More MARTA money spent on bus operations (Atlanta, Dallas: employment, construction)

[arjay57]

Sounds like the Beltline rail advocates are not too happy with how MARTA has used the More MARTA funds.

If you’ve been following along, you’re aware MARTA staff wants at least two of the More MARTA light rail projects approved by the MARTA Board in 2018, converted into bus rapid transit. Mind you, that’s not the “locally preferred alternative” (LPA). MARTA’s decision to push for BRT for both Campbellton Road and Emory Clifton Corridor has experienced varying degrees of pushback.

Emory seems to have thrown in the towel, worn down by two decades of trying to get reliable transit for a major employment center. Campbellton folks are still fighting to get the rail they were promised because of the economic development benefits of light rail, which historically surpasses what BRT brings. Interestingly, MARTA responded with a plan that would spend all of the money that light rail would have cost on a host of other transit and infrastructure improvements. So, is BRT about saving money or something else?

Full story: SURPRISE: MARTA already spent nearly half the More MARTA tax proceeds on enhanced bus operations

[Datdudebrah]

Did the other thread on this get deleted? BRN is misrepresenting the situation. Marta can't spend money on projects that aren't operations because none of those have started construction. Bus enhancements were always a part of the plan and were first on the list for the program, so Marta is spending money on that. The only other possible scenario would be Marta spending more money on design & planning than on 6 years of bus improvements, which would make no sense.

Of course Marta should have some of the expansions projects started by now IMO but the problem isn't them stealing money. These people putting out false info helps nobody.

[arjay57]

Folks should realize that rail projects here in the ATL are multigenerational.

Yes, it was implied that More MARTA would include a bunch of rail projects, but it didn't really say when they might be implemented. My guess is that those projects haven't necessarily been written off; they may just be another few generations down the road.

More MARTA letter to Mayor Bottoms
https://itsmarta.com/uploadedFiles/M...27,%202018.pdf

[Datdudebrah]

Originally Posted by arjay57

Folks should realize that rail projects here in the ATL are multigenerational.

Yes, it was implied that More MARTA would include a bunch of rail projects, but it didn't really say when they might be implemented. My guess is that those projects haven't necessarily been written off; they may just be another few generations down the road.

More MARTA letter to Mayor Bottoms
https://itsmarta.com/uploadedFiles/M...27,%202018.pdf

They did put out a sequencing plan for the program:



Its definitely time for them to put out a new timeline publicly though.

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by Datdudebrah

They did put out a sequencing plan for the program:



Its definitely time for them to put out a new timeline publicly though.

Thanks, Datdudebrah.

Add maybe 20 years or so and I could see some of that happening.

[bu2]

Some interesting data on CBDs and transit usage. http://demographia.com/db-cbd2000.pdf

Atlanta is 24th of the top 56 metro in % of jobs in the CBD.
Atlanta is 19th in the share of total transit trips going to CBD.
Atlanta is 8th in CBD employment (NY, Chicago, DC, SF, Boston, Philly, Seattle, Atlanta, LA, Houston---clearly some of these cities have more non-office jobs as LA and Houston have more office space in downtown than some of these others).
Atlanta is 14th in CBD transit trips. It is behind LA, Houston, Minneapolis, Denver, Pittsburg and Portland which have less CBD employment and don't have HRT or the level of HRT Atlanta has. MARTA clearly is not doing as good a job as it could do downtown.

[bu2]

https://www.capitalfrontiers.com/sin...gest-Downtowns
Tied into the other link, this shows employment and the number of tall buildings (>12 stories in their definition)
#of tall buildings-in order, NY, Chicago, Los Angeles, Houston, DC, Philly, Honolulu, San Francisco, Miami, Boston, Dallas, Atlanta (12th).

[bryantm3]

MARTA needs to be restructured from the ground up. Maybe disbanded and replaced by a regional transit agency. But regardless of what agency we're talking about, we need a transparent one, where public input guides the agency's decisions instead of unelected bureaucrats who can "decide what's best" and continue to make terrible decisions that go against the will of the people who are paying their salaries.

I have been bothered for years by MARTA's "fake" public engagement. Time after time they already have already determined what they are going to do beforehand, and hold these meetings to "guide" the public towards their pre-determined decision. But the last few years have gotten worse. The public input for the new railcars was a complete sham— only the paint colors were up for debate. No discussion of whether the public even wanted open-gangway railcars. I am still not sure that was a good idea in terms of safety, but that discussion was not allowed to happen.

[bu2]

I agree about the “public” input. Now people behind the scenes do change their direction. And they are not transparent. It’s much easier to find data and analysis online with other transit agencies. You can look at BART, DART, Austin, Houston metro, Denver, …and find information online.

[atler8]

Originally Posted by Datdudebrah

Did the other thread on this get deleted? BRN is misrepresenting the situation. Marta can't spend money on projects that aren't operations because none of those have started construction. Bus enhancements were always a part of the plan and were first on the list for the program, so Marta is spending money on that. The only other possible scenario would be Marta spending more money on design & planning than on 6 years of bus improvements, which would make no sense.

Of course Marta should have some of the expansions projects started by now IMO but the problem isn't them stealing money. These people putting out false info helps nobody.

You moved toward a focus on a major problem that MARTA faces in your sentence of, "Marta can't spend money on projects that aren't operations because none of those projects have started construction."

The thrust that line points to is the fact that Marta is hamstrung by the manner in which it was constituted at it's beginning by strictures put in place by the Georgia Legislature in the 1970's which included restrictions on how it's monies were to be spent. In other words, it does not have a free hand (or free enough hand) to decide how to spend the funding it receives.

That right there is a huge factor which reveals the necessity that Marta be restructured now because of ineffective clauses that do not work to it's betterment. That particular spending restriction was never a good one and it makes even less practical sense that it's still in place now after all of these decades later, especially given that we've had years to see how it actually hinders Marta.

It's past time to GET THE GEORGIA LEGISLATURE'S CONTROLLING (and interfering) HANDS OUT OF MARTA'S FINANCES AND IT'S OPERATIONS!

https://www.ajc.com/news/local/marta...zL42LiKQuxwTN/

https://saportareport.com/state-legi...maria_saporta/