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 05-15-2018, 12:59 PM
 
8 posts, read 2,637 times
Reputation: 20

Advertisements

I think the fix to the issue of not sufficiently funding Beltline transit is easy here. There is one project on this finalized list that makes no sense and that's LRT down Campbelton Rd. BRT would suffice here, but the population density is too sparse for rail. So only build out BRT on Campbelton and scrap the rail, and instead extend the westside Beltline transit north to the Bankhead/Westside Resevoir Park area and have it reach only as far south as West End or an Adair Park infill station. Likewise, Extend the eastside Beltline transit south to Glenwood Park. I believe the total additional mileage here would roughly equal that of the Campbelton Rd. corridor. In a logical world this is what would be built out, but Bottom of course has to deliver for her special interests on that side of town.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-15-2018, 02:40 PM
 
Location: Atlanta and St Simons Island, GA
20,962 posts, read 32,955,214 times
Reputation: 12629
Quote:
Originally Posted by sadATLsportsfan View Post
I think the fix to the issue of not sufficiently funding Beltline transit is easy here. There is one project on this finalized list that makes no sense and that's LRT down Campbelton Rd. BRT would suffice here, but the population density is too sparse for rail. So only build out BRT on Campbelton and scrap the rail, and instead extend the westside Beltline transit north to the Bankhead/Westside Resevoir Park area and have it reach only as far south as West End or an Adair Park infill station. Likewise, Extend the eastside Beltline transit south to Glenwood Park. I believe the total additional mileage here would roughly equal that of the Campbelton Rd. corridor. In a logical world this is what would be built out, but Bottom of course has to deliver for her special interests on that side of town.
I think it makes sense, but the political winds are probably not blowing in that direction...as you so correctly surmise.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-15-2018, 03:23 PM
 
Location: Prescott, AZ
5,405 posts, read 2,735,463 times
Reputation: 2164
Quote:
Originally Posted by tikigod311 View Post
Yes, I prefer the City of Atlanta spend it's own extremely finite money on projects that provide the maximum value to the City of Atlanta. 20 Years from now, expediting the Clifton Corridor at the expense of building out the Beltline will prove to be a short sighted decision.

The Clifton Corridor will be funded, they are just leveraging the city's transit funding to build it quicker.

Again, this is not a choice between building out the Beltline or building the Clifton Corridor. This is a choice between expediting the Clifton Corridor at the expense of building out the Beltline.
I'm curious as to what regional funding you're thinking will go to funding the entirety of the Clifton Corridor that the BeltLine is not qualified for?

As it is, the Clifton Corridor, as a final project, is already relying on two service areas' investment. The first from CoA's More MARTA tax, and the other from some as of yet undecided tax increase in DeKalb. Basically, the Clifton Corridor will need to be half-funded by DeKalb already.

Under the new ATL rules, no other entities could fund the project, since it's not in their jurisdiction, and there is no other funding mechanism beyond the same sales-tax increase that's funding the Clifton Corridor right now.

So what funding do you think the CC qualifies for but that the BeltLine does not? The only real option is to make DeKalb fund the whole thing, at which point you start jeopardizing other projects like the I-20 East extension which CoA's no longer helping fund.

Like others have said, likely the best way to improve light rail on the BeltLine is to not push a Campbellton Rd line for now. That would add 5 miles to the 7 already planned to be funded, for a total of 12 of the 22 miles. That would take care of the Westside, Southside, Eastside, and Northeast Side portions of the BeltLine, which are all owned by the BeltLine already, leaving the Northwest side to be filled in later as negotiations continue.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-15-2018, 03:36 PM
 
Location: Kirkwood
22,177 posts, read 16,180,310 times
Reputation: 4903
Quote:
Originally Posted by fourthwarden View Post
I'm curious as to what regional funding you're thinking will go to funding the entirety of the Clifton Corridor that the BeltLine is not qualified for?

As it is, the Clifton Corridor, as a final project, is already relying on two service areas' investment. The first from CoA's More MARTA tax, and the other from some as of yet undecided tax increase in DeKalb. Basically, the Clifton Corridor will need to be half-funded by DeKalb already.

Under the new ATL rules, no other entities could fund the project, since it's not in their jurisdiction, and there is no other funding mechanism beyond the same sales-tax increase that's funding the Clifton Corridor right now.

So what funding do you think the CC qualifies for but that the BeltLine does not? The only real option is to make DeKalb fund the whole thing, at which point you start jeopardizing other projects like the I-20 East extension which CoA's no longer helping fund.

Like others have said, likely the best way to improve light rail on the BeltLine is to not push a Campbellton Rd line for now. That would add 5 miles to the 7 already planned to be funded, for a total of 12 of the 22 miles. That would take care of the Westside, Southside, Eastside, and Northeast Side portions of the BeltLine, which are all owned by the BeltLine already, leaving the Northwest side to be filled in later as negotiations continue.
He makes a good point.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-15-2018, 03:57 PM
 
Location: City of Atlanta
1,405 posts, read 1,157,751 times
Reputation: 1359
Quote:
Originally Posted by fourthwarden View Post
I'm curious as to what regional funding you're thinking will go to funding the entirety of the Clifton Corridor that the BeltLine is not qualified for?

