets.
(15) All streets within the PC-2 District shall be public streets. Private streets will not be
allowed. Streets shall comply with the requirements of public streets found in
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 286
Chapter 14 and other applicable sections of this Code.

(16) Streets shall be designed to create an interconnected system of grid-patterned roads,
modified only to accommodate topographical conditions.

(17) All sides of a residential street in the PC-2 District shall contain nine-foot wide
sidewalks, consisting of a four-foot wide street tree planting zone measured from the back
of the curb and a five-foot wide pedestrian zone.
Sec. 27-650.14. - Development standards for PC-2 District.
The PC-2 District should reinforce or extend existing commercial centers and mixeduse neighborhoods and promote the redesign and revitalization of underused commercial areas.
In addition to sections 27-650.1 through 27-650.13 above, the following standards and criteria
shall apply to all PC-2 Districts.
(b) PC-2 Districts shall meet each of the following criteria:
Adjacent to or set within an existing commercial or employment node within the

City.
Extend or reinforce an existing, surrounding mix of higher density housing,

commercial or office uses.
Support the revitalization of underused commercial areas, including standalone shopping centers or a combination of strip development and single-use
buildings containing offices, multifamily housing, and service and retail uses.
Have sufficient transportation access (an ability to connect easily to the

existing road network and transit system) and infrastructure capacity to
support a dense mix of residential and nonresidential activity.
Support a desired longterm growth strategy to concentrate multiple activities

within areas of the city designated by the comprehensive plan for denser
residential or commercial uses or mixed use or other areas as deemed
appropriate by the city.
Sec. 27-728.15.1. - Scope of provisions.

This division establishes standards and procedures that apply to any development that lies,
in whole or in part, within the Brookhaven-Peachtree Overlay District. The overlay district is
based upon the urban design and development guidelines developed as part of the
Brookhaven-Peachtree livable centers initiative (LCI) plan and is accompanied by the
Brookhaven-Peachtree design guidelines which provide graphic examples and diagrams
depicting overlay district principles and regulations. An official copy of the BrookhavenPeachtree design guidelines shall be held at the offices of the City of Brookhaven
Planning and Development Department and may be updated periodically as necessary to
maintain district standards and a consistent palette of streetlights, landscaping, etc. The LCI
plan's purpose was to create a community vision and action plan for the development of a
more dynamic mixed-use community with the character of a multistory, urban village
surrounding the Brookhaven-Oglethorpe University MARTA transit station and the Peachtree
Road corridor from Fulton County to Ashford-Dunwoody Road. The LCI plan also reinforces
the continued development of neighborhood-oriented mixed-use developments along Dresden
Drive between Apple Valley Road and Conasauga Avenue and protection of established, stable
single-family neighborhoods. Wherever the underlying zoning regulations are in conflict
with the provisions of this overlay district, the regulations of this overlay district shall apply.
Conflict means there are competing regulations or provisions. In the absence of a provision in
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 287
the overlay district, the regulations of the underlying zoning shall apply.
Sec. 27-728.15.2. - Statement of purpose and intent.
The purpose and intent of the Brookhaven-Peachtree Overlay District is as follows:
(b) To implement the policies and objectives of the comprehensive plan and the Zoning
Ordinance of City of Brookhaven within the overlay district;

(c)
To promote the development of a more dynamic, mixed-use district of appropriate

scale and magnitude surrounding the Brookhaven-Oglethorpe University MARTA
transit station;
(d) To ensure that new structures and developments are consistent with the
vision and recommendations of the Brookhaven-Peachtree LCI plan completed in

2005 with significant community involvement and input;
(e) To provide for a variety of housing types and promote mixed-income residential
opportunities;
(f)
To facilitate access to the Brookhaven-Oglethorpe University MARTA transit

station and to compatible and neighboring commercial, civic, recreational and
institutional uses and residential areas;
(g) To design and arrange structures, buildings, streets and open spaces to create an
inviting, walkable, mid-rise, human-scale environment;

(h) To provide for the efficient and effective use of land surrounding the
Brookhaven-Oglethorpe University MARTA transit station and along Peachtree

Road;
(i)
To provide for connectivity of streets and communities and reduce the

dependence on automobile use by increasing the ease of movement and
opportunities for alternative modes of travel; and
(j)
To ensure a proportional relationship of surrounding buildings with respect to

the general spacing of structures, building mass and scale, and street frontage by
using techniques to achieve compatibility, such as:
Use of additional facade detail; proportion of facade elements, doorways,

projections and insets; window scale and pattern; and creation of strong shadow lines
as decorative elements;
(k) Use of consistent setbacks from property lines;
(l)
Development of consistent sidewalks and a more active, interesting pedestrian

environment;
(m) Use of landscaping, lighting and street furniture to unify district buildings and define
space; and
(n) Use of compatible building materials to promote a design and building aesthetic
compatible with Oglethorpe University and the desired urban village character.
Sec. 27-728.15.8. - Streets and sidewalks.
(b) Public and private streets shall comply with the requirements of public streets found in
chapter 14 and other applicable sections of this Code.
(c)
Any new streets shall enhance connectivity within the Peachtree-Brookhaven Overlay
District by connecting at least two (2) public streets.
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 288
(d) Sidewalks shall be provided on all streets and shall consist of a landscape zone and a
pedestrian zone of widths as provided below. Landscape zones shall be planted with
grass, ground cover or flowering plants, or consist of brick pavers, concrete pavers,
or granite pavers where on-street parking is provided or pedestrian crossing and/or
congregation is likely. Pedestrian zones shall be paved in concrete and kept clear and
unobstructed for the safe and convenient use of pedestrians.
New developments shall provide a twenty-foot-wide pedestrian zone consisting of

a five-foot- wide landscape zone measured from the back of the adjacent street curb
and fifteen-foot-wide sidewalks along Peachtree Road.
New developments shall provide a fifteen-foot-wide pedestrian zone consisting of

a five-foot- wide landscape zone measured from the back of the adjacent street
curb and ten-foot-wide sidewalks along Dresden Drive, North Druid Hills Road, or
Apple Valley Road between North Druid Hills Road and Sunland Drive.
New developments within the Brookhaven-Peachtree Overlay District shall provide

a ten-foot- wide pedestrian zone consisting of a four-foot-wide landscape zone
measured from the back of the adjacent street curb and six-foot-wide sidewalks
elsewhere along all new and existing streets other than Peachtree Road, Dresden
Drive, North Druid Hills Road, and Apple Valley Road between North Druid Hills
Road and Sunland Drive.
All sidewalk paving materials shall be continued across any intervening driveway
at the same prevailing grade and cross slope as on the adjacent pedestrian sidewalk
area.
Pedestrian sidewalk areas paved with materials other than concrete that are consistent
in color with concrete sidewalks may be allowed with the approval of the
Community Development Director and development.
Where newly constructed sidewalks abut existing adjacent sidewalks, the newly
constructed sidewalk shall provide safe facilitation of pedestrian traffic flow to
adjacent sidewalks. Any development that disturbs existing sidewalks on an
adjacent property shall replace disturbed areas to their predisturbance state and
condition.
Safe and convenient pedestrian pathways shall be provided from sidewalks along
streets to each structure entrance, including pedestrian access routes to parking
decks and through parking lots and between adjacent buildings within the same
development. All such pathways shall be concrete and a minimum width of five (5)
feet.
(e) Landscape zones.

(f) Street trees shall be planted in all landscape zones spaced at a maximum distance of thirty
(30) feet on center.

(g) New street trees must be a minimum of three and one-half (3.5) inches in caliper
measured twelve (12) inches above ground, shall be a minimum of sixteen (16) feet in
height, shall have a minimum mature height of thirty (30) feet and shall be limbed up to
a minimum height of eight (8) feet.
(h) Street trees shall have a minimum planting area of four (4) feet by eight (8) feet. Tree
planting areas shall provide porous drainage systems that allow for drainage of the
planting area.
(i)
Street tree species shall be consistent for entire block lengths. Species shall be
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 289
permitted to change on individual block faces due only to limited supply and/or
concerns regarding disease or the health of existing and proposed trees with approval
from the Community Development Director and development and consultation from a
certified arborist.
(j)
All initial plantings and plant removal other than routine maintenance or replacement
shall be approved by the Community Development Director and development.
(k)
Street lights shall be located within the landscape zone spaced at a maximum distance of
sixty (60) feet on center on the following streets: Peachtree Road, Dresden Drive, North
Druid Hills Road and Apple Valley Road.
(l)
Benches, trash receptacles, and bike racks shall be placed within the landscape zone on
the following streets: Peachtree Road, Dresden Drive, North Druid Hills Road and
Apple Valley Road.
(m) All sidewalk materials, lighting, street trees, landscaping, benches, trash receptacles, bike
racks and other street and sidewalk elements shall conform to the BrookhavenPeachtree design guidelines, an official copy of which shall be held at the offices of
the City of Brookhaven Planning and Development Department.
(n) (d)
(o) Each development which provides automobile parking facilities shall provide bicycle
parking facilities in adjacent parking structures, parking lots or the landscape zone of the
adjoining sidewalk. Nonresidential developments shall provide bicycle parking at a ratio
of one (1) bicycle parking space for every twenty (20) vehicular spaces. Multifamily
residential developments shall provide bicycle parking facilities at a minimum ratio of one
(1) bicycle parking space for every five (5) multifamily units. No development shall have
fewer than three (3) bicycle parking spaces nor be required to exceed a maximum of fifty
(50) bicycle parking spaces.
(8) The primary entrance to all buildings shall be clearly visible from the street, shall face the
street,and if the building is used for nonresidential purposes, shall be unlocked during
operating business hours for all nonresidential uses. If a building fronts more than one (1)
public street, the primary entrance shall face the street with the highest classification as
follows: Primary: Peachtree Road and Apple Valley Road; Secondary: Dresden Drive,
North Druid Hills Road, Hermance Drive, Ashford-Dunwoody Road, Lanier Drive, Osborne
Drive, Brookhaven Place; Tertiary: new streets and other existing streets.
(b) Open space requirements.
A publicly accessible open space, which is at grade and a minimum of

twenty percent (20%) of the total development parcel, shall be provided by each
new development that includes residential uses.
All publicly accessible open spaces shall be at grade, open to general public access
during daylight hours, surrounded by buildings with a mix of active uses on the
ground floor on at least one side, face the public street, and be directly accessible
from a public sidewalk along a street. Ground floor active uses shall include
primary entries and exits into the building and may include, but are not limited
to, retail storefronts, professional office storefronts and/or the primary facade of
residential buildings with direct entries and exits to multiple residential units.
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 290
(c)
Curb cuts for driveways serving as entrances and exits to private property within any district
other than an R district shall not be located within fifty (50) feet of any intersection or within
forty (40) feet of another curb cut. No curb cut shall be greater than forty (40) feet in width
and no closer than twenty (20) feet to any property line, except where approved by the
Community Development Department director. The determination of need for any such
improvement shall be based upon traffic warrant standards utilized by the Federal Highway
Administration and the Georgia Department of Transportation.
(b) Greenspace may consist of and be designed for the following uses only:
Natural undisturbed areas;
Natural areas that preserve the one hundred-year floodplain;
Grassed playing fields for active recreation;
Village greens for community gathering places;
Natural trails and green ways;
Natural bikeways and paths;
Asphalt or concrete bikeways and paths with a maximum width of eight (8) feet;
and/or
Natural and landscaped stormwater management facilities located on soils

particularly suited to such uses.
(3) A multi-modal access plan, prepared at a scale not greater than 1" = 100', to demonstrate
a unified plan of continuous access to and between all structures in the proposed development
and adjacent properties. The multi-modal access plan shall cover the entire proposed
development along with public rights of way of adjoining streets and any other property lying
between the subject property and the nearest public streets on all sides. Connections to
available transportation modes, such as driveways, sidewalks, and bike paths shall be shown
along adjacent streets and those entering adjoining properties. Safe and convenient pedestrian
pathways shall be provided from sidewalks along streets to each structure entrance, including
pedestrian access routes across parking lots and between adjacent buildings within the same
development. Where an existing or planned public transportation station or stop is within one
thousand two hundred fifty (1,250) feet from the nearest boundary of the subject property, the
access plan shall show how pedestrians may safely travel from such station or stop to the
subject property. Where an existing or planned bike path is located within one thousand five
hundred (1,500) feet from the nearest boundary of the subject property, the access plan shall
show how safe, continuous and convenient bicycle access shall be provided to the subject
property.
(5) Pedestrian access shall be provided from parking behind buildings to the public sidewalk
through the ground floor of the building or via sidewalks between buildings.
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 291
Appendix H
SUITABILITY ANALYSIS
E.2.a
BR
KHAVEN
Packet Pg. 292
SUITABILITY
ANALYSIS
1. Attraction Analysis
2. Demand Analysis
3. Character Analysis
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 293
ATTRACTION
ANALYSIS
Retail Concentrations
Educational Facilities
Recreational Facilities
Cultural and Civic Locations
Transit Access
Employment Areas
Overall Attraction
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 294
FO
RD
RD
A
N PE
RD
NW O O
DY
DU
OO
BL
EE
OW
NW
FIGURE 1:
PEDESTRIAN ACCESS TO RETAIL
LL
DU
TRE
CH
PE
AC
HT
RE
E
HTREE RD
IN
DU
ST
N PEAC
RI
AL
BL
VD
E RD
RD
DY
JOH
NS
Cambridge Square
O N F E RRY RD
Old Five Points

