Fresh Loaf

By Joe Winter

Lost amid news this month that the city has reached an agreement with a developer over the northeast section of the Beltline may be the most significant threat yet to the transit portion of the project. Yet, there’s still an opportunity for the public to have a sliver of say over the decision.

Atlanta Regional Commission staff members have decided to split the Beltline in half, and recommended only the east side for a key type of federal grant called “New Starts” funding. That could upset the political balance that won the project support in all four quadrants of the city. It also jeopardizes the very concept of the project as a transportation loop around downtown.

The decision was incorporated in a draft of the ARC’s Envision6 transportation plan . The U.S. Department of Transportation will use the final plan to dole out hundreds of millions of dollars in transportation funds over the next 25 years.

Atlanta Regional Commission officials tried to paint a happy face on the decision by arguing that there’s still plenty of time to include funding for the west side of the Beltline in future transportation plans. In a response to a letter from Lee Biola, president of Citizens for Progressive Transit, the ARC’s David Haynes wrote:

While this shift doesn’t prohibit an application for New Starts, it would put those segments at a disadvantage because the application would not align with regional priorities (as defined by the RTP [Regional Transportation Plan]). But as you know, the planning process is continual and priorities and funding assumptions can change from plan to plan.

There’s a little history here that Haynes is brushing under the rug. In the 1960s, the federal government decided once-and-for-all that regional organizations would be the arbiters of local transportation funding priorities. Federal regulations on New Starts funding rules continue that tradition. In fact, the regulation (Section 611.7, if you’re counting) makes it quite clear:

New start projects, like all transportation investments in metropolitan areas, must emerge from a regional multimodal transportation planning process in order to be eligible for Federal funding.

So as Haynes suggests, Atlanta could apply for federal funding. But without inclusion in the region’s Envision6 transportation plan, the Beltline’s “disadvantage” (as Haynes puts it) would be so strong, the project might as well be rendered ineligible.

More disappointing is the lack of vision on the part of ARC officials, who contend that — due to funding shortfalls — many painful cuts in the region’s transportation plan were necessary. That funding shortfall didn’t seem to affect the ARC’s decision to recommend funding projects like the Northwest Corridor Project, which would widen I-75 to 23 lanes. The Northwest Corridor Project also would use New Starts money to establish a new bus system that is specially designed so that few people would want to use it.

The bottom line is that as a long-term strategy, ARC staff members are putting more money toward sprawl-inducing projects than toward sustainable transit alternatives. And when the time comes to cut budgets, what few visionary projects remain in the plan are the ones that get the ax.

Individuals can comment on the decision to cut out funding for the western half of the Beltline (as well as on the overall plan) at two online public meetings set up by the Atlanta Regional Commission to allow metro Atlantans to chat directly with transportation planners and policy makers. The online meetings will take place 7-8:30 p.m. Thursday, and 10-11:30 a.m. Saturday. Click here to register. You can also comment on the ARC’s website or by e-mailing transportation@atlantaregional.com before Aug. 23.

Editor’s note: Joe Winter serves on the board of directors of Citizen’s for Progressive Transit.

Bookmark It

Posted in News | Leave a comment