22 20 10383 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/6e43194d770de3cb93a985ce98b6818e.pdf 4b36de311966a8b42daedf27e64112b5 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY ATLANTA, GEORGIA STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL CONDITION JUNE 30, 1967 ASSETS Cash in Banks: C & S National Bank First National Bank - Payroll Trust Company of Georgia Fulton National Bank - Section 9 $ 38,921.04 443.53 1,000.00 90,283.58 Investments: U. S. Treasury Bills U. S. Treasury Bills - Section 9 69,603.14 0 Petty Cash 25. 00 Accounts Receivable: DeKalb County - 1967 Gwinnett County - 1967 Gwinnett County - 1966 $20,692.50 9,105.00 4,552.50 34,350.00 TOTAL ASSETS $234,626.29 LIABILITIES Accounts Payable $ Payroll Taxes Withheld and Accrued Reserves : ARMPC : Urban Design Study Atlanta Transit Study Parsons , Brinckerhoff-Tudor-Bechtel: Section 9 Matching Retainer Agreement: Transportation Study Public Information Survey ing TOTAL LIABILITIES SURPLUS 1,290.67 0 5,800.00 1,000.00 100,000.00 $ 2 07. 7 0 696. 30 5,820.77 6,724. 77 114,815.44 $119. 810. 85 � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY ATLANTA, GEORGIA STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL CONDITION JUNE 30, 1967 ASSETS Cash in Banks: C & S National Bank § 38,921.04 First National Bank - Payroll 443.53 Trust Company of Georgia 1,000.00 Fulton National Bank - Section 9 90,283.58 Investments: U. S. Treasury Bills 69,603.14 U. S&S. Treasury Bills - Section 9 0 Petty Cash 25.00 Accounts Receivable: DeKalb County - 1967 $20,692.50 Gwinnett County - 1967 9,105.00 Gwinnett County - 1966 4,552.50 34,350.00 TOTAL ASSETS $234,626.29 LIABILITIES Accounts Payable $ 1,290.67 Payroll Taxes Withheld and Accrued 0 Reserves: ARMPC:; Urban Design Study 5,800.00 Atlanta Transit Study 1,000.00 Parsons, Brinckerhoff£-Tudor-Bechtel: Section 9 Matching 100,000. 00 Retainer Agreement: Transportation Study $ 207.70 Public Information 696.30 Surveying 5,820.77 6,724.77 TOTAL LIABILITIES 114,815.44 SURPLUS $119,810.85  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 21, Folder 6, Document 22 Box 21 Box 21 Folder 6 Folder topic: Rapid Transit | 1966-1967 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/a4d2e259452994915ca638984afe7126.pdf 3e0f1d49f3c37bfbc96828b370f7b1c6 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. _, METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY BUDGET REPORT JUNE 30, 1967 BUDGET 1967 ACTUAL JANUARY 1, 1967 JUNE 30, 1967 $128,281.64 $128,281.64 Appropriations: City of Atlanta Clayton County DeKalb County Fulton County Gwinnett County Sub-Totals $ 84,030.00 23,190.00 82,770.00 91,800.00 18,210.00 $300,000.00 $ 42,015.00 11,595 . 00 41,385.00 45,900.00 9,105.00 $150,000.00 Interest Income $ Federal Funds : 702 Section 9 Grant Interest on Federal Funds Sub-Totals $ 95,000.00 276,000.00 0 $371,000.00 $ 60,000.00 67,686.12 597.46 $128,283.58 TOTAL INCOME $676,520.00 $281,075.85 TOTAL INCOME AND UNAPPROPRIATED SURPLUS $804,801. 64 $409,357.49 Unappropriated Surplus INCOME 5,520.00 $ 2,792.27 EXPENSES Staff Cos ts: Salaries Expenses Benefits: Social Security (iuaran_t y ·Fu nd Health and Accident Insurance Retirement Workmen's Compensation Sub-Totals $ 68,950.00 10,500.00 $ 29,723. 75 5,615.09 1,109 . 00 533 . 00 1,680 . 00 10 , 000.00 99 . 00 $ 92,871.00 916 . 61 400.00 483.42 300.54 0 $ 37,439 . 41 Board Meetings $ 3,150.00 $ 1 ,7 00 . 00 $ 3 , 000 . 00 2,000 . 00 2,000.00 3 ,6 00 . 00 1,000.00 250 . 00 1,000.00 33,000 . 00 5,000. 00 $ 1,500 . 00 85 7. 64 411.97 1 , 185.34 623 . 56 250 . 00 25 0. 00 11 ,4 79 . 92 705. 7 5 Administrative and Office Overhead: Rent Communications and Posta ge Furniture and Equipment Supplies Printing Auditor Accountant Public Information Special Projects Insurance : Public Liability Depository and Forgery Fidelity Bond Sub-Totals CARRIED FORWARD 72. 00 56 . 00 199 . 00 $ 51 ,177. 00 $147,198 .00 0 0 0 $ 17,264 . 18 $ 56,403 . 59 �METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY BUDGET REPORT JUNE 30, 1967 ACWAL BUDGET 1967 JANUARY 1, 1967 TO JUNE 30, . 1967 $804,BOi. 64 $409 ~ 357 .49 Brought Forward $147,198.00 $ 56,403.59 Counsel Consul tan ts: Atlanta Region Me tropolitan Planning Commission Urban Design Study: Section 9 Matching Atlanta Transit Study: Section 9 Matching Parsons-Brinckerhoff-Tudor-Becktel: 702 Loan Section 9: Federal Matching Re tainer Agreement Research and Technical Servic es Sub-Totals $ 20,000.00 $ 6,625.54 $ 31,250.00 $ 29,939.00 32,667.00 16,333.00 8,000 •. 00 9,800.00 3,333.00 1,667.00 0 1,000.00 95,000.00 60,000.00 240,000.00 120,000.00 60,000.00 2,000.00 $602,250.00 100,000.00 16,182.67 1,595.84 $226,517.51 TOTAL EXPENSES $769,448 . 00 $289,546.64 SURPLUS ~ ~119 ,810. 85 TOTAL INCOME AND UNAPPROPRIATED SURPLUS BROUGHT FORWARD EXPENSES 35 , 35 3. 64 0 � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY BUDGET REPORT JUNE 30, 1967 ACTUAL BUDGET JANUARY 1, 1967 1967 JUNE 30, 1967 Unappropriated Surplus $128,281.64 $128,281.64 INCOME Appropriations: City of Atlanta $ 84,030.00 $ 42,015.00 Clayton County 23,190.00 11,595.00 DeKalb County 82,770.00 41,385.00 Fulton County 91,800.00 45,900.00 Gwinnett County 18,210.00 9,105.00 Sub-Totals $300,000. 00 $150,000. 00 Interest Income $ 5,520.00 $ 2,792.27 Federal Funds: 702 $ 95,000.00 $ 60,000.00 Section 9 Grant 276,000.00 67,686.12 Interest on Federal Funds 0 597.46 Sub-Totals $371,000.00 $128,283.58 TOTAL INCOME $676,520.00 $281,075.85 TOTAL INCOME AND UNAPPROPRIATED SURPLUS $804,801.64 $409,357.49 EXPENSES Staff Costs: Salaries $ 68,950.00 § 29,723.75 Expenses 10,500.00 5,615.09 Benefits: Social Security 1,109.00 916.61 Guaranty Fund 533.00 400.00 Health and Accident Insurance 1,680.00 483.42 Retirement 10,000.00 300.54 Workmen's Compensation 99.00 0 Sub-Totals $ 92,871.00 $ 37,439.41 Board Meetings $ 3,150.00 $ 1,700.00 Administrative and Office Overhead: Rent § 3,000.00 § 1,500.00 Communications and Postage 2,000.00 857.64 Furniture and Equipment 2,000. 00 411.97 Supplies 3,600.00 1,185.34 Printing 1,000. 00 623.56 Auditor 250.00 250.00 Accountant 1,000. 00 250.00 Public Information 33,000.00 11,479.92 Special Projects 5,000. 00 705.75 Insurance: Public Liability 72.00 0 Depository and Forgery 56,00 0 Fidelity Bond 199.00 0 Sub-Totals $ 51,177.00 $ 17,264.18 CARRIED FORWARD $147,198.00 $ 56,403.59 METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY BUDGET REPORT JUNE 30, 1967 ACTUAL JANUARY 1, 1967 BUDGET TO 1967 JUNE 30, 1967 TOTAL INCOME AND UNAPPROPRIATED SURPLUS BROUGHT FORWARD $804,801.64 -$409, 357.49 EXPENSES Brought Forward $147,198.00 $ 56,403.59 Counsel $ 20,000.00 S$ 6,625.54 Consultants: Atlanta Region Metropolitan Planning Commission $ 31,250.00 § 29,939.00 Urban Design Study: Section 9 32,667.00 8,000.00 Matching 16,333.00 9,800. 00 Atlanta Transit Study: Section 9 3,333.00 0 Matching 1,667.00 1,000.00 Parsons-Brinckerhoff-Tudor-Becktel: 702 Loan 95,000.00 60,000.00 Section 9: Federal 240,000.00 0 Matching 120,000. 00 100,000. 00 Retainer Agreement 60,000, 00 16,182.67 Research and Technical Services 2,000. 00 1,595.84 Sub-Totals $602,250.00 $226,517.51 TOTAL EXPENSES SURPLUS $769,448.00 35.3. $289,546. 64 $119,810.85  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 21, Folder 6, Document 21 Box 21 Box 21 Folder 6 Folder topic: Rapid Transit | 1966-1967 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/f360fb6620da73d2386cb89a37bb53ed.pdf 7a9f53aa0a5ea231862c3ebda4f7ab17 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. MINUTES OF THE SEVENTEENTH MEETING OF THE METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY JULY 7, 1967 The Board of Directors of the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority held its regular meeting on July 7, 1967, at 3:30 P.M., in the Glenn Building Conference Room, Atlanta. Mr. Richard H. Rich, Chairman, presided. MEMBERS PRESENT: Robert F. Adamson (City of Atlanta) M. C. Bishop (Fulton County) Roy A. Blount (DeKalb County) Rawson Haverty (City of Atlanta) K. A. McMillan (Gwinnett County) Richard H. Rich (City of Atlanta) MEMBERS ABSENT: Sanford Atwood (DeKalb County) Edgar Blalock (Clayton county) L. D. Milton (City of Atlanta) OTHERS PRESENT: Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority H. L. Stuart, General Manager Glenn E . Bennett, Secretary King Elliott, Public Information Director Earl Nelson, Chief Engineer H. N. Johnson, Secretary to General Manager MARTA Advisory committee Howard K. Menhinick, Chairman, Georgia Institute of Technology H. Boyer Marx, H. Boyer Marx and Associates Richard L. Aeck, Aeck Associates , Inc. Richard M. Forbes, Georgia State College Roy J. Boston, Georgia Department of Public Health �Consultants Walter Douglas, Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade & Douglas, New York w. O. Salter, Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor, Bechtel, San Francisco J. A. Coil, Resident Manager, Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor, Bechtel, Atlanta Raymond O'Neil, Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor, Bechtel, Atlanta David McBrayer, Traffic Engineer, Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor, Bechtel, Atlanta R. w. Gustafson, Supervising Engineer, Parsons, BrinckerhoffTudor, Bechtel, Atlanta Robert P. Barksdale, Project Estimator, Parsons, BrinckerhoffTudor, Bechtel, Atlanta Peter Vandersloot, Manager of Planning and Scheduling, Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor, Bechtel, San Francisco _ Leon Eplan, Eric Hill Associates, Atlanta Jacques L. Laboureur, Eric Hill Associates, Atlanta Lynn Howard, Eric Hill Associates, Atlanta Arden Brey, Eric Hill Associates, Atlanta W. Stell Huie, Huie & Harland, Atlanta Tom Watson Brown, Huie & Harland, Atlanta Others Hugh L. McDaniell, Cobb County Representative Robert w. Roseveare, Traffic Engineer, DeKalb County Joe Lay, Robinson-Humphrey company, Inc., Atlanta Maarten Den Hartog, Lord & Den Hartog, New York City Donald G. Ingram, Central Atlanta Progress, Inc. P.A. Springer, Atlanta Traffic & Safety Council Van Redmon, WAII-TV Remer Tyson, Atlanta Constitution J . D. Wingfield, Jr., Gayle L. Harder, Jerry A. Coursey, Mrs. Margaret c. Breland, Mrs. Rachel Champagne, Miss Claudette Parrish, Atlanta Region Metropolitan Planning Commission - 2 - �,-The meeting was called to order by the Chairman. Minutes Upon motion by Mr. Bishop, seconded by Mr. McMillon, the reading of the minutes of the June meeting was dispensed with and they were unanimously approved. Financial Report The General Manager presented the financial report as of June 30, 1967, which is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. DeKalb County had not sent payment for the second quarter; however it was understood this would be received soon. A bill in the amount of $4,742 .09 had been received from Hammer, Greene, Siler Associates for extra work in connection with a report suggested by Washington officials of HUD. The Chairman had authorized the work subject to Board ratification, because of the timing which was important. Upon motion by Mr. Bishop, seconded by Mr. McMillan, approval of this expenditure was unanimously given. Other Business The Chairman said a managerial seminar sponsored by HUD, would be conducted at Kent State University, Kent, Ohio, from July 10 - July 21. TWo-thirds of salary and tuition would be reimbursed by HUD, and Mr. Rich recommended approval of the General Manager's attendance at this seminar. Upon motion by Mr. Bishop, seconded by Mr. Blount, unanimous approval was given. Mr. Bishop reported on a recent trip to Montreal and Toronto, and his obs ervations of the two rapid transit systems. Progress Reports General Manager Mr . Stuart r e ported on the status of all MARTA consultant contracts. This report is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. There is an unused balance of $42,000 in the retainer agreement with Parsons, Brinckerhoff- Tudor Bechtel, which is expected to be adequate for whatever additional work might be r e quired. Th e General Manager h a d fil l e d seven speaking e ngageme n ts during the month of June . He reported briefly on a recent trip to - 3 - �Washington where he visited HUD officials , and Congressman Fletcher Thompson. Mr. Stuart said a presentation of MARTA's requirements would be made to the State Properties Control Commission on July 10. The General Manager introduced Professor Howard K. Menhinick of Georgia Tech , Chairman of the Advisory Committee to MARTA , who introduced the other members of this Committee to the Board. Consultants Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor , Bechtel In response to a r eque st o f the Board o f Dire ctors, Mr. Wa lter Douglas of Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade & Douglas, present~d a time and action calendar for construction of the 30-mile s y stem. This schedule assumed construction could begin in January , 196 8, and Mr. Douglas pointed •out that it was only a point of re f erence, based not upon financial capabilit i es , but upon length o f time requ i red from the po int o f pract i cal design and con structi on . Mr. Salter identified the 30-mile system, and Mr. Coil presented charts showing costs involved, based on a 1968 beginning date. He reminded the Board that additional costs would accrue e ach year construction had to be dela y ed. ' Mr. Rich s uggested r emoving ac tua l dates fr om th e time and a c tion calendar, s o tha t i t would show t h e construc tion p e r i od i n number of years. Mr. Douglas said the 4½ year period was feasible and possible, but ver y optimistic. Mr. Rich commended Mr. Douglas on the presentation. Hammer , Greene , Si ler Ass o ciates Mr . Bennett reported for Hammer, Greene, Siler Associates on the status of th e e conomic stud y. He said the fi na l r eport would be submitte d wi t h in thirty d ays. The Hammer fi r m ha d r e viewed method s o f fina n cing p ropo sed i n the 1 96 2 study, and ha d i nvest i gated al l permanent meth ods , pro grams, a nd sources which might realistically be a vailable to finance capital costs. They had examined all o ther systems in the c o untry and had exp l ored all poss ib l e s our ces of f i n ance - loc al , sta t e , and f edera l . A fo rmula belie v ed t o be feasib l e and equi t able f o r all o cating costs, using we i ghted indexes o f population, pro perty tax digests, and employment for 1965 and 1985 , had been developed , as f ollows : - 4 - �City of Atlanta Fulton County outside the City of Atlanta DeKalb County Clayton County Gwinnett County 56.6 % 12.0 % 22.1 % 5.9 % 3.4 % It had been recommended by the consultant and accepted by the MARTA Board that Clayton and Gwinnett Counties would not participate in the financing of the system until lines were constructed in those counties, at which time they would begin paying their appropriate share retroactively from the beginning of the construction period. Mr. Bennett said the consultants had worked with local governments to evaluate financial capabilities in light of long-range capital demands and forecasts of ad valorem ta x digests , plus other sources of income. The next step would be meetings with the major governments to explain the report and seek support of it. Proposed New Impact Study Mr. Bennett reported on several recent meetings with HUD officials in Washington, attended by the Chairman, himself, and others. The present policy of the federal government is to help build transit facilities; it also includes the study of the economic and social impact on entire areas affected. HUD hopes to use transit as a tool to guide future growth and reshape blighted areas of cities. Washington officials had recently e x pressed interest in having MARTA study the economic impact, potentials, and issues of the system on Metropolitan Atlanta. Indication had been given that HUD would favorabl y entertain an application for funds'to support such a stud y. Mr . Be n nett recommended that MARTA be authorized to conduct such a study, and to prepare an application for federal funds , with local matching funds not to e x ceed $40,000 . The study was e x pected to take approx imately six months. It was suggested that it be coordinated by ARMPC, with Central Atlanta Progress, Inc . , and the City of Atlanta Planning Department participating, as well as outside consultants as needed . A motion was made b y Mr . Haverty and seconded by Mr . Bishop that local funds of $40,000 for the study be approved , a n d that the Gen eral Manager be autho r ized to ma k e approp r iate application to HUD . - 5 - �Atlanta Transit System - Busways Proposal The Chairman reviewed briefly the recently proposed rapid busways concept of the Atlanta Transit System. He said Mayor Ivan Allen had asked the Authority to evaluate the proposal and make a recommendation concerning it. The Chairman had instructed the staff to make an objective evaluation of the rapid busways proposal and report back to the Board. After discussion, it was the consensus of the Board that