Publix Shopping Center
Chamblee Village
CHAMBLEE TUCKER RD
Whole Foods Shopping Center (future)
141
RD
ORD
OR
Y
PK W
SH
AL
LO
WF
WI N D S
23
13
NE
Town Brookhaven
RD
EE
PE A
CH
TR
Village Place
Brookhaven Plaza
Skyland Shopping Center
Cherokee Plaza
Skye Hill
85
Pedestrian Access to
Retail Centers
Low
23
DN
E
BU
FO
RD
HW
141
DR
Plaza Fiesta
Brookhaven Station
DR
S DE
High
HILL
SR
Features
ND
RU
ID
Northeast Plaza
REI
B R I A R C LI
FF
RD
Retail Locations
NE
Lake
IR
CLA
Park
MO
Roads
NT
RD
Suntan Shopping Center
42
LI F
IA
RC
FR
BR
13
Freeway
Briarcliff Shopping Center
DN
155
0.25
0.5
Attachment: Brookhaven Bike Ped Trail Draft 12-30-15_RJM Comments (2265 : Brookhaven Bicycle, Pedestrian &
RD
C
HA
E.2.a
HA
NS
A S H FO
285
STA RD 1 Mile
LAVI
Major Road
Packet
Pg. 295
Other Roads
285
FIGURE 2:
PEDESTRIAN ACCESS TO
EDUCATION
LL
BL
EE
OW
FO
RD
A
N PE
HT
RE
E
HF
PE
AC
AS
D
OR
N FERRY RD
BU
FO
RD
H
Y RD
OD
WY
O
NW
H N SO
DU
JO
HTREE RD
IN
DU
ST
Marist School
N PEAC
RI
AL
BL
VD
E RD
RD
DY
TRE
CH
NW O O
RD
DU
Montgomery
Elementary School
CHAMBLEE TUCKER RD
Our Lady of
the Assumption
RD
OR
Y
PK W
ORD
WI N D S
141
WF
St. Martin's
Episcopal School
AL
LO
SH
Seigakuin Atlanta
International
23
13
AC
HT
RE
ER
D
NE
Ashford Park
Elementary School
DR
RD
HW
PE
DR
S DE
BU
FO
Schools and Universities
85
High
CLA
IR M
ON
HILLS RD NE
Low
TR
141
R U ID
ND
Features
University
K-12 School
B R I A R C LI
FF
RD
NE
Lake
Park
ND
RU I
H
S
RD
13
LI
FF
ILL
BR
IA
RC
RD
Roads
Freeway
155
0.25
0.5
Kittredge
Magnet School
HA
NS
C
HA
E.2.a
STA RD 1 Mile
LAVI
Major Road
Packet
Pg. 296
Other Roads
OW
RD
A
N PE
E RD
RD
DY
TRE
CH
NW O O
RD
RD
DY
DU
OO
FO
NW
BL
EE
Murphey Candler
Park
FIGURE 3:
PEDESTRIAN ACCESS TO PARKS
LL
DU
Blackburn
Park
Keswick Park
Keswick Park
Park
H NS O N FERRY R D
RD
H
WY
JO
PE
AC
HT
RE
E
HTREE RD
IN
DU
ST
N PEAC
RI
AL
BL
VD
Perimeter Trail
Park
BU
FO
Osborne
Park
Lynwood
Park
CHAMBLEE TUCKER RD
141
RD
ORD
OR
Y
PK W
SH
AL
LO
WF
WI N D S
NE
23
AC
HT
RE
ER
D
13
N
DR
PE
DR
S DE
Dresden Park
Brookhaven
Park
R U ID
ND
141
BU
FO
RD
HW
Skyland
Park
T RD
HILLS RD NE
85
ON
Parks
CLAIRM
Briarwood
Park
Low
High
RO
O
XB
RO
RD N E
BR I A R C L
R
IFF
Features
NE
Lake
Park
ND
RU I
H
S
RD
13
LI
FF
ILL
Shady Valley Park
BR
IA
RC
RD
RD
C
HA
E.2.a
HA
NS
A S H FO
285
Roads
Freeway
155
0.25
0.5
STA RD 1 Mile
LAVI
Major Road
Packet
Pg. 297
Other Roads
285
HA
NS
E.2.a
LL
FIGURE 4:
PEDESTRIAN ACCESS TO CULTURAL
AND CIVIC RESOURCES
OW
RD
A
N PE
RD
TRE
CH
Saint Joseph's Hospital of Atlanta
E RD
RI
AL
PE
AC
D
OR
DU
N FERRY RD
HT
RE
E
SE Kwang Baptist Church
HF
BU
FO
RD
H
Y RD
OD
WY
O
NW
H N SO
HTREE RD
AS
IN
DU
ST
YMCA
JO
N PEAC
BL
VD
Iglesia De Dios Hispana De Atlanta
CHAMBLEE TUCKER RD
Archbishop Roman Catholic Church
Little Zion Baptist Church
RD
141
China Grove Baptist Church
WF
ORD
Episcopal Church of St Martin
AL
LO
Oglethorpe Presbyterian
Brookhaven Christian Church
23
13
North DeKalb Health Center
AC
HT
RE
E
RD
NE
City Hall
EN
DR
E SD
SH
Lynwood Park United Church of God in Christ
PE
Post Office
Drepung Loseling Monastery
Clairmont Baptist Church
Skyland Methodist Church

University Baptist Church
Brookhaven Branch Library
141
Trinity Independent Baptist Church
Brookhaven Baptist Church
HW
BU
FO
RD
Brookhaven Methodist Church
Cultural and
Civic Resources
85
Boys and Girls Club of Metro Atlanta
Low
23
North Atlanta Gospel Chapel
RO
O
XB
RO
RD N E
FF
RD
Cultural and Civic

Resources
NE
Lake
ID
Roads
RD
Park
NT
RD
Salvation Army
Children's Hospital of Atlanta (future)
Freeway
LS
MO
RU
IR
CLA
ND
IL
42
13
High
Features
Congregation Or VeShalom
B R I A R C LI
B RI
L
RC
I FF
RD
155
0.25
0.5
FO
Cross & Crown Lutheran Church
STA RD 1 Mile
LAVI
Major Road
Packet
Pg. 298
Other Roads
285
Dunwoody
FIGURE 5:
PEDESTRIAN ACCESS TO TRANSIT
LL
BL
EE
OW
FO
RD
A
N PE
NW O O
RD
DU
HT
RE
E
HF
PE
AC
AS
D
OR
N FERRY RD
O
NW
H N SO
DU
JO
HTREE RD
IN
DU
ST
N PEAC
RI
AL
BL
VD
E RD
RD
DY
TRE
CH
Medical Center
Y RD
OD
M
Chamblee
CHAMBLEE TUCKER RD
141
RD
ORD
OR
Y
PK W
SH
AL
LO
WF
WI N D S
NE
23
AC
HT
RE
ER
D
13
PE
HW
RD
Public Transit
BU
FO
R U ID
ND
141
DR
Brookhaven
DR
S DE
Low
High
CLAIRM
ON
T RD
HILLS RD NE
85
Features
M
Rail Station
RO
O
XB
RO
RD N E
B R I A R C LI
FF
RD
Bus Stop
NE
Lake
Park
ND
RU I
H
S
RD
13
LI
FF
ILL
BR
IA
RC
RD
Roads
Freeway
155
0.25
0.5
HA
NS
C
HA
E.2.a
STA RD 1 Mile
LAVI
Major Road
Packet Pg.
299
Other Roads
BL
EE
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!!!!! !
!
!
!
!
! ! !!!! !!
! !
!
!
!
! !! !!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!!
AC
HT
RE
!
!
!
!
!D
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!! ! !
!
!
!!
!!
!
RO
RO
RD N E
!
!
! !!
! !
!
!
WY
1-5
6-50
! FF R
B R I A R C LI
Number of Employees
!
85
!! ! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!! ! !
!
!
!!! ! ! !
! !
! !
!
!
!
!!! !
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!! !
!
!
Features
!!! !!
!!
!
!! !!
RD
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
HW
High
O
XB
!
!
!
HILLS RD NE
Low
T RD
NE
ND
RU I
RC
RD
LI
FF
ILL
BR
IA
RD
>5001
Park
Roads
Freeway
155
501-5000
Lake
13
51-500
S DE
Employment Centers
DR
ON
R U ID
ND
RD
H
RD
23
1
3
CLAIRM
!!
!
!
!
!
!
141
!!
BU
FO
!!
!
!
! !
!
!
!!
! !
!
!
PE
ER
D
NE
ORD
WF
W
O R PK
LO
WI N D S
AL
!
!
!
!
SH
141
IN
DU
ST
CHAMBLEE TUCKER RD
BU
FO
Y RD
OD
HT
RE
E
PE
AC
O
NW
N FERRY RD
HTREE RD
DU
H N SO
N PEAC
RI
AL
D
OR
JO
HF
!
!
!
!
BL
VD
AS
E RD
TRE
CH
A
N PE
! !
RD
!
!
RD
DY
NW O O
DU
! !
FIGURE
6:
! ACCESS TO
PEDESTRIAN
!!
EMPLOYMENT
RD
E.2.a
FO
OW
C
HA
285
LL
!
!
!! !
0.25
0.5
!!
!
HA
NS
!! ! !
!!
! !
!
! !! ! !
!
!
!!! ! !
!
!
!
!!
!!!!
! !
!
STA RD 1 Mile
LAVI
Major Road
Packet
Pg. 300
Other Roads
285
FIGURE #:
AGGREGATE PEDESTRIAN
ATTRACTIONS SCORE
LL
BL
EE
OW
FO
RD
A
N PE
HT
RE
E
PE
AC
HF
D
OR
N FERRY RD
DU
BU
FO
RD
H
Y RD
OD
WY
O
NW
H N SO
HTREE RD
IN
DU
ST
N PEAC
RI
AL
BL
VD
E RD
RD
DY
TRE
CH
NW O O
RD
DU
AS
JO
CHAMBLEE TUCKER RD
141
RD
ORD
OR
Y
PK W
SH
AL
LO
WF
WI N D S
NE
23
AC
HT
RE
ER
D
13
N
DR
R U ID
ND
141
BU
FO
RD
HW
PE
DR
S DE
CLAIRM
ON
T RD
HILLS RD NE
85
Low
Pedestrian Access
to Attractions
High
RO
Features
O
XB
RO
RD N E
B R I A R C LI
FF
RD
NE
Lake
Park
ND
RU I
H
S
RD
13
LI
FF
ILL
BR
IA
RC
RD
Roads
Freeway
155
0.25
0.5
STA RD 1 Mile
LAVI
HA
NS
C
HA
E.2.a
Major Road
Packet
Pg. 301
Other Road
DEMAND ANALYSIS
Aging Population (55+)

Young Population (<19)
Auto Ownership
Population Density
Bike to Work
Walk to Work
Transit to Work
Overall Demand
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 302
285
FIGURE 8:
DEMAND BY AGING POPULATION
LL
BL
EE
OW
FO
RD
A
N PE
HT
RE
E
PE
AC
HF
D
OR
N FERRY RD
DU
BU
FO
RD
H
Y RD
OD
WY
O
NW
H N SO
HTREE RD
IN
DU
ST
N PEAC
RI
AL
BL
VD
E RD
RD
DY
TRE
CH
NW O O
RD
DU
AS
JO
CHAMBLEE TUCKER RD
141
RD
ORD
OR
Y
PK W
SH
AL
LO
WF
WI N D S
NE
23
AC
HT
RE
ER
D
13
N
DR
R U ID
ND
141
BU
FO
RD
HW
PE
DR
S DE
CLAIRM
ON
T RD
HILLS RD NE
85
RO
O
XB
RO
RD N E
B R I A R C LI
ND
RU I
H
S
RD
13
LI
FF
ILL
BR
IA
RC
RD
FF
RD
NE
Low
Demand by Aging
Population (> 55)
High
Roads
Freeway
155
0.25
0.5
STA RD 1 Mile
LAVI
HA
NS
C
HA
E.2.a
Major Road
Packet
Pg. 303
Other Road
285
FIGURE 9:
DEMAND BY PERCENT CHILDREN
LL
BL
EE
OW
FO
RD
A
N PE
HT
RE
E
PE
AC
HF
D
OR
N FERRY RD
DU
BU
FO
RD
H
Y RD
OD
WY
O
NW
H N SO
HTREE RD
IN
DU
ST
N PEAC
RI
AL
BL
VD
E RD
RD
DY
TRE
CH
NW O O
RD
DU
AS
JO
CHAMBLEE TUCKER RD
141
RD
ORD
OR
Y
PK W
SH
AL
LO
WF
WI N D S
NE
23
AC
HT
RE
ER
D
13
N
DR
R U ID
ND
141
BU
FO
RD
HW
PE
DR
S DE
CLAIRM
ON
T RD
HILLS RD NE
85
Demand by Percent
Children (< 20)
RO
O
XB
RO
RD N E
B R I A R C LI
ND
RU I
H
S
RD
13
LI
FF
ILL
BR
IA
RC
RD
FF
RD
NE
Low
High
Roads
Freeway
155
0.25
0.5
HA
NS
C
HA
E.2.a
STA RD 1 Mile
LAVI
Major Road
Packet
Pg. 304
Other Road
285
FIGURE 10:
DEMAND BY AUTO OWNERSHIP
LL
BL
EE
OW
FO
RD
A
N PE
HT
RE
E
PE
AC
HF
D
OR
N FERRY RD
DU
BU
FO
RD
H
Y RD
OD
WY
O
NW
H N SO
HTREE RD
IN
DU
ST
N PEAC
RI
AL
BL
VD
E RD
RD
DY
TRE
CH
NW O O
RD
DU
AS
JO
CHAMBLEE TUCKER RD
141
RD
ORD
OR
Y
PK W
SH
AL
LO
WF
WI N D S
NE
23
AC
HT
RE
ER
D
13
N
DR
R U ID
ND
141
BU
FO
RD
HW
PE
DR
S DE
CLAIRM
ON
T RD
HILLS RD NE
85
RO
O
XB
RO
RD N E
B R I A R C LI
ND
RU I
H
S
RD
13
LI
FF
ILL
BR
IA
RC
RD
FF
RD
NE
Low
Demand by Auto
Ownership
Roads
Freeway
155
0.25
0.5
STA RD 1 Mile
LAVI
Major Road
HA
NS
C
HA
E.2.a
High
Packet
Pg. 305
Other Road
E.2.a
285
FIGURE 11:
DEMAND BY POPULATION PER ACRE
WF
M
BL
DU
OR
EE
A
N PE
RD
HT
RE
D
HTREE R
IN
N PEAC
DU
ST
RI
AL
BL
V
E RD
RD
T RE
DY
CH
NW O O
O
HF
PE
AC
AS
RD
N FERRY RD
NW
H N SO
DU
JO
BU
FO
RD
Y RD
HW
OD
CHAMBLEE TUCKER RD
141
RD
W
O R PK
SH
AL
LO
WF
O RD
W IN D S
NE
23
HT
RE
ER
D
13
DE N
DR
AC
ES
141
BU
F
RU
ND
RD
HW
PE
CLA IRM
ON
T RD
NE
ID HILLS RD
85
O
XB
RO
RO
Demand by Population
per Acre
RD N E
BR I A R C
ND
RU
ID
RD
NE
Low
RD
N
BR
IA
RC
Freeway
LI
155
13
High
Roads
E
N
FF
ILL
RD
F
LI F
HA
LLO
HA
NS
Major Road
0
0.25
0.5
ST A R D 1 Mile
L AV I
Other
RoadPg.
Packet
306
285
FIGURE 12:
DEMAND BY BIKING COMMUTERS
LL
BL
EE
OW
FO
RD
A
N PE
HT
RE
E
PE
AC
HF
D
OR
N FERRY RD
DU
BU
FO
RD
H
Y RD
OD
WY
O
NW
H N SO
HTREE RD
IN
DU
ST
N PEAC
RI
AL
BL
VD
E RD
RD
DY
TRE
CH
NW O O
RD
DU
AS
JO
CHAMBLEE TUCKER RD
141
RD
ORD
OR
Y
PK W
SH
AL
LO
WF
WI N D S
NE
23
AC
HT
RE
ER
D
13
N
DR
R U ID
ND
141
BU
FO
RD
HW
PE
DR
S DE
CLAIRM
ON
T RD
HILLS RD NE
85
Demand by Cyclists
per Acre
RO
O
XB
RO
RD N E
B R I A R C LI
ND
RU I
H
S
RD
13
LI
FF
ILL
BR
IA
RC
RD
FF
RD
NE
Low
High
Roads
Freeway
155
0.25
0.5
STA RD 1 Mile
LAVI
HA
NS
C
HA
E.2.a
Major Road
Packet
Pg. 307
Other Road
285
FIGURE 13:
DEMAND BY WALKING COMMUTERS
LL
BL
EE
OW
FO
RD
A
N PE
HT
RE
E
PE
AC
HF
D
OR
N FERRY RD
DU
BU
FO
RD
H
Y RD
OD
WY
O
NW
H N SO
HTREE RD
IN
DU
ST
N PEAC
RI
AL
BL
VD
E RD
RD
DY
TRE
CH
NW O O
RD
DU
AS
JO
CHAMBLEE TUCKER RD
141
RD
ORD
OR
Y
PK W
SH
AL
LO
WF
WI N D S
NE
23
AC
HT
RE
ER
D
13
N
DR
R U ID
ND
141
BU
FO
RD
HW
PE
DR
S DE
CLAIRM
ON
T RD
HILLS RD NE
85
Demand by Pedestrians
per Acre
RO
O
XB
RO
RD N E
B R I A R C LI
ND
RU I
H
S
RD
13
LI
FF
ILL
BR
IA
RC
RD
FF
RD
NE
Low
High
Roads
Freeway
155
0.25
0.5
HA
NS
C
HA
E.2.a
STA RD 1 Mile
LAVI
Major Road
Packet
Pg. 308
Other Road
285
FIGURE 14:
DEMAND BY TRANSIT RIDERS
LL
BL
EE
OW
FO
RD
A
N PE
HT
RE
E
PE
AC
HF
D
OR
N FERRY RD
DU
BU
FO
RD
H
Y RD
OD
WY
O
NW
H N SO
HTREE RD
IN
DU
ST
N PEAC
RI
AL
BL
VD
E RD
RD
DY
TRE
CH
NW O O
RD
DU
AS
JO
CHAMBLEE TUCKER RD
141
RD
ORD
OR
Y
PK W
SH
AL
LO
WF
WI N D S
NE
23
AC
HT
RE
ER
D
13
N
DR
R U ID
ND
141
BU
FO
RD
HW
PE
DR
S DE
CLAIRM
ON
T RD
HILLS RD NE
85
RO
O
XB
RO
RD N E
B R I A R C LI
ND
RU I
H
S
RD
13
LI
FF
ILL
BR
IA
RC
RD
FF
RD
NE
Low
Demand by Transit
Riders per Acre
High
Roads
Freeway
155
0.25
0.5
STA RD 1 Mile
LAVI
HA
NS
C
HA
E.2.a
Major Road
Packet
Pg. 309
Other Road
285
FIGURE 15:
DEMAND FOR BIKE & PED. FACILITIES
LL
BL
EE
OW
FO
RD
A
N PE
HT
RE
E
HTREE RD
IN
DU
ST
N PEAC
RI
AL
BL
VD
E RD
RD
DY
TRE
CH
NW O O
RD
DU
HF
PE
AC
AS
D
OR
DU
BU
FO
RD
H
Y RD
OD
WY
O
NW
R U ID
ND
BU
FO
RD
HW
PE
AC
HT
RE
ER
D
NE
SH
AL
LO
WF
ORD
RD
CHAMBLEE TUCKER RD
ON
CLAIRM
O
RD
NE
Demand for Bike

