As reported in the AJC, MARTA’s board will make a final determination today on the route and type of rail for the long-discussed Clifton Corridor line that would run from Lindbergh Station on MARTA’s North Line to Avondale Station on the East Line. The suggestion before the board is light-rail through Emory’s campus, as shown in the map above.
Maybe even more interesting to those looking for specific impacts to their area are the new station maps that MARTA has posted on its website.
That’s the Suburban Plaza station above, which apparently is planned to have a direct underground connection to the proposed Walmart on the site. Also of particular interest is the Clairmont @ N. Decatur Road Subway Station, which suggests redevelopment of the McDonalds/Chevron station and adjoining Sushi/Edward Jones/Hunan Dragon/Kaplan strip mall.
Check out the full set of PDF maps HERE and click any of the maps above to enlarge. There’s a lot more interesting findings in the other maps, including how the Avondale stop looks to be along Sams Crossing and connects to the East/West Avondale Station via a walkway.
h/t: MANA
Thanks, MARTA. You have destroyed any remaining value in my house.
I don’t know if this is a dumb question, but why not just keep going with the tunnel under Scott Blvd? Why bring the LRT up to street level, just to have it go back under again at Suburban Plaza?
Scott is scheduled for “re-development.” Meaning someone has decided that residential houses don’t belong here and that commercial should stretch from Suburban down the Boulevard to Clairmont.
Well that doesn’t sound very good to me. We just bought. Is this an eminent (sp?) domain thing?
Maybe I’m missing something, but where does it indicate large-scale, commercial redevelopment along Scott Blvd?
I don’t get it either. What do you mean, “someone” has decided? Is there even a single person in a position to make that call? The whole area you’re talking about, minus the small stretch close to Suburban, falls within the city of Decatur and none of it has a commercial zoning designation.
I wish I knew the answer to your questions. All of the plans and timetables are so iffy and dependent on so many variables. Any hard answers are put off and put off.
At one of the Walmart meetings last year Selig said MARTA hadn’t approached them with any plans for a station in Suburban Plaza – not to mention the plan above shows a parking deck, and Selig said the plan was to do underground parking. I suppose the “deck” on the plan could be underground. *shrug*
So Scott Blvd. is going to become Scott Highway? That will have speed and traffic repercussions even further down Scott which is still totally residential plus one soon-to-be-reopened school and a community pool.
AMB, AHID et al
Where in the materials do you come to the conclusion that Scott Blvd will become a ‘Highway’?
I’m just reacting to the comment that Scott Blvd.is up for redevelopment with commercialization of the stretch down to Clairemont. I think that’s a separate issue from the Clifton Corridor proposal but AMB seems to suggest that it would be additive. It has been difficult to keep lower Scott Blvd. a residential street given that it descends out of Lawrenceville Hwy. and has lots of long fun-to-descend-quickly hills. New sidewalks and good traffic enforcement have helped. Would hate to see progress reversed by increased commercialization of the transition zone. My concern is for speed and safety on Scott Blvd., not the Clifton Corridor per se.
Frankly, I already drive too fast down Scott Blvd. I can’t go much faster.
I’d be careful….there’s some clever speed patrolling going on lately and I’m not telling you where. 🙂
Does that blog name get you attention from the authorities? I tell my kids that there are some things that folks just don’t have a sense of humor about.
Hmmm, I just figured he was the guy who *hung* out at Ponce and Briarcliff.
Scott Blvd. already is a highway, isn’t it? Georgia State Route 78. I would think bringing light rail down the middle and changing some of the configurations on both sides would have more of a calming influence than increased speeds. What are the speed and traffic repercussions you’re referring to?
Calming effect of light rail sounds good. Redevelopment plans, unrelated to light rail, that make Scott Blvd. less residential and more commercial don’t sound as good. I want to see more, not less, residents walking on the sidewalks of Scott and treating it like part of the neighborhood. State highways don’t all have to be Buford Highways.
Unless they plan to widen Scott Blvd, it will be reduced to 2 lanes, and have only a handful of locations where you can turn left. The traffic implications will be severe, especially during rush hour.
I assume they are coming above ground for that stretch as a cost saving measure, because I can’t see any other reason for it. The latest drawing doesn’t include a street level station at Superior which was included in the prior proposals.
