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.
The 216 Express Bus from Stonecrest to 5 pts Station was canceled along with many other routes by the Last MARTA CEO when she decided to get rid of many MARTA routes to stick it to the people in hopes the state would feel sorry for them and finally fund MARTA. The end result is a bunch of routes that are really 1.5-2 routes combined into one
GRTA is barely getting by and if they got more buses and ran through out the day maybe that could help more transit wise, but after 10 AM you can drive to most places around the metro in 20-30 minutes making a $3-4 bus fare pointless.
Look at going up 400N, they have been talking about this for years and all MARTA would have to do is build it in the woods right next to the expressway and even that cant get off the ground.
The beltline is 22 miles of track that just needs to be refurbished and Atlanta cant even get that one for something where they already have the right away acess for. Im sure the issue with the beltline is that the west sides of Atlanta will have acess to the east sides of Atlanta, so that is a no no.
We can show support for transit all day long, but the sad reality is this is Metro Atlanta and we will be having this same conversation in 2025 saying how great it will be to have transit go to X,Y,Z with not one brick laid for any new construction. Unless America has a big middle east conflict that shoots gas up to $5-7 a gallon and it starts there for 3-5+ years, we will stall on expanding MARTA just like we have in the 90's, 2000's and probably by 2020 as well.
We can show support for transit all day long, but the sad reality is this is Metro Atlanta and we will be having this same conversation in 2025 saying how great it will be to have transit go to X,Y,Z with not one brick laid for any new construction. Unless America has a big middle east conflict that shoots gas up to $5-7 a gallon and it starts there for 3-5+ years, we will stall on expanding MARTA just like we have in the 90's, 2000's and probably by 2020 as well.
The problem is we need to stop letting government having so much control over how we get to work with tax dollar spending. We need to get to a user fee funded system. The good news is things seem to be going that way. The Highway Trust fund is going insolvent. Highway projects are being scaled back and additional user fee revenues will have to be raised. Even the Atlanta metro has realized that you cannot build more highway lanes as a solution to traffic. New highway projects are few and far between with most focused on things like HOT lanes that collect user fees. This will all contribute to the continued densification of Atlanta as people continue to live closer to work. This in turn will increase demand for transit.
The shift is under way. The next few decades will see some major transformations in transportation that are different from the past few decades.
I would think that to toll the roads, develop and install the IT and telecom infrastructure, hire the staff to run it... Would cost more money than our annual state budget. We are talking a gagillion miles of roadway throughout the state. Heck, a gazillion just in metro Atlanta. Just seems wholly unfeasible to me.
I would think that to toll the roads, develop and install the IT and telecom infrastructure, hire the staff to run it... Would cost more money than our annual state budget. We are talking a gagillion miles of roadway throughout the state. Heck, a gazillion just in metro Atlanta. Just seems wholly unfeasible to me.
Moving that way does not mean it all gets done over night. Gas taxes could be the way to patch this for today. But if we go the route of tolling every road, it would be pretty simple, we would not put "sensors" or toll booths on any road. We already have all the roads mapped, we just need a GPS sensor added to the "Peach Pass" or whatever its replacement is called. Should be relatively low budget especially if we do it as a P3 where it is not a government run program.
Why should "user fees" be the end-all be-all of highway and transit funding? Doesn't the coffee shop that earns massive profits due to the busy road in front of it deserve to pay into the maintenance or expansion of that road? Shouldn't the news stand that sets up next to the train station entrance pay into the infrastructure which directs tons of people to it? As I have posted before, the profits of the old-time transit systems was in the adjacent infrastructure that subsidized the transit route. That can't happen today as easily. Sure there are places where say MARTA could lease or sell air rights, or just build an apartment building itself, but we're talking a handful of spots in comparison to the overall system. The economic activity generated by a transit system would easily add up to a profit.
Doesn't the coffee shop that earns massive profits due to the busy road in front of it deserve to pay into the maintenance or expansion of that road?
Why then shouldn't tax dollars go to that coffee shop that is paying salaries to citizens and attracting customers to the area?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattCW
Shouldn't the news stand that sets up next to the train station entrance pay into the infrastructure which directs tons of people to it?