and Pedestrian Facilites
RO
O
XB
RO
RD N E
B R I A R C LI
ND
RU I
H
ILL
LI
FF
BOR
T RD
HILLS RD NE
R OX
85
RD
BR
IA
RC
RD
FF
RD
NE
Low
High
Roads
Freeway
0.25
0.5
HA
NS
C
HA
E.2.a
STA RD 1 Mile
LAVI
Major Road
Packet
Pg. 310
Other Road
Recreational Facilities
CHARACTER
ANALYSIS
ADT
Block Size
Topography
Posted Speed Limits
Total Character
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 311
285
FIGURE 16:
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC
LL
BL
EE
OW
FO
RD
A
N PE
HT
RE
E
PE
AC
HF
D
OR
N FERRY RD
DU
BU
FO
RD
H
Y RD
OD
WY
O
NW
H N SO
HTREE RD
IN
DU
ST
N PEAC
RI
AL
BL
VD
E RD
RD
DY
TRE
CH
NW O O
RD
DU
AS
JO
CHAMBLEE TUCKER RD
141
RD
ORD
OR
Y
PK W
SH
AL
LO
WF
WI N D S
NE
23
AC
HT
RE
ER
D
13
N
DR
R U ID
ND
141
BU
FO
RD
HW
PE
DR
S DE
CLAIRM
ON
T RD
HILLS RD NE
85
RO
O
XB
RO
RD N E
B R I A R C LI
ND
RU I
H
S
RD
13
LI
FF
ILL
BR
IA
RC
RD
FF
RD
NE
Low
Suitability by
Traffic Volume
Roads
Freeway
155
0.25
0.5
STA RD 1 Mile
LAVI
Major Road
HA
NS
C
HA
E.2.a
High
Packet
Pg. 312
Other Road
285
FIGURE 17:
BLOCK SIZE BY PERIMETER
LL
BL
EE
OW
FO
RD
A
N PE
HT
RE
E
PE
AC
HF
D
OR
N FERRY RD
DU
BU
FO
RD
H
Y RD
OD
WY
O
NW
H N SO
HTREE RD
IN
DU
ST
N PEAC
RI
AL
BL
VD
E RD
RD
DY
TRE
CH
NW O O
RD
DU
AS
JO
CHAMBLEE TUCKER RD
141
RD
ORD
OR
Y
PK W
SH
AL
LO
WF
WI N D S
NE
23
AC
HT
RE
ER
D
13
N
DR
R U ID
ND
141
BU
FO
RD
HW
PE
DR
S DE
CLAIRM
ON
T RD
HILLS RD NE
85
RO
O
XB
RO
RD N E
B R I A R C LI
ND
RU I
H
S
RD
13
LI
FF
ILL
BR
IA
RC
RD
FF
RD
NE
Low
Suitability by Grid
Size
Roads
Freeway
155
0.25
0.5
STA RD 1 Mile
LAVI
Major Road
HA
NS
C
HA
E.2.a
High
Packet
Pg. 313
Other Road
285
FIGURE 18:
AVERAGE SLOPE
LL
BL
EE
OW
FO
RD
A
N PE
HT
RE
E
PE
AC
HF
D
OR
N FERRY RD
DU
BU
FO
RD
H
Y RD
OD
WY
O
NW
H N SO
HTREE RD
IN
DU
ST
N PEAC
RI
AL
BL
VD
E RD
RD
DY
TRE
CH
NW O O
RD
DU
AS
JO
CHAMBLEE TUCKER RD
141
RD
ORD
OR
Y
PK W
SH
AL
LO
WF
WI N D S
NE
23
AC
HT
RE
ER
D
13
N
DR
R U ID
ND
141
BU
FO
RD
HW
PE
DR
S DE
CLAIRM
ON
T RD
HILLS RD NE
85
Suitability by
% Slope
RO
O
XB
RO
RD N E
B R I A R C LI
ND
RU I
H
S
RD
13
LI
FF
ILL
BR
IA
RC
RD
FF
RD
NE
Low
Roads
Freeway
155
0.25
0.5
STA RD 1 Mile
LAVI
Major Road
HA
NS
C
HA
E.2.a
High
Packet
Pg. 314
Other Road
285
FIGURE 19:
POSTED SPEED LIMIT
LL
BL
EE
OW
FO
RD
A
N PE
HT
RE
E
PE
AC
HF
D
OR
N FERRY RD
DU
BU
FO
RD
H
Y RD
OD
WY
O
NW
H N SO
HTREE RD
IN
DU
ST
N PEAC
RI
AL
BL
VD
E RD
RD
DY
TRE
CH
NW O O
RD
DU
AS
JO
CHAMBLEE TUCKER RD
141
RD
ORD
OR
Y
PK W
SH
AL
LO
WF
WI N D S
NE
23
AC
HT
RE
ER
D
13
N
DR
R U ID
ND
141
BU
FO
RD
HW
PE
DR
S DE
CLAIRM
ON
T RD
HILLS RD NE
85
RO
O
XB
RO
RD N E
B R I A R C LI
ND
RU I
H
S
RD
13
LI
FF
ILL
BR
IA
RC
RD
FF
RD
NE
Low
Suitability by
Posted Speed Limit
High
Roads
Freeway
155
0.25
0.5
STA RD 1 Mile
LAVI
HA
NS
C
HA
E.2.a
Major Road
Packet
Pg. 315
Other Road
285
FIGURE 20:
SUITABILITY BY ROAD CHARACTER
LL
BL
EE
OW
FO
RD
A
N PE
HT
RE
E
PE
AC
HF
D
OR
N FERRY RD
DU
BU
FO
RD
H
Y RD
OD
WY
O
NW
H N SO
HTREE RD
IN
DU
ST
N PEAC
RI
AL
BL
VD
E RD
RD
DY
TRE
CH
NW O O
RD
DU
AS
JO
CHAMBLEE TUCKER RD
141
RD
ORD
OR
Y
PK W
SH
AL
LO
WF
WI N D S
NE
23
AC
HT
RE
ER
D
13
N
DR
R U ID
ND
141
BU
FO
RD
HW
PE
DR
S DE
CLAIRM
ON
T RD
HILLS RD NE
85
RO
O
XB
RO
RD N E
B R I A R C LI
ND
RU I
H
S
RD
13
LI
FF
ILL
BR
IA
RC
RD
FF
RD
NE
Low
Suitability by
Road Character
Roads
Freeway
155
0.25
0.5
STA RD 1 Mile
LAVI
Major Road
HA
NS
C
HA
E.2.a
High
Packet
Pg. 316
Other Road
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 317
Appendix I
FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
E.2.a
BR
KHAVEN
Packet Pg. 318
Strt_Names
Buford Highway
Extents
City Limits; east of Cheshire Bridge

to Clairmont
Existing Conditions
State highway with 6 travel lanes; some sections have
center two-way left turn lane, others have median
Sparse sidewalks
Recent improvements with mid-block crossings at some
locations on southern end of roadway
Continuous low- to mid-rise housing with intermittent retail
blocks (strip malls)
Major intersections
Heavy pedestrian and transit usage
Residential street w/ curbs, no centerline, no sidewalk or

other bike/ped infrastructure
Sometimes used for parking
Approx 22' curb-curb
Long, gradual hill down to east
Opportunities
Limitations
Capitalize on recent pedestrian improvements;

Infrastructure improvements could create significant
quality-of-life improvements for residents and workers;
large transit-dependent population along corridor who
would benefit from sidewalk gap fill-in and last mile
connectivity
State maintained;
limited ROW;
heavily traveled vehicular corridor with ADT > 30,000 vpd
little room for improvements at edge of pavement due to
establishments close to the road;
conditions are generally not favorable for narrow bike
lanes, or any other unbuffered bike facility type
Eastern end is near North Fork Creek, potential

connection to trail
Homes are typically set back a reasonable distance
Eastern end also near Buford Highway, potential for
bike/ped connectivity
could provide a key connection betwen PATH 400 via the
proposed Shady Valley Dr. trail (ID #102), Shady Valley
Park, and North Fork trail
low volume, low speed road
Appears to be private property at end near North Fork

Western intersection (w/Shady Valley Drive) is technically
just outside of city and county limits requiring possible
coordination with Buckhead CID and City of Atlanta
powerline utilities on south side of road
Victor Road
North Fork Creek to Shady Valley

Drive
Shady Valley Drive
Corridor also includes portion of Goodwin Road

Goodwin Rd. approx 26' curb-curb, Shady Valley Dr
approx 22'
No sidewalk present on Goodwin Rd.
Victor Road to North Druid Hills Road Continuous 5' sidewalk along western side of Shady
Valley Dr.; eastern side has intermittent 5' sidewalks
Residential/collector street
Speed humps present
Used sometimes for on-street parking
Improvement to pedestrian space by narrowing travel

lanes and acquiring add'l ROW (add buffer, move
mailboxes and signage out of sidewalk);
route could open up connection to PATH 400;
low speed, low volume road;
coordination with city of Atlanta could ultimately lead to a
connection to Shady Valley Park fields
Eastern intersection (w/Victor Road) is technically just

outside of city and county limits
powerline utilities transitions between both sides of the
road making relocation of lines a necessity for any ROW
take;
roadside parking is taking place along much of the road
which may make any form of road diet or buffered bike
lane difficult to get approval from residents;
grade drop off is substantial on east side of road which
limits widening potential - "chasing existing grade
problems" near Victor Road end
Roxboro Road
South of Lake Boulevard: two-lane residential/collector

road, some on-street parking in certain sections;
infrequent sidewalks
North of Lake Boulevard: four-lane collector/arterial with
Goodwin Road to city limits (south of
major signalized intersections providing access to
Lenox Park Boulevard)
Buckhead (becomes Wieuca Road/Phipps Boulevard) 8'-10' (varies) multi use path on both sides that begins at
Lake Blvd and continues under MARTA tracks to E.
Paces Ferry Rd. where the trail become sidwalk/bike lane
Partial sidewalk segments which could be connected

Busy construction corridor, potential to get developers to
put in sidewalks (?)
Potential access to Buckhead area (Lenox Square,
MARTA station, Peachtree Road etc);
some segments on east side of road with wide setbacks
for potential widening - segment approx. 800'
Four lane section south of corridor (North Druid Hills

Road); new developments may make this segment more
congested and less friendly to new bike/ped
infrastructure;
continuous powerline utilities on western side and
intermittent lines on eastern side (setback further from
road);
ADT >18,000 vpd suggesting need for buffered/separate
facility
Roxboro Road to Curtis Drive
Complicated intersection with Roxboro Road (connection

between Roxboro Rd. should take place on Goodwin Rd.
2-3 lane roadway (additional southbound lane from
Roughly parallel to Buford highway; connection to Cross
signal)
Goodwin Road south)
Keys High School;
continuous powerline poles on western side
2 lane section has wide travel way (approx 31 feet for two fewer roadside utilities on eastern side
fencing at Congregation Or VeShalom synagogue on
lanes; approx 33 feet for three)
existing sidewalk on eastern side is continuous but
western side would need to be relocated
Narrow, but largely continuous sidewalk along eastern
narrow
some obstacles on east side such as nearby trees, poles,
edge; sidewalk also on western edge in northern portion MARTA bus stops located on east and west side
mailboxes, etc. would need to be relocated
of corridor;
destinations such as Cross Keys and MARTA station are
residential stone wall south of Curtis Drive on east side
ADT approx. 15,000 vpd
also located on eastern side
could be difficult to move - may consider narrowing lanes
and/or using striped median area
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 319
Extents
Existing Conditions
Curtis Drive to Apple Valley Road
Connection between Cross Keys High School,

Brookhaven MARTA, Peachtree Road retail;
Typically two travel lanes; intersections have auxiliary
fewer roadside utilities on eastern side;
lanes
can take advantage of coordination with school property
Residential/collector type street
and Boys and Girls Club property for construction of
Continuous, but frequently narrow sidewalk along eastern segments of trail
side, intermittent sidewalk on west;
connection to Brookhaven MARTA station is priority;
ADT approx. 15,000 vpd
this section would serve as a primary segment of the
spine, making it critical that this section provide for all
users
Curtis Drive/Corporate Boulevard
Runs immediately by entrances to Cross Keys High

School
North Druid Hills Road to North Fork
Roadway continues across Buford Hwy to I-85 access
Creek
road
2 lane road; wide but highly variable width (22-44 feet)
Nancy Creek/Lynwood Park Connection
Warrenhall Lane to Nancy

Creek/Lynwood Park
Creekbed of fork off of Nancy Creek
Connection from nearby but disconnected neighborhoods

to Lynwood Park and potential Nancy Creek Trail (Project Property ownership, limited space for connection
121)
Peachtree Road to North Druid Hills