this should be done as soon as possible. Mr. Bennett announced that Messrs. Rich, Stuart, and Coil had taped a program on transit for viewing Sunday, July 9, at 10:30 P.M. on WAGA-TV. Also, the Chairman would address the Atlanta Rotary Club on transit on Monday, July 10, and Board members were invited to attend as Mr. Bennett's guests. Adjournment Upon motion by Mr. Bishop, seconded by Mr. Adamson, the meeting was adjourned at 4:45 P.M. Next Meeting August 1, 1967. - 6 - � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document MINUTES OF THE SEVENTEENTH MEETING OF THE METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY JULY 7, 1967 The Board of Directors of the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority held its regular meeting on July 7, 1967, at 3:30 P.M., in the Glenn Building Conference Room, Atlanta. Mr. Richard H. Rich, Chairman, presided. MEMBERS PRESENT: Robert F. Adamson (City of Atlanta) M. C. Bishop (Fulton County) Roy A. Blount (DeKalb County) Rawson Haverty (City of Atlanta) K. A. McMillon (Gwinnett County) Richard H. Rich (City of Atlanta) MEMBERS ABSENT: id Sanford Atwood (DeKalb County) Edgar Blalock (Clayton County) L. D. Milton (City of Atlanta) OTHERS PRESENT: Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority H. L. Stuart, General Manager Glenn E. Bennett, Secretary King Elliott, Public Information Director Earl Nelson, Chief Engineer H. N. Johnson, Secretary to General Manager MARTA Advisory Committee Howard K. Menhinick, Chairman, Georgia Institute of Technology H. Boyer Marx, H. Boyer Marx and Associates Richard L. Aeck, Aeck Associates, Inc. Richard M. Forbes, Georgia State College Roy J. Boston, Georgia Department of Public Health Consultants Walter Douglas, Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade & Douglas, New York W. O. Salter, Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor, Bechtel, San Francisco J. A. Coil, Resident Manager, Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor, Bechtel, Atlanta Raymond O'Neil, Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor, Bechtel, Atlanta David McBrayer, Traffic Engineer, Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor, Bechtel, Atlanta R. W. Gustafson, Supervising Engineer, Parsons, Brinckerhoff- Tudor, Bechtel, Atlanta Robert P. Barksdale, Project Estimator, Parsons, Brinckerhoff- Tudor, Bechtel, Atlanta Peter Vandersloot, Manager of Planning and Scheduling, Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor, Bechtel, San Francisco Leon Eplan, Eric Hill Associates, Atlanta Jacques L. Laboureur, Eric Hill Associates, Atlanta Lynn Howard, Eric Hill Associates, Atlanta Arden Brey, Eric Hill Associates, Atlanta W. Stell Huie, Huie & Harland, Atlanta Tom Watson Brown, Huie & Harland, Atlanta Others Hugh L. McDaniell, Cobb County Representative Robert W. Roseveare, Traffic Engineer, DeKalb County Joe Lay, Robinson-Humphrey Company, Inc., Atlanta Maarten Den Hartog, Lord & Den Hartog, New York City Donald G. Ingram, Central Atlanta Progress, Inc. P. A. Springer, Atlanta Traffic & Safety Council Van Redmon, WALII-TV Remer Tyson, Atlanta Constitution J. D. Wingfield, Jr., Gayle L. Harder, Jerry A. Coursey, Mrs. Margaret C. Breland, Mrs. Rachel Champagne, Miss Claudette Parrish, Atlanta Region Metropolitan Planning Commission The meeting was called to order by the Chairman. Minutes Upon motion by Mr. Bishop, seconded by Mr. McMillon, the reading of the minutes of the June meeting was dispensed with and they were unanimously approved. Financial Report The General Manager presented the financial report as of June 30, 1967, which is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. DeKalb County had not sent payment for the second quarter; however it was understood this would be received soon. A bill in the amount of $4,742.09 had been received from Hammer, Greene, Siler Associates for extra work in connection with a report suggested by Washington officials of HUD. The Chairman had authorized the work subject to Board ratification, because of the timing which was important. Upon motion by Mr. Bishop, seconded by Mr. McMillon, approval of this expenditure was unanimously given. Other Business The Chairman said a managerial seminar sponsored by HUD, would be conducted at Kent State University, Kent, Ohio, from July 10 - July 21. ‘Two-thirds of salary and tuition would be reimbursed by HUD, and Mr. Rich recommended approval of the General Manager's attendance at this seminar. Upon motion by Mr. Bishop, seconded by Mr. Blount, unanimous approval was given. Mr. Bishop reported on a recent trip to Montreal and Toronto, and his observations of the two rapid transit systems. Progress Reports General Manager Mr. Stuart reported on the status of all MARTA consultant con- tracts. This report is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. There is an unused balance of $42,000 in the retainer agreement with Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor Bechtel, which is expected to be adequate for whatever additional work might be required. The General Manager had filled seven speaking engagements during the month of June. He reported briefly on a recent trip to Washington where he visited HUD officials, and Congressman Fletcher Thompson. Mr. Stuart said a presentation of MARTA's requirements would be made to the State Properties Control Commission on July 10. The General Manager introduced Professor Howard K. Menhinick of Georgia Tech, Chairman of the Advisory Committee to MARTA, who introduced the other members of this Committee to the Board. Consultants Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor, Bechtel In response to a request of the Board of Directors, Mr. Walter Douglas of Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade & Douglas, presented a time and action calendar for construction of the 30-mile system. This schedule assumed construction could begin in January, 1968, and Mr. Douglas pointed ‘out that it was only a point of reference, based not upon financial capabilities, but upon length of time required from the point of practical design and construction. Mr. Salter identified the 30-mile system, and Mr. Coil presented charts showing costs involved, based on a 1968 beginning date. He reminded the Board that additional costs would accrue each year construction had to be delayed. Mr. Rich suggested removing actual dates from the time and action calendar, so that it would show the construction period in number of years. Mr. Douglas said the 4% year period was feasible and possible, but very optimistic. Mr. Rich commended Mr. Douglas on the presentation. Hammer, Greene, Siler Associates Mr. Bennett reported for Hammer, Greene, Siler Associates on the status of the economic study. He said the final report would be submitted within thirty days. The Hammer firm had reviewed methods of financing proposed in the 1962 study, and had investi- gated all permanent methods, programs, and sources which might realistically be available to finance capital costs. They had examined all other systems in the country and had explored all possible sources of finance - local, state, and federal. A formula believed to be feasible and equitable for allocating costs, using weighted indexes of population, property tax digests, and employment for 1965 and 1985, had been developed, as follows: City of Atlanta 56.6 % Fulton County outside the City of Atlanta 2.0 &% DeKalb County Zeki % Clayton County 5.9% Gwinnett County 3.4 % It had been recommended by the consultant and accepted by the MARTA Board that Clayton and Gwinnett Counties would not participate in the financing of the system until lines were constructed in those counties, at which time they would begin paying their appropriate share retroactively from the beginning of the construction period. Mr. Bennett said the consultants had worked with local govern- ments to evaluate financial capabilities in light of long-range capital demands and forecasts of ad valorem tax digests, plus other sources of income. The next step would be meetings with the major governments to explain the report and seek support Gf Lt. Proposed New Impact Study Mr. Bennett reported on several recent meetings with HUD officials in Washington, attended by the Chairman, himself, and others. The present policy of the federal government is to help build transit facilities; it also includes the study of the economic and social impact on entire areas affected. HUD hopes to use transit as a tool to guide future growth and reshape blighted areas of cities. Washington officials had recently expressed interest in having MARTA study the economic impact, potentials, and issues of the system on Metropolitan Atlanta. Indication had been given that HUD would favorably entertain an application for funds*to support such a study. Mr, Bennett recommended that MARTA be authorized to conduct such a study, and to prepare an application for federal funds, with local matching funds not to exceed $40,000. The study was expected to take approximately six months. It was sug- gested that it be coordinated by ARMPC, with Central Atlanta Progress, Inc., and the City of Atlanta Planning Department participating, as well as outside consultants as needed. A motion was made by Mr. Haverty and seconded by Mr. Bishop that local funds of $40,000 for the study be approved, and that the General Manager be authorized to make appropriate application to HUD. Atlanta Transit System - Busways Proposal The Chairman reviewed briefly the recently proposed rapid bus- ways concept of the Atlanta Transit System. He said Mayor Ivan Allen had asked the Authority to evaluate the proposal and make a recommendation concerning it. The Chairman had instructed the staff to make an objective evaluation of the rapid busways proposal and report back to the Board. After discussion, it was the consensus of the Board that this should be done as soon as possible. Mr. Bennett announced that Messrs. Rich, Stuart, and Coil had taped a program on transit for viewing Sunday, July 9, at 10:30 P.M. on WAGA-TV. Also, the Chairman would address the Atlanta Rotary Club on transit on Monday, July 10, and Board members were invited to attend as Mr. Bennett's guests. Adjournment Upon motion by Mr. Bishop, seconded by Mr. Adamson, the meeting was adjourned at 4:45 P.M, Next Meeting August 1, 1967.  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 21, Folder 6, Document 20 Box 21 Box 21 Folder 6 Folder topic: Rapid Transit | 1966-1967 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/459d835cb2832ca1323ded981fe1b0b7.pdf d662dc28361ccefa91e85add6d0ccd8b Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. r-- - - July 18 , 1967 Mr . George C . Dillard 2Z97 Browns Mill Road, S . E . AUanta, Georgia 30315 Dear Mr . Dillard: This will acknowledge receipt of your letter regarding your suggestions about rapid transit. I am forwarding this information long to the Rapid Transit Authority for their consideration. Sincerely yours , Iv n Allen, Jr. Mayor JAJr/br CC: Mr. Glenn Bennett � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document a . July 18, 1967 Mr. George C. Dillard 2297 Browns Mill Road, S. E. Atlanta, Georgia 30315 Dear Mr. Dillard: This will acknowledge receipt of your letter regarding your suggestions about rapid transit. I am forwarding this information along to the Rapid Transit Authority for their consideration. Sincerely yours, Ivan Allen, Jr. Mayor 1AJr/br CC: Mr. Glenn Bennett  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 21, Folder 6, Document 19 Box 21 Box 21 Folder 6 Folder topic: Rapid Transit | 1966-1967 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/ab51a44156f395e4af2b8f216ffcdab2.pdf cd4c69f3f5272744575ef5aaf77e17c7 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. July 20, 1967 Honorable Ivan Allen, Jr. City Hall Atlanta, Georgia Dear Mayor Allen: In the reams of material that has been written a.bout Atlanta's traffic problems, its expressways, and its "proposed" Rapid Transit System, it is ironic that nothing (so far as I have seen) has been mentioned of the city~s original natural resource. By this I mean the EXISTING RAILROADS. A map of the city shows railroads stretching out like the spokes of a wheel. Why not ask the Railroads to help with our problem and establish commuter service? It is incalculable what service, for e x ample, on the Southern with stops at Lenox Square, Chamblee, and Norcross, could do toward alleviating the Northeast Expressway farce. If e x perience is any indication, we are planning now for a rapid transit service for 1977 which will probably be out of date by 1972 and completed by 1987, at a cost three times that currently being considered. A drive on our e x pressway system is enough to convince anyone that we need help NOW. Rapid transit will help--when it arrives. But can we wait? In this time of the city's greatest need, it appears strange that we seemingly are ignoring an available resource which could be not only a blessing to us commuters, but a source of revenue to the railroads as well. Very truly y ours, //4J~l~ H. W. DiCristina , Jr . 6251 Vernon Woods Atlanta, Ga. 30328 cc: Drive N.E . Mr. Richard Rich , Chairman Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document July 20, 1967 Honorable Ivan Allen, Jr. City Hall Atlanta, Georgia Dear Mayor Allen: In the reams of material that has been written about Atlanta's traffic problems, its expressways, and its "proposed" Rapid Transit System, it is ironic that nothing (so far as I have seen) has been mentioned of the city!s original natural resource. By this I mean the EXISTING RAILROADS. A map of the city shows railroads stretching out like the spokes of a wheel. Why not ask the Railroads to help with our problem and establish commuter service? It is incalculable what service, for example, on the Southern with stops at Lenox Square, Chamblee, and Norcross, could do toward alleviating the Northeast Express- way farce. If experience is any indication, we are planning now for a rapid transit service for 1977 which will probably be out of date by 1972 and completed by 1987, at a cost three times that currently being considered. A drive on our expressway system is enough to convince anyone that we need help NOW. Rapid transit will help--when it arrives. But can we wait? In this time of the city's greatest need, it appears strange that we seemingly are ignoring an available resource which could be not only a blessing to us commuters, but a source of revenue to the railroads as well. Very truly yours, H. W. DiCristina, . 6251 Vernon Woods Drive N.E. Atlanta, Ga. 30328 cc: Mr. Richard Rich, Chairman Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 21, Folder 6, Document 18 Box 21 Box 21 Folder 6 Folder topic: Rapid Transit | 1966-1967 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/1dd12463de7d9f47b53a3c7080e05c62.pdf aaf43c254896b63fda2c83bfb2c2e516 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. July 24. 1967 M r . H . W. Di Cristina, Jr. 6251 Vernon Woods Dl'iv, , N. E . Atlan , Georgia 30328 Dear Mr. DiCristina: Thank you very m'l.lch for your letter nd your ugge tion concerning ma transportation for Atlanta . .. I am pleased that you furni hed Mr. Rich copy o.f your letter nd l c n a sure you that th R pid Transit Authority ill co.naider all method in their planning. Sincer ly, lv Alle • Jr. M yor IAJr:!y � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document 16 July 24, 1967 Mr. H. W. DiCristina, Jr. 6251 Vernon Woods Drive, N. E. Atlanta, Georgia 30328 Dear Mr. DiCristina: Thank you very much for your letter and your suggestions concerning mass transportation for Atlanta. I am pleased that you furnished Mr. Rich a copy of your letter and I can assure you that the Rapid Transit Authority will consider all methods in their planning. Sincerely, Ivan Allen, Jr. Mayor AJ r: fy seen, sien a 7 drei eee asishatinie beatae rarer aan een iin nina na la tas AN a hla otal Malai  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 21, Folder 6, Document 17 Box 21 Box 21 Folder 6 Folder topic: Rapid Transit | 1966-1967 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/530c89454ea663cf466c9b84f3a3fe60.pdf 4bdfb33236eaba9d82dc9333c4dfe3fc Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. r Jr METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY GLENN BUILDING / ATLANTA , GEORGIA 30303 / AREA CODE 404 524-5711 OFFICERS: Ri chard H. Rich, Chairman J uly 24, 1967 Roy A. Blount, Vice Ch a irman Glenn E. Ben nett, Secretary Henry L. Stuart, Genera l M anager NOTICE TO: Board of Directors Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority FROM: Glenn E. Bennett, S e c r e t a r y ~ The next regular meeting of the Board of Directors of the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority will be held on August 1, at 3 : 30 P . M. , in the Conference Room of the Glenn Building, Atlanta. The tentative agenda is as follows: 1. Minutes of last meeting. 2. Financial report. 