I live darned close to the Scott/Superior intersection so am intimately familiar w traffic on Scott… My reaction is that LRT would likely slow traffic, not turn that section into the back stretch of Atlanta Motor Speedway.
Assuming this all actually gets built while I am still alive and kicking, the next step will be to ensure that Willow/Superior dont turn into a bigger cut-thru than they already are. That is a bigger concern to me than more backups on Scott
So far as the removal of the Superior platform, I liked that I might be able to walk 1 min to an LRT platform, but didn’t like the uncertainty of what it might do to my property value.
AMB – where can I read about this proposed Scott redevelopment? Thanks as I am keenly interested.
I do not have time to study all this material. Where does it say Scott Bld will be widened or reduced to 2 lanes?
The prior drawings contained a “typical” cross section of the proposed LRT which showed only 2 lanes. Plus, Scott isn’t wide enough to accomodate LRT without reducing the number of lanes unless it is widened.
“it will be reduced to 2 lanes”
Light Rail can and does run in automobile traffic lanes, so you don’t have to lose two lanes automatically.
True, but the cross-sections on the prior proposals showed dedicated tracks, lanes and overhead power lines for the LRT. There are no illustrations in the adopted proposal (or I haven’t seen any), so I think it is a lot to ask voters to approve a tax based on a concept plan. Some particulars would be helpful in the evaluation process.
It would be very nice to have at least one station along Scott Blvd. between the N. Decatur/Clairmont & Suburban Plaza stations. That’s a very long stretch without a stop. Superior would be a good location, since there’s already a light there.
LRT DOWN CLAIREMONT!
+1
This is the map that refers to Scott as a redevelopment corridor.
http://www.itsmarta.com/uploadedFiles/About_MARTA/Planning/Clifon_Corr/Application%20of%20StationTypology.pdf
Okay, so it only includes properties outside Decatur that are already zoned and developed as commercial property. Assuming their development value increases with the light rail, it’s no great shocker that dying strips and abandoned car lots would be redeveloped. That’d happen with our without a designation on the map.
I thought you were talking about residential property along Scott, within the city limits.
I thought that too. I didn’t want to see areas zoned as high or low density residential becoming commercial. My lay impression is that folks speed more through strip mall style commercial areas.
No, it includes areas on Scott down to Willow Lane which are currently residential.
Any chance you’re taking the map a bit too literally? I doubt they actually plan to redevelop in circular fashion. Looks like they’ve just used identically sized circles centered on each proposed station.
That corridor stops roughly at the city line.
Oops. I was replying to AMB.
Was at the board meeting today, and the resolution to pursue this and an extension of the heavy rail line parallel to I-20 to The Mall @ Stonecrest was passed. So MARTA will seek funding to move forward with these projects.
If only we could dismiss the folks that are responsible for s*** like this.
Um, what do you mean by that Bobby?
Was that not clear enough? Did you elect your board rep.? Or **** *** ******** ******? I will try to answer a more specific question.
Bobby! My goodness! It really isn’t clear what set you off– the new maps or a particular comment? What are you referring to with “sh** like this”?
Ok… that was not a reply to another comment. The diagrams validate a lot of concerns.
Anyway, my comment was of lament and not in anger. I was calling it as I saw it. Beyond that I am optimistic that many people that might have gone along with the T-SPLOST only because of the Clifton Corridor project will now see this unfortunate reality instead of their fantasy (and will join with me when I Vote NO on July 31).
I really don’t think voting no is going to help anything. What is the Plan B? This is the closest we have ever come as a region to push for transit for all.
It’s not perfect by a longshot, but not only is it better than nothing, but it will at least get some concerns resolved, and put others on the road to being resolved.
So Bobby, if there is no Plan B, then there really isn’t another choice. Otherwise Atlanta WILL be left behind by other nearby areas (*ahem* Charlotte) that is moving forward with transit.
There is a Plan B. I have addressed that fear tactic before.
Charlotte? I have spent time in Charlotte. I have used their Lynx blue line. The rivalry is quite overplayed; it’s a convenient “other” to scare up the public funding of private gain.
