U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Georgia > Atlanta
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-06-2018, 03:38 PM
 
291 posts, read 91,735 times
Reputation: 162

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gulch View Post
This is what happens when your state's constitution hamstrings GDOT from using motor fuel tax revenue on mass transit projects. Instead, we're getting half-ass "BRT" which will do very little, especially for the monstrous price tag.
While it's true that the motor fuel tax must be spent on roads, that's kind of an irrelevant point to this discussion. That tax isn't enough to fund the road projects that are necessary. So it's not actually that constitutional provision that people should be upset about at all. It's the fact that that state supplements the motor fuel tax with a large chunk of general revenue spending as well.

Or put more bluntly: Changing the constitution to allow GDOT to spend motor fuel taxes on something other than roads would change nothing at all with respect to the balance of road vs. transit spending.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-06-2018, 03:54 PM
 
Location: Vinings
5,945 posts, read 2,915,822 times
Reputation: 3183
Does the law say that the state gas tax can only be spent on roads? Or that it can only be spent on cars? Like, can GDOT build a bus-only busway system above the freeways, like that one city in China? Wonder if that's a loophole.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-06-2018, 05:45 PM
 
291 posts, read 91,735 times
Reputation: 162
primaltech,

Just for your reading and analytical pleasure, I present Section IX, Paragraph VI, Subparagraph (b) of the Georgia Constitution:

Quote:
(b) An amount equal to all money derived from motor fuel taxes received by the state in each of the immediately preceding fiscal years, less the amount of refunds, rebates, and collection costs authorized by law, is hereby appropriated for the fiscal year beginning July 1, of each year following, for all activities incident to providing and maintaining an adequate system of public roads and bridges in this state, as authorized by laws enacted by the General Assembly of Georgia, and for grants to counties by law authorizing road construction and maintenance, as provided by law authorizing such grants. Said sum is hereby appropriated for, and shall be available for, the aforesaid purposes regardless of whether the General Assembly enacts a general appropriations Act; and said sum need not be specifically stated in any general appropriations Act passed by the General Assembly in order to be available for such purposes. However, this shall not preclude the General Assembly from appropriating for such purposes an amount greater than the sum specified above for such purposes. The expenditure of such funds shall be subject to all the rules, regulations, and restrictions imposed on the expenditure of appropriations by provisions of the Constitution and laws of this state, unless such provisions are in conflict with the provisions of this paragraph. And provided, however, that the proceeds of the tax hereby appropriated shall not be subject to budgetary reduction. In the event of invasion of this state by land, sea, or air or in case of a major catastrophe so proclaimed by the Governor, said funds may be utilized for defense or relief purposes on the executive order of the Governor.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2018, 01:03 PM
bu2
 
8,980 posts, read 5,682,185 times
Reputation: 3540
Quote:
Originally Posted by autolycus25 View Post
I'm trying to source a good answer on this question, but there doesn't seem to be one one out there right now. MARTA has known about the managed lanes for at least a couple years but was still pushing for/hoping for a Red Line extension. And the Fulton TMP and North Fulton Comprehensive Transportation Plan both considered implementation of both the Red Line extension and the managed lanes. I'm still hoping they are both possible, but HRT expansion is very unlikely right now, regardless of the managed lanes project.
Seems like a lot of money and duplication for one corridor to do both. Doubt it happens.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2018, 01:10 PM
 
1,137 posts, read 475,899 times
Reputation: 870
Quote:
Originally Posted by bu2 View Post
Seems like a lot of money and duplication for one corridor to do both. Doubt it happens.
I don't doubt it one bit ... North Fulton is pretty much the star of the state and given most of the high end jobs are up that way I can easily see them expanding both transit and HOT or BRT lanes in that direction while the rest of the metro sits in traffic.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2018, 01:22 PM
 
Location: Kirkwood
22,178 posts, read 16,186,764 times
Reputation: 4908
Quote:
Originally Posted by Need4Camaro View Post
I don't doubt it one bit ... North Fulton is pretty much the star of the state and given most of the high end jobs are up that way I can easily see them expanding both transit and HOT or BRT lanes in that direction while the rest of the metro sits in traffic.
Meanwhile I-20 east is still 6 lanes...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2018, 03:27 PM
 
291 posts, read 91,735 times
Reputation: 162
Quote:
Originally Posted by bu2 View Post
Seems like a lot of money and duplication for one corridor to do both. Doubt it happens.
By both, do you mean both managed lanes and Red Line extension or by both do you mean BRT and HRT? I've always thought "BRT" in the managed lanes is an acceptable short-term solution as long as HRT/Red Line extension is the long-term one. I think both the managed lanes and HRT to at least Holcomb Bridge, if not Windward are completely justifiable, given the population and number of jobs in North Fulton.

Both managed lanes and some sort of rail transit are a very likely scenario for the 285 top end. I won't be shocked if it ends up being "BRT" in the managed lanes for a long while, but I certainly wouldn't rule out the possibility that light rail will eventually connect Cumberland to Doraville in the long run.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2018, 03:33 PM
 
Location: Kirkwood
22,178 posts, read 16,186,764 times
Reputation: 4908
Quote:
Originally Posted by autolycus25 View Post
By both, do you mean both managed lanes and Red Line extension or by both do you mean BRT and HRT? I've always thought "BRT" in the managed lanes is an acceptable short-term solution as long as HRT/Red Line extension is the long-term one. I think both the managed lanes and HRT to at least Holcomb Bridge, if not Windward are completely justifiable, given the population and number of jobs in North Fulton.

Both managed lanes and some sort of rail transit are a very likely scenario for the 285 top end. I won't be shocked if it ends up being "BRT" in the managed lanes for a long while, but I certainly wouldn't rule out the possibility that light rail will eventually connect Cumberland to Doraville in the long run.
I am willing to bet that both projects will be buses in managed lanes and that is it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2018, 04:03 PM
 
1,137 posts, read 475,899 times
Reputation: 870
Quote:
Originally Posted by cqholt View Post
Meanwhile I-20 east is still 6 lanes...
Something seriously needs to be done in that direction. It aggrevates the heck out of me that they neglect that corridor with such extremity when it clearly needs attention. I remember when there was talk of adding HOV lanes and the reconstruction of the Lithonia Industrial Blvd & Evens Mill Rd imterchanges and they even widened the new overpasses like they were really going to widen the highway and after that...they upgraded the I-285 / I-20 interchange (which was much needed) and just forgot about I-20... Honestly I-20 seems like the most forsaken interstate in the metro both in terms of lanes and transit options.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2018, 04:23 PM
bu2
 
8,980 posts, read 5,682,185 times
Reputation: 3540
Quote:
Originally Posted by autolycus25 View Post
By both, do you mean both managed lanes and Red Line extension or by both do you mean BRT and HRT? I've always thought "BRT" in the managed lanes is an acceptable short-term solution as long as HRT/Red Line extension is the long-term one. I think both the managed lanes and HRT to at least Holcomb Bridge, if not Windward are completely justifiable, given the population and number of jobs in North Fulton.

Both managed lanes and some sort of rail transit are a very likely scenario for the 285 top end. I won't be shocked if it ends up being "BRT" in the managed lanes for a long while, but I certainly wouldn't rule out the possibility that light rail will eventually connect Cumberland to Doraville in the long run.
Both-managed lanes and Red line extension. Don't believe both happen.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Georgia > Atlanta
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top