3. Progress reports: 4. (a) General Manager (b) Pa r sons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor , Bechtel , Engineers (c) Hammer, Greene, Siler Associates , Economic Consultants {d ) Eric Hill Associates, corr id or I mpact Study Other business . � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document i METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY GLENN BUILDING / ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 / AREA CODE 404 524-5711 OFFICERS: Richard H. Rich, Chairman July 24, 1967 Roy A. Blount, Vice Chairman Glenn E. Bennett, Secretary Henry L. Stuart, General Manager NOTICE TO: Board of Directors Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority FROM: Glenn E. Bennett, Secretary The next regular meeting of the Board of Directors of the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority will be held on August 1, at 3:30 P.M., in the Conference Room of the Glenn Building, Atlanta. The tentative agenda is as follows: 1. Minutes of last meeting. 2. Financial report. 3. Progress reports: (a) General Manager (bo) Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor, Bechtel, Engineers (c) Hammer, Greene, Siler Associates, Economic Consultants (dq) Eric Hill Associates, Corridor Impact Study 4. Other business.  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 21, Folder 6, Document 16 Box 21 Box 21 Folder 6 Folder topic: Rapid Transit | 1966-1967 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/ba34b82e9c65dbb449baa99f1b08f624.pdf e8ef0b8186679dd1941e0aca87999b05 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. METROPOLITAN ATLA TA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY GLENN BUILDING/ ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 / AREA CODE 404 524-5711 OFFICERS: Richard H. Rich, Chairman . Roy A. Blount, Vice Chairman Glenn E. Bennett, Secretary Henry L Stuart, General Manager ,. July 25, 1967 Mr. H. W. DiCristina, Jr. 6251 Vernon Woods Drive, N. E •· Atlanta, Georgia 30328 Dear Mr. DiChristina: Thank you for your letter of July 20 in which you sugg.est the use of existing railroads for rapid transit. Very early in our study of rapid transit for the Atlanta region the possibility of using diesel electric commuter cars on the existing tracks was very carefully considered. The proposal was never accepted for a number of reasons. <"Railroad operating conditions in the city require speed limits as low as 15 mi.les per hour in many places. This would slow rapid transit trains to the point where they would be no more rapid than the expressway. Another problem which would have to be overcome would be the necessity to operate rapid transit vehicles on the same tracks with freight trains, passenger tra ins, and switch engines. This would ~nvariably cause delays to the railroad operation and to the r-apid transit operation, neither of which would be tolerable. In the same connection, the problem of maintaining a safe operation would be exceedingly difficult. Another v ery difficult problem in using existing railroad tracks is that there would be no way to provide any services to Peachtree Street between Brookwood Station and the five points area. A similar gap exists on the West Line from Chappell Road to downtown. / As for such a service b e ing a source of reve nue, Southe rn Railway has indicated to us that such a service is possible but could not be expected to be a profit-making service and �-2Mr. H. w. DiCristina, Jr. July 25, 1967 that MARTA or some agency would have to underwrite the service and make up the operating deficit. Our position is that such a service using old cars on old tracks to inconvenient or inacc e s sible stations would no t be practi c al . Henry L. Stuart·: General Manager of MARTA, was, prior to assuming his preserit position, Director of Service Control, Southern Railway System, Atlanta, and was responsible for developing and implementing effective operational control plans for the entire system and is very familiar with the operational procedures and problems. If you have further questions or comments along this line, please contact Mr. Henry L. Stuart, Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority, 808 Glenn Building, 120 Marietta, N. w., Atlanta , Georgia 30303. Very truly yours, .,.. Richard H. Rich, Chairman of the Board RHR: je cc : ., , Mayor Ivan Allen / H. L. Stuart J � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY GLENN BUILDING / ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 / AREA CODE 404 524-5711 OFFICERS: Richard H. Rich, Chairman. Roy A. Blount, Vice Chairman Glenn E. Bennett, Secretary Henry L. Stuart, General Manager July 25, 1967 - * Mr. H. W. DiCristina, Jr. 6251 Vernon Woods Drive, N. E. Atlanta, Georgia 30328 : Dear Mr. DiChristina: Thank you for your letter of July 20 in which you suggest the use of existing railroads for rapid transit. Very early in our study of rapid transit for the Atlanta region the possi- bility of using diesel electric commuter cars on the exist- ing tracks was very carefully considered. The proposal was never accepted for a number of reasons. fRailroad operating conditions in the city require speed limits as low as 15 miles per hour in many places. This would slow rapid transit trains to the point where they would be no more rapid than the expressway. Another problem which would have to be overcome would be the necessity to operate rapid transit vehicles on the same tracks with freight trains, passenger trains, and switch engines. This would invariably cause delays to the railroad operation and to the rapid transit operation, neither of which would be tolerable. In the same connection, the problem of maintaining a safe operation would be exceedingly difficult. Another very difficult problem in using existing railroad tracks is that there would be no way to provide any services to Peachtree Street between Brookwood Station and the five points area. A similar gap exists on the West Line from Chappell Road to downtown. As for such a service being a source of revenue, Southern Railway has indicated to us that such a service is possible but could not be expected to be a profit-making service and Mr. H. W. DiCristina, Jr. July 25, 1967 that MARTA or some agency would have to underwrite the ser- vice and make up the operating deficit. Our position is that such a service using old cars on old tracks to inconvenient or inaccessible stations would not be practical. Henry L. Stuart, General Manager of MARTA, was, prior to as- suming his present position, Director of Service Control, Southern Railway System, Atlanta, and was responsible for developing and implementing effective operational control plans for the entire system and is very familiar with the operational procedures and problems. If you have further questions or comments along this line, please contact Mr. Henry L. Stuart, Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority, 808 Glenn Building, 120 Marietta, N. W., Atlanta, Georgia 30303. Very truly yours, Richard H. Rich, Chairman of the Board RHR: je cc: Mayor Ivan nied H. L. Stuart  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 21, Folder 6, Document 15 Box 21 Box 21 Folder 6 Folder topic: Rapid Transit | 1966-1967 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/213ca0b34381ab85ce02d74636ec42a5.pdf 934042d8d5dee31ee34c89b8d518803f Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. July 24, 1967 585 Mountain Drive, N. E. Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Mayor Ivan Allen, Jr, 204 City Hall Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Dear Mr, Allen: The Mayor ap.d Aldermen must give serious consideration, direction support, and if necessary some financial assistance to Mr. Robert Sommerville 1 s proposal on "Rapid Busways," The city of Atlanta, its merchants, its industries and comme rcial employe rs, will be strangled soon by automobile traffic, The continued growth and very deve lopment of our city demands the immediate implementation of the rapid busways system, This system, as proposed, will be the method for acquiring ri ght of way and ther eby will speed up the implementation of the rapid transit sys tem. · Please exercise your influence to see that this system is adopted. S.incerely 1 JJ::;-;ayl JXT/da cc: Aldermen Mr. Richard Rich Mr. Mill s B. Lane - � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document July 24, 1967 585 Mountain Drive, N. E. Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Mayor Ivan Allen, Jr. 204 City Hall Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Dear Mr. Allen: The Mayor and Aldermen must give serious consideration, direction support, and if necessary some financial assistance to Mr. Robert Sommerville’s proposal on "Rapid Busways." The city of Atlanta, its merchants, its industries and commercial employers, will be strangled soon by auto- mobile traffic. The continued growth and very development of our city demands the immediate implementation of the rapid busways system. This system, as proposed, will be the method for acquiring right of way and thereby will speed up the implementation of the rapid transit system. ; Please exercise your influence to see that this system is adopted, Sincerely, Ship Joe Tayl JKT/da cc; Aldermen Mr. Richard Rich Mr. Mills B. Lane  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 21, Folder 6, Document 14 Box 21 Box 21 Folder 6 Folder topic: Rapid Transit | 1966-1967 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/c255ed0dd2bbf732a81273eca2ba8c6e.pdf 3527d783a8ccbb016adf11be342a8ac8 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. July 24, 1967 585 Mountain Drive, N. E. Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Mayor Ivan Allen, Jr. 204 City Hall Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Dear Mr. Allen: The Mayor and Aldermen must give serious consideration, direction support, and if necessary some financial assistance to Mr. Robert Sommerville's proposal on "Rapid Busways." The city of Atlanta, its merchants, its industries and commercial employers, will be strangled soon by automobile traffic. The continued growth and very development of our city demands the immediate implementation of the rapid busways system. This system, as proposed, will be the method for acquiring right of way and thereby will speed up the implementation of the rapid t ransit system. Please exercise your influence to see that this system is adopted. JKT/da cc: Aldermen Mr . Richard Rich Mr. Mills B. Lane � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document pr July 24, 1967 585 Mountain Drive, N. E. Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Mayor Ivan Allen, Jr. 204 City Hall Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Dear Mr. Allen: The Mayor and Aldermen must give serious consideration, direction support, and if necessary some financial assistance to Mr, Robert Sommerville’s proposal on "Rapid Busways.”" The city of Atlanta, its merchants, its industries and commercial employers, will be strangled soon by auto- mobile traffic. The continued growth and very development of our city demands the immediate implementation of the rapid busways system. This system, as proposed, will be the method for acquiring right of way and thereby will speed up the implementation of the rapid transit system. Please exercise your influence to see that this system is adopted, ‘Sincerely, rage ce: Aldermen Mr. Richard Rich Mr. Mills B. Lane JIKT/da  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 21, Folder 6, Document 13 Box 21 Box 21 Folder 6 Folder topic: Rapid Transit | 1966-1967 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/545762d86394f264d1a492e9f50e9dd2.pdf cbd1bf116b7b3c77b1f87c728236db0b Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. J July 28 , 1967 Mr . Joe Taylor 585 Mountain Drive, N . E . Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Dear Mr . Taylor: Thank you very much for your letter and support of the Rapid Busways proposal outlined by the Atlanta Trans i t System. I note by copy of your letter you have advised the Chairman of the Rapid Transit Authority of your views. With appreciation for your interest, I am Sincerely, Ivan Allen, Jr. Mayor lAJr: o � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document July 28, 1967 Mr. Joe Taylor 585 Mountain Drive, N. E. Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Dear Mr. Taylor: Thank you very much for your letter and support of the Rapid Busways proposal outlined by the Atlanta Transit System. I note by copy of your letter you have ad- vised the Chairman of the Rapid Transit Authority of your views. With appreciation for your interest, I am Sincerely, Ivan Allen, Jr. Mayor IAS r: eo  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 21, Folder 6, Document 12 Box 21 Box 21 Folder 6 Folder topic: Rapid Transit | 1966-1967 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/e8f928992a09804d06cff57e56d7fc9f.pdf f883cec5c76f1f4954b1d19a80c7df65 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. SPEECH OF RICHARD H. RICH , CHAIRMAN , METROPOLITAN ATLAN" TA RAPID TRANSIT" AUTHORITY TO ATLANTA ROTARY CLUB v MONDAY , JULY 10, 1967--DINKLER MOTOR - HOTEL o INTRODUCTION "Why don 1 t we already have rapid transit? It ' s too l a te now-it took me 40 minutes on the e x pressway this morning to get to work-a 7-rnile trip ! 11 "We ' ve been talking about rapid transit for 10 y ears--when will we get it?" "What' s the de lay? Why aren ' t we bui l d ing rapi d tr a n sit'? " "WHEN WILL WE GET RAPID TRANSIT?" The se are ques tion s I g et every day fr om people who t a l k to me i n my c a p a c i t y as MARTA Cha i r ma n . Be fo r e I star t t alking about r oute s and othe r details, I would like to answer some of these questions first . 1. It took u s 5 ye ar s to get a constitutional amendme nt a n d s upporting legisla tion p a ssed s e tti ng up t he Authori t y. This was comple ted i n 1965, with the Author ity a c t u a lly corning into being J a nu a r y 3 , 196 6. The MARTA Board o f Di re ctors i s compr i sed o f ten pub lic-spirited citizens--not politica ns-bu t busine ssmen who are concerned about the futu re o f t his gre a t area . 2o S i nce the Authority c a me into be i ng, t h e p r eliminary pla n o f 196 2 h as b e en a lmost comple t e l y upda t ed. The growth o f Atl a nta 6 t h e popula t i on shif ts , and the changes t hey have brought about h ave requir ed a comple te r e-stu dy o f the l i n es a s then p l a nned . 3. F ina nc i n g i s the ~a jor obs t a c le. The BAS IC sys t e m is about 29 mi l es , a nd wil l c o s t abou t 35 0 mil l ion dollars. The b i g ques tion : A. "WHERE I S THE MONEY COMING FROM ?" Firs t , we mu s t p l an th e system s o it is feasib l e a n d we ll -engin eered so it will wo rk . It must c on tribute to the e n tire u rban deve lopme nt, if we are to expect t o get ma jor f und s fr om t h e U . s. Department o f Hou sing a nd Ur b a n Develo pmen t . Addi tiona l studie s are bein g ma de to d etermine the i mpact o f rapid t ransi t on the entir e community. -1- �Congress has passed permi ssive legislation allowing federal grants of two-thirds the cost, wi th one-thi rd matching funds from local sources o However , Congress has APPROPRI ATED funds only in l i mited amounts, because of the severe drain on the Federal Government to finance the war in Viet Nam. So we have federal funds for planning, but massive funds required for construction are not yet available. MARTA has now 960 thousand dollars in contracts , two-thirds of which is federal funds. In addition, the State 1 s first contribution-500 thousand dollars--is now comi ng in . This will enable us to buy some critical right of way and to further refine our engineering. The general sentiment in Washington is that urban areas MU.ST be helped. Atlanta stands very high wi th the f e de r al author ities , and we believe that when massive federal funds a re available , we will get our share o B. But the federal grant is just the begi nni ng of our f i nanci a l problem . Federal funds will be ava i lable only if c i t i es put up the i r :one -thi rd . Our share for the entire s y stem could run up to 200 mi llion dollars--or more . That ' s a lot of money even i f it is spl i t f ive ways between the four counti es a nd Atla nta . Our e conomic consulta nts - -Ha mmer , Greene , Siler As socia t es , I n corpor a ted--a re working now to determine a practi cal , f a ir a nd equitable plan for the local financ i al progr am . Local sha re of f inanc i n g i s e x pected to involve i ssu a nce o f revenue bonds by MARTA , gu a ranteed by contracts wi th the loc a l g ov e r nment s to serv i ce t h e deb t . S i nce this guarantee b y the governments will no d oubt require some inc rea se i n t axes , the fi nanc i n g must b e a ppr ov ed b y t he peop l e i n a r e fere ndum i n each o f the f i ve jurisdictions " Qu i t e l ike l y, we wi ll b e ask i ng for some t hing l i ke 12 o r 1 3 d o ll ar s i n t axes a nnu a lly f rom the t axp ayer