I’ll be honest, Bobby, but after reading your comments I still have no clue what your gripes are. As someone who lives right neat Scott and Clairemont, I am super psyched by these plans. Then again, I will also shop at Walmart. So maybe I’m just too simple to grasp it all…
I honestly doubt people are that interested. Most will apply existing opinions of MARTA. And in short, this proposal offers little to sway that debate… bus bays, parking, bad compromises. Some of the shortcomings could be fixed – though probably not in this forum. And… I will not judge you for shopping at Walmart.
I would personally be interested in hearing the particulars. I am one of the people with an existing poor opinion of Marta. That opinion is based not on unfounded fears or misconceptions, but rather it’s based on first-hand experience. I have probably used Marta more than 95% of the people who will read this. I have, in the past decade, gone a year without even owning a car and another two sharing one with a full-time working partner.
My biggest problem with Marta is that it just doesn’t go where I need it to go. This current plan seems like a huge step in the right direction for me. In all seriousness, what am I missing?
I agree JT, but it’s a huge catch 22: MARTA doesn’t have enough riders to expand like they need to (in terms of sales, but they need to expand to get more riders. So building on the existing infrastructure, combined with the Beltline would be a huge step in the right direction. I don’t feel the same about the Streetcar really…
Bobby- I’m very interested in hearing from you on these plans! You always offer up good stuff on what’s what about MARTA, so please don’t bail on us now! Like J_T, I’m pretty excited about what I’m seeing. For me, connecting all this area near Decatur Heights is wonderful. Won’t you please share your concerns and what you think will turn voters off?
The goals should include a high capacity connection from Emory/CDC/CliftonRd. to the transit core, urban design, rider safety, and low operating costs. That’s not what I see in the proposal. It has parking lots, parking decks, bus bays, and bus drivers. Light Rail Vehicle drivers will be required.
The scale is somewhat reduced — call it MARTA-lite. It’s the old playbook updated with footnotes on the flexibility of the “modern streetcar” vehicle.
While several contributing factors are historical or external to the agency, I hold MARTA responsible for what it endorses and for failing to educate the public on the agency’s strengths and weaknesses.
What about using this to cross between the heavy rail lines? 32-40 minutes maybe (two transfers). Oh right, it’s MARTA, so mark it at 44 minutes. Five Points and one less transfer please!
East Lake anyone?
Of course someone right around Suburban Plaza could be excited. Let’s spend a half billion on me too! Rail transit should go everywhere!
But it can’t. I think it’s fair to view this plan as stretching to service Suburban Plaza and DeKalb Medical. Furthermore the two stations/platforms are between 1/5 and 1/6 mile apart!
We want to make Sycamore good for walking, bicycling, and neighborhood use; yes, let’s do it.
Sure, let’s give Winn Way fancy bus service. (It already has route 125, and DeKalb Medical is also on route 123.)
The first reply is Missing In Action. I will wait a bit.
Damn it, Bobby! I wasn’t looking at it as an “I got mine” plan, so I kinda resent your remark. But yes, I am very pleased that it’s no longer going to plow through the properties of my friends in Springdale Heights, and I’m very happy that it’ll help folks get to shopping, hospitals, doctors’ care, and schools. My preference would be to see every transit dollar go into extending the existing rail lines, but that’s not what’s been presented. What is on the table is worth the additional tax to me, so I’ll be voting Yes.
“Miss Deanne, the Decatur-Metro ate my homework.” My first reply is up.
I believe we need to invest in transit also, so I’m asking everyone to band together to say no to the extra road building which undercuts new and existing transit. I’m looking for a different arrangement in 2 years… not 10 years.
I will vote No. To each her, or his, own.
That’s Ms. D if you’re nasty… *Ahem*… Anyway… so if we all vote No to prevent more roads building, how are we ever gonna get the $$$ for the transit projects we want?
(And yessiree on making Sycamore Drive safer! Y’all kindly stop at our brand new stop signs at Sycamore & Grove! They’re so gosh darn purty! :0)
The TIA could be changed, the project list criteria could change, elected officials could be swayed or dismissed. When you hear that we need this because of what cities like Seattle are doing, it’s left out that in Seattle the sales tax for transportation was first voted down and only passed after it became a sales tax for transit. Other arrangements are more involved. Eventually we would probably need an “All of the above” option, which would be similar to how we already pay to build and maintain our roads. We may need to reject the regionalism banner as being all or nothing.