Road
2 lane residential streets

Speed humps present
Provides overpass of railway
Access to Peachtree Rd. west of Peachtree Rd. at North
Druid signal
Very little sidewalk except for section between Peachtree
and first intersection south of railway bridge
Typ approximately 23 feet wide
Connection to Peachtree Road;

Access crossing rail line;
Capitalize on existing traffic calming;
grid network of Thornwell Dr., Pine Grove Ave., and
Oglethorpe presents a bike boulevard candidate
Strt_Names
Colonial Drive/Oglethorpe Avenue
2 lane residential/collector connecting many apartments

and Briarwood park; 20-30 feet wide
Continuous sidewalk along northern/eastern edge,
southern/western edge is intermittent with a few long
segments, but not continuous
Briarwood Road
North Druid Hills Road to Buford

Highway
Briarwood Road
2 lane collector with aux lanes at intersections

25-30' wide
Buford Highway to I-85 Access Road
Existing bridge over North Fork Creek
Existing sidewalks on both sides of street
Opportunities
Connection between Cross Keys High School, North Fork

Creek/Buford Highway
Use excess width to create buffer for pedestrians or new
bike infrastructure;
much opportunity to widen sidewalk to 10' trail on eastern
side of road and connect to residences
Connection from Buford Highway to N Druid and thus up

to Peachtree
Connection to Briarwood Park, Boys & Girls Club, and
Northeast Plaza
shoulder on southern/western side offers some room to
build new facilities;
some MARTA bus stops exist on southern/western side
that do not have sidewalk access
Connection to North Fork Creek, Buford Highway, I-85
Access (REI)
Extra pavement width for most of length of corridor
Existing sidewalks
Bridge over North Fork Creek has bike lanes and
sidewalks
Limitations
frequent number of residential driveways on eastern side,

which is preferred side of road based on utility relocation,
destinations, etc.
some street-accessible parking at Brookhaven Baptist
Church on east side;
no access to MARTA stops on western side of road
steep grades;
will likely require coordination with Cross Keys High
School to construct additional sidewalk width
landscape treatments south of school (fencing, trees)
may limit available widening space
Awkward offset-T intersection at eastern termini (North

Druid Hills at Colonial and Oglethorpe);
Oglethorpe is extremely narrow and residential
landscaping often extends up to edge of pavement
Awkward offset-T intersection at western termini (North

Druid Hills at Colonial and Oglethorpe)
roadway width is limited and may make bike lanes
infeasible without widening;
continuous utilities line northern/eastern edge of road;
steep grades
Congested and constrained intersections

Limited ability to get new ROW
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 320
Strt_Names
Standard Drive/Sylvan Circle/Cartecay Drive
Extents
Colonial Drive to Oostanaula Drive

(stormwater walkway)
Existing Conditions
2 lane residential streets with speed humps;

existing sidewalk on north side of Standard Drive;
no sidewalk on Sylvan Cir. or Cartecay Dr.
20'-25' typical width (wider towards east)
Opportunities
Roughly parallel to Peachtree/Dresden; could be
bypass/additional corridor
Connection to/near Brookhaven MARTA;
Standard Drive has existing sidewalks and could
accomodate bikes with sharrows and routing info;
greenspace on north side of Sylvan Cir. offers an ideal
location for a trail section and potential cut-thru to Apple
Valley Rd;
access to Dresden shops is essential - can be made via
Appalachee Dr (bike bouleveard?), Fernwood Cir. or
Apple Valley Road
Connection to Brookhaven MARTA, Caldwell Rd. and
Chamblee
Parallel to Peachtree Road, could serve as alternate
corridor (together with Caldwell Road)
Could connect to a railroad crossing at Osborne Road;
north of Dresden, sidewalk extends on west side of road
for a short segment
Apple Valley Road
2-3 lane street

North Druid Hills Road to Caldwell Rd From <20 ft to >40ft wide
Effectively no sidewalks
Brookhaven Drive
Peachtree Road to Peachtree Road
2 lane residential street

Continuous sidewalks/sidepaths for full length
25-30 feet wide
Dresden Drive
Thompson Road to Clairmont Road
2-3 lane street

Continuous sidewalk along southern side west of Skyland Connection from Brookhaven Village and Peachtree
Drive, continuous sidewalk along northern side east of
Road to eastern city limits
Skyland
Peachtree Road
Connections to Brookhaven Park, Town Brookhaven,

Oglethorpe University, rail underpass at Redding Road
and potential rail overpasses at Osborne Road or
Kendrick Road
Potential for "premeire corridor";
5-6 lane highway (2 NB/SB, center left turn lane,
this segment has 3 SB lanes that begin at AshfordCity limits to city limits (Club Drive to temporary additional SB lane from Ashford Dunwoody
Dunwoody and end at N. Druid Hills that could potentially
New Peachtree Road)
Road to Dresden Drive)
be reduced to 2 lanes to save space for alt mode facility;
Mostly continuous sidewalk along northern/western edge
Town Brookhaven has installed a 10' wide segment of
path in front of the development;
Between Ashford Dunwoody and Redding is an existing
approx. 8.5'-9' wide sidewalk adjacent to retaining wall on
north side of road
Access to Peachtree Road/around Peachtree Road @

North Druid Hills
Parallel connection to Peachtree Road
Limitations
Standard Dr./Sylvan Cir at N. Druid Hills is unsignalized;
While roadways link well to form a single corridor, this
corridor is not immediately obvious on the ground; would
need extra wayfinding signage;
Sylvan Cir. and Cartecay Rd. are very constrained by
large established trees, landscaping close to edge of
pavement, and no existing pedestrian space;
utilities on south side of Sylvan and Cartecay
Northern end is industrial/empty

Limited space for new infrastructure, especially north of
Dresden Dr.
Opportunity to coordinate with MARTA and the TOD to
construct a trail section on MARTA property;
limited shoulder width available
Residential and golf course uses; may not be able to
expand pavement
Constrained intersections at Peachtree Road
Minor Arterial classification makes "road diet" a less
feasible alternative;
massive high-transmission power lines exist on south
side from Carlton Pl. east to Skyland Dr.;
other utility lines on both sides of the road
Rail line along southern/eastern edge limits connectivity;

will require extensive coordination with MARTA and
Norfolk Southern to span tracks;
very constrained ROW between A-D Road and Redding
Road (rail lines, retaining walls, golf course)
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 321
Existing Conditions
Opportunities
Limitations
Strt_Names
Extents
Caldwell Road
Parallel to Peachtree Road to south;

Connections to Chamblee on New Peachtree Rd,
2 lane residential street with speed humps
apartments and Asford Park;
Mostly continuous sidewalks on both sides of road; some
Eastern city limits (8th Street) to East
Existing bike lanes present east of Redding Rd.;
missing towards western end of corridor
Osbourne Road or Oaklawn Avenue
Connection to potential rail overpass near Town
20-40 feet wide curb-curb
Boulevard/Kendrick Road;
Existing bike lane and sharrows on eastern end
Between Cheshire Way and Ashford Road, ROW is 32'36' with periodic medians for traffic calming (?) in road
Awkward offset-T instersection at Caldwell Road at

Redding Road;
east side of Caldwell Rd. is predominantly residential with
numerous driveways;
existing utility lines run continously on west side of road

Continuous sidewalk on western side south of Windsor,
Peachtree Road to northern terminus sidewalk on eastern side to north
(Lynwood Park)
20-25 feet wide
Heavily walked path can be seen in street view on east
side of road near Haven Brook/Oakland Trace
Some sections very narrow

Road has vertical and horizontal curves which limit sight
distances
High speed vehicular traffic
Sole access point for many homes; may increase
resistance to modification
Utilities along east side south of Windsor; along west side
with frequent poles on east to noth
Homes, landscaping, and trees on west
Osborne Road
Lanier Drive
Windsor Parkway
Connection from Peachtree Road to Lynwood and

Osborne Parks
Piece of potential N-S connection west of Peachtree
Road/Ashford Dunwoody Road
Peachtree Road to Hearst

Drive/Humility Lane
Median-divided road with 1 travel lane on each side

Single travel lanes are typically 15-20 feet wide
Speed Humps
No significant sidewalks
Significant grades on either side

Steep driveways make many people park on street
Parallel to Ashford Dunwoody Road (to west)
Direct connectivity limited to Peachtree and Windsor with
Connections to St. Martin's Episcopal School, Oglethorpe
potential extension to Ashford Dunwoody
University and Our Lady of the Assumption church/school
Utilities along east
Close-built trees and landscaping on both sides
Ashford Dunwoody Road to western

city limits (Windsor Lake Drive)
2 lane residential/collector
20-25 feet wide
Sidewalk along northern side east of Lanier, southern to
west; some segments on south east of Lanier
Connection to Sandy Springs

One of few E-W connections in northwest portion of city
Listed as "walking route" on signage
Curvature and high vehicular volume and speeds make

corridor dangerous
ROW constrained by grades to south, landscaping to
north, treet on both sides
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 322
Existing Conditions
Opportunities
Limitations
Connections to Peachtree Road, Oglethorpe University

(possible), Town Brookhaven, PATH Academy

Limited network connections due to termination on
Windsor Parkway
Along Mill Creek Rd, Knollhaven, and creekbed

Mill Creek and Knollhaven are narrow residential streets
with no sidewalks
Creation of largely off-road connections

Part of N-S connector in western portion of city
Access through individuals's back yards, or nearby

Existing bridges may not be wide enough
Creekbed

Access to Ashford Dunwoody Road and Marist School

Creekbed travels through Marist School property
Creekbed

Access to Murphey Candler Park


E-W connector from Ashford Dunwoody Road to
Clairmont Road
Segment in park already creates a low-speed, bike/ped
friendlier environment
T-Intersection of Nancy Creek Drive and Ashentree Drive

would require signage to direct users
Limited ROW
Part of N-S connector in northwestern portion of city

Connection to creek path (Project #121) (doesn't appear
to be a home at end of Nancy Creek Dr)
Mailboxes and lanscaping built up to curb
Strt_Names
Extents
Hermance Drive
Speed humps
Peachtree Road to Windsor Parkway Sidewalks on both sides north to Crosswycky Forest
Drive w/Traffic calming crosswalk islands
Single sidewalk on eastern edge north of Crosswycky
Forest Drive
Nancy Creek
Lynwood Park to Johnson Ferry

Road
Nancy Creek
Johnson Ferry Road to Ashford

Dunwoody Road
Nancy Creek
Ashford Dunwoody Road to

Chamblee Dunwoody Road
Nancy Creek Drive/Ashentree Drive

Typically 20-30 feet wide
Western limit of Murphy Candler Park
Speed humps
to Clairmont Road
Sidewalks on Nancy Creek Drive, but not always on same
side of road, not always continuous
Traffic calming islands
Sidewalk along northern edge
Utilities along northern edge, in buffer zone
Typically 25 feet wide
2 lane roads of different characters
Old Johson Ferry Rd, residential
Old Balloon Rd, small collector
St. Joseph Hospital, hospital access
Southen extent is 2 lane road
Northern end road expands to 4-6 lanes at 285
interchange
Residential/collector to large collector
Continuous sidewalk on western side, almost continuous
sidewalk on eastern side, but few gaps
Ashford Dunwoody Road to western

terminus
Old Johnson Ferry Road/Saint Joseph Hospital
Nancy Creek Drive to Peachtree

Dunwoody Road
Ashford Dunwoody Road
I-285 interchange to Nancy Creek

Drive
3 lane collector/aterial
Complete sidewalk coverage
Nancy Creek Drive to Blackburn Park
Bike lanes from north of Ashford Creek Trail to Nancy
Creek Drive
Blair Circle
Donaldson Drive to Johnson Ferry

Road
2 lane residential/commercial street

Parallel and agle parking
Pedestrian Tables
Runs through/adjacent to apartment complexes
Connection to Medical Center MARTA, medical buildings Roundabout at Old Johnson Ferry and Old Balloon
Part of parallel corridor to Johnson Ferry/Peachtree
Hospital driveway is heavily constrained, needs to be
Dunwoody Road
accessible and useful for hospital
Connection to Perimeter Center
Busy interchange with no room for bike infrastructure
Access to Marist School, nearby Murphey Candler Park
Constrained, congested roadway
Goes around Ashford Dunwoody at Johnson Ferry

intersection
Access to Blackburn Park and Blackburn II Park
May pass through private land/roadway

Southern access point would need to link into Publix path
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 323
Nancy Creek Drive
Strt_Names
Extents
Existing Conditions
Opportunities
Limitations
Donaldson Drive/Harts Mill Road
Blair Circle to Harts Mill Road

Some missing sidewalks, esp north end
Residents have mentioned excessive cut-through traffic,

may be good place for traffic calming
Connections to Chamblee schools
Very narrow, constrained ROW
I-285 interchange to eastern city

limits (Harts Mill Road)
Long stretches without sidewalks
Network connection for all segments which end on

eastern end of city
Steep grades on sides, and along path of road

High-volume roadway
Chamblee Dunwoody Road to

Murphy Candler Park

Traffic calming islands
Existing sidewalk on north side
Could create E-W connector in northern part of city

Access to Murphey Candler Park, Kittredge Magnet
School
Utilities on north side, opposite side of sidewalk from road

Series of roads, would need signage to guide users
Grade on either side of Ashwoody Trail; more severe to
north/west
Trees, landscaping up to edge of road
Steep grades along road as well
Ashwoody Court/Ashwoody Trail
Perimeter Summit Parkway

Perimeter Center Parkway
Lake Hearn Drive
Murphy Candler Park to Ashford

Dunwoody Road

Could create E-W connector in northern part of city
Asford Dunwoody Road to Perimter

Center Parkway/Lake Hearn Drive
Perimeter Summit Parkway to
norther city limit (I-285 bridge)
Perimeter Summit
Parkway/Perimeter Center Parkway
to western city limit
4 lane, median-divided roadway

Bike lanes and sidewalks on both sides
4 lane, median-divided roadway
Bike lanes and sidewalks on both sides
Relatively low-volume access into Medical Center and

Perimeter Center
Connection from Perimeter Summit Pkwy into Perimeter
Center
2-6 lane roadway

Sidewalks on both sides
Connection from Perimeter Summit Pkwy into Medical

Center
High-volume roadway, already has many tansitions

occuring. May not be space for additional
infrastructure/signage/striping
2 lane roadway
Railway underpass from Peachtree Road
Sidewalks on both sides and crosswalks at Peachtree
Connection from Peachtree Road to Caldwell;

Ashford Park
Rail underpass
Connection roughly parallel to Buford Highway/Dresden

Drive
Houses built near narrow road, no room for additional

pavement or bike lane restriping;
utility lines alternative between north and south side of
road
Redding Road
Peachtree Road to Caldwell Road
Drew Valley Road

Skyland Drive to stormwater walking
Speed humps
path
Continuous sidewalk on northern edge of road; some
segments on southern
City limit (Airport Road) to Dresden

Road
4 lane residential/arterial
Typically 45 feet wide (w/ center TWLTL)
Continuous sidewalks on both sides
Clairmont Road
Dresden Road to Buford Highway
5 lane arterial

eastern end of city
Access to Plaza Fiesta
Clairmont Road
Buford Highway to I-85 interchange
4-5 collector/arterial
Connection between Buford Highway and I-85
Packet Pg. 324
Brookhaven Drive to Oglethorpe