who l i v e s i n a 1 5 thous a nd dollar h ouse . We e x pect d etai ls on a f i n a nc ia l p l an v e ry shor t ly " A suc cessful referendu m will require much inte r est a n d great l eadersh i p fr om such me n as y ourselve s o We are i n t h e prov erb ia l "ch icken o r t h e egg " situ a t i o n . The Federal Gov ernment will not provide funds unti l the local gove r n me nts show the i r serious intent to do t he ir p a r t ; and the loca l g overnments will l ike l y b e relu c t a n t to s tep out withou t assu ranc e o f federal suppo rt o -2- �So you fellows tell me : year--5 years--in 10 years? When will we · have rapid transit--nex t We can be ready to put this issue to the ultimate test--a referendum--possibly as early as November of 1968 or Nov ember 1969. This sounds a bit negative but it is typical of the problems MARTA faces. It is a most frustrating task but otherwise a most challenging one . We are not discouraged by the obstables, and we certainly are not quitting or giving up. If we do NOT start now, and get rap i d transit under way , planned and built, traffic congestion will strangle our city when we get into the 1980 ' s . Rapid transit is not competing wi th any other developments designed to alleviate our traffic and transportation problems . The leadership of our city--many of whom are in .this room-must press for speed in the completion of the perimeter e x pressway, I-485 , the Northside Parkway , the widen i ng of the North Ex pressway , the completion of the Stone Mounta i n Ex pressway, as well as improvement of surface streets . These and others must be completed just to "keep even" with our present inadequate thoroughf a res , while we conti nue to develop the long-range thrust for a rap i d trans i t system which wi ll be a "must" i f we are to be a healthy c i ty of two mi llion people . F. very i nteresti ng proposal fo r an i nter i m solution to our traffic problems wa s submitted two weeks a go by Robe r t Sommervi lle o f the Atlanta Tr a ns i t Sy stem . Hi s i dea i s to pave the r ights of way along the ra i lroads and to allow e x press busses to use these s p e ci al l a nes . He p r esen ted t he concept to Mayo r I v a n Al l en , Jr ., wh o i n t urn p a ssed i t a l o n g to MARTA for ou r ser i ous con s i d er at ion. The Boar d ' of Dir e cto r s ha s i nstr ucted the MARTA staff and e ngineer s to s tu d y t h e propos al ob jecti v e l y, t o a na lyz e t he c os t s , c on s truc t ion t imetables , patro nage , and to d e termine whe th e r the busways wou ld delay th e deve lopment o f rapi d t ran s it. I f the "Rapi d Busway s 11 pr o p os al prove s to be f e asible and sources of f i nanc ing can b e discov e r e d, we would e ndorse its imp l e me ntation as an interim .pl a n until the c o mpl e t i on of the rail rapid transit system. - 3- �We would hope to have our studies completed in a few weeks and be inaa position to make a recommendation. But even with a "rapid busways" system operating and with the completion of all the expressways under construction, planned, or projected, we STILL will need rapid transit. The number of cars will have doubled, and without rapid transit the development of Atlanta will be thwarted, and we will slide into a "second class" status as a city. (Atlanta is most unique among American cities in its requirement for a str,ong, highly centralized business district. The role ·of the city in the area and in the entire region evolves from its character as a transportation hub, distribution center, headquarters for regional offices of most of the county ' s larger businesses and industries. If it is to continue and to expand in this role, the maintenance of a strong central business district with rapid transit and convenient access is essential.) We must make our long-range plans as a city the same way we do for our businesses. We must plan for the orderly development and re-development of the entire city, as well as to provide adequate transportation. We must not have a fragmented with with sprawling satellite development J ut a strong and orderly growth process. We can 1 t go out and start digging right now but we must continue to plan for the future. All of this is by way of preliminary, background information. Now I would like to bring you up to date briefly and show you some slides to outline some of our routes, station locations, and typical modern underground, aerial, and grade constructions. First, I must point out that the engineers are just completing their proposals . Before these routes and station locations are finalized, three steps will be taken: 1. MARTA directors must approve these routes and locations in principle and recommend them to the local governments;' 2. The 5 local political bodi es must approve them tentatively; and 3o Public hearings must be held prior to the final appr oval. - 4- �(At this point Mr. Rich showed a number of slides. the commentary he made with these slides.) Following is 1. Being part of the Rapid Transit Authority is both frustrating and challenging. It requires considerable time in the field with our engineering consultants and the MARTA staff, checking out what is geing debeloped on paper. 2. Our lines, routes, and stations are being developed under a contract with Parsons Brinckerhoff-Tudor-Bechtel, planners of the San Francisco System. As in the 1962 report, there is a Transit Center under Broad Street and in the gulch, with lines radiating to the east, west, north, and south o The display at the entry to this room, being seen today for the first ·.time, gives you an idea of how Transit Center might be designed. The Central line branches off at Pershing Point into a Northwest stub and a Northeast line. 3. The Central Line, running in subway or tunnel north from Transit Center, has stations planned at Cain Street, North Avenue, Tenth Street and Pershing Point. 4. The Cain Street Station will be located on Peachtree between Dai Davison's and Peachtree Center. 5. The line follows Peachtree straight out West Peachtree with the next station located at North Avenue, opposite the Life of Georgia Building. 6. The Central Line branches northwest at Pershing Point , with a station at Northside Drive. Further extension of the Northwest Line will depend to a great extent on whether Cobb County becomes a participating member of the Authority. 7. Tbe Northeast Line proceeds generally along Southern Railway rights of way, with stations at Piedmont Road, Lenox Road , Brookhaven, and on to Chamblee, Doraville and ~orcross . 8. The Northeast Line leaves it s .subway just behind White Columns ••• 90 crosses the northeast expressway on aerial structure •• oand swings behind the buildings to go along the right of way on the Southern Railway tracks. 10. The line comes behind Lenox Square and crosses Lenox Road to the station . 11. Considerable work is still being done on the South Line , wi th changes in routing being made to provide a station at the proposed new terminal at the airport, and then on into Forest Park . - 5- �i 1 12. The South Line is also in subway under Broad Street south of Transit Center. 13. The line comes out of subway at Broad Street at Garnett and then proceeds along railroad rights of way southward . 140 The West Line terminates at Lynhurst Drive . This provides access to the citizens living in that area, and also allows those who drive in on I-20 and I-285 to park close to the expressway and ride rapid transit on into town. 15. The West Line comes out of Transit Center, .proceeds through the railroad switching yards and underneath the "Cousins Development" and on out to the west. 16. The line also passes through some portions of the city which are in need of re-development and on which rapid transit can have a beneficial effect. 17. The East Line follows the railroad tracks along Decatur Street and DeKalb Av enue out to Decatur and on to Avondale Estates and I-285 on the east. 18. The East-West Line is on ground level in the "gulch" and proceeds along corridors such as this . 19. A station is planned for the location between Washington Avenue and Piedmont Avenue, and will serve many thousands of riders going to the enlarged Georgia State College, the contemplated Nasher development, the State Capitol complex, Fulton County courthouse , and Atlanta City Hall. 20. The East Line makes e x tensive use of r i ghts of way along the rai l road where ex i sting tracks are not currently in regular o r heavy use. 21 . The proposed basic system i s the heavy red line on the map and contai ns approx imately 30 miles of routes , 25 stati on s , and will have cost about 350 million dollars when comp leted . The extensions in the lighter red would bring the system up to 46 mi les ; and if the e x tension to Cobb County , whown in a broken l ine , i s completed , the entire 66 - mile system cost would be about 500 million ' dollars. WHAT WILL ATLANTA ' S RAP I D TRANS IT SYSTEM ACTUALLY LOOK LIKE? It will definitely not look l ike New York or Chicago subways , s inc e the technology of building cars o f greate r comfort , beauty and speed has greatl y advanced si nc e those s y stems have been built. - 6- �As you are aware, San Francisco has completed a local bond issue of 792 million dollars and has received rederal and state funds which will bring their total cost to approximately one billion dollars. The federal funds have been used largely for independent research concerning construction methods, equipment, etc. Since they have con tr acted with the same engineers we:. are using, we will benefit from hundreds of thousands of dollars of their research. The two outstanding successful systems which have been completed in recent years are those of Toronto and Montreal. 22. Some sections of our s y stem will be in a n open cut such as this one in Toronto with well - l a ndscaped r ights of way. 23. Stations will be designed to provide convenient access to passengers who would arrive and depart b y bus. 24 . Outlying sta tions would have l ar ge p arking lots for p a ssengers who will d r ive to t he stations a n d "park-a nd-ri de " t h e r a p id tr a ns i t on into town. 25 . As in Montreal, the sta tions themselve s will b e colorful, mo d ern, well-lit and spacious . 26. The y wi ll utili ze v ari ous types o f a rchi tecture a n d interio r design to 6 liminate any possibility o f monotony. 27 . They wi ll handl e large numbe rs of pa ssengers safely a n d e ff i c iently. 2Bo Es c a l ato rs wi ll be provided at Transit Cen t er and a t other stations t o minimize climbing of steps. 29 . The car s the ms e lves will be modern , air-cond i tion ed , ligh t -weight , s pac i ous, r ubber-cu s h i oned , fast~ _. and comfo rtab l e. S o n Franc isco has designed · a c ar a long t his line.- For t h o se who say the mo torist will not leave his car to ride rapid transit, we answer, "he will if he is provided with s omething better." We believe tha t a car designed with the attributes I have just described, capable o f speeds up to 70 miles per hour and opera ting a t a verage speeds of 45 miles per hour, automated for split-second timing, WILL attract many thous ands o f motorists o ff our crowded expre ssways a nd city streets to ride rapid transit o It has done this in Toronto and Montreal in both instances attracting many more passengers than predicted o - 7- �TO SUM UP AND IN CLOSING Gmm• We have talked rapid transit in theory for about 10 year s and people generally approve it as a concept . Now we are fast approaching a time for making decisions and for taking action. The growth of metropolitan Atlanta demands adequate planning for the future. The number of cars will have doubled by the mid-1980 ' s·. The population will have reached the 2 million mark in 1983. The time to begin rapid trans i t is now, while we can, rather than in 15 or 20 years when we will not be able to do without it but there will be no place to put it. The plan we are developing is designed to serve the most people in the best manner at the lowest possible cost. Every year we delay means an increase of cost of 18 to 20 million dollars because of inflation and increased construction and other costs . We are e xploring every possibility f or federal and state funds. We who live in the Merropolitan Area and who will reap the benefits of the system , must now take the initiative. The plan will be presented to the voters in a series of public hearings, and no increase of ad valorem taxes can be levied for rapid transit unless approved by the voters. The completion of rapid transit will touch off a boom in this area which will far exceed anything we have seen in the past e Toronto is a living example of what rapid trans it can do for a city. Toronto ope ned a short rapid t rans i t r oute in 1949 and the first extension in 1954 . This system, built then for 67 mill i on dollars, stt off a 10 BILLION dollar development explosion. Between 1959 and 1963, high-rise aprrtments totalling eight a nd a half million square feet, were bui lt . TWO-THIRDS of this construction was within five minutes walk o f a rapid t ransit station. Property values in Metropolitan Toronto have increase d f rom 35 bi llion to 50 billion dollars in the past ten y ears , and two - thirds of this 15 million do llars increase is attributed to rapid transit Q -8 - �(CORRECTION: Please substitute this page for the concluding page of speech of Richard H. Rich, Chairman , Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority, to Atlanta Rotary Club , Monday, July 10, 1967. New page corrects statistics on Toronto patronage.) And the people of Toronto ride the system--118 million passengers in 1966 rode the modern and comfortable system and left their cars at home or in the station parking lots . What has happened in Toronto and what is happening in Montreal, will also happen in Atlanta when we build our rapid transit system. WHEN WILL WE HAVE RAPID TRANS I T? The decision will be made by us as individual voters when we go to the ballot box--next year or the following year--and vote "YES" on a program to finance and build the system . If y ou --and men like you in the five local g overnment s--will assume the role of leadership in supporting this project, we CAN have rapid transit ••. And we WILL have rapid transit .. • An d the continued growth of this great Metropolitan Are a will be assured. Thank y ou . --END-- � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document SPEECH OF RICHARD H. RICH, CHAIRMAN, METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT" AUTHORITY TO ATLANTA ROTARY CLUB, MONDAY, JULY 10, 1967--DINKLER MOTOR HOTEL. INTRODUCTION “Why don't we already have rapid transit? It's too late now-- it took me 40 minutes on the expressway this morning to get to work-- a 7-mile trip:" "We've been talking about rapid transit for 10 years--when will we get it?" "What's the delay? Why aren't we building rapid transit?" “WHEN WILL WE GET RAPID TRANSIT?" These are questions I get every day from people who talk to me in my capacity as MARTA Chairman. Before I start talking about routes and other details, I would like to answer some of these questions first. 1. It took us 5 years to get a constitutional amendment and supporting legislation passed setting up the Authority. This was completed in 1965, with the Authority actually coming into being January 3, 1966. The MARTA Board of Directors is comprised of ten public-spirited citizens--not politicans-- but businessmen who are concerned about the future of this great area. 2. Since the Authority came into being, the preliminary plan of 1962 has been almost completely updated. The growth of Atlanta, the population shifts, and the changes they have brought about have required a complete re-study of the lines as then planned. 