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.
Most of the suburbs are such low density that having rail going to them is just not economically feasible. You can't expect MARTA to spend billions and billions to send rail to every suburb...You just can't.
Cities like NYC are known for their extensive heavy rail within their 350 or so square miles. We need more transit in and right near the city. We also need more transit in dense suburban corridors....Along I-20 in Dekalb, into Marietta and Gwinnett if we can ever get them to allow MARTA tax. If not, then I mean, the only place to send rail to in the suburbs are N Fulton and Dekalb.
This is an excellent point.
Though with new funding methods that have emerged over the past decade or so, it has become apparent that it is not completely necessary for tax increases to be enacted for transit service to be improved, upgraded and expanded to areas where it is most needed.
If the option of increasing taxes is not available (which the option of raising taxes to fund transportation needs most-certainly is not available in this increasingly anti-tax and anti-government political climate), methods like:
...For-profit term-leases of publicly-owned transportation infrastructure (transit lines and major roads);
...For-profit out-leases of publicly-owned real estate assets along transit lines (for-profit out-leases of publicly-owned land at and around transit stations for the construction of high revenue-yielding high-density mixed-use transit-oriented development);
...Distance-based user fees (distance-based fare structures on transit lines; distance-based tolls on major roads);
...Tax Increment Financing/Value Capture (property tax revenues from new development that pops up along transit lines).
A robust combination of for-profit out-leases of entire multimodal transportation corridors (starting with transit lines), for-profit out-leases of publicly-owned real estate, and distance-based user fees is the way that transit can be improved, upgraded and expanded to areas where it is most needed in the absence of (or inability to) increased tax revenues.
And even if tax revenues were to be increased, for-profit out-leases of transit lines and adjoining publicly-owned real estate, and the implementation of distance-based user fees should still be options because limited tax revenue increases along can only go so far in funding critically-needed transit improvements, upgrades and expansions.
Most of the suburbs are such low density that having rail going to them is just not economically feasible. You can't expect MARTA to spend billions and billions to send rail to every suburb...You just can't.
Totally agree.
Quote:
We also need more transit in dense suburban corridors....Along I-20 in Dekalb, into Marietta and Gwinnett if we can ever get them to allow MARTA tax. If not, then I mean, the only place to send rail to in the suburbs are N Fulton and Dekalb.
The corridor along I-20 east has been losing a lot of population. It doesn't pick up until you get a good way outside the Perimeter, around Wesley Chapel and Lithonia.
Likewise with I-20 west corridor. The intown westside neighborhoods have been emptying out, and you don't see population growth until you get outside the Perimeter.
So should we spend billions extending the lines to just hop over these large underutilized areas? Many of the big growth areas are in Cobb and Douglas counties, which don't belong to the MARTA tax base. It's hard to ask MARTA taxpayers to build lines in counties where MARTA is not wanted and from whom it receives no funding.
The corridor along I-20 east has been losing a lot of population. It doesn't pick up until you get a good way outside the Perimeter, around Wesley Chapel and Lithonia.
Likewise with I-20 west corridor. The intown westside neighborhoods have been emptying out, and you don't see population growth until you get outside the Perimeter.
So should we spend billions extending the lines to just hop over these large underutilized areas? Many of the big growth areas are in Cobb and Douglas counties, which don't belong to the MARTA tax base. It's hard to ask MARTA taxpayers to build lines in counties where MARTA is not wanted and from whom it receives no funding.
i think that we should spend money on connecting to areas that have the potential to be a future urban center. we shouldn't waste money on connecting to a suburban area that might be full of deserted homes in 30 years. a lot of people don't want to face this reality, but what do you think is going to happen to the thousands, possibly millions, of cheaply-built, rapidly dating suburban homes built outside the perimeter in the next 40 years? i don't mean to be pessimistic, but we need to start building a war chest for the future, because i think a lot of these areas starting with further in suburbs in clayton, south dekalb, south cobb and in gwinnett, are going to have large stocks of empty and abandoned homes in the next 20~30 years, and everyone's going to be completely caught off guard and wonder what the hell happened, since we've never experienced anything of that scale in the atlanta area. but that's an issue for the future. i do believe, however, that transit will be the life preserver for many suburbs in the upcoming years— if you've got cities like lithonia and alpharetta connected to transit, that is going to keep those communities' property values high while suburbs that aren't connected via transit won't have such a positive fate.