Creek
Narrow 2 lane road

Continuous sidewalk to south with wide buffer (golf
course to north)
Roughly parallel to Peachtree Road

Part of potential path around Peachtree at Dresden
Intersection (NE)
Brookhaven Drive
Fairly steep bridge
State maintenance;
partially outside of city limits;
some utilities on west side of road (city side);
steep sloped shoulders south of Georgian Hills park;
homes closer to edge of pavement south of G.H. park;
commercial corridor 2 blocks north of Dresden is dense
with many buildings and parking at roadside
State maintenance
Heavily constrained corridor
Utilities to west
State maintenance
Busy interchange to south;
new sidewalk/streetscaping along corridor from Buford
Hwy to interchange for most of the segment
Golf course bounds to the west and north
E.2.a
Clairmont Road

eastern end of city
Access to Plaza Fiesta and Peachtree Dekalb Airport;
passes by runway protection zone that could become
park space;
also passes by Georgian Hills green space
Many, horizontal curves create dangerous situation
Existing Conditions
Strt_Names
Extents
Drew Valley Road
Narrow 2 lane roads

Drew Valley Road to Buford Highway Typ approx 25 feet wide
No sidewalks
Keswick Park connection
Durden Road to Keswick Park
North Fork Nancy Creek

Ashford Park/former runway protection zone,

creek
Tobey Road/Parkridge Drive/Cravenridge Drive
Link between Durden Road and nearby Keswick Park in

Chamblee
Murphy Candler Park to northern city

Creekbed
limit (I-285)
2-3 lane residential/collector
Peachtree Road to norther edge of
Some sidewalk along north portion of this segment,
Peachtree Golf Club
missing entirely to the south
Opportunities
Limitations
Important connection between Drew Valley Road and

neighborhood and Buford Highway
Intersection with Buford Highway is stop-controlled with

no crossings and is constrained
Connection from Brookhaven to Chamblee via Keswick

Park, Keswick Parks's extension trail into downtown
Chamblee
Challenging terrain
Connection across 285 to Perimeter Center area off road

N-S connection in center of city
Golf course to east eliminated driveways and cross
streets on that side of the road
Possible connection points north of 285 are isolated and

not walkable
Golf course bounds to the east
High volume roadway
Vertical and horizontal curvature
Clairmont Road to Skyland Drive
Ashford Park is undeveloped with some unpaved trails

running through it
Ashford Park offers major green space as attraction and

can connect to Clarimont Road and PDK
some segments have potential to be along creek between
Tobey Road and Duke Road (private lot)
DeKalb county owns parcel south of Duke Road
power line easement could potentially be used with
coordination with utility provider
existing sidewalk on Skyland Drive (southern segment)
could connect to proposed project ID #148 and Ashford
Park Elementary School
Tobey Road to Caldwell Road
Tobey Road-25' wide no sidewalks, stormwater inlets and

curbing present
Parkridge Drive-24' wide no sidewalks no curb and gutter,
utilities on east side of road
existing unpaved path between Parkridge and
Cravenridge
Cravenridge Drive-existing sidewalks and crosswalks
along entire segment
existing cut-through path between Parkridge and

limited ROW
Cravenridge
Tobey Road - steep shoulder slopes on both sides of
connection to Ashford Park Elem., Caldwell Road corridor
road and power lines on south side
and proposed Project ID #147
requires coordination with private owner for creek

segment
requires coordination with utility provider for powerline
easement segment
utilities on east side of road

no sidewalks
parking currently taking place within roadway
residential landscaping is established and extends to
edge of pavement along Poplar Springs Road
Drew Valley Road to Buford Highway
Poplar Springs Road-25' side no sidewalks

existing curb and gutter
makes use of FEMA buyout lots
Clairmont Way
Buford Highway to Clairmont Way
Clairmont Way-26' wide

sidewalks on east side
connects multifamily residences north of Buford Highway

to Montclair Elementary
crossing Buford Highway via existing culvert
connects Brookhaven to North Fork area
existing sidewalk on Clairmont Way
North Duid Hills Road
Buford Highway or North Fork Creek 5 lane arterial

to Goodwin Road at Projects #103
and 104
North Fork Creek
City limits to city limits
Creekbed along I-85/Buford Highway
North Fork Creek to Frontage Road
Corporate: 2-4 lane connector with RI/RO access to

frontage road; widewalk on west
Poplar Springs Drive
Well shaded
Access to Corporate Square offices
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 325
Corporate Boulevard
Relatively few driveways/intersection streets

Little to no development immediately on roadway,
High speed, high volume roadway
expecially to east
Planned construction of trail in creekbed along North Fork
Peachtree Creek
Existing Conditions
Opportunities
Strt_Names
Extents
Bragg Street/Tobey Road
Skyland: 20-25 feet wide residential street, no sidewalk

Skyland Drive to city limits/Clairmont
East-west connection from Skyland Dr and nearby creek
Tobey Road: 25 feet wide no sidewalks, stormwater inlets
Drive
trail (Project 147) to potential southern PDK airport trail
and curbing present
Ellijay Drive and Coosawattie Drive
Dresden Drive to Briarwood Road
Residential street
Mostly continuous sidewalk on west from Dresden to
Cortez Lane, then continuous sidewalk to east until
approx 350 feet north of Briarwood Road
Limitations
Narrow, constrained residential street
Limited usefulnees without PDK trail
Useful north-south connection from Briarwood into urban

Narrow, constrained residential street
area of Dresden
Narrow roads with no existing infrastrucutre
Limited connectivity if rail crossing not built near Town
Connection from potential rail crossing south to Dresden
Brookhaven
Indirect route
Major redevelopment at southern end in progress;
Connection from Skyland Park to Drew Valley and Buford
unclear how this will change sidewalk conditions and/or
Highway
road cross-section
Cheshire Way, Valvedere Drive, Thompson Road Caldwell Road to Dresden Drive
Series of residential streets with no sidewalks

25-35 feet wide
Skyland Drive
Dresden Drive to Drew Valley Road
Wide residential street

Continuous sidewalk to west
Large redevelopment happening along south
City limits (Sheridan Road) to North

Druid Hills Road
Executive Park Drive is four lane, median-separated

Connectivity between major office parks
roadway
Alternative to busy Briarcliff Road
Very limited sidewalks, typically on south side of roadway
Tullie is narrow
Limited need for connectivity
Thompson Road
Dresden Drive to Drew Valley Road
Narrow residential streets with speed humps
Narrow street
Offset T intersection to north, disjointed from Proj 149 to
south
Dresden Drive
2-3 lane street

Continuous sidewalk along southern side west of Skyland
Peachtree Road to Thompson Road
Drive, continuous sidewalk along northern side east of
Skyland
Connections to Peachtree Road, Brookhaven MARTA,

Brookhaven Village, Plaza Fiesta
Single corridor from center of city to eastern limits;
homes east of retail area are setback from the edge of
pavement and existing sidewalk lines south side of the
road

E-W connector from Ashford Dunwoody Road to
Clairmont Road
Segment in park already creates a low-speed, bike/ped
friendlier environment
Link between projects 156 and 149
Nancy Creek Drive
Ashford Dunwoody Road to Murphy

Candler Park

Speed humps
Sidewalks on Nancy Creek Drive, but not always on same
side of road, not always continuous
Blackburn Park
Blair Circle to Ashford Dunwoody

Road
Park with winding recreational paths
Create direct link from Blair Circle to northern limits of

park at Ashford Dunwoody Road
Frontage Road
Corporate Boulevard to Briarwood

Road
Frontage Road: 2-3 lane one-way road; intermittent

sidewalks along north
Frontage road has extra shoulder width

Crossing of 85, regional connection
North Druid Hills Road to Frontage

Road
Typical two lane roadway, 30-35 feet wide

Some on-street parking, on Circle, some short sidewalk
segments, but sidewalks largely missing
Missing marking (centerline, edge of pavement marking
etc)
Integration with Project 165 to cross I-85

Use of excess pavement
Tullie Road/Tullie Circle
Minor Arterial classification makes "road diet" a less

feasible alternative;
massive high-transmission power lines exist on south
side from Carlton Pl. east to Skyland Dr.;
other utility lines on both sides of the road
T-Intersection of Nancy Creek Drive and Ashentree Drive

would require signage to direct users
Limited ROW
Existing fields and other facilities may be impacted
depending on alignment, these facilities may force a less
direct alignment
High speed, high volume; one way design and access
to/from intersetate promote high speeds and decrease
expectations of bike/ped
Crossing under 85 would be challenging, underpass is
unfriendly environment for bike/ped
Space beyond existing pavement is constrained
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 326
Existing Conditions
High speed, one way access road with two lanes
3-5 foot shoulder on southern edge
Some sidewalk segments along southern side, fairly
sparse
Skyland Drive-currently 22' wide, sidewalk on south/west
side from Carlton Place to Dresden Drive, no curb and
gutter
Opportunities
Limitations
Connection to Project 163, crossing I-85, space to south

of roadway
High-speed roadway, unattractive to walking or cycling
Connection from Proj 147 and 154 south to Dresden
Power lines on south side of road
Strt_Names
Extents
Frontage Road South
Tullie Circle to I-85 underpass
Skyland Drive/Tobey Road
Ashford Park (runway protection

zone) to Dresden Drive
Rail Overpass
Peachtree Road to Caldwell Road
Brookhaven Park/Mabry Road
Peachtree Road/Osborne Road to

Brookgate Way and Brookhaven
Park Place
East Osborne Road/Green Meadows Lane
Caldwell Road to Dresden Drive
Drew Valley Stormwater Trail
Oostanaula Drive to Drew Valley

Road
Loose path around Drew Valley Stormwater retention

area
Existing connection betwenn otherside non-integrated
Skyland Drive
Drew Valley Road to Buford

Highway/Clairmont Road
Existing roadway ends before intersection of Clairmont

and Buford Highway, some sidewalks
Bike/ped only connection to major corridors
Need for connection over rail line between Redding Road Could be located at entrance for Town Brookhaven
and North Druid Hills Road
(shown) or to south at Osborne Road
Expensive, large structure, must be well-integrated into

network to be useful, limited space for landings on each
side
Connection to Brookhaven Park for residents who are

nearby but must use Peachtree Road or Osborne Road to
Various trails in Brookhaven Park and nearby unbuilt area
Property owners
access; connection between cul-de-sacs which would
increase access to Peachtree Road
Narrow residential streets with speed humps
Some sidewalks near Dresden, none at all elsewhere
Connection from Caldwell Road (project 116) to
Very narrow, constrained ROW, residences on all sides
Alignment could also be shifted to follow Caldwell Road
Brookhaven Village area
only
Narrow, adjacent residents have built privacy fences
along path
Connection would help create a strong north-south

corridor in western section of the city; complement to
Ashford-Dunwoody and PATH 400; provide better access Property owners
to Osborne and Lynwood Parks for residents of areas just
north
Access to Nancy Creek Trail (Projects 121, 122) for
nearby residents; provide grade-seperated crossing of
Property owners
Johnsons Ferry
Stronger east-west connection in north part of city,
Parkland, new access point has limitations
access through park to Kittleridge Elementary
Osborne Park
Osborne Road to Nancy Creek
Osborne Park and other properties
Nancy Creek access trail
West Nancy Creek Drive to Nancy

Creek
Undeveloped section of property at end of cul-de-sac
Murphy Candler Park connection
Ashwoody Court to Murphy Candler

Park trail
Thin slice of parkland between road and trail
Publix connection

Johnsons Ferry
Borderline between loading zone for Publix and northern

property of Peachtree Golf Club
Connection in major north-south spine, provides a bypass

Publix land provides uncomfortable area for pedestrians,
to the intersection of Ashford Dunwoody Rd and
golf course land is fenced off and includes difficult terrain
Johnsons Ferry, connections to Projects 146 and 129
Dorby Park Drive
Small residential street providing access to only a

handlful of homes
Connection between Osborne Road and Hermance Drive Narrow street, no space for widening
Dorby Park Drive to Hermance Drive Undeveloped parcel along creekbed
Matthews Street
Colonial Drive to Oglethorpe Avenue
Matthews-Park Vista connection
Cul-de-sac of Park Vista Drive to culUndeveloped, privately owned land

de-sac of Matthews Street
North Druid Hills Road to existing
sidewalk
Connection to existing rail overpass; especially useful in

Narrow street with limited ROW
conjuction with Project 178, which would create a
Existing landscaping, mailboxes, etc near roadway
stronger link between Peachtree and AT&T development
Connection between cul-de-sacs, increasing access
between AT&T development and northern
Privately owned land
neighborhoods, as well as alternative connection to Cross
Keys High School
Narrow residential street with some sidewalk, which don't Gap-filling to take advantage of existing sidewalks and
reach to North Druid Hills Road
create a more complete pedestrian network
Narrow street with limited ROW

Existing landscaping, mailboxes, etc near roadway
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 327
Colonial Drive
Sidewalk at intersection with Pine Grove Avenue, two

lane residential street
Connection between Osborne Road and Hermance Drive
Strt_Names
Extents
Existing Conditions
North Druid Hills Road to Roxboro

Road
Median-divided four lane road with continuous sidewalks
Mabry Road
Brookhaven Drive to Windsor

Parkway
Harts Mill Road

Johnson Ferry Road
Donaldson Drive to eastern city limit
Typical two lane residential street

Continuous sidewalk on east side of road
Constrained two lane residential street
Continuous sidewalk on south of street, long segments of
sidewalk on north, but with gaps
Major 2 lane collector/arterial with auxiliary lanes at most
driveways and intersections
Existing 8' sidepath along northern side
Opportunities
Limitations
Inclusion of biking provisions to complement pedestrian
facilities and improve access to AT&T development on on
into Buckhead
Alternative to Osborne Road for western portion of city
Narrow roadway
Increased connection to Chamblee and Nancy Creek

Trail
Narrow roadway
Increase connectivity to Chamblee, near downtown
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 328
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 329
Appendix J
PROJECT PRIORITIZATION
E.2.a
BR
KHAVEN
Packet Pg. 330
Corridor ID Implementation Phase Street Name

100 ST
Treatment
Corridor
Suitability Attractions
Corridor
Suitability Demand
Corridor
Suitability Character
Corridor
Corridor
Consistency with
General
Suitability Suitability
Community Vision Connectivity
Total
15.7
9.2
0
Construction
ROW Cost
Cost
Community
Support
6.7
3.6
100 MT
Buford Highway
road diet to make room for a "bus and bike only" lane
Identify additional potential sites for HAWK crossings
6.7
3.6
15.7
9.2
101 ST
Victor Road
2.4
10.0
18.0
102 ST
Shady Valley Drive/Goodwin Road
3.3
0.0
18.5
103 LT
Roxboro Road/Goodwin Road
4.3
5.3
13.9
8.1
10
104 MT
5.7
6.5
13.8
8.1
20
15
105 MT
9.5
6.5
16.9
9.9
20
20
20
69.9 $
1,210,000
106 MT
Curtis Drive/Corporate Boulevard
5.7
7.7
18.8
11.0
20
15
15
61.0 $
1,060,000
107 LT
Nancy Creek/Lynwood Park Connection
31.3 $
240,000
108
108
109
109
110

Briarwood Road
Briarwood Road
Briarwood Road
ST
LT
ST
LT
ST
111 LT
Sylvan Circle
112
112
113
114
115
115
116
Apple Valley Road