3. Financing is the major obstacle. The BASIC system is about 29 miles, and will cost about 350 million dollars. The big question: "WHERE IS THE MONEY COMING FROM?" A. First, we must plan the system so it is feasible and well-engineered so it will work. It must contribute to the entire urban develop- ment, if we are to expect to get major funds from the U. S. Depart- ment of Housing and Urban Development. Additional studies are being made to determine the impact of rapid transit on the entire community. oa] i Congress has passed permissive legislation allowing federal grants of two-thirds the cost, with one-third matching funds from local sources. However, Congress has APPROPRIATED funds only in limited amounts, because of the severe drain on the Federal Government to finance the war in Viet Nam. So we have federal funds for planning, but massive funds required for construction are not yet available. MARTA has now 960 thousand dollars in contracts, two-thirds of which is federal funds. In addition, the State's first contribution-- 500 thousand dollars--is now coming in. This will enable us to buy some critical right of way and to further refine our engineering. The general sentiment in Washington is that urban areas MUST be helped. Atlanta stands very high with the federal authorities, and we believe that when massive federal funds are available, we will get our share. B. But the federal grant is just the beginning of our financial problem. Federal funds will be available only if cities put up their one-third. Our share for the entire system could run up to 200 million dollars--or more. That's a lot of money even if it is split five ways between the four counties and Atlanta. Our economic consultants--Hammer, Greene, Siler Associates, In- corporated--are working now to determine a practical, fair and equitable plan for the local financial program. Local share of fi- nancing is expected to involve issuance of revenue bonds by MARTA, guaranteed by contracts with the local governments to service the debt. Since this guarantee by the governments will no doubt require some increase in taxes, the financing must be approved by the people in a referendum in each of the five jurisdictions. Quite likely, we will be asking for something like 12 or 13 dol- lars in taxes annually from the taxpayer who lives in a 15 thousand dollar house. We expect details on a financial plan very shortly. A successful referendum will require much interest and great leadership from such men as yourselves. We are in the proverbial "chicken or the egg" situation. The Federal Government will not provide funds until the local govern- ments show their serious intent to do their part; and the local governments will likely be reluctant to step out without assurance of federal support. eas So you fellows tell me: When will we have rapid transit--next year--5 years--in 10 years? We can be ready to put this issue to the ultimate test--a refer- endum--possibly as early as November of 1968 or November 1969. This sounds a bit negative but it is typical of the problems MARTA faces. It is a most frustrating task but otherwise a most challenging one, We are not discouraged by the obstables, and we certainly are not quitting or giving up. If we do NOT start now, and get rapid transit under way, planned and built, traffic congestion will strangle our city when we get into the 1980's. Rapid transit is not competing with any other developments designed to alleviate our traffic and transportation problems. The leadership of our city--many of whom are in .this room-- must press for speed in the completion of the perimeter expressway, I-485, the Northside Parkway, the widening of the North Express- way, the completion of the Stone Mountain Expressway, as well as improvement of surface streets. These and others must be com- pleted just to "keep even" with our present inadequate thoroughfares, while we continue to develop the long-range thrust for a rapid transit system which will be a "must" if we are to be a healthy city of two million people. 2 very interesting proposal for an interim solution to our traf- fic problems was submitted two weeks ago by Robert Sommerville of the Atlanta Transit System. His idea is to pave the rights of way along the railroads and to allow express busses to use these special lanes. He presented the concept to Mayor Ivan Allen, Jr., who in turn passed it along to MARTA for our serious consideration. The Board' of Directors has instructed the MARTA staff and engineers to study the proposal objectively, to analyze the costs, construction time- tables, patronage, and to determine whether the busways would delay the development of rapid transit. If the "Rapid Busways" proposal proves to be feasible and sources of financing can be discovered, we would endorse its implementation as an interim -plan until the completion of the rail rapid transit system. We would hope to have our studies completed in a few weeks and be inaa position to make a recommendation. But even with a "rapid busways" system operating and with the completion of all the expressways under construction, planned, or projected, we STILL will need rapid transit. The number of cars will have doubled, and without rapid transit the development of Atlanta will be thwarted, and we will slide into a "second class" status as a city. (Atlanta is most unique among American cities in its requirement for a strong, highly centralized business district. The role of the city in the area and in the entire region evolves from its character as a transportation hub, distribution center, headquarters for region- al offices of most of the county's larger businesses and industries. If it is to continue and to expand in this role, the maintenance of a strong central business district with rapid transit and convenient access is essential.) We must make our long-range plans as a city the same way we do for our businesses. We must plan for the orderly development and re-development of the entire city, as well as to provide ade- quate transportation. We must not have a fragmented with with sprawling satellite development But a strong and orderly growth process. We can't go out and start digging right now but we must continue to plan for the future. All of this is by way of preliminary, background information. Now I would like to bring you up to date briefly and show you some slides to outline some of our routes, station locations, and typical modern underground, aerial, and grade constructions. First, I must point out that the engineers are just completing their proposals. Before these routes and station locations are finalized, three steps will be taken: 1. MARTA directors must approve these routes and locations in principle and recommend them to the local governments; ' 2. The 5 local political bodies must approve them tentatively; and 3. Public hearings must be held prior to the final approval. the 10. il. (At this point Mr. Rich showed a number of slides. Following is commentary he made with these slides.) Being part of the Rapid Transit Authority is both frustrating and challenging. It requires considerable time in the field with our engineering consultants and the MARTA staff, checking out what is geing debeloped on paper. Our lines, routes, and stations are being developed under a contract with Parsons Brinckerhoff-Tudor-Bechtel, planners of the San Fran- cisco System. As in the 1962 report, there is a Transit Center under Broad Street and in the gulch, with lines radiating to the east, west, north, and south. The display at the entry to this room, being seen today for the first time, gives you an idea of how Transit Center might be designed. The Central line branches off at Pershing Point into a Northwest stub and a Northeast line. The Central Line, running in subway or tunnel north from Transit Center, has stations planned at Cain Street, North Avenue, Tenth Street and Pershing Point. The Cain Street Station will be located on Peachtree between Dai Davison's and Peachtree Center. The line follows Peachtree straight out West Peachtree with the next station located at North Avenue, opposite the Life of Georgia Building. The Central Line branches northwest at Pershing Point, with a station at Northside Drive. Further extension of the Northwest Line will depend to a great extent on whether Cobb County becomes a participating member of the Authority. The Northeast Line proceeds generally along Southern Railway rights of way, with stations at Piedmont Road, Lenox Road, Brookhaven, and on to Chamblee, Doraville and Norcross. The Northeast Line leaves its subway just behind White Columns... crosses the northeast expressway on aerial structure...and swings behind the buildings to go along the right of way on the Southern Railway tracks. The line comes behind Lenox Square and crosses Lenox Road to the station. Considerable work is still being done on the South Line, with changes in routing being made to provide a station at the pro- posed new terminal at the airport, and then on into Forest Park, Las Lex 14. LBs 16. Bs 18. 19. 20. 21 The South Line is also in subway under Broad Street south of Transit Center. The line comes out of subway at Broad Street at Garnett and then proceeds along railroad rights of way southward. The West Line terminates at Iiynhurst Drive. This provides access to the citizens living in that area, and also allows those who drive in on I-20 and I-285 to park close to the expressway and ride rapid transit on into town. The West Line comes out of Transit Center, proceeds through the railroad switching yards and underneath the "Cousins Davecopmenc! and on out to the west. The line also passes through some portions of the city which are in need of re-development and on which rapid transit can have a beneficial effect. The East Line follows the railroad tracks along Decatur Street and DeKalb Avenue out to Decatur and on to Avondale Estates and I-285 on the east. The East-West Line is on ground level in the "gulch" and proceeds along corridors such as this. A station is planned for the location between Washington Avenue and Piedmont Avenue, and will serve many thousands of riders going to the enlarged Georgia State College, the contemplated Nasher development, the State Capitol complex, Fulton County Courthouse, and Atlanta City Hall. The East Line makes extensive use of rights of way along the rail- road where existing tracks are not currently in regular or heavy use. The proposed basic system is the heavy red line on the map and contains approximately 30 miles of routes, 25 stations, and will have cost about 350 million dollars when completed. The extensions in the lighter red would bring the system up to 46 miles; and if the extension to Cobb County, whown in a broken line, is com- pleted, the entire 66-mile system cost would be about 500 million dollars. WHAT WILL ATLANTA'S RAPID TRANSIT SYSTEM ACTUALLY LOOK LIKE? It will definitely not look like New York or Chicago subways, Since the technology of building cars of greater comfort, beauty and speed has greatly advanced since those systems have been built. aG= 226 23. 24. 25 26. 27 « 28. 29. As you are aware, San Francisco has completed a local bond issue of 792 million dollars and has received rederal and state funds which will bring their total cost to approximately one billion dollars. The federal funds have been used largely for independent research concerning construction methods, equipment, etc. Since they have contracted with the same engineers we: are using, we will benefit from hundreds of thousands of dollars of their research. The two outstanding successful systems which have been com- pleted in recent years are those of Toronto and Montreal. Some sections of our system will be in an open cut such as this one in Toronto with well-landscaped rights of way. Stations will be designed to provide convenient access to pas- sengers who would arrive and depart by bus. Outlying stations would have large parking lots for passengers who will drive to the stations and "park-and-ride" the rapid transit on into town. As in Montreal, the stations themselves will be colorful, modern, well-lit and spacious. They will utilize various types of architecture and interior design to eliminate any possibility of monotony. They will handle large numbers of passengers safely and efficiently. Escalators will be provided at Transit Center and at other stations to minimize climbing of steps. The cars themselves will be modern, air-conditioned, light-weight, spacious, rubber-cushioned, fast,:. and comfortable. Son Francisco has designed a car along this line.- For those who say the motorist will not leave his car to ride rapid transit, we answer, "he will if he is provided with something better." We believe that a car designed with the attributes I have just described, capable of speeds up to 70 miles per hour and operating at average speeds of 45 miles per hour, automated for split-second timing, WILL attract many thousands of motorists off our crowded expressways and city streets to ride rapid transit. It has done this in Toronto and Montreal in both instances attracting many more passengers than predicted. aa as TO SUM UP AND IN CLOSING.... We have talked rapid transit in theory for about 10 years and people generally approve it as a concept. Now we are fast approach- ing a time for making decisions and for taking action. The growth of metropolitan Atlanta demands adequate planning for the future. The number of cars will have doubled by the mid-1980's. The population will have reached the 2 million mark in 1983. The time to begin rapid transit is now, while we can, rather than in 15 or 20 years when we will not be able to do without it but there will be no place to put it. The plan we are developing is designed to serve the most people in the best manner at the lowest possible cost. Every year we delay means an increase of cost of 18 to 20 million dollars because of inflation and increased construction and other costs. We are exploring every possibility for federal and state funds. We who live in the Merropolitan Area and who will reap the bene- fits of the system, must now take the initiative. The plan will be presented to the voters in a series of public hearings, and no increase of ad valorem taxes can be levied for rapid transit unless approved by the voters. The completion of rapid transit will touch off a boom in this area which will far exceed anything we have seen in the past. Toronto is a living example of what rapid transit can do for a city. Toronto opened a short rapid transit route in 1949 and the first extension in 1954. This system, built then for 67 million dollars, stt off a 10 BILLION dollar development explosion. Between 1959 and 1963, high-rise aprrtments totalling eight and a half million square feet, were built. TWO-THIRDS of this construction was with- in five minutes walk of a rapid transit station. Property values in Metropolitan Toronto have increased from 35 billion to 50 billion dollars in the past ten years, and two-thirds of this 15 million dollars increase is attributed to rapid transit. =e (CORRECTION: Please substitute this page for the concluding page of speech of Richard H. Rich, Chairman, Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority, to Atlanta Rotary Club, Monday, July 10, 1967. New page corrects statistics on Toronto patronage.) And the people of Toronto ride the system--118 million passengers in 1966 rode the modern and comfortable system and left their cars at home or in the station parking lots. What has happened in Toronto and what is happening in Montreal, will also happen in Atlanta when we build our rapid transit system. WHEN WILL WE HAVE RAPID TRANSIT? The decision will be made by us as individual voters when we go to the ballot box--next year or the following year--and vote "YES" on a program to finance and build the system. If you--and men like you in the five local governments--will assume the role of leadership in supporting this project, we CAN have rapid transit... And we WILL have rapid transit... And the continued growth of this great Metropolitan Area will be assured. Thank you. --END--  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 21, Folder 6, Document 11 Box 21 Box 21 Folder 6 Folder topic: Rapid Transit | 1966-1967 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/b5ed4845460c3bc00edc700ecb925947.pdf 1d6bbf0485a1d89af27f201295c3bb5d Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. AFF ILIATED COMPANIES : ETHCO , INC . RESIDENTIAL LAND DEVELOPMENT FRANK ETHERIDGE, INC . COMMERCIAL & INDUSTRIAL F I NANCING - LEASING Etheridge & Company, Inc. 7?.ealtors 3100 · ?veortgages · Insurance · Financing MAPLE DRI V E , N . E., ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30305 PH ONE 404 / 261 -169 0 August 3, 1967 The Honorable Ivan Allen Mayor, City of Atlanta City Hall Atlanta, Georgia Dear Ivan: During the past several days I happen to have been in groups where traffic congestion, rapid transit, the Sommerville proposal, etc., have been topics of considerable conversation. I listened to the reas ons given by MARTA for rejection of the "busways" proposal, and the reasons may seem logical; however, it is my opinion that most of the people feel that something must be done right away, and although the cos t of the Sommerville proposal may have been understated, and the timing estimates may have been o ff, I am of the opinion that we should proceed on the Sommerville proposal immediately, possibly combining both in our future planning . Best regards. FGE/sr � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document AFFILIATED COMPANIES: ETHCO. INC. RESIDENTIAL LAND DEVELOPMENT cna ermencee.me | Lrheridge & Campany, /nc. FINANCING 2 LEASING Realtors + “Mortgages * Insurance * Financing 3100 MAPLE DRIVE,N.E., ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30305 PHONE 404-/ 261-1690 August 3, 1967 The Honorable Ivan Allen ¢ Mayor, City of Atlanta City Hall Atlanta, Georgia Dear Ivan: During the past several days I happen to have been in groups where traffic congestion, rapid transit, the Sommerville proposal, etc., have been topics of considerable conversation. I listened to the reasons given by MARTA for rejection of the "busways" proposal, and the reasons may seem logical; however, it is my opinion that most of the people feel that something must be done right away, and although the cost of the Sommerville proposal may have been understated, and the timing estimates may have been off, I am of the opinion that we should proceed on the Sommerville proposal immediately, possibly combining both in our future planning. Best regards. Sincerely yours, FGE/sr  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 21, Folder 6, Document 10 Box 21 Box 21 Folder 6 Folder topic: Rapid Transit | 1966-1967 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/fb152f216f84365e1471b153f26a5198.pdf cda1aab90818dc7c86c14bce9979afdc Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. l August 7, 1967 Mr . Frank G . Etheridge Etheridge & Company, Inc . 