The suburbs need to stop fighting transit and realize that Atlanta as a region needs better transit. The only county i think would fund Marta is Clayton but the leaders there don't even care enough to have a vote. Metro Atlanta needs to accept the fact that without Marta we wouldn't even be on the map.
The suburbs need to stop fighting transit and realize that Atlanta as a region needs better transit. The only county i think would fund Marta is Clayton but the leaders there don't even care enough to have a vote. Metro Atlanta needs to accept the fact that without Marta we wouldn't even be on the map.
i would love to see clayton get a vote on MARTA, but i would imagine MARTA officials are actually not eager to see clayton added to their service area since the tax revenue gained would be less than the cost of expanding into clayton. they probably want to see a richer county like cobb vote in so they can pay for clayton.
i would love to see clayton get a vote on MARTA, but i would imagine MARTA officials are actually not eager to see clayton added to their service area since the tax revenue gained would be less than the cost of expanding into clayton. they probably want to see a richer county like cobb vote in so they can pay for clayton.
Didn't they have a vote on a nonbinding resolution to raise sales taxes by one cent a few years back? Although I'm not sure how much that would actually contribute in regards to revenue.
i would love to see clayton get a vote on MARTA, but i would imagine MARTA officials are actually not eager to see clayton added to their service area since the tax revenue gained would be less than the cost of expanding into clayton. they probably want to see a richer county like cobb vote in so they can pay for clayton.
Bus service might work but rail might be too expensive.
i think that we should spend money on connecting to areas that have the potential to be a future urban center. we shouldn't waste money on connecting to a suburban area that might be full of deserted homes in 30 years. a lot of people don't want to face this reality, but what do you think is going to happen to the thousands, possibly millions, of cheaply-built, rapidly dating suburban homes built outside the perimeter in the next 40 years? i don't mean to be pessimistic, but we need to start building a war chest for the future, because i think a lot of these areas starting with further in suburbs in clayton, south dekalb, south cobb and in gwinnett, are going to have large stocks of empty and abandoned homes in the next 20~30 years, and everyone's going to be completely caught off guard and wonder what the hell happened, since we've never experienced anything of that scale in the atlanta area. but that's an issue for the future. i do believe, however, that transit will be the life preserver for many suburbs in the upcoming years— if you've got cities like lithonia and alpharetta connected to transit, that is going to keep those communities' property values high while suburbs that aren't connected via transit won't have such a positive fate.
I completely agree with your assessment that developed areas that are closest to passenger rail transit lines will benefit the most economically in the future.
The dystopian future that you are predicting for developed areas that do not have immediate access to passenger rail transit lines is one possible scenario, particularly if the economy struggles substantially over the long-term, in which case the closeness (or seeming lack thereof) of a developed area to passenger rail transit may be the least of our worries.
But with the evidence in other large metro areas with more established and more-extensive transit systems being that passenger rail transit lines benefit and raise the property values of developed areas both immediately near and relatively farther away (from regional commuter rail lines and even regional heavy rail lines in suburban areas away from the core...with property values closest to passenger rail transit lines obviously being increased the most), a more likely scenario is not the emptying and abandonment of outlying suburban areas away from passenger rail lines.
...A more likely scenario is an overall benefit and an all-around increase in value of properties in areas both immediately near and relatively farther away from suburban passenger rail transit lines, with the values of properties in areas closest to passenger rail transit lines benefitting and increasing the most.
...With immigration rates expected to increase from Asia (and with immigration rates expected to remain somewhat relatively high from Latin America), there is also evidence that instead of being totally abandoned, the aging stocks of lower-density suburban single-family housing will become inhabited by lower-income families (mostly immigrants and racial minorities and even some working-class whites).
...This has been the case in outlying suburban counties like Cobb and Gwinnett where racial minorities and immigrants from Latin America have moved into both single-family and multi-family housing that was abandoned by middle class and upper-middle class whites who moved to areas with newer single-family housing in farther-out areas like Paulding, Cherokee, Forsyth, Hall, Jackson, Barrow and Walton Counties.
In any case, with immigration rates expected to remain high in coming years (...something which will directly affect the economic and population growth rates of an international city/metro region like Atlanta, a city/metro region which is the site of the world's busiest passenger airport), the much-needed extension of passenger rail transit service out to the suburbs will not only benefit developed areas located immediately along the lines, but will also benefit developed areas that are not located immediately near passenger rail transit lines (...with the help of bus transit lines that can be extended to developed areas away from passenger rail transit lines in many cases...and with the help of park-and-ride rail and bus transit stations where passengers can drive to board buses and trains in outlying areas...and with the help of local carpools and vanpools to and from transit stations in outlying areas where applicable).