Apple Valley Road
Brookhaven Drive
Dresden Drive
Peachtree Road
Peachtree Road
Caldwell Road
ST
LT
ST
MT
ST
MT
ST
116 LT
Caldwell Road
117 ST
117 LT
Osborne Road
Osborne Road
118 ST
Humility Lane/Hearst Drive/Lanier Drive
Sidewalks along Humility Lane/Hearst Drive; add cycle

track and sidewalk to opposite sides of Lanier Drive
119
119
120
120
121
122
123
124
125
Windsor Parkway
Windsor Parkway
Hermance Drive
Hermance Drive
Nancy Creek
Nancy Creek
Nancy Creek
Nancy Creek Drive/Ashentree Drive
Nancy Creek Drive
Sharrows, fill in sidewalk gaps

Road calming and multi-use trail
Sharrows
Improve sidewalk connections to school
Path along creekbed
Path along creekbed
Path along creekbed
Sidewalks and sharrows
Sharrows, connect sidewalks
ST
LT
ST
LT
LT
LT
LT
ST
ST
10
10
20
10.5
10.8
Total Cost

Fill in sidewalks on Goodwin Road, crossing
improvements, sharrows
Multi-use trail along eastern side to Goodwin Road and
northern side of Goodwin to North Druid Hills Road
(Project 104)
Add multi-use path on east and fill in sidewalk gaps to
west
Expand sidewalk to multi-use trail along eastern side, fill
in sidewalk gaps on west side
Multi-Use trail to east of road
Multi-use trail along creekbed in coordination with Project
121 and resident demand
sharrows on Oglethorpe and Colonial
Multi-use trail
Fill in sidewalk gaps on south/west
Widen sidealk to multi-use trail to the south/west
Bike lanes striped on existing roadway
Multi-use trail on north through greenspace, add access
to Apple Valley
Sidewalks
Expand sidewalk to trail along north/west of roadway
Add sharrows
Multi-use path on south side of road
Fill in sidewalk gaps on north/west
Expand multi-use path on north side
Expand sidewalk to multi-use trail to north/west of
roadway
Fill in sidewalk gaps to south
Sharrows, fill in sidewalk gaps
Widen sidewalk to multi-use trail
20
TOTAL
Buford Highway
44.2 $
930,000
10
39.2 $
480,000
25.5 $
310,000
10
30.8 $
140,000
1.9
7.5
19.4
11.3
9.0
9.0
5.2
5.2
4.8
6.9
6.9
6.5
6.5
6.2
22.1
22.1
17.1
17.1
15.4
12.9
12.9
10.0
10.0
9.0
0
0
0
0
0
10
10
10
10
10
10
5
5
0
10
10
0
10
0
10
9.0
6.9
21.4
12.5
10
7.6
7.6
7.6
5.2
8.6
8.6
4.8
6.5
6.5
6.9
6.4
2.1
2.1
6.0
20.9
20.9
21.1
19.8
15.6
15.6
17.1
12.2
12.2
12.3
11.5
9.1
9.1
10.0
0
0
0
10
20
20
0
15
15
5
15
20
20
15
0
0
10
0
5
0
5
10
0
10
0
10
0
10
4.8
6.0
17.1
10.0
15
3.8
3.8
6.4
6.4
17.0
17.0
9.9
9.9
10
10
15
15
0
0
10
0
3.8
6.4
17.0
9.9
10
15.0
0.0
3.3
10.0
4.3
4.3
5.7
5.7
1.9
3.8
2.9
2.9
2.9
7.2
7.2
6.3
6.3
7.5
8.4
6.9
6.9
0.0
16.4
16.4
18.2
18.2
19.4
22.2
19.7
15.4
16.1
9.6
9.6
10.6
10.6
11.3
13.0
11.5
9.0
9.4
10
10
0
0
10
10
10
0
0
10
10
10
10
10
10
15
10
5
0
0
10
10
0
0
0
0
5
10
0
10
10
0
0
0
0
10
5
5
10
10
10
23.1 $
640,000
58.1 $
410,000
42.9
27.9
35.0
20.0
39.0
$
$
$
$
$
27.5 $
650,000
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
540,000
1,390,000
40,000
1,180,000
140,000
4,380,000
130,000
10
35.0 $
1,780,000
10
10
54.9 $
44.9 $
530,000
1,310,000
10
15
15
15
5
10
10
10
37.2
37.2
37.3
51.5
79.1
64.1
45.0
40,000
640,000
220,000
1,100,000
50,000
48.2 $
44.6
34.6
40.6
40.6
41.3
43.0
46.5
19.0
29.4
550,000
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
540,000
2,140,000
70,000
10,000
940,000
1,550,000
2,090,000
1,010,000
140,000
126 ST
Old Johnson Ferry Road/Saint Joseph Hospital Sharrows, connect sidewalks
4.3
0.0
18.6
10.8
10
10
35.8 $
340,000
127 ST
127 MT
128 MT

4.8
4.8
3.8
7.7
7.7
8.4
17.1
17.1
24.4
10.0
10.0
14.3
0
20
20
10
10
10
10
0
5
10
0
10
15
15
15
55.0 $
55.0 $
74.3 $
30,000
1,170,000
350,000
129 MT
Blair Circle
7.1
7.5
18.9
11.0
20
15
10
10
15
81.0
130 MT
Donaldson Drive
131
132
133
134
135
136

Ashwoody Court/Ashwoody Trail
Perimeter Summit Parkway
Perimeter Center Parkway
Lake Hearn Drive
MT
ST
ST
MT
ST
ST
137 LT
Redding Road
138
138
139
140
Drew Valley Road

Drew Valley Road
Clairmont Road
Clairmont Road
ST
LT
LT
LT
Clairmont Road
142
143
143
144
145
146
146
Brookhaven Drive
Drew Valley Road
Drew Valley Road
Keswick Park connection
North Fork Nancy Creek
Ashford Park/fmr runway protection
zone/Skyland Dr
ST
ST
LT
MT
LT
ST
MT
147 LT
148 MT
Multi-use trail on west side, tying in to park and Caldwell

Road (Project 116)
Wayfinding to Dresden Drive and downtown Chamblee
Sharrows
Sidewalk on north
Multi-use trail to west
Trailhead at North Fork
Add wayfinding signage to recent streetscaping
Sharrows
Connect sidewalks, improve crossings
Expand sidwalk to multi-use trail
Extend sidewalk/trail to park
Creekbed path
Fill in gaps in sidewalk to east
Expand sidewalk to multi-use trail to east of road
Multi-use path
Tobey Road/Parkridge Drive/Cravenridge Drive Multi-use path along all segments
3.8
7.3
16.8
9.8
3.3
5.2
2.4
0.0
8.1
0.0
0.8
6.9
6.9
0.0
6.9
8.1
13.1
19.1
15.7
N/A
22.7
13.1
7.6
11.1
9.2
N/A
13.3
7.7
0
0
10
20
0
20
10
5
10
5
10
10
0
10
0
10
10
10
0
10
0
10
10
10
4.3
6.4
34.3
20.0
15
10
2.9
2.9
5.7
8.6
0.4
0.4
6.5
6.9
24.1
24.1
17.3
20.9
14.1
14.1
10.1
12.2
0
0
10
10
10
10
15
15
10
10
0
0
10
10
0
0
5
5
44.1
44.1
40.1
42.2
6.2
9.1
15.9
9.3
10
15
10
10
59.3
3.3
3.8
3.8
3.3
0.5
7.6
7.6
6.8
9.3
9.3
7.5
6.9
7.5
7.5
17.1
19.3
19.3
20.5
17.4
17.7
17.7
10.0
11.2
11.2
12.0
10.1
10.3
10.3
0
0
0
10
10
20
20
5
10
10
15
10
20
20
10
10
5
10
0
5
0
10
10
5
5
5
10
10
10
35.0
41.2
31.2
62.0
35.1
80.3
75.3
2.5
5.0
4.3
5.9
10
10
VARIES
19.8 $
15
15
15
15
17.6
36.1
29.2
60.0
43.3
72.7
730,000
$
$
$
$
$
$
1,140,000
60,000
800,000
40,000
10,000
10,000
50.0 $
110,000
$
$
$
$
80,000
30,000
1,320,000
1,050,000
VARIES
$
$
$
$
90,000
120,000
250,000
170,000
VARIES
$
370,000
$
830,000
17.5
10.2
15.2 $
770,000
23.4
13.6
23.6 $
750,000
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 331
141 MT
Fill in gaps in sidewalk to east

Expand sidewalk to multi-use trail to east of road
Improve and brand multi-use trail to east of road
Improve and brand existing multi-use trail; widen
sidewalks where necessary to make trail continuous
Coordinate with Chamblee to improve and connect
sidewalks
Sharrows
Coordinate with Chamblee to add sidewalks
Extend sidewalk, add sharrows
Midblock crossing at offices
Sharrows
Sharrows
Corridor ID Implementation Phase Street Name
Treatment
Corridor
Suitability Demand
150 LT
Clairmont Way
Trailhead at North Fork, widen sidewalk to multi-use trail
4.3
7.7
26.0
15.2
151 MT
Mixed use trail on east side, continuation of project 104
5.7
7.5
16.3
9.5
20
152 MT
153 MT
154 LT
Peachtree Creek Greenway

Corporate Boulevard
Bragg Street/Tobey road
4.8
4.8
5.2
1.6
6.3
6.9
16.3
16.5
17.7
9.5
9.6
10.3
10
20
0
155 ST
Ellijay Drive and Coosawattie Drive
Multi-use trail
Multi-use path on east side of Corporate Blvd.
Multi-use trail extending PDK trail
Fill in sidewalk gaps, sharrows, improve crossings,
especially where sidewalk changes sides of street
(Cortez)
5.7
5.6
19.0
11.1
156 MT
157
158
158
159
LT
ST
MT
ST
160 MT
Dresden Drive
161 MT
162 MT
163 MT
Nancy Creek Drive

Blackburn Park
Frontage Road
163 LT
Frontage Road
164
165
166
166
Tullie Road/Tullie Circle

Frontage Road South
MT
LT
ST
MT
8.1
7.7
Corridor
Corridor
Consistency with
General
Suitability Suitability
Community Vision Connectivity
Total
10
20.6
12.1
0
26.0
15.2
0
Poplar Springs Drive/Peachtree Creek

Clairmont Way
156 LT
2.5
4.3
Corridor
Suitability Character
149 LT
150 ST
Cheshire Way, Valvedere Drive, Thompson

Road
Cheshire Way, Valvedere Drive, Thompson
Road
Skyland Drive
Thompson Road
Multi-use path
Sharrows
Corridor
Suitability Attractions
10
Construction
ROW Cost
Cost
10
10
Community
Support
TOTAL
Total Cost
5
10
0
10
27.1 $
45.2 $
970,000
60,000
10
10
35.2 $
600,000
20
54.5 $
1,450,000
20
10
10
0
5
0
10
0
0
15
15
64.5 $
59.6 $
20.3 $
2,550,000
600,000
940,000
10
10
31.1 $
490,000
Add sidewalk to south/west
3.3
5.9
15.1
8.8
18.8 $
440,000
Expand sidewalk to multi-use trail to south/west
3.3
5.9
15.1
8.8
13.8 $
740,000

Fill in sidewalk gaps, sharrows
Expand sidewalk to multi-use trail on south
Sharrows, sidewalks
4.8
6.2
6.2
2.4
6.6
5.6
5.6
5.7
20.4
17.8
17.8
15.3
11.9
10.4
10.4
8.9
0
20
20
0
5
10
10
5
5
0
0
10
5
10
5
5
15
15
26.9
65.4
60.4
28.9
$
$
$
$
540,000
510,000
520,000
180,000
Bike lanes (as width allows) from Apple Valley Rd. thru
urban area (Camille Dr.) and widen sidewalks to south,
incorporating development regulations as appropriate
8.1
6.1
18.4
10.8
10
20
15
55.8 $
1,280,000
4.3
8.1
4.3
6.9
6.9
6.2
17.3
25.0
18.4
10.1
14.6
10.7
10
20
20
10
10
20
5
0
5
5
10
10
15
10
40.1 $
69.6 $
75.7 $
410,000
510,000
250,000
2,820,000
Expand multi-use PATH trail

Multi-Use Path
Fill sidewalk gaps
Widen sidewalk to multi-use path on north side of
Frontage Rd., crossing at I-85 underpass
Multi-use trail
Multi-use path on south side of road
Expand sidewalk to multi-use trail
4.3
6.2
18.4
10.7
20
20
10
60.7 $
5.7
4.3
3.8
3.8
7.5
7.5
6.4
6.4
20.3
21.8
28.4
28.4
11.9
12.7
16.6
16.6
20
20
0
0
20
20
5
5
5
5
10
5
5
0
10
5
15
15
76.9
72.7
41.6
31.6
24.8
14.5
15
20
15
64.5
21.2
20.0
20.0
12.4
11.7
11.7
0
0
0
5
10
10
5
10
10
10
10
5
32.4 $
41.7 $
36.7 $
230,000
30,000
200,000
10
10
460,000
370,000
30,000
310,000
167 LT
Rail Overpass
Multi-use trail overpass connecting to Town Brookhaven
8.6
6.3
168 LT
169 ST
169 LT
Brookhaven Park
Multi-use trail
Sharrows
Add sidewalk
3.8
6.2
6.2
6.9
6.3
6.3
170 MT
Drew Valley Stormwater Trail
Pave existing trail, with possibility of widening to full 10'
3.8
5.0
10
18.8
11.0
10
31.0 $
210,000
171 ST
Skyland Drive
0.0
7.3
10
17.3
10.1
10
10
10
40.1 $
10,000
171 LT
Skyland Drive
0.0
7.3
10
17.3
10.1
10
10
10
40.1 $
20,000
172 LT
Osborne Park
2.4
7.5
10
19.9
11.6
10
10
41.6 $
210,000
173 LT
174 LT
175 MT
Nancy Creek access trail