3100 Maple Drive . N . E . Atlanta, Georgia 30305 De r Tobe: Thank you for your letter of August 3 and yo\1r concern about imrnediat action to elimin te traffic cong tion. Just becau e MAR TA rejected the bu ways propos 1, this does not me nth t e are not pursuing oth r po sibl olutions . With be t wi hes. I am Sine rely, Ivan Allen, Jr. Mayor IAJr: o � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document 10 Ay August 7, 1967 Mr. Frank G. Etheridge Etheridge & Company, Inc. 3100 Maple Drive, N. E. Atlanta, Georgia 30305 Dear Tobe: Thank you for your letter of August 3 and your concern about immediate action to eliminate traffic congestion. Just because MARTA rejected the busways proposal, this does not mean that we are not pursuing other possible solutions. With best wishes, I am Sincerely, Ivan Allen, Jr. Mayor IAJr:eo  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 21, Folder 6, Document 9 Box 21 Box 21 Folder 6 Folder topic: Rapid Transit | 1966-1967 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/c1b6eed970a1c5a2bfd58b4e2c31ccfc.pdf 05f9304737cbae60c8e5354e2ca658bb Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. SUMMARY OF MARTA REVIEW OF "RAPID BUSWAYS" PROPOSAL. As requested by Mayor Ivan Allen, Jr. on June 28, 1967, MARTA and its staff and consultants have reviewed the proposal made by the Atlanta Transit System for "RAPID BUSWAYS 11 in Atlanta. The proposal was given serious and objective consideration and study over a period of approximately five weeks. Contact was made with Atlanta Transit System personnel and additional material was obtained from them. MARTA reports three basic findings: 1. The costs to develop the busways were seriously underestimated. MARTA estimates that the costs would be three to four times the amount noted in the proposal. 2. Time schedules also were seriously underestimated. No busway could be made operational in less than 3½ years, the same time required for the East Line of rapid transit. The interim between completion of busways and completion of rail rapid transit would range from a minimum of one year to a maximum of three years. 3. The amount of busways coinciding with MARTA routes is no more than 50 percent, and quite likely would be no more than one third and require considerable expenditures which would never be recovered by MARTA. MARTA makes two recommendations: 1. Because of the high cost for very short term relief , implementation of the "Rapid Busways 11 proposal should not be attempted . 2. If the public interest demands an e x perimental development o f busways , it is recommended that any experimental busway be built first along MARTA ' s East-West Line . The attached r eport provides detai l s fo r the above findings and r e c ommendati ons., - 1 - �CLOSING SUMMARY Based on MARTA's study and review of the "Rapid Busways" proposal , MARTA concludes that the implementation of the busways proposal as it now stands is not practicablee --The time required to complete a specific busways and rapid transit line (except where subway is concerned) is virtually the same. The " interim" between operational busways .and operational rapid transit would be almost entirely consumed by the laying of tracks for rapid transit. --The total cost of busways is not $52 million as described in the proposal , but, according to MARTA engineers, more like $150 million. --While $150 million is indeed much less than the cost of rapid transit, busways so constructed would not do the job of relieving traffic as will be required for a permanent longrange solution for a city of 2 million people. --Although there is a great differential in costs , it would be much more wasteful to spend $150 million for an inadequate interim system than to spend $350 million for permanent and efficient relief. MARTA therefore : 1. Disapproves of busways as a permanent solution and recommends against its implementation as an interim measure; 2. Concludes that the experimental route proposed by the Atlanta Tr ansit System as an interim solution would be a waste of public money ; 3. Recommend s that if it is deemed necessary by the Atlanta ci ty o ffici al s to develop an experimental section , that the experimental section should utilize MARTA ' s East-West Lines , and use them exclusively and not attempt to use rights of way which will never be of any value to MARTA. - E~D- � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document SUMMARY OF MARTA REVIEW OF "RAPID BUSWAYS" PROPOSAL. As requested by Mayor Ivan Allen, Jr. on June 28, 1967, MARTA and its staff and consultants have reviewed the proposal made by the Atlanta Transit System for "RAPID BUSWAYS" in Atlanta. The proposal was given serious and objective consideration and study over a period of approximately five weeks. Contact was made with Atlanta Transit System personnel and additional material was obtained from them. MARTA reports three basic findings: l. 2e The costs to develop the busways were seriously under- estimated. MARTA estimates that the costs would be three to four times the amount noted in the proposal. Time schedules also were seriously underestimated. No busway could be made operational in less than 345 years, the same time required for the East Line of rapid transit. The interim between completion of busways and completion of rail rapid transit would range from a minimum of one year to a maximum of three years. The amount of busways coinciding with MARTA routes is no more than 50 percent, and quite likely would be no more than one third and require considerable expendi- tures which would never be recovered by MARTA. MARTA makes two recommendations: Ls Because of the high cost for very short term relief, im- plementation of the "Rapid Busways" proposal should not be attempted. If the public interest demands an experimental develop- ment of busways, it is recommended that any experimental busway be built first along MARTA's East-West Line. The attached report provides details for the above findings and recommendations. oh % CLOSING SUMMARY Based on MARTA's study and review of the "Rapid Busways" pro- posal, MARTA concludes that the implementation of the busways proposal as it now stands is not practicable. --The time required to complete a specific busways and rapid transit line (except where subway is concerned) is virtually the same. The "interim" between operational busways and operational rapid transit would be almost entirely consumed by the laying of tracks for rapid transit. --The total cost of busways is not $52 million as described in the proposal, but, according to MARTA engineers, more like $150 million. --While $150 million is indeed much less than the cost of rapid transit, busways so constructed would not do the job of relieving traffic as will be required for a permanent long- range solution for a city of 2 million people. --Although there is a great differential in costs, it would be much more wasteful to spend $150 million for an inadequate interim system than to spend $350 million for permanent and efficient relief. MARTA therefore: l. Disapproves of busways as a permanent solution and recommends against its implementation as an interim measure; 2e- Concludes that the experimental route proposed by the Atlanta Transit System as an interim solution would be a waste of public money; 3. Recommends that if it is deemed necessary by the Atlanta city officials to develop an experimental section, that the experimental section should utilize MARTA's East-West Lines, and use them exclusively and not attempt to use rights of way which will never be of any value to MARTA. -END—  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 21, Folder 6, Document 8 Box 21 Box 21 Folder 6 Folder topic: Rapid Transit | 1966-1967 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/f5986620fc3167a485c3668f843bd28f.pdf 2dbb003671fe03e3fb47f50568b31f67 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. - METROPOLI TAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY ATLANTA, GEORGIA STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL CONDITION J ULY 31 , 196 7 ASSETS Cash in Banks : C & S Nationa l Bank First National Bank - Payroll Trust Company of Georgia Fulton National Bank - Sec t ion 9 $ 10,729.07 2 ,33 2. 07 1 , 000 . 00 90,283 . 58 Depos i t In Transit (DeKalb Coun ty Appropria tion) 20,69 2 . 50 Investment s : U. S . Treasur y Bi lls U. S. Treasury Bills - Se ction 9 130 , 585.50 0 Pe tty Cash 25 . 00 Accounts Rec e ivable: Gwinnett County - 1967 Gwinnett County - 1966 $9, 105 . 00 4 ,552 . 50 13 , 657 . 50 $269, 305. 22_ TOTAL ASSETS LIABILITIES Accounts Payab le $ 91 , 857 .45 Payroll Taxes Wi t hheld a nd Accrued Reserves : ARMPC : Ur ban Des i g n St udy At lanta Transit Study Parsons-Brinckerho ff-Tudo r - Bechtel : Section 9 Matching Retainer Agreement : Transportation Study Public Information Surverying TOTAL LIABILITIES SURPLUS 1, 166.97 5,800 . 00 1 , 000 . 00 70,000 . 00 $ 207 . 70 696 . 30 5,82 0 .77 6,724 . 77 176,549.19 $ 92 ,756.03 I � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY ATLANTA, GEORGIA STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL CONDITION JULY 31, 1967 ASSETS Cash in Banks: C & S National Bank $ 10,729.07 First National Bank - Payroll 2,332.07 Trust Company of Georgia 1,000.00 Fulton National Bank - Section 9 90,283.58 Deposit In Transit (DeKalb County Appropriation) 20,692.50 Investments: U. S, Treasury Bills 130,585.50 U. S. Treasury Bills - Section 9 0 Petty Cash 25.00 Accounts Receivable: Gwinnett County - 1967 $9,105.00 Gwinnett County - 1966 4,552.50 13,657.50 TOTAL ASSETS LIABILITIES Accounts Payable S$ 91,857.45 Payroll Taxes Withheld and Accrued 1,166.97 Reserves: ARMPC : Urban Design Study 5,800.00 Atlanta Transit Study 1,000.00 Parsons~Brinckerhoff-Tudor-Bechtel: Section 9 Matching 70,000.00 Retainer Agreement: Transportation Study $ 207.70 Public Information 696,30 Surverying 5,820.77 6,724.77 TOTAL LIABILITIES SURPLUS $269,305.22 176,549.19 $_92 756.03  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 21, Folder 6, Document 7 Box 21 Box 21 Folder 6 Folder topic: Rapid Transit | 1966-1967 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/c590bfef4cb1e093d58ba4ea33d3ca30.pdf 0c4c934367187ea88cda7bd8fe1e1b15 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY BUDGET REPORT JULY 31 , 196 7 BUDGET 1967 Unappropriated Surp lu s ACTUAL JANUARY 1 , 196 7 TO JULY 31 , 196 7 $128,281.64 $128,281.6 4 Appropriations : Cit y of Atlanta Clayton County DeKalb Count y Fu lton Coun ty Gwinnett County Sub-Totals $ 84,030 . 00 23,190.00 82 , 770 . 00 91,800 . 00 lLl 10 . 00 $300,000 . 00 $ 63) 022.5 0 17,392 .50 41 ,38 5 . 00 68,85 0 . 00 9,1 05 .·00 $199,755. 00 Interest Income $ $ I NCOME Fed E:ral Fund s : 702 Loan Sec tion 9 Grant Interest - Federal Funds Sub-Totals 5,520.00 $ 95,000 . 00 276,000 . 00 2,792.27 $3 71,0 00 . 00 $ 60,0 00 . 00 67,686.12 597.46 $128,283. 58 TOTAL INCOME $676,520.00 $33 0 ,830 . 85 TOTAL INCOME AND UNAPPROPRIATED SURPLUS $804_, 801 . 64 $459,112.49 0 EXPENSES Staff Cost: Sa l a rie s Ex penses Benefits: Socia 1 Secur it y Guaran t y Fund Heal th and Acc i dent I n surance Retiremen t Workmen's Compensa t ion Sub-Total s $ 68,950 . 00 10,500.00 $ 35,~20.51 6,361. 63 1,109.00 533 . 00 1,680.00 10,000 . 00 99 .00 $ 92,871.00 1, 002 . 75 400.00 64 0 . 67 300 . 54 104.00 $ 44,23 0 . 10 Boa rd Meetings $ 3,150.00 $ 1, 900.00 Admi n i strative a nd Of fic e Overh ead : Rent Commun i cations a nd Postag e Furn i ture and Eq uipment Su ppli e s Pr i n t ing Aud i tor Account ant Pub lie Informa tion Adv i sory I nsur ance ~ Publ i c Liability Depos i tory and Forgery Fidelity Bond Sub - Tot a l 72. 00 56. 00 199 . 00 51,177. 00 $ 55 . 00 56. 27 198.60 $ 20 ,2 73 . 86 CARRIED FORWARD i l 47,1 98.00 $ 66 , 403.96 $ 3,000 . 00 2,000 , 00 2,000 . 00 3, 600.0 0 1 ,000 . 00 250 . 00 1 ,000.00 33,000.00 5, 000 . 00 $ 1, 750 . 00 1,101.21 411. 97 1,214 . 78 623 , 56 250 , 00 250. 00 13,385 . 12 977 . 35 �METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY BUDGET REPORT JULY 31, 1967 BUDGET 1967 TOTAL INCOME AND UNAPPROPRIATED SURPLUS BROUGHT FORWARD ACTUAL JANUARY 1, 196 7 TO JULY 31, 196 7 $804,801.64 $459,112.49 Brought Forward $147,198 . 00 $ 66,403.96 Counsel Consultants: Atlanta Region Metropolitan Planning Commission Urban Design Study: Section 9 Matching Atlanta Transit Study: Section 9 Matching Parsons-Brinckerhoff-Tudor-Becktel: 702 Loan Section 9: Federal Match ing Retainer Ag reement Res earch and Te chn i cal Services Sub -Totals $ 20,000.00 $ $ 31,250.00 $ 29,939.00 32,667.00 16,333.00 8,000.00 9,800.00 3,333.00 1,667.00 95,000.00 0 1,000.00 60,000.00 240,000.00 120,000.00 60,000.00 2,000.00 $602,250.00 60,000.00 100,000.00 21,859.05 1,595.84 $292,193.89 TOTAL EXPENSES $769,448.00 $366,356.46 SURPLUS ~ ~ EXPENSES J.5,J~J.6~ 7,758.61" ~2,Z.56,QJ � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY BUDGET REPORT JULY 31, 1967 ACTUAL JANUARY 1, 1967 BUDGET TO 1967 JULY 31, 1967 Unappropriated Surplus $128,281.64 $128,281.64 INCOME Appropriations: City of Atianta S 84,030.00 $ 63,022.50 Clayton County 23,190.00 17,392.50 DeKalb County 82,770.00 41,385.00 Fulton County 91,800.00 68,850.00 Gwinnett County 18,210.00 9,105.00 Sub-Totals $300,000, 00 $199,755.00 Interest Income S$ 5,520.00 $ 2,792.27 Federal Funds: 702 Loan $ 95,000.00 $ 60,000.00 Section 9 Grant 276,000.00 67,686.12 Interest - Federal Funds 0 597.46 Sub-Totals $371,000, 00 $128 ,283.58 TOTAL INCOME $676,520.00 $330,830.85 TOTAL INCOME AND UNAPPROPRIATED SURPLUS $804,801.64 $459,112.49 EXPENSES Staff Cost: Salaries $ 68,950.00 § 35,420.51 Expenses 10,500,00 6,361.63 Benefits: Social Security 1,109,00 1,002.75 Guaranty Fund 533.00 400.00 Health and Accident Insurance 1,680.00 640.67 Retirement 10,000.00 300.54 Workmen's Compensation 99.00 104,00 Sub~Totals $_ 92,871.00 $ 44,230.10 Board Meetings $3,150.00 $1,900.00 Administrative and Office Overhead: Rent S 3,000.00 $ ‘1,750.00 Communications and Postage 2,000,00 1,101.21 Furniture and Equipment 2,000.00 411.97 Supplies 3,600.00 1,214,78 Printing 1,000.00 623.56 Auditor 250,00 250,00 Accountant 1,000,00 250,00 Public Information 33,000,00 135,385,172 Advisory 5,000.00 977.35 Insurance; Public Liability 72.00 55.00 Depository and Forgery 56.00 56.27 Fidelity Bond 199.00 198.60 Sub-Totals §_ 51,177.00 S$ 20,273.86 CARRIED FORWARD $147,198.00 $ 66,403.96 METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT BUDGET REPORT TOTAL INCOME AND UNAPPROPRIATED SURPLUS BROUGHT FORWARD EXPENSES Brought Forward Counsel Consultants: Atlanta Region Metropolitan Planning Commission Urban Design Study: Section 9 Matching Atlanta Transit Study: Section 9 Matching JULY 31, Parsons-Brinckerhoff-Tudor-Becktel: 702 Loan Section 9: Federal Matching Retainer Agreement Research and Technical Services Sub-Totals TOTAL EXPENSES SURPLUS 1967 AUTHORITY ACTUAL JANUARY 1, 1967 BUDGET TO 1967 JULY 31, 1967 $804,801.64 $459,112.49 $147,198.00 $ 66,403.96 $ 20,000.00 $ 7,758.61 $ 31,250.00 $ 29,939.00 32,667.00 8,000.00 16,333.00 9,800.00 3,333.00 0 1,667.00 1,000.00 95,000.00 60,000.00 240,000.00 60,000.00 120,000.00 100,000.00 60,000.00 21,859.05 2,000.00 1,595.84 $602,250.00 $292,193.89 $769 ,448 .00 $366 , 356.46 $35,353.64 $92,756.03  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 21, Folder 6, Document 6 Box 21 Box 21 Folder 6 Folder topic: Rapid Transit | 1966-1967 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/9948f7bab8135fc8b44162c44114a837.pdf 424542a69d09db7d3e6a16e3524b0e9e Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. MINUTES OF THE EIGHTEENTH MEETING OF THE METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY AUGUST 1, 1967 The Board of Directors of the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority held its regular meeting on August 1, 1967, at 3:00 P.M. in the Glenn Building Conference Room, Atlanta. Mr. Richard H. · Rich, Chairman, presided. MEMBERS PRESENT: Robert F. Adamson (City of Atlanta) Sanford Atwood (DeKalb County) M. C. Bishop (Fulton County) Edgar Blalock (Clayton County) Roy A. Blount (DeKalb County) Rawson Haverty (City of Atlanta) K. A. McMillon (Gwinnett County) Richard H. Rich (City of Atlanta) MEMBERS ABSENT: L. D. Milton (City of Atlanta) OTHERS PRESENT: Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority H. L. Stuart, General Manager Glenn E . Bennett, Secretary King Elliott, Public Information Director Earl Nelson, Chief Engineer H. N. Johnson, Secretary to General Manager Joan Eschenbrenner, Secretary MARTA Advisory Committee H. Bo y er Marx, American Society of Landscape Architects Roy J. Boston , P.E ., Georgia Society of Professional Engineers �Consultants W. 0. Salter, Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor, Bechtel, San Francisco J. A. Coil, Resident Manager, Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor, Bechtel, Atlanta Raymond O'Neil, Deputy Resident Manager, Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor, Bechtel, Atlanta R. W. Gustafson, Supervising Engineer, Parsons, BrinckerhoffTudor, Bechtel, Atlanta Robert P. Barksdale, Project Estimator, Parsons, BrinckerhoffTudor, Bechtel, Atlanta David McBrayer, Traffic Engineer, Parsons, BrinckerhoffTudor, Bechtel, Atlanta Louis Dismukes, Eric Hill Associates, Atlanta C. B. Cleveland, Eric Hill Associates, Atlanta Arden Brey, Eric Hill Associates, Atlanta W. Stell Huie, Huie & Harland, Atlanta Tom Watson Brown, Huie & Harland, Atlanta Others Joseph Errigo, Urban and Community Development Assistant, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Atlanta P.A. Springer, Atlanta Traffic and Safety Council Robert W. Roseveare, Traffic Engineer, DeKalb County J. B. Cooley, Planning and Research Engineer, Bureau of Public Roads Norman J. Van Ness, Bureau of Public Roads George B. Pilkington, Bureau of Public Roads Gerald L. Smith, Bureau of Public Roads Joseph E. Lay, Robinson-Humphrey Company, Atlanta William M. G. Fletcher, White, Weld & Co., New York Dick Hebert, Atlanta Constitution David Nordan, Atlanta Journal Art Schultz, WSB Radio Ken Goodnight, WSB-TV Abe Gallman, WSB-TV Harvey Kramer, Intern, Fulton County Comptroller's Office Al Barr, Intern, Fulton Count y Comptroller's Office Bill Hayes, Intern, Fulton County Comptroller's Office J . D. Wingfield, Jr . , Jerry A . Coursey, Mrs . Margaret C . Breland, Miss Claudette Parrish, Tim Urban, Atlanta Region Metropolitan Planning Commission - 2 - �The meeting was called to order by the Chairman. Minutes Upon motion by Mr. Bishop, seconded by Mr. Blount, the reading of the minutes of the July meeting was dispensed with and they were unanimously approved. Financial Report The General Manager presented the financial report as of July 31, 1967, which is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes ~ DeKalb County had sent in its second quarterly payment; Gwinnett County was the only one in arrears. Progress Reports General Manager Mr. Stuart reported on the two-week managerial seminar he attended at Kent State University, Kent, Ohio, sponsored by Kent University and the Department of Housing and Urban Development. The General Manager said Los Angeles, Seattle and Washington, D.C., were to have referenda during 1968 with regard to rapid transit. He pointed out that insufficiency of federal funds may be less important than the competition from these cities. Mr. Rich mentioned the importance of taking steps to hold a referendum in 1968. Mr. Stuart reported on meetings with Cousins Properties regarding MARTA's requirements. Cousins Properties were about to incur certain construction expenses in the Air Rights area in their efforts to provide for future rapid transit operations; these were costs that could be charged to MARTA under appropriate agreements. Mr. Stuart requested the Board's approval to continue negotiations with Cousins. Costs involved had not been determined; however, Mr. Stuart estimated them to be between $70,000 and $90,000. The Chief Engineer was to meet with representatives from Cousins Properties and reach agreement as to exact costs which would be eventually chargeable to MARTA, when funds were available. MARTA would be responsible for accrued interest as well. It was moved by Mr. Bishop and seconded by Mr. Haverty that the General Manager continue negotiations with Cousins Properties with an indication of intent o~ the part of the Authority, provided all requirements were met. - 3 - �Mr. Stuart said the proposed subcontract between Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor, Bechtel and Law Engineering Testing Company for test borings had been reviewed and found to be in order. Upon motion by Mr. Bishop, seconded by Mr. McMillan, approval was given to proceed with the subcontract. Mr. Rich suggested that in the future the General Manager prepare a brief write-up on each proposed subcontract prior to the Board meeting. Consultants Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor, Bechtel Mr. Coil summarized the report given at the briefing prior to the Board meeting, which included parking layouts, patronage estimates, and parking lot requirements for the 64-mile system; work contemplated in connection with the soils engineer on the central and west lines which Law Engineering Testing Company was to do; as well as the work b e ing done in San Francisco on central line alignments affecting the I-75/I-85 connector on West Peachtree Street. Hammer, Greene, Siler Associates In the a bsence of Mr. Ha mme r, Mr . .Be nnett said the report on financi a l f e asibility was comple t e d and that copies would be made available to the Board very soon. "Rapid Busways" Proposal As a re sult of a r e ques t f rom Mayor ·rvan All e n, the Board h a d direct e d t h e MARTA staf f to r e vi e w the r a pid busways proposal made recently by the Atlanta Transit System. Mr. Stuart read the complete report of this evaluation, the summary of which is attached hereto and made a part of the minutes . In res ponse to a ques tion from Mr. Bla lock, Mr . Stuart s a i d th e right s -of-wa y f o r rap i d b u s wa y s a nd r a pid t r a nsit were not the same . The Ch airman polled e ach Director for his reaction to the report. Mr. Mc Mi llan was e mphatic in hoping that nothing would divert the Board from i ts e fforts to bring rail rapi d transit to me t r opolitan At l a n ta. Mr. Bis hop sa i d he was c oncerned with t h e l ega l e n tangl eme nts i nvo lve d in th e bus ways p r o po sal . Mr. Have r t y sta t e d h e woul d be i nteres t ed i n the r e b u tta l from t h e At l a n t a Transit Sy s t e m wi th r e g a rd to t h e r e po r t . Mr . Adams on fe lt t h ere were too many pro b l e ms - 4 - �I and that there would be a delay in rapid transit if the busways proposal were accepted. After discussion, it was moved by Mr. Blount, seconded by Mr. Bishop, and unanimously agreed that the Chairman forward to Mayor Allen MARTA's recommendation that the implementation of the "Rapid Busways" concept not be attempted. Other Business The Chairman introduced the following interns from the Fulton County Comptroller's Office: Harvey Kramer, Al Barr and Bill Hayes. Adjournment The Chairman adjourned the meeting at 3:50 P.M. Next Meeting September 5, 1967. - 5 - � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document MINUTES OF THE EIGHTEENTH MEETING OF THE METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY AUGUST 1, 1967 The Board of Directors of the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority held its regular meeting on August 1, 1967, at 3:00 P.M. in the Glenn Building Conference Room, Atlanta. Mr. Richard H. Rich, Chairman, presided. MEMBERS PRESENT: Robert F. Adamson (City of Atlanta) Sanford Atwood (DeKalb County) M. C. Bishop (Fulton County) Edgar Blalock (Clayton County) Roy A. Blount (DeKalb County) Rawson Haverty (City of Atlanta) K. A. McMillon (Gwinnett County) Richard H. Rich (City of Atlanta) MEMBERS ABSENT: L. D. Milton (City of Atlanta) OTHERS PRESENT: Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority H. L. Stuart, General Manager Glenn E. Bennett, Secretary King Elliott, Public Information Director Earl Nelson, Chief Engineer H. N. Johnson, Secretary to General Manager Joan Eschenbrenner, Secretary MARTA Advisory Committee H. Boyer Marx, American Society of Landscape Architects Roy J. Boston, P.E., Georgia Society of Professional Engineers Consultants W. O. Salter, Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor, Bechtel, San Francisco J. A. Coil, Resident Manager, Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor, Bechtel, Atlanta Raymond O'Neil, Deputy Resident Manager, Parsons, Brincker- hoff-Tudor, Bechtel, Atlanta R. W. Gustafson, Supervising Engineer, Parsons, Brinckerhoff- Tudor, Bechtel, Atlanta Robert P. Barksdale, Project Estimator, Parsons, Brinckerhoff- Tudor, Bechtel, Atlanta David McBrayer, Traffic Engineer, Parsons, Brinckerhoff- Tudor, Bechtel, Atlanta Louis Dismukes, Eric Hill Associates, Atlanta Cc. B. Cleveland, Eric Hill Associates, Atlanta Arden Brey, Eric Hill Associates, Atlanta W. Stell Huie, Huie & Harland, Atlanta Tom Watson Brown, Huie & Harland, Atlanta Others Joseph Errigo, Urban and Community Development Assistant, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Atlanta P. A. Springer, Atlanta Traffic and Safety Council Robert W. Roseveare, Traffic Engineer, DeKalb County J. B. Cooley, Planning and Research Engineer, Bureau of Public Roads Norman J. Van Ness, Bureau of Public Roads George B. Pilkington, Bureau of Public Roads Gerald L. Smith, Bureau of Public Roads Joseph E. Lay, Robinson-Humphrey Company, Atlanta William M. G. Fletcher, White, Weld & Co., New York Dick Hebert, Atlanta Constitution David Nordan, Atlanta Journal Art Schultz, WSB Radio Ken Goodnight, WSB-TV Abe Gallman, WSB-TV Harvey Kramer, Intern, Fulton County Comptroller's Office Al Barr, Intern, Fulton County Comptroller's Office Bill Hayes, Intern, Fulton County Comptroller's Office J. D. Wingfield, Jr., Jerry A. Coursey, Mrs. Margaret C. Breland, Miss Claudette Parrish, Tim Urban, Atlanta Region Metropolitan Planning Commission The meeting was called to order by the Chairman. Minutes Upon motion by Mr. Bishop, seconded by Mr. Blount, the reading of the minutes of the July meeting was dispensed with and they were unanimously approved. Financial Report The General Manager presented the financial report as of July 31, 1967, which is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. DeKalb County had sent in its second quarterly payment; Gwinnett County was the only one in arrears. Progress Reports General Manager Mr. Stuart reported on the two-week managerial seminar he attended at Kent State University, Kent, Ohio, sponsored by Kent University and the Department of Housing and Urban Development. The General Manager said Los Angeles, Seattle and Washington, D.C., were to have referenda during 1968 with regard to rapid transit. He pointed out that insufficiency of federal funds may be less important than the competition from these cities. Mr. Rich men- tioned the importance of taking steps to hold a referendum in 1968. Mr. Stuart reported on meetings with Cousins Properties regarding MARTA's requirements. Cousins Properties were about to incur cer- tain construction expenses in the Air Rights area in their efforts to provide for future rapid transit operations; these were costs that could be charged to MARTA under appropriate agreements. Mr. Stuart requested the Board's approval to continue negotiations with Cousins. Costs involved had not been determined; however, Mr. Stuart estimated them to be between $70,000 and $90,000. The Chief Engineer was to meet with representatives from Cousins Prop- erties and reach agreement as to exact costs which would be even- tually chargeable to MARTA, when funds were available. MARTA would be responsible for accrued interest as well. It was moved by Mr. Bishop and seconded by Mr. Haverty that the General Manager continue negotiations with Cousins Properties with an indication of intent on the part of the Authority, provided all requirements were met. Mr. Stuart said the proposed subcontract between Parsons, Brincker- hoff-Tudor, Bechtel and Law Engineering Testing Company for test borings had been reviewed and found to be in order. Upon motion by Mr. Bishop, seconded by Mr. McMillon, approval was given to pro- ceed with the subcontract. Mr. Rich suggested that in the future the General Manager prepare a brief write-up on each proposed subcontract prior to the Board meeting. Consultants Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor, Bechtel Mr. Coil summarized the report given at the briefing prior to the Board meeting, which included parking layouts, patronage estimates, and parking lot requirements for the 64-mile system; work contem- plated in connection with the soils engineer on the central and west lines which Law Engineering Testing Company was to do; as well as the work being done in San Francisco on central line alignments affecting the I-75/I-85 connector on West Peachtree Street. Hammer, Greene, Siler Associates In the absence of Mr. Hammer, Mr. Bennett said the report on finan- cial feasibility was completed and that copies would be made avail- able to the Board very soon. "Rapid Busways" Proposal As a result of a request from Mayor Ivan Allen, the Board had directed the MARTA staff to review the rapid busways proposal made recently by the Atlanta Transit System. Mr. Stuart read the complete report of this evaluation, the summary of which is attached hereto and made a part of the minutes. In response to a question from Mr. Blalock, Mr. Stuart said the rights-of-way for rapid busways and rapid transit were not the same. The Chairman polled each Director for his reaction to the report. Mr. McMillon was emphatic in hoping that nothing would divert the Board from its efforts to bring rail rapid transit to metropolitan Atlanta. Mr. Bishop said he was concerned with the legal entangle- ments involved in the busways proposal. Mr. Haverty stated he would be interested in the rebuttal from the Atlanta Transit System with regard to the report. Mr. Adamson felt there were too many problems and that there would be a delay in rapid transit if the busways proposal were accepted. After discussion, it was moved by Mr. Blount, seconded by Mr. Bishop, and unanimously agreed that the Chairman forward to Mayor Allen MARTA's recommendation that the implementation of the "Rapid Bus- ways" concept not be attempted. Other Business The Chairman introduced the following interns from the Fulton County Comptroller's Office: Harvey Kramer, Al Barr and Bill Hayes. Adjournment The Chairman adjourned the meeting at 3:50 P.M. Next Meeting September 5, 1967.  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 21, Folder 6, Document 5 Box 21 Box 21 Folder 6 Folder topic: Rapid Transit | 1966-1967 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/6f53cd379f9c1c2d38a3f379d4b1f095.pdf 61d13ef13030718ffaae33d7b1697672 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. --· - - . _ . _,,. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - -- - - - - . · · -- ..... _ . 1 As noted, relatively small payments would be required in the early years of construction of the transit system. MARTA's bond issues could be modest because of the initial availability of sizable Federal funds under the given assumption. Subsequently, however, the impact upon the local governments would be more substantial. Followi_ng is the schedule of mill_age rates that would need to be levied _against the net property digests in each county in order to meet · the indicated payments set for~h in Table 5, above: Fulton 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 .7 .7 1.6 1.5 2.6 2.4 3.3 3.6 3.6 3.2 3.0 2.7 2.5 2.4 2.2 DeKalb .4 .4 .9 .9 1.5 1.3 1.8 1.9 1.9 1. 7 1.6 1.4 1.2 1.1 1.1 .-. It is possible and it would be desirable to reschedule these levies t o provide more substantial payments in the earlier years .and lower payments during the peak years between 1975 and 1978. It is recommended that an a l t ernat ive s chedule of taxes might be considereq, which would make - 42HAMMER.O R &lN& . BI L ER AiiOOIATEi ( I �·- -- - - -- - -- - -- - - ·- - -- - - ~ . . _.·_ -··- --- - · ~--· 1.. - -· . - -----··-. .·-.,_.· ..___... . ..- _...... ~· ~~ ~ pos sible a ceiling of on l y three mills in Fulton County in the peak years and a ceili_ng of 1. 6 mills in DeKalb County. This revised schedule would produce more funds in the earlier years than would be needed if the MARTA · . bond program set forth herein is followed. However, this bond program · eould g g ~gVisea to make use el ~he avai labl e funds i n the early years and advance, purchases of land with these additional funds could well save · a substantial amount of money in face of risi_ng land values in the area. The recommended schedule of county payments and millage rates for MARTA bond financing is set forth below in Table 6. The peak year payments would be substantially reduced under this schedule and the peak impact upon local taxpayers would be corrospondingly less ~ Table 6. RECOMMENDED COUNTY PAYMENTS AND MILLAGE RATES, MARTA BOND ALTERNATIVES Millage Rat es Fu lton DeKalb County County 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 19 75 19 76 19 77 19 78 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1.5 1.5 2. 