Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
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)
 
Old 09-03-2017, 08:33 PM
 
Location: Prescott, AZ
5,559 posts, read 4,693,421 times
Reputation: 2284

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by tikigod311 View Post
It would be pretty absurd to pay for the very expensive configuration approaching and connecting to Lindbergh for a single station at Cheshire Bridge (maybe Piedmont).
Well, really CoA is paying for that connection, and then 4 or 5 stations, and probably a small initial VMF for Phase 1 operations so we don't have to wait on the larger one planned further down the line.

CoA land, though, only encompasses that one station and the connection. Building more might be an issue that is negated, or at least lowered, by having more CoA land to directly cooperate with.

If DeKalb hasn't extended the MARTA tax by the time the agency goes in to acquire land, there could very well be harsher push-back from the county to stall the project. Especially given the responses that have come from county leadership over Emory's Annexation.

The more land that is in CoA's control, the easier it is to put the money that was going to have been set aside no matter what to use sooner and easier.

Quote:
It is very clear the Clifton Corridor wasn't meant to be funded by the city on its own. It left the option open to contribute some funds to a multi-jurisdictional project if that possibility occurs.
Right, CoA isn't funding the whole thing on its own, which wasn't ever the plan...

Remember, MARTA originally pitched the $8 Billion scheme, which immediately funded both the Clifton Corridor and the I-20 East BRT sections fully. CoA's contribution was built into that initial scheme since it wasn't to be some piece-meal tax-raise. It was to be all at once.

With the individual service areas increasing their tax rates at different times, though, it became necessary to split up the costs for these routes in a way that reflected both their portion of the contributing share and the remaining projects that would need funding.

Quote:
It says that directly in the slide, there is no other way to interpret how the Clifton Corridor is to be funded.
As the slide said, it's a multi-jurisdictional project. The completion of the entire project is contingent on DeKalb joining in. Regardless of when that is to happen, CoA was to pay for the first 4 miles of the Clifton Corridor per the publicly published plans. Now, the start of construction doesn't necessarily mean that we need to wait for DeKalb. We don't even need to wait on DeKalb to start operation of phase 1 if, for some god-awful reason, they're not ready to get phase 2 going by that point.

For the full project? Yeah, we need DeKalb.

For the first half? Naw.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-05-2017, 10:35 AM
 
Location: Atlanta
5,242 posts, read 6,238,029 times
Reputation: 2784
Quote:
Originally Posted by fourthwarden View Post
Well, really CoA is paying for that connection, and then 4 or 5 stations, and probably a small initial VMF for Phase 1 operations so we don't have to wait on the larger one planned further down the line.

CoA land, though, only encompasses that one station and the connection. Building more might be an issue that is negated, or at least lowered, by having more CoA land to directly cooperate with.

If DeKalb hasn't extended the MARTA tax by the time the agency goes in to acquire land, there could very well be harsher push-back from the county to stall the project. Especially given the responses that have come from county leadership over Emory's Annexation.

The more land that is in CoA's control, the easier it is to put the money that was going to have been set aside no matter what to use sooner and easier.



Right, CoA isn't funding the whole thing on its own, which wasn't ever the plan...

Remember, MARTA originally pitched the $8 Billion scheme, which immediately funded both the Clifton Corridor and the I-20 East BRT sections fully. CoA's contribution was built into that initial scheme since it wasn't to be some piece-meal tax-raise. It was to be all at once.

With the individual service areas increasing their tax rates at different times, though, it became necessary to split up the costs for these routes in a way that reflected both their portion of the contributing share and the remaining projects that would need funding.



As the slide said, it's a multi-jurisdictional project. The completion of the entire project is contingent on DeKalb joining in. Regardless of when that is to happen, CoA was to pay for the first 4 miles of the Clifton Corridor per the publicly published plans. Now, the start of construction doesn't necessarily mean that we need to wait for DeKalb. We don't even need to wait on DeKalb to start operation of phase 1 if, for some god-awful reason, they're not ready to get phase 2 going by that point.

For the full project? Yeah, we need DeKalb.

For the first half? Naw.
Oh boy, where to start. This whole premise is wrong, you have to ignore words on official documents presented to voters to even start this conversation. It's impressive how convenient it is for yall to ignore a bold faced fact.

Please show me where the voters were told they were approving a 4 mile version and I will largely stop this effort.