Murphy Candler Park connection
Publix connection
0.0
0.5
6.7
8.1
6.9
7.5
10
10
10
18.1
17.3
24.2
10.6
10.1
14.1
0
10
20
10
5
20
10
10
5
5
5
0
15
35.6 $
40.1 $
74.1 $
100,000
20,000
560,000
176 LT
Dorby Park Drive/Oglethorpe Connection
3.4
7.2
10
17.5
10.2
0.0
7.5
5.0
30.2 $
370,000
177
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
Matthews Street
Matthews Street
Matthews-Park Vista connection
Colonial Drive
Mabry Road
Harts Mill Road
Johnson Ferry Road
Cartecay Drive
Standard Drive
Peachtree Creek
Sharrows
Add sidewalks, continuation of adjacent projects,
improve connections to intersection
Multi-use trail connecting to Nancy Creek Trail (Project
121)
Multi-use trail connecting trail and cul-de-sac
Multi-use trail
Multi-use trail along northern edge of forested area
Sharrows on Dorby Park Drive, multi-use path from road
end to Hermance Drive
Sharrows
Add sidewalk to east
Multi-use path
Fill sidewalk gaps
Buffered bike lanes as part of road diet
Sharrows
Coordinate with Chamblee to create multi-use path
Improve and brand existing sidepath
Sharrows
Sharrows
Multi-use path
7.1
7.1
0.0
6.2
3.8
3.3
1.9
6.7
6.2
10.0
3.3
5.3
5.3
4.4
4.4
4.6
1.8
6.9
7.5
6.0
6.9
8.0
19.0
19.0
14.4
17.9
14.6
14.6
13.7
17.2
21.3
23.6
21.3
11.1
11.1
8.4
10.5
8.5
8.5
8.0
10.1
12.4
13.8
12.4
0
0
0
0
10
0
0
10
0
0
0
5
5
5
5
15
15
10
10
10
5
15
10
10
10
10
10
5
0
10
10
10
5
10
5
0
10
10
10
0
10
10
10
0
ST
LT
LT
MT
MT
ST
LT
MT
ST
ST
MT
10
$
$
$
$
10
10
187 MT
Creek parallel to Skyland Drive, power easment Multi-use path
4.8
6.2
10
21.0
12.3
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
Fernwood Circle
Woodrow Way
North Cliff Valley Way
Northeast Plaza
Perimeter-Medical Connector Trail
Osborne Road
Georgian Hill Park Trail
Cove Circle/Bamby Lane Creekway
6.2
5.2
5.2
2.9
4.3
3.8
4.8
2.9
5.0
7.5
8.5
6.3
8.1
7.5
6.9
6.3
10
10
10
10
18.7
18.6
17.7
19.1
22.4
18.3
21.6
19.1
10.9
10.9
10.3
11.2
13.1
10.7
12.6
11.2
0
0
10
10
0
10
0
0
5
5
10
10
15
15
5
5
5
10
10
5
5
10
5
0
10
10
10
0
0
10
5
0
1.9
8.4
17.3
10.1
ST
MT
ST
LT
LT
ST
LT
LT
196 MT
Coosawattee Connector
Fill in sidewalk gaps, add sharrows

Extend existing sidewalk to Lanier Boulevard
Add buffered bike lanes
Multi-use path
Multi-use path
Sharrows
Multi-use path
Multi-use path
Multi-use trail connecting from Coosawattee through
existing ROW and small pieces of apartment land to
southern Coosawatee. Then along west side of
Coosawattee to N Cliff Valley Rd.
5
5
36.1
31.1
23.4
35.5
58.5
38.5
23.0
50.1
42.4
38.8
32.4
VARIES
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
20,000
140,000
340,000
40,000
80,000
130,000
2,060,000
VARIES
$
30,000
$
20,000
$
530,000
22.3 $
10
30.9
35.9
50.3
36.2
33.1
65.7
27.6
16.2
490,000
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
300,000
50,000
50,000
660,000
930,000
50,000
440,000
1,260,000
25.1 $
510,000
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 332
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 333
Appendix K
CONCEPTUAL DRAWINGS
E.2.a
BR
KHAVEN
Packet Pg. 334
A
A
112-LT and 116-LT
Apple Valley Road and Caldwell Road Multi-Use

Path
A A
112-LT
Project Description
10 multi-use path along Apple Valley Road, E. Osborne Road, and
Caldwell Road connecting such destinations as:
Proposed MARTA Transit Oriented Development (TOD) at the
Brookhaven Station
Retail and residences on Dresden Drive
Potential Peachtree Road grade-separated pedestrian bridge
Proposed Dresden Drive trail
Local neighborhoods
City of Chamblee
The multi-use path is proposed for the west side of the road(s) with a
typical 2-5 grassed buffer when applicable. The southern terminus is
the signal at Apple Valley Road at Dresden Drive and the project will
extend approximately 1.9 miles to the northeast to the intersection of
Caldwell Road and 8th Street at the Brookhaven city limit. Improved
crossings are proposed for
Signalized intersection of Apple Valley Rd. and Dresden Dr.
Unsignalized side-street stop controlled T of Apple Valley Rd.
and E. Osborne Rd.
Unsignalized side-street stop controlled intersection of Caldwell
Rd. and Redding Rd.
10 Grassed
Multi- buffer
use
varies
path
2-5
Varies
25 typical
112-LT Estimated Cost:

$1,390,000
E.2.a
* Note: installation of a 10 multi-use path is one potential treatment that serves multiple user types; another alternative includes a wider section with designated
lanes for pedestrians and cyclists. Design should be determined through concept phase and should consider constraints such as right-of-way and public opinion
Packet Pg. 335
B
B
112-LT and 116-LT
Apple Valley Road and Caldwell Road Multi-Use

Path (cont.)
B B
116-LT
Project Description
10 multi-use path along Apple Valley Road, E. Osborne Road, and
Caldwell Road connecting such destinations as:
Brookhaven Station
Potential Peachtree Road grade-separated pedestrian bridge
Local neighborhoods
City of Chamblee
The multi-use path is proposed for the west side of the road(s) with a
typical 2-5 grassed buffer when applicable. The southern terminus is
the signal at Apple Valley Road at Dresden Drive and the project will
extend approximately 1.9 miles to the northeast to the intersection of
Caldwell Road and 8th Street at the Brookhaven city limit. Improved
crossings are proposed for:
Signalized intersection of Apple Valley Rd. and Dresden Dr.
Unsignalized side-street stop controlled T of Apple Valley Rd.
and E. Osborne Rd.
Unsignalized side-street stop controlled intersection of Caldwell
Rd. and Redding Rd.
10 Grassed
Multi- buffer
use
varies
path
2-5
Varies

$1,780,000
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 336
BRAGG ST.
CLAIRMONT RD.
139-LT and 140-LT
Clairmont Road Multi-Use Path
A A
139-LT/140-MT
Project Description
10 multi-use path along the west side of Clairmont Road connecting
such destinations as:
Buford Highway
Retail and residences on and off of Clairmont Road
Georgian Hills Park
Proposed green space in former runway protection zone
City of Chamblee
The multi-use path is proposed for the west side of Clairmont Road
with a typical 2-5 grassed buffer when applicable. The urban setting
and proximity of businesses and residences on Clairmont Road may
necessitate a narrower buffer section in certain areas. The southern
terminus is the signal at Buford Highway and Clairmont Road. The
project will extend approximately 0.5 miles to the north to the
Brookhaven city limit. Improved crossings are proposed for:
Signalized intersection of Buford Highway and Clairmont Road
Signalized intersection of Clairmont Road and Skyland Road
Signalized intersection of Clairmont Road and Dresden Drive
Signalized intersection of Clairmont Road and Bragg Street
Various unsignalized intersections along Clairmont Road
10
Multi-use
path
Varies
60 typical
5
sidewalk
Buffer
varies
2-5
typical

$1,320,000
E.2.a

Packet
Pg. 337
$1,050,000
A
A
160-MT and 114--MT
Dresden Drive Wide Sidewalks/Buffered Bike

Lanes and Multi-Use Path
A A
160-MT
Project Description
10 multi-use path along Dresden Drive connecting such destinations
as:
Brookhaven Station
Proposed Caldwell Road trail
Proposed Clairmont Road trail
Local neighborhoods
Skyland Park
The segment between Peachtree Road and N. Thompson Road (MT160) is a proposed combination of wide sidewalks (5-7) and buffered
bike lanes, with the potential to use on-street parking as the buffer.
East of N. Thompson Road, the section (MT-114) would transition into
a 10 multi-use path on the south side of Dresden Drive with a typical
2-5 grassed buffer when applicable. The project would extend
approximately 1.2 miles from Peachtree Road to Clairmont Road.
Improved crossings are proposed for:
Signalized intersection of Dresden Drive and Apple Valley Road
Signalized intersection of Dresden Drive and Caldwell Road
Signalized intersection of Dresden Drive and N. Thompson Road
Signalized intersection of Dresden Drive and Skyland Drive
Various unsignalized intersections along Dresden Drive
Shoulder
varies
between
sidewalk
and
grass
Varies
34 typical
8 typical 5 sidewalk
parking with varying
lane
buffer (2-5
typical)
5 Bike
lane w/ 18
buffer
160-MT Estimated Cost:

$1,280,000
CLAIRMONT RD.
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 338
B
B
160-MT and 114-MT
Dresden Drive Wide Sidewalks/Buffered Bike

Lanes and Multi-Use Path (cont.)
B B
114-MT
Project Description
10 multi-use path along Dresden Drive connecting such destinations
as:
Brookhaven Station
Proposed Caldwell Road trail
Local neighborhoods
Skyland Park
The segment between Peachtree Road and N. Thompson Road is a
proposed combination of wide sidewalks (5-7) and buffered bike
lanes, with the potential to use on-street parking as the buffer. East of
N. Thompson Road, the section would transition into a 10 multi-use
path on the south side of Dresden Drive and 5 sidewalk to the north
with a typical 2-5 grassed buffer when applicable. The project would
extend approximately 1.2 miles from Peachtree Road to Clairmont
Road. Improved crossings are proposed for:
Signalized intersection of Dresden Drive and Apple Valley Road
Signalized intersection of Dresden Drive and Caldwell Road
Signalized intersection of Dresden Drive and N. Thompson Road
Signalized intersection of Dresden Drive and Skyland Drive
varies
5
sidewalk
varies 36
typical
10
Multiuse
path
varies
Grassed
buffer varies
2-5
Estimated Cost:
$1,180,000
CLAIRMONT RD.
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 339
A
DREW VALLEY RD.
138-LT
Drew Valley Road Multi-Use Path
A A
138-LT
Project Description
10 multi-use path along Drew Valley Road connecting such
destinations as:
Trail connection to Oostanaula Drive in wetland retention area
Local neighborhoods
The segment is an example of a narrower local multi-use path
connecting the existing trail in the wetland retention area at the
western terminus of the proposed Drew Valley Road path to Clairmont
Road to the east. The project would extend on the north side of Drew
Valley Road for approximately 0.9 miles from the connection over to
Oostanaula Drive to Clairmont Road.
Improved crossings are
proposed for:
Various unsignalized intersections along Drew Valley Road
10 Grassed
Multi- buffer
use
varies
path
2-5
Varies 24
typical
Estimated Cost:
$4,000,200
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 340
A
A
182-LT
Harts Mill Road Multi-Use Path
A A
182-LT
Project Description
10
as:
multi-use path along Harts Mill Road connecting such destinations

Marist School
Nancy Creek Trail
Local neighborhoods
City of Chamblee
The proposed multi-use path on Harts Mill Road would extend

between the signal at Ashford Dunwoody Road and Chamblee
Dunwoody Road. The path is proposed on the south side of Harts Mill
Road to retain the existing sidewalk on the north side and to minimize
utility impacts. Gaps in the north-side sidewalk would be completed to
create a continuous section. The typical section consists of a 10 wide
path with a 2-5 grassed buffer. The project would extend
approximately 1.4 miles. Improved crossings are proposed for:
Signalized intersection of Harts Mill Road and Ashford Dunwoody
Road (into the Marist School)
Signalized intersection of Harts Mill Road and Chamblee
Dunwoody Road
5
sidewalk
Varies 36
typical
10
Multiuse
path
Grassed
buffer
varies
2-5

$2,060,000
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 341
A
A
151-MT, 104-MT and 105-MT
North Druid Hills Road Multi-Use Path and

Sidewalks
A A
151-MT
Project Description
10 multi-use path along east side of N. Druid Hills Road and 5
sidewalk on west side connecting such destinations as:
Proposed North Fork Creek trail
Buford Highway
Cross Keys High School and Woodward Elementary School
MARTA bus stops
Local neighborhoods
Boys and Girls Club
Congregation Or VeShalom Synagogue
Brookhaven United Methodist Church
Brookhaven Baptist Church
Brookhaven Branch Library
Proposed MARTA Transit Oriented Development (TOD) at
Brookhaven Station
5 sidewalk
with varying
buffer (2-5
typical, either
side)
The proposed multi-use path on the east side of N. Druid Hills Road
would begin at a trailhead for the proposed North Fork Creek trail
south of the signal at Buford Highway and N. Druid Hills Road. The
path would continue to the north for approximately 1.9 miles to the
proposed MARTA TOD site at the Brookhaven Station. On the east
side, the existing sidewalk gaps should be filled when applicable. The
typical section consists of a 10 wide path section on the east side, 5
sidewalks on the west side in certain segments, with a 2-5 grassed
buffer where applicable.
Varies
60 typical
10 multi-use
path with
varying buffer
(2-5 typical,
either side)

$1,450,000
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 342
B
B
151-MT, 104-MT and 105-MT
North Druid Hills Road Multi-Use Path and

Sidewalks (cont.)
B B
104-MT/105-MT
Project Description (cont.)

Signalized intersection of Buford Highway at N. Druid Hills Road
Signalized intersection of N. Druid Hills Road and E. Roxboro
Road
Signalized intersection of N. Druid Hills Road and Goodwin Road
Signalized intersection of N. Druid Hills Road and Curtis Drive
Signalized intersection of N. Druid Hills Road and Lenox Park
Blvd./N. Cliff Valley Way
Signalized intersection of N. Druid Hills Road and Briarwood Road
Signalized intersection of N. Druid Hills Road and Apple Valley
Road
Varies
5
sidewalk
10 multiuse path
Grassed
buffer
varies
2-5

$410,000
E.2.a

Packet
Pg. 343
$1,210,000
A
A
190-ST
North Cliff Valley Way Buffered Bike Lanes
A A
190-ST
Project Description
Existing pavement width to be converted to buffered bike lanes in
each direction of N. Cliff Valley Way connecting such destinations as:
Buford Highway
Local neighborhoods
Proposed North Druid Hills Road trail
MARTA bus stops on Buford Highway and North Druid Hills Road
The proposed buffered bike lanes would begin at the signalized
intersection of N. Druid Hills Road and Lenox Park Boulevard/N. Cliff
Valley Way and extend to the east to the signal at Buford Highway at
N. Cliff Valley Way. The typical section consists of 4 bike lanes in
each direction with a 1.5 buffer within the existing pavement. The
proposed improvements would extend for approximately 0.6 miles
Signalized intersection of N. Druid Hills Road and Lenox Park
Boulevard/N. Cliff Valley Way
Signalized intersection of N. Cliff Valley Way and Buford Highway
Varies
26 typical
5 sidewalk
with varying
buffer (2-5
typical)
5 Bike
lane w/ 18
buffer
190-ST Estimated Cost:

$50,000
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 344
A
A
117-LT and 193-ST
Osborne Road Multi-Use Path and Bike

Sharrows
A A
117-LT
Project Description
10 multi-use path along Osborne Road between Peachtree Road and
Windsor Parkway, with sharrow pavement markings extending north of
Windsor Parkway to Lynwood Park, connecting such destinations as:
Peachtree Road
Brookhaven Park
Local neighborhoods and retail
China Grove Missionary First Baptist Church
Proposed Windsor Parkway trail
Lynwood Park
Proposed West Nancy Creek trail
Between Peachtree Road and Windsor Parkway, the proposed typical
section consists of a 10 wide multi-use path on the east side of
Osborne Road, retaining the existing sidewalk on the west side. North
of Windsor Parkway, the proposed improvement consists of sharrow
pavement markings within travel lanes to avoid impacts to existing
homes on Osborne Road to Lynwood Park. The existing sidewalk on
this segment would be retained for pedestrian use. The southern
segment (with multi-use path) would extend approximately 1 mile and
the northern segment (with sharrows) would extend another The
project would extend approximately 0.5 miles. Improved crossings are
proposed for:
Unsignalized four-way stop controlled intersection of Osborne Rd.
and Windsor Pkwy.
Various unsignalized intersections along Osborne Rd.
5
sidewalk
Varies 24
typical
10 multiuse path
Grassed
buffer
varies
2-5