0 2. 0 2.5 2.5 3. 0 3. 0 3. 0 3. 0 3. 0 2,5 2.5 2.3 / 2.2 · 1. 0 1.0 1.1 1. 1 1. 4 1.4 1.6 1.6 1.6 1. 6 1. 5 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.1 Doll ar Amounts ( 000 ) Ful ton DeKa l b County County $2,783 2 ,925 4 ,098 4 ,3 24 5, 698 6,015 7 , 62 9 · 8 ,064 8, 526 9, 033 9, 576 8,4 59 8, 97 3 8,893 8,8 93 $1,081 1 , 158 1,367 1, 48 9 2, 05 4 2, 169 2,7 51 2 ,907 3, 074 · 3 , 257 3,453 3,048 3,235 3,206 3,206 (These level annual payments to the complete retirement of bond issues b_eginning in 1997) - 43HAMMIR , QRiENi.BILiR A88001ATl8 / . ·-. -. �Table 7. 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 RECO~lENDED COUNTY PAYMENTS AND MILLAGE RATES, GOVERNMENT OBLIGATION BOND ALTERNATIVE Millage Fulton Countl 1.5 1.5 2.0 2.0 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.4 2.3 2.1 2.0 1.9 Rates DeKalb Countl 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.4 1.4 1.3 1.3 1~3 .l. 3 1. 2 1.1 1.0 1.0 ,.,. Dollar Amounts (000) DeKalb Fulton County County .9 $3,015 3,162 4,420 4,654 6,120 6,448 6,800 7, l 70 7,568 8,000 8,124 8,234 7,959 8,026 8,076 $1,230 1,312 1,545 1,653 2,260 2,416 2,452 2,585 2,729 2,884 2,929 2,968 2,870 2,894 2,912 (The level annual payments to the complete retirement of · bond issues b_e ginning in 1997) It is to be noted that the peak mill_a ge requirements under GO financing . ( would be substantially lower than in the case of government payments to underwrite MARTA bond issues. This is true because the overall financi_n g cost is lower and the gross rather than the net d_:l..gest is used as basis for the calculations. The lower interest charges are by all odds the most important factor in this lower impact, the difference between_ gross and net digest being relatively small. As already mentioned, however, the reduced millage rate does not necessarily produce a lower tax for the residential taxpayer because the homestead exemption is not applicable~ Following are representative figures on the tax impact of the maximum millage under GO bond financi_n g, and these figures might be compared with the earlier figures for servici_n g MARTA revenue bonds: HAMMIR ,8R IINl . l l l l R AIIOOIATII �t~ - ~. . -----· -- ------------ -- - -- - - -- - - - ' •; ,. . "·- ··· ··-- .;----, -~~- -- _r-:. . . :·-:· .-:- _ ·-:. "'.'·':~•· . . , ·.""'. -:_-.: _ ·. .- · . ·-A;· . ~s·--···:;: ..;_;_=..,:.::=.=:..:::_::..::.....,,::_,__:__~,=..~=:::::..::.;c...:.:..:::::.==......;.c;:;~~ ' r r Fulton DeKalb 2.5 1.4 1973-78 1973-74 $15.00 $20.00 $25.00 $ 8.40 $11.20 $14.00 Maximum millage needed for GO Bond ·financing Years of maximum Annual cost of maximum millage to · owner of loan withli market valu·e of: $15,.060 2·0 ,.oo·o is-;ooo The projected gross and net tax digests/used as a basis for all of the for_e going calculations are shown in Chart 2. · Combination of Approaches There· is no reason, of course, why both methods of financi_n g m_ight not be employed by the local_ governments in meeting their obl_igations to MARTA, for constructing the rapid transit system -- the collection. of property taxes to support the issuance of MARTA bonds plus the issuance of general obligation bonds by the governments themselves. The act establishing MARTA clearly rec_o gnized this possibility, as follows: "A local government may elect any.method provided in this section to finance the participation required of it in whole or in part, and the election of one method shall not preclude the election of another method with respect thereto or with respect to any additional or supplementary participation determined to be necessary ." As a purely practical matter, there would be a number of distinct advantages o both Fulton and DeKalb counties in employi_n g both methods . It would make ossible the use of available GO bond capacity with the consequent saving in ·nt erest charges but it would not demand too much of that capacity in compet~tion ith other capital improvement needs. It would give each government_ greater ..S Q- HAMMIR.ORIINI . IILIR AIIOGIATII �' - - - - - - - - - - - -~'-----···--~! ,:.___ . . -_:_ ____ . . ··.··. -------- . . . . --. ,. . ., : . --· - · __., . , The reason for the lower local requirements for the _52-mile system in .. the 1973-76 period, of- course, is the projected availability of $100,000,000 more in Federal money. This fact, plus the shari_ng of the local cost by four instead of two governments, would produce an actually lowe,r demand upon Fulton and DeKalb for the larger system in a number of years. ~ ... Table 9 . COMPARATIVE MILLAGE RATES NEEDED TO SUPPORT 30~MILE AND · 52~MILE SYSTEMS 1/ 30-Mile SystemDeKalb Fulton Fulton 52-Mile System.!/ Gwinnett DeKalb Clayton 1969 1970 1971 1972 1.5 1.5 2.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.1 .1.1 1.5 1.5 2.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.1 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 et seq 2.5 2.5 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.5 2.5 2.3 1.4 1.4 1. 6 1. 6 1.6 1.6 1.5 1.3 1. 2 1.1 1.1 2.0 2.0 2.5 2.5 3.0 3.0 2.8 2.8 2.6 2.4 2.3 1.1 1.1 1.4 1.4 1.6 1.6 1.4 1.4 1. 3 1.2 1.1 2.2 y y 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 LS From Table 6 . Assumes $100,000,000 in Federal and $33,000,000 iri>state funds. Assumes $2 00,000,000 in Federal and $48,000,000 in state funds . - 56HAMM E A ,G AE &N E,IILlA A IIUO IAT E8 ( � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document As noted, relatively small payments would be required in-the early years of construction of the transit system. modest because of the initial availability of sizable Federal funds under MARTA's bond issues could be the given assumption. Subsequently, however, the impact upon the local governments would be more substantial. Following is the schedule of millage rates that would need to be levied against the net property digests in each county in order to meet the indicated payments set foreh in Table 5, above: 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 ' 1974 1975 1976 LOTT 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 Fulton . NNNNWAWAWWAWNNH HB DeKalb if HP RPNADUOCOBOUNOOR ee It is possible and it would be desirable to reschedule these levies to provide more substantial payments in the earlier years and lower pay- ments during the peak years between 1975 and 1978. It is recommended that an alternative schedule of taxes might be considered, which would make mA Qa HAMMER.OGAREENE.BILER ASSOOIATES oS  ml certo ceieanly main resmctincine attee ai hates possible a ceiling of only three mills in Fulton County in the peak years and a ceiling of 1.6 mills in DeKalb County. This revised schedule would produce more funds in the earlier years than would be needed if the MARTA’ bond program set forth herein is followed. However, this bond program could be revised to make use of the availabie funds in the early years and advance. purchases. of land with these additional funds could well save a substantial amount of money in face of rising land values in the area. The recommended schedule of county payments and millage rates for MARTA bond financing is set forth below in Table 6. The peak year payments would be substantially reduced under this schedule and the peak impact upon local taxpayers would be corrospondingly less. 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 Table 6. RECOMMENDED COUNTY PAYMENTS AND MILLAGE RATES, MARTA BOND ALTERNATIVES Millage Rates Dollar Amounts (000) Fulton DeKalb Fulton DeKalb County County County County 1.5 Ls'0 $2,783 $1,081 iS 1.0 2,925 , 1,158 2.0 ieee 4,098 1,367 2.0 Lied 4,324 1,489 2.5 1.4 5,698 2,054 2.5 led... 6,005 2,169 3.0 1.6 7,629 257511 3.0 Li6 °8,064 2,907 3.0 1.6 8,526 3,074 30 1.6 9,033 33,257 3.0 iS 9,576 5,453 2.5 1.3 8,459 3,048 2.5 1.2 8,973 ' 3,235 Zed Ls 8,893 3,206 262 Led 8,893 3,206 (These level annual payments to the complete retirement of bond issues beginning in 1997) AZ HAMMEA.QGREENE.SILER ABBOOIATES _l I a a ee oe ee ee ee Table 7. RECOMMENDED COUNTY PAYMENTS AND MILLAGE RATES, GOVERNMENT OBLIGATION BOND ALTERNATIVE Millage Rates Dollar Amounts (000) Fulton DeKalb Fulton DeKalb . County County County County 1969 1.5 1.0 $3,015 $1,230 ‘ 1970 iso 1.0 3,162 1,312 1971 2.0° is1 4,420 1,545 1972 2.0 4.1. 4,654 1,653 1973 2.5 1.4 6,120 2,260 1974 2.5 1.4 6,448 2,416 1975 2.5 1.3 6,800 2,452 1976 2:5 1.3 7,170 2,585 1977 255 1.3 7,568 2,729 1978 2.5 1,5 8,000 2,884 1979 2.4 1.2 8,124 2,929 1980 Zaid 1.1 8,234 2,968 1981 2.1 1.0 7,959 2,870 1982 2.0 1.0 8,026 2,894 1983 1.9 9 8,076 2,912 (The level annual payments to the com- plete retirement of: bond issues beginning in 1997) It is to be noted that the peak millage requirements under GO financing would be substantially lower than in the case of government payments to under- write MARTA bond issues. This is true because the overall financing cost is lower and the gross rather than the net digest is used as basis for the calculations. The lower interest charges are by all odds the most important factor in this lower impact, the difference between gross and net digest being relatively small. As already mentioned, however, the reduced millage rate does not necessarily produce a lower tax for the residential taxpayer because - the homestead exemption is not applicable. Following are representative figures on the tax impact of the maximum millage under GO bond financing, and these figures might be compared with the earlier figures for servicing MARTA revenue bonds: Di ete . -49. e HAMMER,.GREENE.DGILER AGBBOGIATER oe ee ee ee Nes de nee ete tg fe ne ced ec me fe aes on OS pn Se ne ane oe Pe se eee — eg ee ee ee Fulton DeKalb Maximum millage needed for GO Bond financing 2.9 1.4 Years of maximum 1973-78 1973-74 Annual cost of maximum millage to ~ owner of loan with’ market value of: $15 ,.000 $15.00 $ 8.40 20 ;000 $20.00 $11.20 25,000 $25.00 $14.00 The projected gross and net tax digests/used as a basis for all of the foregoing calculations are shown in Chart 2. Combination of Approaches There is no reason, of course, why both methods of financing might not be employed by the local governments in meeting their obligations to MARTA gor constructing the rapid transit system -- the collection of property taxes to support the issuance of MARTA bonds plus the issuance of general obligation . bonds by the governments themselves. | The act establishing MARTA clearly recognized this possibility, as follows: "A local government may elect any.method provided in this section to finance the participation required of it in whole or in part, and the election of one method shall not preclude the election of another method with respect thereto or with respect to any additional or supplementary participation determined to be necessary." As a purely practical matter, there would be a number of distinct advantages to both Fulton and DeKalb counties in employing both methods. It would make possible the use of available GO bond capacity with the consequent saving in interest charges but it would not demand too much of that capacity in competition ith other capital improvement needs. It would give each government greater =50- HAMMER,GREGENE,BILER AGBOOIATER cu > aus ee ee et ee ee The reason for the lower local requirements for the 52-mile system in the 1973-76 period, of course, is the projected availability of $100,000,000 more in Federal money. This fact, plus the sharing of the local cost by four instead of two governments, would produce an actually lower de- mand upon Fulton and DeKalb for the larger system in a number of years. ad 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1S77 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 et seq Table 9. COMPARATIVE MILLAGE RATES NEEDED TO ‘SUPPORT 30-MILE AND 52-MILE SYSTEMS 30-Mile Systen!/ 52-Mile System Fulton DeKalb Fulton DeKalb Clayton Gwinnett 1.5 1.0 1.5 1.0 1.5 1.0 1.5 1.0 2.0 1.1 2.0 a 2.0 tea 2.0 1.1 2.5 1.4 2.0 i 1.5 1.5 2.5 1.4 2.0 Lyd 1.5 15 3.0 1.6 oe 1.4 1.5 1s 3.0 1.6 2.5 1.4 1.5 1's 3.0 1.6 3.0 1.6 1.5 1.5 3.0 16d » BO 1.6 ae 1.5 3.0 £5 2.8 1.4 1.5 1.5 2:6 1.3 2.8 1.4 15 1.5 3,5 1.2 2.6 1,3 1,5 ib 2.3 1.1 2.4 1.2 Lk 1.5 2.2 1.1 2.5 Led ib 34.8 1/ From Table 6. Assumes $100,000,000 in Federal and $33,000,000 in state funds. Assumes $200,000,000 in Federal and $48,000,000 in state funds. -56=- HAMMER, GAEENE.BILER AGBOOIATES  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 21, Folder 6, Document 4 Box 21 Box 21 Folder 6 Folder topic: Rapid Transit | 1966-1967 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/e4b00fd7f558621e7c0318cdbc8e3f0f.pdf f0284258020284e4e166a2694e76c563 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. I .I. REVENUE FROM PROPERTY TAXES TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, THIRTY-EIGHT LARGEST METROPOLITAN AREAS, 1964-65 Y Metropolitan Area Rank .1 Property Revenue as Percent of Revenue from Local Sources Per CaEita Revenue to Local Governments from Property Sources Newark San Francisco New York Los Angeles Milwaukee Boston Anaheim San Bernardino Paterson Minneapolis-St. Paul Iluffalo Cleveland Denver Chicago Portland (Oregon-Wash~) · Detroit Indianapolis . Roche_ster ,. San Diego Dayton Miami Cincinnati Providence Houston Washington, D.C. Baltimore Kansas City Seattle Philadelphia St. Louis Dallas Columbus (Ohio) ATLANTA Pittsburgh Tampa-St . Petersburg Louisville San Antonio New Orl eans $202.74 $199.39 $180.29 $178.30 ' .. $178.29 $176.86 . $176.03 $169.67 $168.92 $156.14 $155.90 . $154.08 $143.58 · $14.3. 24 $14).90 $140.04 $136 .• 89 $132. 76 $129.96 $122.79 . $119.88 $117.14 $116. 19 $113.65 $111.00 1 $110.83 . $108.00 $103.49 • $101,48 $101.40 $ 97.77 $ 97. 06 ... $ 95.52 $ 94 .42 $ 87 . 61 $ 70.28 $ 59. 34 $ 44 .75 Pro12erty Revenue as Percent of Revenue from All Sources 68.6% 46.5% 41.2% ,,.: ,· 4 46.8% 5 54 ~2% 6 60.0% 7 47.5% 8 43.4% 9 74.4% 10 52.1% 11 '49.0% .. 12 59.1% 13 53.5% 14 56.7% 15 55.5% 16 49.6% 17 62.1% 18 40. 7% 19 39.4% 20 52.3% 21 44.6% 22 46.1% 23 65.8% 24 55.4% 25 31.6% 26 42.3% 27 48.0% 28 35.8% 29 47.9% 30 50.8% 31 53. 5% · 32 45.2% 33 43. 7% 34 46.3% 35 37.9% 36 36. 0% 37 41. 6% 38 23.3% Average $129.94 6r.3% 48.6% Y These are the areas recorded as the mos! populous SMSA's in the. nation by the 1960. Census of Population, when each of them had at least 700,000 ~nhabitants. 2 3 ~ ' Source: - - ------ --- 82.0% 69.8% 56.1% 69.7% 80.1% 85.6% 73.6% 67.7% 84.6% 73.3% 75.6% 75.1% 71.9% 72.9% 73.4% 71. 2% 83.5% 67.7% 66.6% 70.1% 56.7% 60.1% 87.0% 71.5% 49.3% 71.8% 61.0% 53 . 9% 58.8% 62.0% 67.9% 63.4% 59.6%,· 59.-8% 49. 9% 47 .2% 66.6% 38.6% i '· j . • . i . :I i ' ,; 1l . U.S. B~reau of the Census, Looat, ovePnment Firu:mc6s in SetBotGd Matropotitan ·~aa ~n li64-8$• Series G.P. • . . ·.. . Nd,9, · I .. .· !· • i • __:_.__ . . . --~- -~ . ... \ .--,.11., -.!···,l'~-r• - .. _ - ...:...-.- ..... _ . ,..,. _:...• · - . . ,...- ,.._..__ . ~-- . .. .. .. . . ··- ... ,. ···-, . .._ . , __ -·- - � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document Wendt aAn aun 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 38 i/ These are the areas recorded as the mos Census of Population, Sources U.S. Bureau of the Census, Looa REVENUE FROM PROPERTY TAXES TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, THIRTY-EIGHT LARGEST METROPOLITAN AREAS, 1964-65 1/ Metropolitan Area Newark San Francisco New York Los Angeles Milwaukee Boston Anaheim San Bernardino Paterson Minneapolis-St. Paul Buffalo Cleveland Denver Chicago Portland (Oregon-Wash,) | Detroit Indianapolis — Rochester San Diego Dayton Miami Cincinnati Providence Houston Washington, D.C. Baltimore Kansas City Seattle Philadelphia St. Louis Dallas Columbus (Ohio) ATLANTA Pittsburgh Tampa-St. Petersburg Louisville San Antonio New Orleans Average Per Capita Revenue to Local Governments from Property Sources Property Revenue as Percent of Revenue from Local Sources — $202.74 82.0% $199.39 69.8% $180.29 56.1% $178.30 69.7% $178.29 80.1% $176.86. 85.6% $176.03 73.6% $169.67 67.7% $168.92 84.6% $156.14 73.3% $155.90 75.6% $154.08 ' 75.1% $143.58 °° 71.9% $143.24 + - ‘ 72.9% $141.90 73.4% $140.04 71.2% $136.89 83.5% $132.76 67.7% $129.96 66.6% $122.79 | 70.1% $119.88 56.7% $117.14 60.1% $116.19 87.0% $113.65 71.5% $111.00 49.3% ‘$110.83 71.8% . $108.00 61.0% $103.49 ' 53.9% $101.48 58.8% $101.40 62.0% $97.77 67.9% $ 97.06~ ~ 63.4% $ 95.52 59.6% * $ 94.42 59.8% $ 87.61 49.9% $ 70.28 47.2% $ 59.34 66.6% $ 44.75 38.6% $129.94 67.3% “Aveas in 1964-65, Series G.F. = No.9, [ populous SMSA' when each of them|had at least 70 t Government Finances in Seleo meee Sst ft teeny weely pe eee Property Revenue _as Percent of Revenue from All Sources 68.6% 46.5% 41.2% 46.8% 54,2% 60.0% 47.5% 43.4% 48.6% Ss in the nation by the 1960 - 0,000 inhabitants, ted Metropolitan  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 21, Folder 6, Document 3 Box 21 Box 21 Folder 6 Folder topic: Rapid Transit | 1966-1967