MARTA to make an $8 billion pitch to change the face of Atlanta (Clayton: free, religious)

[fieldm]

Is this takeover does happen do you think transit lines OTP will be developed faster than waiting for them to join MARTA because 20 years waiting is a long time

[primaltech]

Originally Posted by cqholt

Not is it comes at the expense of service cuts to areas that have been supporting transit for 40 years.

I would very much doubt that high ridership bus routes will be cut, since those are the least expensive to operate because the fare offsets the cost.

The cuts, if any, would be anything that's not high ridership and it's also not supporting TOD or investment. That would be the business approach to it.

Yeah, some people are going to get screwed over somewhere. Welcome to Earth. But, speaking as a liberal progressive, I think it would be pretty ridiculous for us to dismiss the idea of a vastly expanded, much more robust MARTA system, just because Republican and private sector leaders would control it. That much is pretty much inevitable, given the Red state we live in.

Regardless, they'd have to expand both in rich and non-rich areas alike, or else they'll be legally blocked, at the state level or federal.

I'm just going to wait and see what this study committee recommends, before loving or hating the idea.

[fourthwarden]

Originally Posted by jsvh

Well, that I would be interested in seeing.



As any business, transit will go where their customers are. So you won't get many expensive pet-project expansions to neighborhoods that won't produce many riders. But if an area (rich or poor) are producing a lot of paying riders, they will continue to get service. Many of the world's best transit systems are run as private companies or P3s.

That's not really an acceptable outcome. It'll just serve to further widen the gap of economic mobility. Those who can least afford it, need it most. I get that you're all business minded here, but there's a balance to be set between the necessary social service that public transit brings, and using it as a development and money making tool.

Right now I think MARTA has a good balance, between their moving forward with TODs on their own, and the affordable housing initiatives here in the city.

Originally Posted by Born 2 Roll

Money.

This is all about the money.

Specifically, the massive amount of money that can be made from TOD on the land at and around MARTA stops and even along major bus lines in the city.

Also, real estate developers and business interests in Cobb, North Fulton and Gwinnett counties (and beyond) want to be connected directly (by way of high-capacity transit lines) to the world-leading Atlanta Airport and the extremely lucrative convention and tourism business in Downtown Atlanta (Georgia World Congress Center, Mercedes-Benz Stadium, Georgia Aquarium, etc).

There has been talk of folding MARTA into GRTA for years as a way of making transit more acceptable to conservative OTP voters. This talk was especially prevalent during the administration of former governor Roy Barnes but died out after Sonny Perdue beat Barnes in an upset in 2002 and took office in 2003.

I get all that, but it seems like such a silly, convoluted way to do it instead of just expanding GRTA. It wouldn't require pissing off the city, and it wouldn't require convincing the exurbs. There can be plenty of money made with TODs around commuter rail stations, and light rail, and BRT, etc. if GRTA was given the capacity and resources to establish them.

Instead they go after MARTA? It just seems like someone's cost/benefit analysis is off here.

[fieldm]

Originally Posted by fourthwarden

That's not really an acceptable outcome. It'll just serve to further widen the gap of economic mobility. Those who can least afford it, need it most. I get that you're all business minded here, but there's a balance to be set between the necessary social service that public transit brings, and using it as a development and money making tool.

Right now I think MARTA has a good balance, between their moving forward with TODs on their own, and the affordable housing initiatives here in the city.

I get all that, but it seems like such a silly, convoluted way to do it instead of just expanding GRTA. It wouldn't require pissing off the city, and it wouldn't require convincing the exurbs. There can be plenty of money made with TODs around commuter rail stations, and light rail, and BRT, etc. if GRTA was given the capacity and resources to establish them.

Instead they go after MARTA? It just seems like someone's cost/benefit analysis is off here.

I agree. It has to be an easier why to accomplish this.

[cqholt]

Originally Posted by fourthwarden

That's not really an acceptable outcome. It'll just serve to further widen the gap of economic mobility. Those who can least afford it, need it most. I get that you're all business minded here, but there's a balance to be set between the necessary social service that public transit brings, and using it as a development and money making tool.

Right now I think MARTA has a good balance, between their moving forward with TODs on their own, and the affordable housing initiatives here in the city.






I get all that, but it seems like such a silly, convoluted way to do it instead of just expanding GRTA. It wouldn't require pissing off the city, and it wouldn't require convincing the exurbs. There can be plenty of money made with TODs around commuter rail stations, and light rail, and BRT, etc. if GRTA was given the capacity and resources to establish them.

Instead they go after MARTA? It just seems like someone's cost/benefit analysis is off here.

You can count out any of these TODs having affordable housing if Cagle's takeover comes true.

[cqholt]

Originally Posted by fourthwarden

That's not really an acceptable outcome. It'll just serve to further widen the gap of economic mobility. Those who can least afford it, need it most. I get that you're all business minded here, but there's a balance to be set between the necessary social service that public transit brings, and using it as a development and money making tool.

Right now I think MARTA has a good balance, between their moving forward with TODs on their own, and the affordable housing initiatives here in the city.






I get all that, but it seems like such a silly, convoluted way to do it instead of just expanding GRTA. It wouldn't require pissing off the city, and it wouldn't require convincing the exurbs. There can be plenty of money made with TODs around commuter rail stations, and light rail, and BRT, etc. if GRTA was given the capacity and resources to establish them.

Instead they go after MARTA? It just seems like someone's cost/benefit analysis is off here.

I am saying this as a white man, but when have rich, white men not tried to takeover something for their own profit?

[fieldm]

Originally Posted by cqholt

I am saying this as a white man, but when have rich, white men not tried to takeover something for their own profit?

Lol.

This is going to be a nasty battle

[fourthwarden]

Originally Posted by cqholt

You can count out any of these TODs having affordable housing if Cagle's takeover comes true.

That's what I'm worried about. I wonder if there would be laws in place that would exempt TODs from their local governments' affordable housing laws.

I'm just not sold on the 'running it the business way' as an acceptable way to do things. Of course, without details it's hard to say how it will be structured, but I am quite weary of letting private interests take over social services without significant oversight.

[fourthwarden]

Originally Posted by cqholt

I am saying this as a white man, but when have rich, white men not tried to takeover something for their own profit?

It's not even about race anymore. Sure the poor ignorant MFs out there still think that way, but it's all about the money. Don't be surprised if you see rich any color get up in favor of this. At least that way they can say, "see, we're not discriminating, we have X supporting us!"

[fieldm]

Originally Posted by fourthwarden

That's what I'm worried about. I wonder if there would be laws in place that would exempt TODs from their local governments' affordable housing laws.

I'm just not sold on the 'running it the business way' as an acceptable way to do things. Of course, without details it's hard to say how it will be structured, but I am quite weary of letting private interests take over social services without significant oversight.

He really means "running it into the ground way"