Last edited by Born 2 Roll; 11-02-2013 at 11:15 PM..
I realize I am totally responsible for my choice to move to a suburb. My bad and I'm in the process of resolving that round of poor decision making.
I am glad to see that the attitude towards public transit, biking trails, etc. is changing. If you're not originally from the south (and not just Atlanta), it can be difficult to try to explain why there's a bit of almost built-in disdain for public transit. Using it is sort of like saying you're too broke to afford a car. I think that is why proper development of it fell by the wayside.
As for highway projects, there always seems to be something going on that will not address projected needs by the time it reaches completion. I think maybe the developers need some rules: do not build another house out here until you find a way to add another street lane. I don't know if it feasible but the traffic is indeed out of hand.
The corridor along I-20 east has been losing a lot of population. It doesn't pick up until you get a good way outside the Perimeter, around Wesley Chapel and Lithonia.
Likewise with I-20 west corridor. The intown westside neighborhoods have been emptying out, and you don't see population growth until you get outside the Perimeter.
So should we spend billions extending the lines to just hop over these large underutilized areas? Many of the big growth areas are in Cobb and Douglas counties, which don't belong to the MARTA tax base. It's hard to ask MARTA taxpayers to build lines in counties where MARTA is not wanted and from whom it receives no funding.
This is a good point.
Though, with urban living (and gentrification) trends expected to become more popular in the future, the extension of passenger rail service through these relatively large under-utilized areas to higher-growth areas farther-out can help under-utilized areas redevelop as transit infrastructure (particularly rail transit infrastructure...when operated and utilized properly) can attract higher-density mixed-use transit-oriented development around transit stations and along transit lines.
I agree that taxpayers in Fulton and DeKalb counties alone should not bear the brunt of the costs for extending passenger rail transit lines to outlying areas that do not and will not pay the 1% sales tax that funds current MARTA operations (and any possible future MARTA expansion).
Which is a good reason why the 1% sales tax on transactions in Fulton and DeKalb counties should be phased-out (and most likely even discontinued eventually) and replaced with more-equitable (and more-lucrative) funding methods such as:
...Distance-based fares (fare rates charged by-the-mile instead of by-the-trip) that automatically rise with inflation so that a certain set percentage of operating costs are always covered by farebox revenues;
...The for-profit leasing and sales of publicly-owned real estate assets along transit lines;
...Tax Increment Financing and Value Capture (portions of property tax revenue from new development that pops up along transit lines);
Future high-capacity passenger rail transit lines (like a high-capacity passenger rail transit line extending out from the Airport and Downtown areas (Five Points area) up through the Marietta St/Howell Mill Rd corridor out to Cobb County, or a future high-capacity passenger rail line between Atlanta and Athens by way of the Emory University area) don't even have to be operated by MARTA, but can be leased-out to private investor/operators who will be responsible for all construction, operational and maintenance costs, with the lucrative profits from adjoining real estate assets (land leases of publicly-owned land along transit lines and future toll revenues from future term-leases of nearby major roads) being the main incentive for prospective investors.
Heck, since it appears that it would help some current heavy rail lines to be improved, upgraded and expanded much more quickly, existing MARTA heavy rail lines (like the current MARTA Red and Gold heavy rail lines) and adjoining bus lines and real estate assets could be for-profit term-leased out to private investors/operators who would be responsible for all initial construction costs and all continuing operational and maintenance costs.
Just because the 1% sales tax that funds MARTA is not politically-viable outside of Fulton and DeKalb counties does not mean that the need for at-least a basic and effective level of transit service outside of Fulton and DeKalb counties goes away in a fast-growing metro region.
If voters in surrounding areas will not approve (or will not get the chance to approve) a 1% sales tax, then other revenue streams must be utilized to improve, upgrade and expand transit service to where it is most-needed.
Revenue streams like inflation-indexed distance-based fares, for-profit term-leases of publicly-owned transit infrastructure real estate assets, and Tax Increment Financing and Value Capture are the fairest, most-equitable and most-lucrative ways to fund those critically-needed (and long-overdue) improvements, upgrades and expansion of transit service throughout the fast-growing greater Atlanta metro region.
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.