Like a lot of others, I’m confused by Bobby’s comments on these issues, but convinced that he is informed and has a strong opinion about them. Here’s my attempt to summarize, so that everyone can discuss more directly and maybe even get on board.
1. The overall TIA is a net bad idea because it splits money between roads and transit.
2. The specific concept for the Clifton Corridor is a net bad idea because:
a. It is not designed to minimize operational costs, which is a big problem for a system that is financially constrained on operational spending.
b. It is not designed as an urban/walkable community system, but rather an automobile/suburban feeder system, with parking lots and bus bays rather than pedestrian orientation.
c. It seems to be oriented toward servicing a decrepit strip mall and the DeKalb Medical Center, rather than augmenting the existing transit system with more popularly useful routing
Bobby, does that sum it up? Please feel free to add or adjust anything I misinterpreted.
Deanne – Exactly. We have to see the region for what it is, and we won’t be able to alienate car/truck users for the sake of transit. Road projects mixed in with transit is the best that we can do right now, of course it may not be perfect but it definitely puts us in the right direction.
Bobby – I think the region has waited long enough, and killing this referendum and trying again in 2014 is 2 years wasted to me.
TeeRuss, that’s pretty good. I think 2c is not so stark; targeting future development is okay but a lot of stuff factors in.
There is also the capacity question. 3 hours with 10 minute headway (6 service vehicles per hour) using a paired (based on proposed platform length) Siemens S70 LRV could carry about 7,000 commuters (sardines) end to end.
I don’t have estimates for the dwell time penalty of capacity service, but it’s probably small if riders know and respect the shuffle.
clarification. by “end to end” I mean from one end to the other end. The same capacity would be available in the opposite direction.
OK, so 2d is that the capacity of the planned Clifton Corridor LRT (or whatever it’s called) will be small or insufficient? Or is it that the ridership demand, as demonstrated by capacity that was anticipated in the plans, is so small as to not be worth the investment?
One more thing, Bobby. I think I speak for most people who may not be informed enough or don’t care if the bill is imperfect, who just fear that if this doesn’t pass then there’s really no plan B. That transit funding will be delayed indefinitely.
Sounds like you see a roadmap that begins after rejecting this vote – correct? If so, could you lay that out in more detail?
At 6tph the peak capacity is low considering the density of jobs on Clifton. We know commutes are not spread evenly over 3 hours. In a 20 minute period, this could move roughly 350 people from each end to their jobs. What about lunchtime? What about shift changes at the hospitals?
Whatever your preferred Plan B for transit, the first step will be contacting each of your elected officials and telling them that you voted the TIA tax down because you support transit and oppose increasing capital spending on roads. Ask them to increase funding dedicated to transit. Tell them you support a tax for transit.
If your Plan B needs to include large capital expansion of transit, like additional miles of rail, one option would be a transit SPLOST by county, similar to those for education and those used in other counties to build new roads.
No one has effective easy fixes for our complex problems — maybe I should start saying: “There is no Plan A.” My own hope is for an eventual outcome that is comprehensive and maximizes public benefit.
The way the convoluted law was written, the TIA list cannot be changed.
If the referendum fails, the law has the roundtable process start over again and return to voters in 2014.
After I brought transfers into the conversation last week it was pointed out to me that I had not considered the numerous riders for whom the F Line was actually a reduction of transfers, which I interpret to mean that I lack the third hand necessary to count both the regular and semi-regular riders – traveling from Avondale (or North Decatur) to MARTA Headquarters but lacking an agency vehicle – who need to transfer at Five Points currently. 🙂
Does anyone know what’s up with the old underground springs that prevented Walmart from considering underground parking only to be replaced by an underground Marta line? (Someone mentioned these springs months ago but I don’t know anything about them.)
Sorry, I don’t understand. The WM plan includes underground parking.
I wonder if DEM still reads this blog? I miss his comments, but especially so on these types of stories.
Me too.
Since MARTA typically uses the “cut and cover” method for tunneling I wonder if that means that all the buildings above the tunnels (like the YMCA) will have to be torn down and rebuilt after the tunnel is completed? With the exception of a small portion of the North/South line they always used this method.