Shouldn't that train system pay the businesses that are attracting the employees and customers that ride that train and pay for a train ticket? Why does it flow one way? (The answer is neither should be forced to pay taxes to the other, basically every industry provides positive benefits to society and contributes to the growth in other areas and the economy as a whole.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattCW
As I have posted before, the profits of the old-time transit systems was in the adjacent infrastructure that subsidized the transit route. That can't happen today as easily. Sure there are places where say MARTA could lease or sell air rights, or just build an apartment building itself, but we're talking a handful of spots in comparison to the overall system.
I disagree. Land ownership and development is a part of lots of successful industries and still a part of some profitable private / 3P transit systems today. But even without that, there are many profitable transit companies all over the world.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattCW
Why should "user fees" be the end-all be-all of highway and transit funding?
Because the free market works better than command economies. When a government bureaucracy makes a choice for how you live and what money gets spent on, you lose some of your freedom and the economy works less efficiently and everyone suffers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattCW
The economic activity generated by a transit system would easily add up to a profit.
I agree. And transit systems and even roads are profitable in places all over the world where they do not have to compete with government subsidies.
Why then shouldn't tax dollars go to that coffee shop that is paying salaries to citizens and attracting customers to the area?
They are in the form of infrastructure. Without that rail system or road, the business could not exist, but that road or rail system could easily exist without that business.
Quote:
Shouldn't that train system pay the businesses that are attracting the employees and customers that ride that train and pay for a train ticket? Why does it flow one way? (The answer is neither should be forced to pay taxes to the other, basically every industry provides positive benefits to society and contributes to the growth in other areas and the economy as a whole.)
Simply existing is "paying" so shouldn't the business pay its way? Afterall, the rail benefits the business more than the business benefits the rail, so if you really want that business to pay its way, shouldn't it be paying into the rail system?
Quote:
I disagree. Land ownership and development is a part of lots of successful industries and still a part of some profitable private / 3P transit systems today. But even without that, there are many profitable transit companies all over the world.
A few, yes, and in higher density places than exist anywhere in the country. People get all fired up when trying to compare Atlanta to Europe, so why the comparison here?
Quote:
Because the free market works better than command economies. When a government bureaucracy makes a choice for how you live and what money gets spent on, you lose some of your freedom and the economy works less efficiently and everyone suffers.
And an unregulated economy is anarchy. That's what people always fail to realize is that we aren't a democracy, we are a republic, where we elect representatives to carry out our will rather than voting on every little detail. We also aren't toally free, again, that's anarchy. I encourage you to look up the tragedy of the commons.
Quote:
I agree. And transit systems and even roads are profitable in places all over the world where they do not have to compete with government subsidies.
Except we're talking about a government-provided system rather than a government-subsidized system. It's a public good that the private industry has deemed impossible to provide (otherwise, why aren't they providing it?) so the government has to take over in order to maintain the economy. Most roads started out as tolled turnpikes, why aren't they now?
Face palm, Georgia! Why do we let these small town elected officials give their opinion?
Im from Fayette and I essentially agree. The county fights transit at every turn. Just because Fayette doesn't want transit doesn't mean its bad for the rest of the Metro. I don't know why he always chimes in on transit issues for Atlanta.
I think they should either remove Fayette and other small counties from the ARC or start a new transportation agency / commission for the more urban counties. Nothing great is ever happen when you have such drastically different needs and preferences working on a solution.
They are in the form of infrastructure. Without that rail system or road, the business could not exist, but that road or rail system could easily exist without that business.
Sure business can and do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattCW
Simply existing is "paying" so shouldn't the business pay its way? Afterall, the rail benefits the business more than the business benefits the rail, so if you really want that business to pay its way, shouldn't it be paying into the rail system?
They should not be forced to pay via taxes. No more than the grocery store should give all food away free and be compensated with tax money. Business should pay into the transportation system via usage just like everyone else. The customers, workers, and truck that brings supplies should be tolled
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattCW
A few, yes, and in higher density places than exist anywhere in the country. People get all fired up when trying to compare Atlanta to Europe, so why the comparison here?