$41,310,000
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 345

B
B
117-LT and 193-ST
Osborne Road Multi-Use Path and Bike

Sharrows (cont.)
B B
193-ST
Project Description
10 multi-use path along Osborne Road between Peachtree Road and
Windsor Parkway, with sharrow pavement markings extending north of
Windsor Parkway to Lynwood Park, connecting such destinations as:
Peachtree Road
Brookhaven Park
China Grove Missionary First Baptist Church
Proposed Windsor Parkway trail
Lynwood Park
Proposed West Nancy Creek trail
Between Peachtree Road and Windsor Parkway, the proposed typical
section consists of a 10 wide multi-use path on the east side of
Osborne Road, retaining the existing sidewalk on the west side. North
of Windsor Parkway, the proposed improvement consists of sharrow
pavement markings within travel lanes to avoid impacts to existing
homes on Osborne Road to Lynwood Park. The existing sidewalk on
this segment would be retained for pedestrian use. The southern
segment (with multi-use path) would extend approximately 1 mile and
the northern segment (with sharrows) would extend another The
project would extend approximately 0.5 miles. Improved crossings are
proposed for:
Unsignalized four-way stop controlled intersection of Osborne Rd.
and Windsor Pkwy.
Various unsignalized intersections along Osborne Rd.
20 typical
5
sidewalk
193-ST Estimated Cost:

$50,000
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 346
A
A
119-LT
Windsor Parkway Multi-Use Path
A A
119-LT
Project Description
10 multi-use path along Windsor Parkway connecting such
destinations as:
St. Martins in the Fields Episcopal Church and School
Lynwood Park United Church
Buckhead/Fulton County
Proposed Osborne Road trail
The proposed multi-use path on Windsor Parkway would extend
between the eastern terminus of Windsor Parkway at Ashford
Dunwoody Road and the Brookhaven city limit to the west. The path
is proposed on the south side of Windsor Parkway and would consist
of the conversion of existing sidewalk into a 10 wide multi-use path
with a 2-5 grassed buffer when appropriate. The project would extend
approximately 1.3 miles. Improved crossings are proposed for:
Unsignalized four-way stop controlled intersection of Windsor
Pkwy. and Lanier Dr.
Pkwy. and Woodrow Way
Pkwy. and Osborne Rd.
Pkwy. and Mabry Rd./Antioch Dr.
24 typical
Grassed
buffer 10 multivaries use trail
2-5

$2,140,000
OSBORNE RD.
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 347
A
A
100-MT
Buford Highway Bus and Bike-Only Lanes and

Sidewalks
A A
100-MT
Project Description
Bike lanes in each direction, with complete sidewalks connecting such
destinations as:
City of Chamblee
Retail and residences on and off Buford Highway
MARTA bus stops
Proposed North Druid Hills trail
Proposed North Cliff Valley Way buffered bike lanes
The proposed project would consist of the creation of a shared
bike/bus only lane in each direction on Buford Highway through the
city of Brookhaven (and potentially further north and south). The
shared lanes would extend for approximately 3 miles through the city
in each direction. Additional study is recommended for this proposed
improvement. Sidewalk gaps should be completed as necessary.
Pedestrian-hybrid beacon(s) (PHB) would be installed periodically on
Buford Highway to improve pedestrian crossings. Additional study is
recommended to determine preferred locations.
5 sidewalk 12 shared
with varying bike and
buffer (2-5 bus lane
typical)
53 typical
12 shared 5 sidewalk
bike and with varying
bus lane buffer (2-5
typical)
Estimated Cost:
$480,000
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 348
100-MT
Buford Highway Bus and Bike-Only Lanes and

Sidewalks (cont.)
Project Description
Bike lanes in each direction, with complete sidewalks connecting such
destinations as:
City of Chamblee
Retail and residences on and off Buford Highway
MARTA bus stops
Proposed North Druid Hills trail
Proposed North Cliff Valley Way buffered bike lanes
The proposed project would consist of the creation of a shared
bike/bus only lane in each direction on Buford Highway through the
city of Brookhaven (and potentially further north and south). The
shared lanes would extend for approximately 3 miles through the city
in each direction. Additional study is recommended for this proposed
improvement. Sidewalk gaps should be completed as necessary.
Pedestrian-hybrid beacon(s) (PHB) would be installed periodically on
Buford Highway to improve pedestrian crossings. Additional study is
recommended to determine preferred locations.
E.2.a
Packet Pg. 349
CITY OF BROOKHAVEN, GEORGIA

TRAVEL EXPENSE ACCOUNTING FORM
TRAVEL ADVANCE/TRAVEL EXPENSES ACCOUNTING FORM
Claimant's Name
EmpID (not SS#)
Department
Telephone#
Vehicle License#
City Mileage Rate

$0.575
Travel Destination (city & state, or city & county) Purpose of Trip
Departure and Arrival City and State or City and
County where expenses
were incurred
Date
Time
Domestic Travel Meals Costs

B
0.00
0.00
0.00
Domestic Domestic Travel

Incidental
Meals Total
Expenses
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Airfare
Costs
0.00
Lodging
Costs
Personal Car Use

Odometer Odometer Mileage
Start
End
($$$)
$0.00
0.00
Misc.
Travel
Expense
Total
Expenses
$0.00
0.00
0.00 $
FUNDS ADVANCED TO EMPLOYEE

FUND
DEPT
CHECK#
ACCOUNT NUMBER
AMOUNT
Less Travel Advance
TRAVEL EXPENSES PAID ON YOUR BEHALF - Direct Billed

(You are not claiming these expenses for reimbursement.
They have been paid via p-Card and/or accounts payable (invoice-check)
Airfare Costs
Conference Fees
Lodging Expenses
Rental Car Expenses
Other Expenses
Subtotal
GRAND TOTAL OF TRIP $
Notes:
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
I hereby certify that the above is a true statement of the travel expenses incurred by me in accordance with applicable City of Brookhaven travel and training policies and procedures and that all
items shown were for the official business of the City of Brookhaven. If a privately owned vehicle waas used, and if mileage rates exceeed the minimum rate, I certify that the cost of operating
the vehicle was equal to or greater than the rate claimed, and that I have satisfied the requirements regarding vehicle insurance, safety and seat belt usage.
CLAIMANT'S SIGNATURE
PRINT NAME
DATE
APPROVING OFFICIAL SIGNATURE

PRINT NAME OF APPROVING OFFICIAL
$
$
DATE
TITLE
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-
Attachment: Travel Advance-Travel Expense Accounting Form v1 (2268 : City of Brookhaven Travel and
E.3.c
Packet Pg. 357
Attachment: Brookhaven Council Work Session - Bike Ped Trail Briefing (2280 : Post Meeting Handouts)
J.1.a
BR
KHAVEN
BR
KHAVEN
Briefing to City Council

March 22, 2016
March 22, 2016
Packet Pg. 363
WHAT IS THE PLAN?

March 22, 2016
J.1.a
BR
KHAVEN
Packet Pg. 364
GENERAL PROCESS
BR
KHAVEN
SUMMER 2015
SPRING 2015
FALL 2015
WE ARE HERE
EXISTING CONDITIONS
SYSTEM APPRAISAL
NETWORK DEVELOPMENT
Field Inventory

PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT
March 22, 2016
J.1.a
RECOMMENDATIONS
Prioritization
Cost Estimates
Funding
Documentation
Packet Pg. 365
BR
KHAVEN
GENERAL PROCESS
+
March 22, 2016
FEASIBILITY
INPUT
SUITABILITY
J.1.a
PRIORITIZATION
Packet Pg. 366
285
H
NS
EE
DU
R EE
R EE
DY R
T
CH
DY R
HT
AC
N PE
RD
N WO O
A
N PE
RD
N WO O
VD
BL
AL
RI
ST
DU
IN
E
RE
HT
AC
OR
PE
RI
ST
DU
IN
E
RE
HT
AC
HF
OR
PE
AS
HF
DU
BUF
OR
CHAMBLEE TUCKER RD
141
141
RD
WF
LO
SH
AL
SH
AL
LO
WF
O RD
WY
O R PK
O RD
WI N D S
RD
WY
O R PK
NE
EE
RD
DR
HW
RD
FO
BU
T RD
ON
CLA I RM
ON
T RD
HILLS RD N
85
CLA I RM
141
85
RO
RO
ND
RU
ID
RD
BR
I
CL
SR
SR
FF

March 22, 2016
AR
BRI A R C LI
155
FF
RD
NE
FF
NE
IL L
IL L
RD
RD
R D NE
R D NE
H
FF
RO
O
XB
RO
O
XB
BRI A R C LI
ND
RU
ID
13
PE
HW
RD
FO
BU
HILLS RD N
RUID
ND
141
S DE
PE
RE
RE
23
13
HT
R
EE
RD
HT
R
AC
S DE
DR
AC
NE
23
13
RUID
ND
WY
CHAMBLEE TUCKER RD
WI N D S
DH
Y RD
Y RD
DH
OD
OD
WY
BICYCLE
SUITABILITY
NW
NW
N SO N FE RRY RD
OR
DU
JO
H
PEDESTRIAN
SUITABILITY
BUF
D
N SO N FE RRY RD
TREE RD
N PEA CH
TREE RD
N PEA CH
AL
BL
VD
RD
RD
AS
JO
H
BR
KHAVEN
OR
BL
WF
DU
OR
EE
LO
HA
WF
BL
LO
AL
AL
HA
285
H
NS
BR
C
AR
LI
155
S TA R D
LAVI
13
J.1.a
S TA R D
LAVI
Attraction Analysis
Demand Analysis
Character Analysis
Packet Pg. 367
BR
KHAVEN
GENERAL PROCESS
+
March 22, 2016
FEASIBILITY
INPUT
SUITABILITY
J.1.a
PRIORITIZATION
Packet Pg. 368
INPUT Web Survey

394 responses
90% of respondents are
Brookhaven residents
91% of respondents
advocate for more
pedestrian facilities
85% of respondents
advocate for more bicycling
facilities

March 22, 2016
J.1.a
BR
KHAVEN
Packet Pg. 369
INPUT Public Meeting

March 22, 2016
J.1.a
BR
KHAVEN
Packet Pg. 370
BR
KHAVEN
GENERAL PROCESS
+
March 22, 2016
FEASIBILITY
INPUT
SUITABILITY
J.1.a
PRIORITIZATION
Packet Pg. 371
Murphey Candler
Park
Murphey Candler
Park
Blackburn Park
Blackburn Park
Town Brookhaven
Town Brookhaven
MARTA TOD
Briarwood Park
March 22, 2016
MARTA TOD
Briarwood Park
J.1.a
BR
KHAVEN
Packet Pg. 372
A S H FO
Dunwoody
285
RD
DU
OO
NW
BL
N WO O
RD
ek
Tra
il
Na
re
DY R
Montgomery
Elementary School
BR
KHAVEN
EE
DU
DY
Kittredge
Magnet School
Murphey Candler
Park
Medical Center
HA
M
C
y
nc
Perimeter Trail
Park
Marist School
Blackburn
Park
JOH
NS O N FE RR Y RD
Keswick Park
Osborne
Park
Lynwood
Park
Chamblee
Our Lady of
the Assumption
W IN DS
Peachtree Golf Club
141
WY
O R PK
St. Martin's
Episcopal School
Seigakuin Atlanta
International
AC
HT
R
EE
RD
NE
Ashford Park
Elementary School
PE
Brookhaven
Park
HW
Skyland
Park
RD
BU
FO
Brookhaven
CL A
IR
MO
NT
RD
141
Briarwood
Park
ND
RU
ID
RD
SR
FF
IL L

VISION
March 22, 2016
Shady Valley Park
BR
L
RC
IA
155
13
J.1.a
TRAILS
BIKE
PED
Packet Pg. 373
BR
KHAVEN
GENERAL PROCESS
+
March 22, 2016
FEASIBILITY
INPUT
SUITABILITY
J.1.a
PRIORITIZATION
Packet Pg. 374
PRIORITIZATION
BR
KHAVEN
Suitability Ratings (up to 20 points)
Areas of Demand, Attraction, or Appropriate Character

Spine = 20 points
Loop = 10 points
General Community Connectivity (up to 20 points)

Cost (up to 10 points)
R-O-W (up to 10 points)
Community Support (up to 20 points)

March 22, 2016
J.1.a
Packet Pg. 375
BR
KHAVEN
DRAFT VISION
20.4 miles of new sharrows

6.9 miles of new bicycle lanes/cycle tracks
31.3 miles of new sidewalks
38.7 miles of new multi-use trails
Short-Term (0-10 Years)

42 Projects
$9.2 Million
Mid-Term Projects (10-20 years)
36 Projects
$25.2 Million
Long-Term Projects (20+ years)
44 Projects
$32.0 Million+
March 22, 2016
J.1.a
Packet Pg. 376
J.1.a
BR
KHAVEN
WEBSITE
http://www.brookhavenga.gov/citydepartments/public-works/bicycle-pedestrian-trailplan
EMAIL CONTACT
March 22, 2016
Packet Pg. 377

Brookhaven Bike Ped Trail Plan

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Brookhaven Bike Ped Trail Plan

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

BR

Bicycle, Pedestrian, & Trail Plan

DRAFT | December 2015

DRAFT | December 2015

Special Thanks to the Stakeholder

Pond & Company

With Assistance from:

Center Forward, Inc.

And Brookhaven Elected Officials

DATA COLLECTION & EXISTING CONDITIONS

Purpose of the Plan

alignment which runs parallel to Peachtree

Brookhavens transportation system features

DRA FT | December 2015

Purpose of the Plan

in Chapter 2 Community Engagement)

The Planning Process

Corridor Feasibility Review

The plan effort included a significant amount of

The community survey was conducted on the Citys website

In regards to general support for bicycle,

91 percent of respondents believe

Additionally, as shown in Table 2.1 and the

Respondents were additionally asked their

Bicycling Comfort Level

Very confident on almost any street or trail

Only comfortable on a few streets and trails

Not comfortable at all

Finally, to help guide the process of what type

The community survey was valuable to

Exclusive Bicycle Lanes

DRA FT | December 2015

favored clusters indicated around the

Following a formal presentation in which the

A detailed summary of this meeting is provided

DRA FT | December 2015

A detailed summary of this meeting is provided

Other Outreach Events

The third and final community meeting was held

The study team attended several other events

Materials and comments received at this

DRA FT | December 2015

Town Hall Meeting

On May 28, 2015, the study team participated

The plan was also benefitted by the creation of

City Council Workshop

The committee met three times:

At the first stakeholder meeting, an initial series

July 28, 2015

At the second stakeholder meeting, the study

At the third and final stakeholder meeting, the

Working with the stakeholder committee

DRA FT | December 2015

DATA COLLECTION &

State of Good RepairRepair To provide for

Public HealthHealth To plan and develop an

The technical elements of the planning effort

Previous Plans & Studies

SafetySafety To plan, develop, and manage a

Mobility and AccessAccess To efficiently and

Four out of five of these goals directly

DRA FT | December 2015

The DeKalb CTP (2014) recommended a

Perimeter Community Improvement District