Beyond violating a promise to voters, it is absurd for the CoA to pay for, what is likely the most expensive portion of a project where the overwhelming majority of lies in another jurisdiction! How much of the CC is in the CoA, 10%? Maybe 15%? Absurd. Using the technicality of annexing a portion of another county at the last minute just adds to the absurdity
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2017, 12:32 PM
bu2
 
24,101 posts, read 14,879,963 times
Reputation: 12933
Your Morning Jolt: APS wants in on Emory annexation into Atlanta | Political Insider

APS doesn't like the CofA idea of leaving it out of the Emory annexation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2017, 12:41 PM
 
Location: Decatur, GA
7,358 posts, read 6,526,600 times
Reputation: 5176
What are they going to do? Change tests to make annexation of those kids look good?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2017, 01:16 PM
 
2,412 posts, read 2,785,620 times
Reputation: 2027
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattCW View Post
What are they going to do? Change tests to make annexation of those kids look good?
No need--According to Zillow, most of those affected are currently zoned for Brair Vista--which tests much lower than the schools the students would be transferred over to--either SPark, Lin, or Morningside. Jokes aside, many home owners in Morningside have asked to be annexed in order to be zoned for those very schools. Not sure if Emory is over-thinking this "problem", or under-thinking it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2017, 02:32 PM
 
2,412 posts, read 2,785,620 times
Reputation: 2027
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeoff View Post
No need--According to Zillow, most of those affected are currently zoned for Brair Vista--which tests much lower than the schools the students would be transferred over to--either SPark, Lin, or Morningside. Jokes aside, many home owners in Morningside have asked to be annexed in order to be zoned for those very schools. Not sure if Emory is over-thinking this "problem", or under-thinking it.
Re-reading the article, it seems that Emory is afraid of backlash from Dekalb County, and not from parents--but, I really don't see how the handful of students transferring over would be that much of an issue to Dekalb, or how Dekalb might use that transfer as a way to block annexation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2017, 03:12 PM
 
Location: NW Atlanta
6,503 posts, read 6,120,315 times
Reputation: 4463
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeoff View Post
Re-reading the article, it seems that Emory is afraid of backlash from Dekalb County, and not from parents--but, I really don't see how the handful of students transferring over would be that much of an issue to Dekalb, or how Dekalb might use that transfer as a way to block annexation.
DeKalb is less concerned about those kids and more concerned about the rest of the surrounding neighborhoods jumping ship in the future.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2017, 03:23 PM
Status: "Pickleball-Free American" (set 3 days ago)
 
Location: St Simons Island, GA
23,462 posts, read 44,083,751 times
Reputation: 16856
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gulch View Post
DeKalb is less concerned about those kids and more concerned about the rest of the surrounding neighborhoods jumping ship in the future.
There you have it. They're well aware that they are already on shaky ground with Druid Hills after twice rebuffing the neighborhood's efforts to charter DHHS. It's what fomented the earlier annexation movement.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-06-2017, 06:27 AM
 
Location: Prescott, AZ
5,559 posts, read 4,693,421 times
Reputation: 2284
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gulch View Post
DeKalb is less concerned about those kids and more concerned about the rest of the surrounding neighborhoods jumping ship in the future.
Truth, and they're naive if they think that stalling will do anything to really prevent something like that from happening. All it takes is one of the areas going somewhere other than unincorporated DeKalb, and it sets off the race. Emory could be spark, or Druid Hills, or any of the neighborhoods.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-06-2017, 06:46 AM
 
Location: Prescott, AZ
5,559 posts, read 4,693,421 times
Reputation: 2284
Quote:
Originally Posted by tikigod311 View Post
Oh boy, where to start. This whole premise is wrong, you have to ignore words on official documents presented to voters to even start this conversation. It's impressive how convenient it is for yall to ignore a bold faced fact.
I mean, it's not so much ignoring a 'bold faced fact' as it is rejecting your interpretation of the presentation.

Quote:
Please show me where the voters were told they were approving a 4 mile version and I will largely stop this effort.
Okay, here you go. As you can see on that page, the first four miles of the Clifton Corridor is shaded pink / purple, with the last four greyed out. Just like how the first chunks of the I-20 East BRT route is colored orange, with the other bits greyed out.

Oh, and here's the fact sheet, that explicitly lists the Clifton corridor in the list of High-Capacity improvements, again showing the full first four miles, with the remainder of the route greyed out.

As you can see, it's rather directly showing the parts of the corridor that the City of Atlanta tax is to fund, and which parts we're not really supposed to.

Quote:
Beyond violating a promise to voters, it is absurd for the CoA to pay for, what is likely the most expensive portion of a project where the overwhelming majority of lies in another jurisdiction! How much of the CC is in the CoA, 10%? Maybe 15%? Absurd. Using the technicality of annexing a portion of another county at the last minute just adds to the absurdity
The first 1.8 miles, or ~23%, of the Clifton Corridor is currently within the city limits. The next 2.2 miles are the 'not in CoA' section. That's not a crazy thing, either, since the ART routes do something similar, where CoA funded their entire route despite not being entirely within the city limits.

Why is it so crazy, then, to consider that the city would help fund a project that is important to it even if it extends beyond the city limits? It's not like we're paying for the whole thing, anyway. Just the first four miles. Of which, 46% is within the city limits to begin with.

Again, that funding would be set aside, since it was included in the project presentations and lists, regardless of Emory's annexation. The ONLY thing that Emory's annexation allows for the Clifton Corridor, is the opportunity for a stream-lined buildout of the first phase. The REST of the route is still contingent on DeKalb joining the expansion effort.
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:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 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

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:56 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top