As it is, the Clifton Corridor, as a final project, is already relying on two service areas' investment. The first from CoA's More MARTA tax, and the other from some as of yet undecided tax increase in DeKalb. Basically, the Clifton Corridor will need to be half-funded by DeKalb already.

Under the new ATL rules, no other entities could fund the project, since it's not in their jurisdiction, and there is no other funding mechanism beyond the same sales-tax increase that's funding the Clifton Corridor right now.

So what funding do you think the CC qualifies for but that the BeltLine does not? The only real option is to make DeKalb fund the whole thing, at which point you start jeopardizing other projects like the I-20 East extension which CoA's no longer helping fund.

Like others have said, likely the best way to improve light rail on the BeltLine is to not push a Campbellton Rd line for now. That would add 5 miles to the 7 already planned to be funded, for a total of 12 of the 22 miles. That would take care of the Westside, Southside, Eastside, and Northeast Side portions of the BeltLine, which are all owned by the BeltLine already, leaving the Northwest side to be filled in later as negotiations continue.
This is exactly what should be done. Campbellton Rd can't support a streetcar, the density isn't there. BRT would be great for that corridor. But as has been said, politics is playing the cards more so than the use of data. Such is life, nowadays.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-15-2018, 04:04 PM
 
8 posts, read 2,637 times
Reputation: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by CCATL View Post
This is exactly what should be done. Campbellton Rd can't support a streetcar, the density isn't there. BRT would be great for that corridor. But as has been said, politics is playing the cards more so than the use of data. Such is life, nowadays.
There is supposedly supposed to be public input and debate on the project list, so hopefully people can make their voices heard. The term "boondoggle" is typically used by anti-transit types in the suburbs to describe any transport investment that isn't a 10-lane highway, but light rail down Campbelton would be a legitimate boondoggle. Connecting more neighborhoods along the Beltline to a regional transit network would be the right use of these funds.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-15-2018, 04:20 PM
bu2
 
8,979 posts, read 5,679,048 times
Reputation: 3540
Quote:
Originally Posted by cqholt View Post
He makes a good point.
I think the best parts are being built. You get a half swastika shaped line that goes through downtown using the existing streetcar and connects to Lindberg in the north.

Campbellton is just one of those political lines.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-15-2018, 05:43 PM
 
Location: City of Atlanta
2,576 posts, read 1,501,809 times
Reputation: 3383
I have a feeling the Campbellton project is going to get hammered in the public forums. To waste that amount of money to first do BRT, then upgrade to LRT is extremely stupid.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-15-2018, 07:42 PM
 
Location: Atlanta
5,243 posts, read 4,382,430 times
Reputation: 2723
Quote:
Originally Posted by fourthwarden View Post
I'm curious as to what regional funding you're thinking will go to funding the entirety of the Clifton Corridor that the BeltLine is not qualified for?

As it is, the Clifton Corridor, as a final project, is already relying on two service areas' investment. The first from CoA's More MARTA tax, and the other from some as of yet undecided tax increase in DeKalb. Basically, the Clifton Corridor will need to be half-funded by DeKalb already.

Under the new ATL rules, no other entities could fund the project, since it's not in their jurisdiction, and there is no other funding mechanism beyond the same sales-tax increase that's funding the Clifton Corridor right now.

So what funding do you think the CC qualifies for but that the BeltLine does not? The only real option is to make DeKalb fund the whole thing, at which point you start jeopardizing other projects like the I-20 East extension which CoA's no longer helping fund.

Like others have said, likely the best way to improve light rail on the BeltLine is to not push a Campbellton Rd line for now. That would add 5 miles to the 7 already planned to be funded, for a total of 12 of the 22 miles. That would take care of the Westside, Southside, Eastside, and Northeast Side portions of the BeltLine, which are all owned by the BeltLine already, leaving the Northwest side to be filled in later as negotiations continue.
How was the funding supposed to work out before the More MARTA tax was conceived? IIRC, MARTA was going to fund it from the capital projects fund and leverage the feds. I do not recall discussions of this being a project with no prospect for funding.

I also think the State could be a source of funding. I don't believe The ATL framework would prevent funding direct from the state. The State already directly funded MARTA project(s) last year. Out of all the potential transit project in Metro Atlanta, I believe the CC would be one of the most likely candidate for state funding. The project makes a lot of sense from a regional perspective.

All the above is really beside the point considering that less than 20% of the CC resided in Atlanta when this tax was passed and voters were explicitly told that the CC was contingent on funding from other municipalities. Now, thanks to an annexation that resulted in boundaries that look like political gerrymandering, it's now the city's burden to cover what is most likely going to be over 50% of the total local funding for the CC? Phase 1 will certainly be more expensive than Phase 2.

Again, I don't mind if some funding for the CC come from the More MARTA tax. But Atlanta should not be covering the majority of local funding. It's really absurd considering how very little of this project resided in the city of Atlanta just a few months ago.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-15-2018, 08:11 PM
 
28,148 posts, read 24,679,387 times
Reputation: 9544
Quote:
Originally Posted by tikigod311 View Post
Again, I don't mind if some funding for the CC come from the More MARTA tax. But Atlanta should not be covering the majority of local funding. It's really absurd considering how very little of this project resided in the city of Atlanta just a few months ago.
It would sure be nice to see our extremely well-heeled (and tax exempt) new congregants drop a few coins into the collection plate. Especially since they've decided to sit in the front pew.
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

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