“Cut and cover” does not sound good. Not good for folks living in the line of the cutting, nor for the folks who have to live and transport themselves near it.
Hopefully MARTA will learn from other systems up north, such as New York. They are building another subway line as a matter of fact. You know “cut & cover” isn’t even close to being an option there.
They only used tunnel boring machines on the north south line near Peachtree Center because the stations were so deep. I think even the Decatur station was excavated out and then covered back over after everything was done. Here is an interesting 1961 image of what the area looked like where the Decatur station is now. All those buildings had to go so they could build the station…no tunneling.
http://atlantatimemachine.com/misc/decatur_skyline.htm
“cut and cover” was not used from Decatur station to the tunnel entrance near the Avondale station. The method has a lot to do with how deep the tunnel is.
I own a house on N. Decatur near Suburban Plaza and I think I may be the only one excited that someone’s working on the “MARTA doesn’t go anywhere I go” issue. Yes, there will be growing pains, but if you truly believe in a city/community, thinking long-term is key- and part of any community worthwhile is good transit options other can cars.
Alex: I owned a home 3 blocks from the East Lake MARTA station. This was in the 1970’s prior to MARTA rail. As the station was planned and built, many of my neighbors panicked and sold out and moved to Gwinnett. I thought “great, I will be able to can walk to rapid rail”. I did not sell-out, instead I worked to form a neighborhood organization to rebuild and improve our neighborhood, now called Lenox Place. Now I do not have to own a car, and I fully support transit and in-town living. I am very excited about the TIA and the Belt Line! MARTA has been a great benefit to my neighborhood and Decatur. So hang in there!
Here’s another question – will MARTA be around in 2 or 3 years which is the amount of time they will need to do the studies before they start buying land and actually that’s just the Lindberg to Emory Segment who knows when/if the Emory to Avondale segment gets built. (btw is DeKalb County saving land for this project? shouldn’t they be getting concessions from selig?)
If the legislature had created the regional transit governance I’d feel more secure that the folks inside 285 would have enough of a voice in stuff like this. As it stands we just know that what was proposed would have unfairly diluted our voices. So will that be what happens?
Bottom line, its bad policy to use a sales tax that is also applied to essential groceries to fund road projects. And the TIA list is mainly a road list especially when you discount the 600 to 700 million for the undefined transit service from kennesaw to midtown,
And by the way, you all do realize that the state could care less about DeKalb, that rail will get state support to cobb or North Fulton or Gwinnett first. What if they do use the 600 to 700 billion in cobb for transit? they will be seeking/needing a federal match, which will the state put first? Then when the 400 and 85 rail studies are done via TIA funding, which projects will get federal funding.
I don’t know its a mixed bag here. On one hand I question the commitment to building good transit outside 285, or even inside. On the other hand there is an interest so if it happens its also going to decrease the chance of getting more funding for this line. Which is ironic because i see the TIA only passing via support from DeKalb and fulton inside 285. Imagine if we just did a vote for increased MARTA funding inside the two areas. Then we’d get all the federal transit dollars since you know the other counties won’t vote for it.
InAtl, you’re right that TIA will probably only pass with support from Dekalb and Fulton, if nothing else, simply because they are the most populated. But doing a vote for increased MARTA funding wouldn’t be good because the argument would be that Dekalb & Fulton have been paying into it for 30 years. Adding more funding on top of that would be an almost impossible sell.
Getting more people onboard is what the TIA looks like it is poised to do. But with the seemingly long process of doing the studies before construction even begins, the feasibility of usage wouldn’t be until the 2020’s it looks like.
I think InAtl is saying that the regional T-SPLOST may deliver some rail from Lindbergh to Emory/CDC “for DeKalb,” but that by round 2 (in 2022) the clout will have moved even further north and will push for whatever transit capital remains to go to Gwinnett and Cobb or “Milton county” (north Fulton). There are examples to support this notion.
Given the collapse of the housing market in the northern exurbs and general suburban decline in this economy, will things still be biased towards North of the Perimeter in 2022? I’m thinking that given how hot intown life isbecoming, in light of traffic, gas prices, healthy living, schools, maybe political power will have shifted intown as well? After all, even the Governor’s mansion is intown!