Why should we be paying people to move far away from work? That is the effect of these subsidies and one of the key drivers of Atlanta's and America's sprawl. Thats why.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattCW
And an unregulated economy is anarchy. That's what people always fail to realize is that we aren't a democracy, we are a republic, where we elect representatives to carry out our will rather than voting on every little detail. We also aren't toally free, again, that's anarchy.
Regulation is different from subsidization or a state run market / economy. I am fine with reasonable safety and security regulations.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattCW
I encourage you to look up the tragedy of the commons.
The tragedy of the commons is a great example of why you don't give grazing land (or transportation) away for free. You allow user fees or private market mechanisms to have users pay for their land (or transportation) usage.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattCW
Except we're talking about a government-provided system rather than a government-subsidized system. It's a public good that the private industry has deemed impossible to provide (otherwise, why aren't they providing it?) so the government has to take over in order to maintain the economy. Most roads started out as tolled turnpikes, why aren't they now?
The same reason there were no private super markets in Soviet Russia. Market mechanisms have provided and can provide transportation. But they cannot compete with free government hand outs. The private transportation industry in the US deteriorated as government subsidies and monopolization flooded in. But you can still find examples of successful business competing in the heavily subsidized public transit even right here in Atlanta.
Why should "user fees" be the end-all be-all of highway and transit funding?
User fees should not necessarily be the "end-all, be-all" of highway and transit funding.
But user fees most definitely and absolutely should make up a much-heavier funding component of roads and transit (particularly on major roads and on bus and rail transit lines in major metro areas) so that those crucial pieces of transportation infrastructure will be capable of funding their own critical needs (...critical needs like maintenance and expansion when needed).
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattCW
Doesn't the coffee shop that earns massive profits due to the busy road in front of it deserve to pay into the maintenance or expansion of that road?
The coffee shop that earns massive profits from located on a busy road already at least somewhat and/or partially pays into the maintenance and expansion of that road when they pay to transport supplies to their shop (when taxes are paid on fuel that is bought to transport supplies).
That coffee shop may also pay into the maintenance and expansion of the busy road in front of it when it pays property taxes which fund both the small portion of the highway maintenance budget that is funded by the state's general fund and the part of the maintenance of locally-maintained streets and roads.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattCW
Shouldn't the news stand that sets up next to the train station entrance pay into the infrastructure which directs tons of people to it?
Yes that newsstand should pay into the infrastructure which directs tons of people to it, and in many cases that newsstand and other businesses like it do pay into the infrastructure which it benefits from when it (the newsstand) pays to have supplies and product transported to its location (by way of transporting costs which pay fuel taxes which fund the transportation network, including transit in many states) and when it pays its lease and/or its property taxes which are used to fund transit in many places (...here locally in Georgia, the bare-bones transit systems in Cobb and Gwinnett counties are funded with revenues from those counties' general budgets which are funded with property taxes).
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattCW
As I have posted before, the profits of the old-time transit systems was in the adjacent infrastructure that subsidized the transit route. That can't happen today as easily. Sure there are places where say MARTA could lease or sell air rights, or just build an apartment building itself, but we're talking a handful of spots in comparison to the overall system. The economic activity generated by a transit system would easily add up to a profit.
Excellent points.
Though the for-profit out-leasing of publicly-owned real estate at and around transit stations can happen much more easily than it seems.
That's because MARTA owns some relatively large expanses of surface parking-covered real estate (some of which are very-large) that can be profitably leased-out for high-density mixed-use transit-oriented development at 17 of its 38 stations, including at the Hamilton E. Holmes, West Lake, Ashby, King Memorial, Inman Park-Reynoldstown, Edgewood-Candler Park, East Lake, Avondale, Indian Creek, College Park, East Point, Lakewood-Ft. McPherson, Oakland City, West End, Brookhaven, Chamblee, and Doraville stations.
And even at most of the stations where the relatively large expanses of surface parking-covered real estate don't exist, the stations themselves could become high-density mixed-use structures with the transit station being incorporated into the bottom level of a vertical development.
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.
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.
